Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: J_F_Shepard who wrote (690982)	1/2/2013 5:50:40 PM
From: one_less	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1579737

Hold it. Twas you who claimed the government could remove the choice of others to put you in jeopardy... not me. I called that notion, nonsense and used the fire bombing illustration to make my point. There is no guarantee you won't be the target of some wacko, which is precisely the reason we should and do have the right to self defense. As autonomous beings we also know what is best for our selves in individual circumstance. Not everyone wants to live in a guarded gated community and most are not able to afford such accommodations. " I will give you the assurance that the gov. will protect you far better than you can protect you." 1) I don't trust you. 2) The government isn't available in every circumstance, so your assurance is empty. When the government can guarantee zero assaults, violent crimes, and murders I will reconsider your claim. The NRA and all gun huggers believe the 2nd gives them the right and the choice...." The right to self defense is inalienable. The choice on how best to defend oneself is personal and circumstancial. I don't currently own a gun but if my circumstances change in a way that suggests self defense warrants my owning a gun, you have no right to block me from protecting my self. The second amendment does protect that right and afford me the choice.