• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is the United States Nearing a Civil War?

Is the United States Nearing a Civil War?

  • Yes, Any further Obama backed Legislation might cause a Civil War.

    Votes: 4 3.7%

  • Maybe, It matters what happens in the near future.

    Votes: 21 19.4%

  • No, The U.S. is not nearing a Civil War.

    Votes: 70 64.8%

  • Somewhat, People like Alex Jones will cause the nation to further split along their opinion lines.

    Votes: 2 1.9%

  • Not Possibly, This is just a small uproar that will soon pass over.

    Votes: 11 10.2%
  • Total voters
    108
  • Poll closed .
FreedomFromAll said:
Thats great and I applaud your civic duties but why are you telling me this? I gave you links of people that seem to be planing on a civil war.
Click to expand...

There are 300million people in this country, it's not that difficult to find a handful of people at one extreme of any subject, especially one that is hot off the presses. With this issue being so current there are a lot of generalizations flying around, and one of them seems to be that them crazy irrational gun toten second amendment folks is looking to revolt.

It's simply not the case. I'm telling you what the hundred or so people I met with last week are thinking, and it certainly wasn't finding a way to battle with the federal government. Thing is, things don't seem to be changing for the better and people are getting scared. The overwhelming oplnion seems to be that the government is not going to be able to help anybody soon and we are going to have to take care of ourselves. If your home is being robbed in Detroit, how long does it take for the police to arrive? That would be an example of a government not being able to protect it's citizens. We're not looking to take over, we're trying to keep things from completely unraveling. The government is more than capable of destroying itself. It's the people we're concerned with.
 
Last edited:
tech30528 said:
There are 300million people in this country, it's not that difficult to find a handful of people at one extreme of any subject, especially one that is hot off the presses. With this issue being so current there are a lot of generalizations flying around, and one of them seems to be that them crazy irrational gun toten second amendment folks is looking to revolt.

It's simply not the case. I'm telling you what the hundred ornso people I met with last week are thinking, and it certainly wasn't finding a way to battle with the federal government. Thing is, things don't seem to be changing for the better and people are getting scared. The overwhelming oplnion seems to be that the government is not going to be able to help anybody soon and we are going to have to take care of ourselves. If your home is being robbed in Detroit, how long does it take for the police to arrive? That would be an example of a government not being able to protect it's citizens. We're not looking to take over, we're trying to keep things from completely unraveling. The government is more than capable of destroying itself. It's the people we're concerned with.
Click to expand...

Im a gun owner and a strong supporter of the 2nd Amendment. All I did was link some people that seem to be planing for a Civil War. I did not say that us gun owners were wanting to start a Civil War I said that crazies on the right seem to want to. Personally I think they will be just as successful as the occupiers on starting unrest that could lead to Civil War. You do remember those occupiers right? If you dig deep those were those idiots in parks thinking that they were starting a new government.
 
FreedomFromAll said:
Im a gun owner and a strong supporter of the 2nd Amendment. All I did was link some people that seem to be planing for a Civil War. I did not say that us gun owners were wanting to start a Civil War I said that crazies on the right seem to want to. Personally I think they will be just as successful as the occupiers on starting unrest that could lead to Civil War. You do remember those occupiers right? If you dig deep those were those idiots in parks thinking that they were starting a new government.
Click to expand...

My apologies, I misinterpreted your intent. Lately there has been a lot of new threads pointing out a few extremists and using them to label all gun owners as that extreme. The intent seems to be working, even on me.
 
tech30528 said:
My apologies, I misinterpreted your intent. Lately there has been a lot of new threads pointing out a few extremists and using them to label all gun owners as that extreme. The intent seems to be working, even on me.
Click to expand...
Thank you.
I think that we should not deny that crazies exist and that we should do what is in our power to fight the crazies since they are being used against law abiding citizens that just happen to own firearms.
 
FreedomFromAll said:
Thank you.
I think that we should not deny that crazies exist and that we should do what is in our power to fight the crazies since they are being used against law abiding citizens that just happen to own firearms.
Click to expand...
Well depending on what Obama comes out with tomorrow we might get to find out who those people are.
 
No. We are a spoiled, well fed nation regardless of class and upbringing. We live in a society where technology is wasted on the ****tiest bunch of people. My phone and many can video conference over a cellular network and people to bitch. It's amazing.
 
JohnWOlin said:
No. We are a spoiled, well fed nation regardless of class and upbringing. We live in a society where technology is wasted on the ****tiest bunch of people. My phone and many can video conference over a cellular network and people to bitch. It's amazing.
Click to expand...


It'll take a lot more people getting broker and even stupider, if that's possible.
 
Thrilla said:
what is lost by omitting it?

do you see the militia clause as somehow limiting the right?.... do you see it as providing a justification for the federal government to infringe upon the peoples RTKBA?
Click to expand...
No. From the begining it qualified the right. The federal government didn't add it later to infringe upon the peoples RTKBA. It was in there from the begining to describe the right. When did you drop the first 13 words, that have been there from the begining, of a 27 word single sentance admendment that I'm defending?
 
I may be a nobody on these forums, but here's my take:

The Liberals will tell you there will never be a civil war or anything like it. The Conservatives will tell you there will be a civil war in the very near future if things continue as it is. Both are wrong. I believe if the people's rights continue to be infringed upon, we will see more localized instances of violence, but it will take a lot to push a country to full-on civil war. So no, I don't expect a civil war anytime soon. Is it a possibility in the distant future? Definitely.

And to those thinking that the American people would stand no chance against the government.... are so wrong.
 
No. Quit masturbating over the idea.
 
reidster said:
I may be a nobody on these forums, but here's my take:

The Liberals will tell you there will never be a civil war or anything like it. The Conservatives will tell you there will be a civil war in the very near future if things continue as it is. Both are wrong. I believe if the people's rights continue to be infringed upon, we will see more localized instances of violence, but it will take a lot to push a country to full-on civil war. So no, I don't expect a civil war anytime soon. Is it a possibility in the distant future? Definitely.

And to those thinking that the American people would stand no chance against the government.... are so wrong.
Click to expand...
Hello. It's OK to be new, good even. I'll even ask you a question about your post. What kind of group will be running the civil war you think might happen? Many in history and those that are hapening around the world now are run at the root buy those with a fundamentalist belief. Even thoes that kept people as slaves incorperated the belief that having slaves is ok, a God given right even, were fundamentalists.
 
Personally, I think civil war is closer than most people realize. Our government cannot compromise on issues like the fiscal cliff, gun control, illegal immigration and healthcare. The moderates, if there are any left, are voiceless. Anger and aggression seem to be the mode of communication. The president, unwilling to wait for congress, uses executive orders to get his way and circumvent the due process. We have a dysfunctional government in office and nothing is being done. How long will the American people be able to put up with the ineptitude of our current government?
 
shadowfax220 said:
Personally, I think civil war is closer than most people realize. Our government cannot compromise on issues like the fiscal cliff, gun control, illegal immigration and healthcare. The moderates, if there are any left, are voiceless. Anger and aggression seem to be the mode of communication. The president, unwilling to wait for congress, uses executive orders to get his way and circumvent the due process. We have a dysfunctional government in office and nothing is being done. How long will the American people be able to put up with the ineptitude of our current government?
Click to expand...

Don’t you see a contradiction in these two sentences in your post?:2wave:

“The president, unwilling to wait for congress, uses executive orders to get his way and circumvent the due process.”

“Our government cannot compromise on issues like the fiscal cliff, gun control, illegal immigration and healthcare.”
 
Whipsnade said:
Don’t you see a contradiction in these two sentences in your post?:2wave:

“The president, unwilling to wait for congress, uses executive orders to get his way and circumvent the due process.”

“Our government cannot compromise on issues like the fiscal cliff, gun control, illegal immigration and healthcare.”
Click to expand...

Actually I do, but congress being unable to come to an agreement doesn't give the president the right or responibility to circumvent them.
 
shadowfax220 said:
Actually I do, but congress being unable to come to an agreement doesn't give the president the right or responibility to circumvent them.
Click to expand...


He just spent four years attempting to get something passed. Some of of the original sponsors ended up voting against the very bills that they originated.But back to your post, give me an example of something that he is in the process of circumventing.
 
Whipsnade said:
He just spent four years attempting to get something passed. Some of of the original sponsors ended up voting against the very bills that they originated.But back to your post, give me an example of something that he is in the process of circumventing.
Click to expand...

He directed DHS not to deport undocumented immigrants brought here as children who meet certain other requirements.

He issued conditional waivers from the workfare requirements of the 1996 welfare law.

He issued waivers giving states greater flexibility in meeting the requirements of the No Child Left Behind law enacted in 2001.

He instructed the Justice Department to no longer enforce the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act.

He issued a presidential memorandum effectively overturning a congressional ban on federal research into the cause of gun violence.
 
I believe the political division in this nation is coming to an impasse and will eventually spark conflict. There is no way this nation will unify with this much tension going on. Liberals at consrvatives throats, vice versa. There's a certain wall we're all balancing on that will eventually fall. We should expect a coming conflict even if we're expecting it to happen between the next 1-20 years.
 
Your Star said:
All rather unlikely IMO, and anyone who is crazy enough to try and go to war with the government over gun control would not last long, nor have enough numbers, nor support. People's lives will continue, you will still be able to go to the store and buy food, and things would still be normal, so no widespread support would manifest.
Click to expand...

what makes you think so? In Chicago where gun control is tight, they are setting a new record on murder rates.
 
Rocketman said:
what makes you think so? In Chicago where gun control is tight, they are setting a new record on murder rates.
Click to expand...

A favorite meme of the gun fanatics, who for some reason fail to acknowledge that Chicago, like other urban centers, does not have a big fence around it. You know, this is America where people are free to travel where ever they want to, where Americans aren't stopped randomly along highways to see if they are carrying a ****-load of guns. (well most Americans aren't stopped randomly, there's still that "driving while black" problem), and where it is real easy to pay someone to travel down to southern Illinois and pick up what ever a gang banger desires.

It's not like the street punks care about their weapons, guns are tools for committing crimes, use once and throw away - buy another one.
 
shadowfax220 said:
He directed DHS not to deport undocumented immigrants brought here as children who meet certain other requirements.

He issued conditional waivers from the workfare requirements of the 1996 welfare law.

He issued waivers giving states greater flexibility in meeting the requirements of the No Child Left Behind law enacted in 2001.

He instructed the Justice Department to no longer enforce the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act.

He issued a presidential memorandum effectively overturning a congressional ban on federal research into the cause of gun violence.
Click to expand...

Its hardly circumventing when you bypass a traffic accident on a freeway.Same thing with a dysfunctional congress, if they wont govern(see record number of non bills passed)the only thing left is to take every LEGAL step available to GOVERN.:peace
 
Somerville said:
A favorite meme of the gun fanatics, who for some reason fail to acknowledge that Chicago, like other urban centers, does not have a big fence around it. You know, this is America where people are free to travel where ever they want to, where Americans aren't stopped randomly along highways to see if they are carrying a ****-load of guns. (well most Americans aren't stopped randomly, there's still that "driving while black" problem), and where it is real easy to pay someone to travel down to southern Illinois and pick up what ever a gang banger desires.

It's not like the street punks care about their weapons, guns are tools for committing crimes, use once and throw away - buy another one.
Click to expand...

Another meme from the ignorant that do not want to acknowledge facts that the windy city is a sesspool of criminal activity
 
Rocketman said:
Another meme from the ignorant that do not want to acknowledge facts that the windy city is a sesspool of criminal activity
Click to expand...


Uh huh, like totally ignorant am I. But in the future when replying to one of my posts please try, even though you might find it difficult, to respond to what I actually wrote and not to some words that may be found only in your brain and not on the computer screen.


My point in the earlier post being that no matter how stringent gun control laws might be in Chicago, they will do little good in stopping gun crime when all one has to do is drive about an hour away from the South Side and buy whatever type of firearm one wants. OR as I wrote earlier - "Chicago, like other urban centers, does not have a big fence around it"
 
Somerville said:
Uh huh, like totally ignorant am I. But in the future when replying to one of my posts please try, even though you might find it difficult, to respond to what I actually wrote and not to some words that may be found only in your brain and not on the computer screen.


My point in the earlier post being that no matter how stringent gun control laws might be in Chicago, they will do little good in stopping gun crime when all one has to do is drive about an hour away from the South Side and buy whatever type of firearm one wants. OR as I wrote earlier - "Chicago, like other urban centers, does not have a big fence around it"
Click to expand...

Get real, they don't even have to leave Cicero.:lamo
 
Rocketman said:
Get real, they don't even have to leave Cicero.:lamo
Click to expand...


A couple of problems with your 'hilarious' :)lamo)response

1) Cicero ain't Chicago, it is the same urban area but it is a separate municipality

2) As Cicero is part of the same urban area, local police probably coordinate with Chicago police. It is less likely that a Chicago resident could legally purchase a firearm that falls under the restrictions in Chicago law. 'Street' buys could be done in Chicago - so why drive to Cicero.

3) Driving an hour out of the city puts a gun buyer into a region with less thoughts about complying with Chicago law or statutes.

4) Mentioning Cicero as an attempted rebuttal of my earlier point about the lack of a fence around Chicago just kinda, you know, totally destroys your original point about how Chicago has super-strict laws regarding gun ownership and yet has a very high murder rate. So what is your point?

Laws on gun ownership in America don't do any good in suppressing gun crime because Americans can travel freely, therefore - why bother? Is that what you are trying to say? or perhaps there is some other motive behind you referring to Chicago's crime problem. ?????
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom