Loading...
Welcome to Anarcho-Punk.net community ! Please register or login to participate in the forums.   Ⓐ//Ⓔ

Guns and anarchist society

Discussion in 'Anarchism and radical activism' started by ungovernable, May 16, 2010.

  1. j3zrahhh

    j3zrahhhExperienced Member Experienced member


    51

    0

    1

    May 25, 2010
     
    exactly my point. we have no need for them at all.

    but do you seriously think the entire world could operate as a post-revolutionary society?
     
  2. ungovernable

    ungovernableAutonome Staff Member Uploader Admin Team Experienced member


    4,326

    60

    24

    Aug 21, 2009
    Male, 33 years old
    Canada Canada
    A very reductive statement. Anarchism is already about forcing some peoples to not do some things. For example, anarchism doesn't allow the freedom to others to be proprietary of lands and basements, anarchism doesn't allow you to have mass destruction weapons, etc.... So we are owning other peoples now ?

    Please stop with the shitty pro-constitution statements, you really sound like a dumb brainwashed american.

    So in an anarchist society i should be allowed to have a nuclear bomb because else it would equal to peoples wanting to assume ownership over me ?

    Seriously the whole world think differently, americans are very special and very unique on how they absolutly want to be able to have 50 war weapons in their house.

    Why not ? It worked in a couple of countries, so why not the entire world ?

    If peoples want to live differently they aren't forced to join, we can live without them anyway. A whole country being anarchist is already great.
     
  3. metalpunx

    metalpunxActive Member Forum Member


    38

    0

    0

    May 26, 2010
     
    To hunt for food... Not everyone in the world is a vegan and not everyone should be. Also, if you want a world-free of the State you have to defend against those that seek to re-create it... And there would be people that would try as such. While I believe world-wide anarchism is possible (albeit improbable), peace will not last.

    'course, I wouldn't kill a man to begin with - so the point is moot, I suppose. Weapons don't need to be "lethal", however... Rubber bullets, bean bag shells, etc.
     
  4. bgrass

    bgrassExperienced Member Experienced member


    50

    0

    0

    Apr 11, 2010
     
    Is my statement not accurate? Isn't using violence to control another, who is not doing harm or threatening to do harm to you, effectively an assumption of ownership over that person?

    And what pro constitution comments are you talking about. I don't care what someone else wrote down on some piece of paper hundreds of years ago. My position is always based upon my personal moral belief in the use of violence. I believe violence should only be used in response to violence (including the threat of) and not initiated to control another. This is why I ask what are you will to do to enforce what you want? Are you going to take through force peoples weapons? Are you going to throw them in cages for disobeying what you want? Are you willing to kill to take their weapon and/or throw them in a cage? And how are you supposed to take away guns from these armed men if your not armed yourself? And if you are armed, why do you get to be armed, but not others?

    Or, like I asked before (I think in the other thread), are just going to call them nasty names and give them dirty looks?

    It always comes down to violence. That's how men own other men.
     
  5. Rathryn

    RathrynExperienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    853

    0

    0

    Oct 21, 2009
     
    Very little to add to this.

    I wouldn't say that too quickly... a crime passionelle is committed quite easily. What if they decide to go after your friends and family and make you watch?
     
  6. ungovernable

    ungovernableAutonome Staff Member Uploader Admin Team Experienced member


    4,326

    60

    24

    Aug 21, 2009
    Male, 33 years old
    Canada Canada
    Hunt for food ? Come on guys we live in the 21st century, we don't need to hunt our food anymore.

    Agreed, but this task should be given to a group of individuals like a syndicate, and this group would be controlled by the people. If we just give guns to everyone and tell them "use it if someone wants to take the power" it will be chaos.

    In the spanish revolution it was the CNT and the POUM in charge of protecting the peoples against the fascist who wanted the power.


    The major problem if we just let guns access to everyone is that we will need an army and a strong police to protect ourselves from the bad peoples who would want to use their guns to kill peoples. So that anarchist society wouldnt be better than the one we live in. And like i said previously, the only thing that prevent the peoples to abuse weapons and start killing persons they dont like is the authority in place. If we abolish the state and everything that forced those persons to not use their weapons disseapear with the state, then we will have a lot of problems, killing, and chaos.

    Now you are just being paranoid again.

    Why do you always talk about what *I* want to do ??? It's not what *I* want to do but what *WE* the people want to do. I wouldn't be a dictator in an anarchist community, i would just be part of the people. And remember, in anarchism we all decide together, so it's up to the communities to decide if they want weapons or not. And trust me, the whole world will oppose against weapons, exept america because you have been brainwashed by second amendement for a long time, you believe owning weapons equal freedom and you think you HAVE to own weapons to protect yourself due to the propaganda of insecurity.

    And yes, i would want to live in a community that disallow weapons and a community that doesn't let peoples enter with weapons.

    lol if you understand that then why would you let weapons into everyone's hands ??? You say that you want more guns and less control but on the other side you admit men are violent by nature and it always comes down to violence.

    and like i said:
    "It's also funny how the guns defender contradict themselves with opposite arguments. For example, they say that we need guns to protect ourselves from armed assaults. But on the other side, when we critize weapons for being the responsible of murders, they answer that the majority of murders aren't commited with firearms. So why would we need firearms to protect ourselves from murders with firearms if those murders are only a very small percentage ?"
     
  7. Rathryn

    RathrynExperienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    853

    0

    0

    Oct 21, 2009
     
    Perhaps, but I still say it's one of the most honest ways to get your meat. Better than sticking animals in cages for their entire, far-too-short lives and feeding them antibiotics that actually interfere with our ability to combat certain diseases (as recent Dutch tests have shown).
     
  8. Wooly

    WoolyExperienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    123

    0

    0

    May 24, 2010
     
    We have farms, because 7 billion people taking to the forests to hunt for food, simply because it is an honest way to get meat (Witch i do agree with, hunting is far more honest that imprisoning animals from birth and then killing them once they are large enough), is not realistic. The best way to feed a large population is to farm animals (Witch sucks, but its the only realistic way to do it).

    This sounds awfully familiar to the corrupt governments (Particularly under Stallin) of the former USSR. If you give control to a group of people, even if they are supposed to be controlled by the community, the second that syndicate becomes powerful enough there is noting to stop them from becoming dictators. :ecouteurs:
     
  9. ungovernable

    ungovernableAutonome Staff Member Uploader Admin Team Experienced member


    4,326

    60

    24

    Aug 21, 2009
    Male, 33 years old
    Canada Canada
    Ever heard about bio farms ? ;)

    What needs to be reformed in an anarchist society is the society of over-consumation and the big animal factories, there is nothing wrong with farms itself...

    And for your milk products what will you do ? Find a cow in the woods ? And for your clothes ? Find wild sheeps ?

    And seriously i don't see the difference between buying meat or killing the animal with your own hands... It's just a way to feel less guilty or feel like you deserve more to eat meat...

    Oh really ? So the CNT and POUM in spanish anarchist revolution were "awfully familiat to the stalin government" ???

    i'm talking about a syndicate or whatever group that represent the peoples. Not a closed organisation, something open that everyone can join.

    Seriously, inform yourself about the spanish revolution and stop seeing stalinism everywhere.
     
  10. ghoul

    ghoulExperienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    169

    0

    0

    May 16, 2010
     
    Sounds like the police to me.
     
  11. Wooly

    WoolyExperienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    123

    0

    0

    May 24, 2010
     
    Chill man, Im new. Besides, the way you described it, it sounded like how Ghoul is describing it, It sounds like a Police. In fact it reminds me of the gestapo coming around to your house to make sure you were listening to Hitler approved radio stations...
     
  12. Wooly

    WoolyExperienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    123

    0

    0

    May 24, 2010
     
    You know what? just forget i said that....
     
  13. Rathryn

    RathrynExperienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    853

    0

    0

    Oct 21, 2009
     
    Yes I've heard of it and no I don't see a complete destruction of farms of any kind as the ultimate goal. I just feel more comfortable with hunting for my food, rather than rely on someone else to 'produce' it for me. Besides any animals that has a skin can basically be turned into leather, if the skin is furry you can make fur. That simple. You don't actually NEED cows for leather, nor do you NEED sheep for fur (which wool technically is), in fact horse and camel wool have also been successfully used throughout the ages.
    And I DO see a difference between buying meat and hunting my meat.
     
  14. Anom

    AnomExperienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    698

    0

    0

    Dec 21, 2009
     
    Hemp!!! Huge fields of hemp. It can be used for close to everything; you can make fabric of it, ropes, super nutricious oil, paper, eat the seeds (very healthy), fuel, etc.
    Just have to keep it at a safe distance from your cannabis plants ;)
     
  15. bgrass

    bgrassExperienced Member Experienced member


    50

    0

    0

    Apr 11, 2010
     
    The community is you and the other individuals that live in that geographical area. So you, as an individual, will support, vote for and possibly assist in the prohibition of guns. So you are responsible for the actions that are used to prohibit the guns.

    So, again, what are you willing to do to those that wish own guns? Will you resort to violence, which makes an assumption of ownership over the individual and puts on the same level as any of the other governments that function the same, or will it be nasty words and dirty looks?

    Also, my position is not on what some other person might do violently with a gun so I need a gun to defend myself. My position is personal. I want you to know that I believe using violence to control others, including controlling what items they may possess, is an assumption of ownership over that person and I oppose people owning other people. So I want to know what you will do?
     
  16. nodz

    nodzExperienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    328

    0

    5

    Apr 4, 2010
     
    Why? How much of the meat/eggs/fish etc that you eat is currently hunted wth a gun? They even have deer/venison farms these days. Again no need for guns.
     
  17. Anom

    AnomExperienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    698

    0

    0

    Dec 21, 2009
     
    While i'm definately against everyone walking around with a gun and i'm vegan so i don't see a need for eating meat at all, i don't follow this logic. How do you supose they kill the animals at a farm? By suffocation?
     
  18. ungovernable

    ungovernableAutonome Staff Member Uploader Admin Team Experienced member


    4,326

    60

    24

    Aug 21, 2009
    Male, 33 years old
    Canada Canada
    You are very naive, the police is controlled by the state and not by the people.

    So you are saying that during the spanish anarchist revolution, the CNT and the POUM were a police ?

    Yeah you are right, i have a really good documentary about all the use of hemp but it's in french :(

    I already explained my point clearly. I would vote to live in a community without guns like 90% of the anarchists in the world would do. Peoples who want to live with guns are free to find a community that accept them, it's as simple as that.

    I already said multiple times that i never talked about using violence, this is just your paranoia...

    As for the rest, it's bullshit. In anarchism nobody would be allowed to own tanks, bombs, chemical weapons or WMD so following your ridiculous theory it would be "ownership over the individual"....

    I seen a couple of documentary about meat farms and no, they are not killed with guns :p

    Your position is personnal ? Why the fuck are you participating to a debate on guns if you can't even explain why you want guns
     
  19. ghoul

    ghoulExperienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    169

    0

    0

    May 16, 2010
     
    The real problem I see is this. I keep reading references to "a post revolutionary society" and the lack of a need for guns there. This assumes that there will be an armed revolution (and really is there any other kind?) to overthrow a tyrannical government. I would even support this as I believe the politicians no longer work for the people. But then what is to stop a new system from later oppressing the people in the same way? Faith? Hope? An arrogant belief that you will do better and not make the same mistakes humanity has made for tens of thousands of years? It will happen again. So we must be ready for that, always.

    Guns may not be needed at the moment. Hell, I hope I never have to use mine against another person. But to not have the ability to defend one's self, from others or a government, is to throw away your freedom. The truth is no matter how perfect you try to make the world there will always be someone that will try to take that away. That may be the saddest fact of the human condition but it is true.
     
  20. Anom

    AnomExperienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    698

    0

    0

    Dec 21, 2009
     
    Usually they don't use guns but bolt driving guns, wich has on occations in sweden been used to kill humans as well. Then there are halal butchery where they kill the animal by only cutting it's throat, wich makes it take a longer time for the animal to die then when it's been shot so it's even more vicious.
     
Loading...