NationStates Jolt Archive

You know the quote. Something like "one who would trade his freedom for a little security deserves neither". Why do people always remember that quote when we're discussing Bush's transgressions against freedom in the name of security and it's never brought up when we're discussing gun control?

I've seen it brought up in the context of gun control.
Unfortunately, the quote is often misquoted. Admittedly I'm paraphrasing here also, but it is "Those who would give up essential freedom for liberty deserve neither." Most people neglect the word 'essential', but it is within the quote. Now the question remains what 'essential freedom' is.

Now the question remains what 'essential freedom' is.

Ice cream and butt sex.

Ice cream and butt sex.Wouldn't that be a bit cold?

You know the quote. Something like "one who would trade his freedom for a little security deserves neither". Why do people always remember that quote when we're discussing Bush's transgressions against freedom in the name of security and it's never brought up when we're discussing gun control?
I think Ben gets misquoted a lot on that. Probably because he said the same thing so many ways. There's another of his quotes that's a little closer to the one that you referred to as misquoted. It goes "Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one."

[edit]
What do you know, I quoted the wrong guy. I meant to quote Biafra...
I've seen it brought up in the context of gun control.
Unfortunately, the quote is often misquoted. Admittedly I'm paraphrasing here also, but it is "Those who would give up essential freedom for liberty deserve neither." Most people neglect the word 'essential', but it is within the quote. Now the question remains what 'essential freedom' is.

I think Ben gets misquoted a lot on that. Probably because he said the same thing so many ways. There's another of his quotes that's a little closer to the one that you referred to as misquoted. It goes "Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one."Ah, I see. Now I suppose we have to decide whether or not he meant essential freedom or any freedom at all. ;)

Ice cream and butt sex.
You are, as of this post, my personal hero.

Ah, I see. Now I suppose we have to decide whether or not he meant essential freedom or any freedom at all. ;)
Franklin was a heck of a politician, huh?

Franklin was a heck of a politician, huh?Lol. yes, I'm forced to agree with this.

It's a bullshit quote anyway. Security usually comes at the expense of some freedom.

You know the quote. Something like "one who would trade his freedom for a little security deserves neither". Why do people always remember that quote when we're discussing Bush's transgressions against freedom in the name of security and it's never brought up when we're discussing gun control?
Apart from hunting applications, a citizen has a gun because they are not feeling secure. They feel threatened within their environment, i.e. may need to defend themselves at a moment's notice.

They have traded the freedom of peace of mind for the security of being able to shoot their neighbours. I think old Ben was right; they deserve neither, at least until they have earned it by changing their thinking.

You know the quote. Something like "one who would trade his freedom for a little security deserves neither". Why do people always remember that quote when we're discussing Bush's transgressions against freedom in the name of security and it's never brought up when we're discussing gun control?

Every time I try, I get a used sock stuffed into my mouth.

That's not the shocking part. The shocking part is that I'm starting to like it. :eek:

Apart from hunting applications, a citizen has a gun because they are not feeling secure. They feel threatened within their environment, i.e. may need to defend themselves at a moment's notice.

They have traded the freedom of peace of mind for the security of being able to shoot their neighbours. I think old Ben was right; they deserve neither, at least until they have earned it by changing their thinking.
Not really. I don't own a gun because I'm afraid. I own a gun because I like guns. Anti-gun people are afraid of guns, therefore they want to trade away my freedom for their perception of security.

Not really. I don't own a gun because I'm afraid. I own a gun because I like guns. Anti-gun people are afraid of guns, therefore they want to trade away my freedom for their perception of security.

I hate guns. But, not because they scare me (although if one were pointed at me I'd be a little scared. more of the person holding it than the weapon itself though.) I just think guns are dumb, and have an uncanny ability to bring out the worst in a person (note: this is not a blanket statement that all people who own guns are bad, but that guns do indeed have that effect on some people)

I hate guns. But, not because they scare me (although if one were pointed at me I'd be a little scared. more of the person holding it than the weapon itself though.) I just think guns are dumb, and have an uncanny ability to bring out the worst in a person (note: this is not a blanket statement that all people who own guns are bad, but that guns do indeed have that effect on some people)
Alcohol has that effect on some people. Hypoglycemia and sleep deprivation do as well. Ban 'em all I say.

Ice cream and butt sex.
how deep

how deep?
I guess that depends on penis size.

how deep

Is that a question?

You know the quote. Something like "one who would trade his freedom for a little security deserves neither". Why do people always remember that quote when we're discussing Bush's transgressions against freedom in the name of security and it's never brought up when we're discussing gun control?

All below from The Quotations Page (http://www.quotationspage.com/)

Results from Cole's Quotables:
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Benjamin Franklin (1706 - 1790)

even better

"Three may keep a secret, if two of them are dead."
Benjamin Franklin:D

or

"At 20 years of age the will reigns, at 30 the wit, at 40 the judgment."
Benjamin Franklin:cool:

and
"Creditors have better memories than debtors."
Benjamin Franklin, Poor Richard’s Almanac (1758)

and another

"If your head is wax, don't walk in the sun."
Benjamin Franklin
;)

whoops, got carried away...Ben was a funny guy!

Alcohol has that effect on some people.

Yes, but alcohol isn't in and of itself a deadly weapon. The container it cam in can be "modified" into one, but even then it's far less deadly than a firearm.

Hypoglycemia and sleep deprivation do as well.

Medical conditions are also not weapons in and of themselves, nor do they have modifiable containers.

What are you getting at? How was that one supposed to convince me of anything?

You know the quote. Something like "one who would trade his freedom for a little security deserves neither". Why do people always remember that quote when we're discussing Bush's transgressions against freedom in the name of security and it's never brought up when we're discussing gun control?
Meh. It's just the politics of Hipocrisy. (or the Hipocrisy of Politics - same thing).

It's likeall those folks who disparage the "War on Terror" because it is a "War on a Noun" - yet have no problems with a "War on Guns" or "War on Poverty" (or "War on Drugs"...). :rolleyes:

Yes, but alcohol isn't in and of itself a deadly weapon. The container it cam in can be "modified" into one, but even then it's far less deadly than a firearm.How about Drunk Driving?
During 2004, 16,694 people in the U.S. died in alcohol-related motor vehicle crashes, representing 39% of all traffic-related deaths (NHTSA 2005).

Results from Cole's Quotables:
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Benjamin Franklin (1706 - 1790)!This quote mentions "essential" liberty, which is what I was talking about. But apparently Benny had a habvit of saying different things about liberty and freedom.

Yes, but alcohol isn't in and of itself a deadly weapon. The container it cam in can be "modified" into one, but even then it's far less deadly than a firearm.



Medical conditions are also not weapons in and of themselves, nor do they have modifiable containers.

What are you getting at? How was that one supposed to convince me of anything?
Your objection to guns is that, in your opinion, they bring out the worst in people. I've seen alot of things bring out the worst in people.

I hate guns. But, not because they scare me (although if one were pointed at me I'd be a little scared. more of the person holding it than the weapon itself though.) I just think guns are dumb, and have an uncanny ability to bring out the worst in a person (note: this is not a blanket statement that all people who own guns are bad, but that guns do indeed have that effect on some people)

What about all the millions of Americans who own guns, but do not shoot their families or friends or neighbors?

My wife owns a gun, and we have been married for over 14 years, but she has not and will not shoot me, no matter how angry she gets at my antics.

To me, it is like watching a movie containing novel ways of committing murder. Only a previously disturbed person would see that, and then go out and try to imitate it. That does not make the movie worthy of hatred.

And some people using guns because they think it is an easy way to assert themselves is because of their own deficient personalities, not because of guns.

I went to high school with a guy who wanted to bring his bow and arrow to school to get back at some bullies. Not a gun, but could have been deadly had he gone through with it instead of being temporarily committed.

A gun is a tool. In fact, there was a movie about someone committing gruesome murders with the contents of his toolbox. Ouch! Let's ban all pointy or heavy hand-held objects!

I hate guns. But, not because they scare me (although if one were pointed at me I'd be a little scared. more of the person holding it than the weapon itself though.) I just think guns are dumb, and have an uncanny ability to bring out the worst in a person (note: this is not a blanket statement that all people who own guns are bad, but that guns do indeed have that effect on some people)
Funny how arguments against gun ownership are usually emotional rather than logical.

According to Hobbes, self-preservation (security) is the single most important thing to a person. And in Hobbes view was the only legitimate reason for rebellion.

Franklin was a pussy who never lived through a war in his life. Throughout the American War of Independence he lived in a suberb or Paris (fine, he lived America for about 6 months at the very beginning of the war). Whereas Hobbes witnessed the entirety of the English Civil War. It wasn't obvious who the out of touch idealist was and who the realist was already then it should be now.

Now am I playing devils advocate, or is that what I really believe. :confused:

Funny how arguments against gun ownership are usually emotional rather than logical.
Isn't it though.

I will be the first to admit that the statistics are murky and causality cannot be proven for or against civillian gun ownership and crime.

But most anti-gun-choice aguments basically come down to the childishly emotional "do what I want you to because I want you to". :rolleyes:

Noticed that did you?:p

And technically, alcohol is a poisonous substance.

Noticed that did you?:p

And technically, alcohol is a poisonous substance.What do you mean 'technically'? There's no technically about it. It just is poisonous. It's just that most of us don't tend to drink lethal doses of it, at least not more than once.

I just think guns are dumb)
Evil will always triumph, because good is dumb.

What do you mean 'technically'? There's no technically about it. It just is poisonous. It's just that most of us don't tend to drink lethal doses of it, at least not more than once.

I only said technically because most people don't seem to see it as such. Or something like that.:headbang: Wouldn't the definition of the word "lethal" suggest you COULDN'T drink it more than once?:p

I only said technically because most people don't seem to see it as such. Or something like that.:headbang: Wouldn't the definition of the word "lethal" suggest you COULDN'T drink it more than once?:pStomach pump. It would have killed them if they hadn't have had their stomach pumped. Such a waste of NHS funds. :(

Evil will always triumph, because good is dumb.What's the matter, Colonel Sandurz? CHICKEN?

...
Sorry, I couldn't think of a relevant reply. But that's one of my favourites.

You know the quote. Something like "one who would trade his freedom for a little security deserves neither". Why do people always remember that quote when we're discussing Bush's transgressions against freedom in the name of security and it's never brought up when we're discussing gun control?

I've always wanted gun control and hated that quote. But for the people who like both... well everyone in California just got pwnd. (I had to say it.)
I give you a gold star. Of course they're going to argue that guns aren't part of your freedom but maybe you think the gov looking at your libary books is hurting your freedom either. But seriously who uses libraries? Communists that's who.

Not really. I don't own a gun because I'm afraid. I own a gun because I like guns. Anti-gun people are afraid of guns, therefore they want to trade away my freedom for their perception of security.
But then what that says to me is that you would never carry or use it.

I've seen it brought up in the context of gun control.
Unfortunately, the quote is often misquoted. Admittedly I'm paraphrasing here also, but it is "Those who would give up essential freedom for liberty deserve neither." Most people neglect the word 'essential', but it is within the quote. Now the question remains what 'essential freedom' is.

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Is the original quote...