For you anti-gun folk

[angelofdeath]

I think that Rioting and protesting is a much better way of effecting change in your government.

 

If someone came to take my land (even though I don't have any) I would like a gun to defend myself with. Maybe a militia could hand them out in such a case. But most of us humans are too stupid not to shoot ourselves in the face, and only a total cunt needs to pack a weapon in public.

ps i just bought this really awesome nuclear warhead. Now everyone will have to listen to me.

in short- guns for whales only.

 

problem is some 'cunts' might live in bad areas. walking around in a bad area, one is probably MORE likely to get into a bad situation than sitting at ones house. which is where it would make sense to be carrying a gun. if its a defensive weapon, who really cares and why is this person a 'cunt?' i mean, someone trained in hand to hand combat or martial arts carries around their 'weapons' all the time...

[Scotty1972]

Yeah! Take away legally owned guns! Only people who have illegally imported, stolen, or otherwise improperly obtained assault weapons deserve to own them!

[Decyferon]

I can see why people want to legally own guns, I just really don't see why people need to own assault weapons other than the military

[Scotty1972]

I can see why people want to legally own guns, I just really don't see why people need to own assault weapons other than the military

 

Amen! I just have no clue why criminals would want assault weapons. Only the military should have them. And the idea of law abiding citizens wanting assault weapons to defend against the criminals who want assault weapons because they are powerful enough for the military simply escapes my comprehension.

[Decyferon]

Thats the problem you have in America with such lax gun laws.

 

Obviously Criminals will always be able to get weapons through illegal means, so because terrorists are able to have dirty bombs, have RPGs, missles all that sort of thing do you think that an average american citizen should be able to own these things to 'defend' themselves against that?

 

To me it is just crazy the ease with which people can have firearms in the US, some states have remarkably lax gun laws and others are stricter. To defend one's self is one thing to be armed to the teeth is another.

 

Criminals in the US would not have assault weapons so readily available if they were illegal in the US, because most of them are legally owned weapons that have been stolen. But, America has gone to far down that road to turn back, so i'm not saying to outlaw guns because it would just be pointless.

 

If they wanted to have gun laws here like they have in the US I would definitely be against it and would not want this country to go down that route.

[OLD_STYLE]

I hate the fact that in my state, Illinois, law-abiding citizens cannot carry a gun with them and only the criminals can. This, like in New York, creates a place where all the criminals, who never cared for the law in the first place, take advantage that the rest wont carry a weapon with them. A very unhealthy balance.

 

This would of never happened if people here would do what others are doing like in AZ or TX, carrying there weapons with them at events where the MSM is present, exercising there rights for the country to see as a reminder.

 

Owning assault weapons, I see as a bold way of exercising that right, and a way of balancing out the scale against all the criminals who own assault weapons. Just like carrying an AR-15 to an Obama event, it sends a clear message to the establishment that "we like our guns, and we will not accept that right to be suppressed in any way".

[Scotty1972]

Thats the problem you have in America with such lax gun laws.

 

Obviously Criminals will always be able to get weapons through illegal means, so because terrorists are able to have dirty bombs, have RPGs, missles all that sort of thing do you think that an average american citizen should be able to own these things to 'defend' themselves against that?

 

To me it is just crazy the ease with which people can have firearms in the US, some states have remarkably lax gun laws and others are stricter. To defend one's self is one thing to be armed to the teeth is another.

 

Criminals in the US would not have assault weapons so readily available if they were illegal in the US, because most of them are legally owned weapons that have been stolen. But, America has gone to far down that road to turn back, so i'm not saying to outlaw guns because it would just be pointless.

 

If they wanted to have gun laws here like they have in the US I would definitely be against it and would not want this country to go down that route.

 

Instead of switching the topic to "RPGs, missles, all that sort of thing", I would actually prefer to keep it in the vein of things that we can actually purchase legitimately from retailers. The average home-invasion or robbery gang does not use a nuclear warhead to neutralize their victim, why would you even imagine that we would use something similar against them? They have assault weapons, they have fully automatic weapons (which we, the legitimate citizens, are forced to pay upwards of $20,000 and require numerous permits to obtain), and they have more. Our legal methods of self preservation and defense of ourselves and family are numbered - must you sincerely insist that we be denied this last form of protection?

[Decyferon]

Yes and what i am pointing out is those kind of weapons should never have been legitamately on sale in the first place. When the bill of rights was written there were not weapons capable of firing hundreds and hundreds of round a minute, those kind of weapons should never have been made available to the general public - criminals can get their hands on anything they want through illegal means, just because they can get them doesn't mean anyone should legally be able to own them

 

I am not denying your right to defend yourself I just think there should be stricter laws on tohse type of weapons because frankly they are overkill

[Scotty1972]

criminals can get their hands on anything they want through illegal means

 

I am not denying your right to defend yourself

 

Yes, criminals can get their hands on anything they want through illegal means. You do not believe we should be able to legally obtain weapons of the same type in order to defend ourselves with, so as a result I must ask the following question: what do you suggest we use instead?

 

I do feel as though you are hoping to deny rights.

 

While my opinion may be very unpopular, I will state it regardless. I feel that if criminals can attack us using military or assault type weapons, we as honest citizens should be able to defend ourselves using similar weapons. While others will disagree and say that we should call 911, hide, use a knife, etc,; I am honestly simply saying that I feel that free people deserve to defend their lives against violent criminals with tools of lesser of equivalent harm/damage potential. If you rob/murder/steal for a living, I do not condone the fact that you want a defenseless population, because this is simply a business motive for you. However, if you are a law-abiding citizen, I must question why you have such a burning desire to disarm the legitimate and render them into hapless victims of brutal and merciless crimes.

[Decyferon]

Also I would like to point out as I have said before that I believe there are sensible gun owners, I am not denying people's right to defend themselves, I would own a gun/guns if I lived in the US because everyone else has them

 

I am kinda playing devils advocate to the arguement - like I have said before I live in the UK where guns are illegal and Yes criminals do have them but hardly at all and they are only generally used during armed robberies of banks/jewellery stores etc and not to mug people, rob members of the public or during buglaries it is only complete hardcore criminals that don't bother with those petty crimes that use them so there is really no need for members of the public to own guns

[Decyferon]

Yes, criminals can get their hands on anything they want through illegal means. You do not believe we should be able to legally obtain weapons of the same type in order to defend ourselves with, so as a result I must ask the following question: what do you suggest we use instead?

 

I do feel as though you are hoping to deny rights.

 

While my opinion may be very unpopular, I will state it regardless. I feel that if criminals can attack us using military or assault type weapons, we as honest citizens should be able to defend ourselves using similar weapons. While others will disagree and say that we should call 911, hide, use a knife, etc,; I am honestly simply saying that I feel that free people deserve to defend their lives against violent criminals with tools of lesser of equivalent harm/damage potential. If you rob/murder/steal for a living, I do not condone the fact that you want a defenseless population, because this is simply a business motive for you. However, if you are a law-abiding citizen, I must question why you have such a burning desire to disarm the legitimate and render them into hapless victims of brutal and merciless crimes.

 

I do believe that military grade assault weapons should not be available to just anyone but America has gone to far down thatr road so the arguement is mute - you can own them so will, if they had never been made legal in the first place then your average common criminal who would rob you or break into your house would not have those military level weapons in which case for you to defend yourself a rifle or handgun is sufficient

 

well time for bed now so any responses from me will be tomorrow, thanks for the continued discussion tho - props given

[angelofdeath]

in 1776 the 'military assault weapon' was the flintlock rifle and musket. in 2009 it is a full automatic m16, m4, m14, m60, ak47, etc. etc. cannons and mortars were allowed to be owned by private citizens in 1776. why are we not allowed to own these today? when the 1st amendment was written guaranteeing free speech and press, does it now somehow not apply to automatic printing machines and computers? did the founders not realize that there are now new crazy religions out there that you must register for certain religions and obtain a permit to go to church?

 

the exact original intent of the guys who wrote and ratified the constitution was that the citizenry retain all their rights and retain ultimate power OVER the government. the founding generation was so scared of government power, they didnt even authorize the government to have a STANDING ARMY. they made it explicit in their debates and in the federalist papers which was the propaganda machine for ratification of the constitution that the citizenry was to retain power and to have weapons capable of taking on the military. the people DELEGATED the power to the government to aid in defending the citizenry. if they didnt have the right own assault weapons and all manners of weapons, they could of never given it to the government. so the citizens still retain this right, even though the government has made it illegal for most people to own full auto weapons due to NFA34.

 

but why such a fear of assault weapons or even nukes. the roads in the US kill more than 40K people a year... how many are killed with assault weapons? in 2001 a handful of arabs with boxcutters flew planes into the world trade center and killed 3000 americans. are we to ban box cutters, airplanes, arabs and pilots?

 

would it make a difference if a 'hunting rifle' had 90% of the same features of an 'assault weapon' would it change your mind on the assault weapon issue? what is so bad about them to begin with? what makes a ar15 any worse than a semi auto .22 mag? is it the looks? many hunters out west use ar15s and ruger mini 14's for ranch guns to shoot varmits... why do these people need to give up these guns? its silly. if a gun holds a few to many rounds or looks threatening it is somehow more lethal than another gun? do you really think people are bayoneted to death at an alarming rate in states where it is legal to own assault weapons? these are both features of ugly assault weapons. whats the big deal, really?

 

and just how are guns so 'available' in the US. some places in the US people cant even OWN guns. alot of other places have registration, 7 day waits, intense background checks, etc. the places with the high crime, have the most gun control. the places where you dont need a permit to carry a gun concealed, like vermont, gun crime is unheard of.

 

believe me, its not like you can walk into a store, flop down 500 bucks and walk out with a full auto AR and 1000 rounds. the criminals are already banned from getting guns. so if they get them, they are already breaking the law. even law abiding citizens cant keep up with the gun laws. they try to combat suicides or child accidents with guns by requiring trigger locks, if you dont do this, you could go to jail in jurisdictions that enforce this. there is also an unintended consequence of not being able to defend yourself when you need it with this law in effect.

[angelofdeath]

Also I would like to point out as I have said before that I believe there are sensible gun owners, I am not denying people's right to defend themselves, I would own a gun/guns if I lived in the US because everyone else has them

 

I am kinda playing devils advocate to the arguement - like I have said before I live in the UK where guns are illegal and Yes criminals do have them but hardly at all and they are only generally used during armed robberies of banks/jewellery stores etc and not to mug people, rob members of the public or during buglaries it is only complete hardcore criminals that don't bother with those petty crimes that use them so there is really no need for members of the public to own guns

 

i think what alot of people dont get, is that for so many years other countries have been run in a much more tyrannical fashion than the US has. despite what has happened to the US traveling down the road to serfdom, the US was founded with gun culture. the revolution began when a tyrant sent his thugs to confiscate guns from citizens. guns were used defend early americans lives. they were used to hunt food, and they were used to combat invading armies and defend the citizens liberty. the gun culture and the militia is what founded america. this is not the case in the countries like the UK, australia, etc.

 

its not the 'guns' and it never has been. when my great great grandfathers neighbor came home from ww1 he came home with a BAR, full auto. no shit. kept it in his closet. no permit, no nothing. i've heard all the stories and saw the picture of the guy and my g-g-grandfather with it. there was no gun crime to speak of like it is today. you used to be able to order 20mm solothurns through the mail before the GCA of 1968. who was shot with these?

 

there is a lot of debate with what has/is causing gun crime in the US but it surely isn't availability of guns. they were much more available in years past than now, and crime is much worse.

[shai]

so there is really no need for members of the public to own guns

 

I don't trust the cops to get to my house before I can cock a shotgun and tell a burglar to get the fuck out. Every cop I've talked to about this has said variations on the same exact thing- "If every homeowner had a shotgun, there would be far fewer burglaries."

 

I don't see the need for owning an AR-15 in the city. It seems like more of a liability than anything else. But if you live in the desert or the mountains and can afford ammunition for it, why not? Handguns are tricky...if you're trained and understand that you don't pull it unless you plan to use it, then I'm okay with that. Otherwise, no.

 

Another thing I could understand is that it's kind of hard to shoot a gun in the UK and not hit someone or something belonging to someone. That's not meant to sound flippant, BTW.

 

I don't know...AOD, I agree with you almost across the board, but Americans have a lot of entitlement issues. Just look at people who live in cities who own huge SUVs. Something about people like that having a handgun scares me...and a lot of them do. And if their gun gets stolen, it's about even odds whether they'll report it or not (more entitlement/"I can't be inconvenienced" issues)...they'll just go buy a new one and try to forget about it or pretend they never got ripped off. That's all bad no matter how you look at it. I know you're all about liberty but just because you can afford something doesn't mean you should have it...it's not as cut and dried as that, but it's something to ponder.

 

You seem like a responsible guy, therefore you aren't the kind of person I'm worried about. It's the people that can't wrap their heads around what kind of responsibility they're taking on but go ahead and do it anyway that scare me.

[Scotty1972]

i think what alot of people dont get, is that for so many years other countries have been run in a much more tyrannical fashion than the US has. despite what has happened to the US traveling down the road to serfdom, the US was founded with gun culture. the revolution began when a tyrant sent his thugs to confiscate guns from citizens. guns were used defend early americans lives. they were used to hunt food, and they were used to combat invading armies and defend the citizens liberty. the gun culture and the militia is what founded america. this is not the case in the countries like the UK, australia, etc.

 

its not the 'guns' and it never has been. when my great great grandfathers neighbor came home from ww1 he came home with a BAR, full auto. no shit. kept it in his closet. no permit, no nothing. i've heard all the stories and saw the picture of the guy and my g-g-grandfather with it. there was no gun crime to speak of like it is today. you used to be able to order 20mm solothurns through the mail before the GCA of 1968. who was shot with these?

 

there is a lot of debate with what has/is causing gun crime in the US but it surely isn't availability of guns. they were much more available in years past than now, and crime is much worse.

 

It is certainly refreshing to hear a voice of reason anywhere near a debate about gun control. I must applaud you for being one of the few brave enough to support the fact that it is only fair for law abiding citizens to stand up to criminals, legally, with their own comparable type of defense weapon. Others would love for criminals to dominate us with illegally obtained weapons, and to harm our families with said weapons, but thankfully there are still a few voices out there who believe that letting our loved ones die tragically at the hands of murderers is simply not acceptable.

[angelofdeath]

I don't trust the cops to get to my house before I can cock a shotgun and tell a burglar to get the fuck out. Every cop I've talked to about this has said variations on the same exact thing- "If every homeowner had a shotgun, there would be far fewer burglaries."

 

true. im also surprised that in a youtube vid of that dude chris open carrying the AR in arizona, a cop gets asked if its legal for him to do so, and they say, "oh yes, it is." and someone said... but what about a permit...they answered with '' the second amendment.''

i wish more law enforcement personnel were like this.

 

I don't see the need for owning an AR-15 in the city. It seems like more of a liability than anything else. But if you live in the desert or the mountains and can afford ammunition for it, why not? Handguns are tricky...if you're trained and understand that you don't pull it unless you plan to use it, then I'm okay with that. Otherwise, no.

 

Another thing I could understand is that it's kind of hard to shoot a gun in the UK and not hit someone or something belonging to someone. That's not meant to sound flippant, BTW.

 

I don't know...AOD, I agree with you almost across the board, but Americans have a lot of entitlement issues. Just look at people who live in cities who own huge SUVs. Something about people like that having a handgun scares me...and a lot of them do. And if their gun gets stolen, it's about even odds whether they'll report it or not (more entitlement/"I can't be inconvenienced" issues)...they'll just go buy a new one and try to forget about it or pretend they never got ripped off. That's all bad no matter how you look at it. I know you're all about liberty but just because you can afford something doesn't mean you should have it...it's not as cut and dried as that, but it's something to ponder.

 

You seem like a responsible guy, therefore you aren't the kind of person I'm worried about. It's the people that can't wrap their heads around what kind of responsibility they're taking on but go ahead and do it anyway that scare me.

 

you are making some good points. but for this discussion i have been speaking purely about rights, not about tactical, strategic or practical issues. let me put it another way, i may defend someones right to say that obama is really run by the lizard alien family and was sent to take over the world, but i might disagree.

 

you are right. an ar-15 is a pretty poor choice for home defense in the city. why? because every bullet that comes out of any firearm has a lawyer on the other end. you are responsible for what happens. but its just that, if you are silly enough to use an ar15 in a highly populous neighborhood, you are responsible for any collateral damage. if you are in your house in the city, a much better choice would be a shotgun. a handgun would be second in my opinion.

 

i consider myself a decently trained enthusiast, im not some highly trained tacticool dude. even alot of the professionally trained military boys are not trained as good as you think. that is why whenever the military wants the best shooters they send them to rifles only in texas to train, a private firearms school.

 

i think one of the silliest things a person could do is buy a gun, shoot one mag through then consider themselves ready for anything. if your life is in danger, you must be able to hit what you are shooting at. you must stop the threat. you must also minimize collateral damage, you are ultimately liable. for instance famed firearms instructor clint smith advocates that if you or your family are not in direct danger, that you do not shoot at an attacker attacking someone else. i personally have a moral issue with that, but strategically, its probably the best advice. you might find yourself in the clinker and not the attacker.

 

i also think that people with escalades or any kind of 4x4 that live in the city and never leave are also stupid. my girl used to live in the city and she always wanted a jeep, i always talked her out of it. it makes no sense. BUT one does have the RIGHT to own this vehicle. the same way a person may choose to high power of a gun for home defense... they still have that right, but they must suffer the consequences if they use the gun improperly, shoot an innocent person or tear up someones property.

[Scotty1972]

true. im also surprised that in a youtube vid of that dude chris open carrying the AR in arizona, a cop gets asked if its legal for him to do so, and they say, "oh yes, it is." and someone said... but what about a permit...they answered with '' the second amendment.''

i wish more law enforcement personnel were like this.

 

 

 

you are making some good points. but for this discussion i have been speaking purely about rights, not about tactical, strategic or practical issues. let me put it another way, i may defend someones right to say that obama is really run by the lizard alien family and was sent to take over the world, but i might disagree.

 

you are right. an ar-15 is a pretty poor choice for home defense in the city. why? because every bullet that comes out of any firearm has a lawyer on the other end. you are responsible for what happens. but its just that, if you are silly enough to use an ar15 in a highly populous neighborhood, you are responsible for any collateral damage. if you are in your house in the city, a much better choice would be a shotgun. a handgun would be second in my opinion.

 

i consider myself a decently trained enthusiast, im not some highly trained tacticool dude. even alot of the professionally trained military boys are not trained as good as you think. that is why whenever the military wants the best shooters they send them to rifles only in texas to train, a private firearms school.

 

i think one of the silliest things a person could do is buy a gun, shoot one mag through then consider themselves ready for anything. if your life is in danger, you must be able to hit what you are shooting at. you must stop the threat. you must also minimize collateral damage, you are ultimately liable. for instance famed firearms instructor clint smith advocates that if you or your family are not in direct danger, that you do not shoot at an attacker attacking someone else. i personally have a moral issue with that, but strategically, its probably the best advice. you might find yourself in the clinker and not the attacker.

 

i also think that people with escalades or any kind of 4x4 that live in the city and never leave are also stupid. my girl used to live in the city and she always wanted a jeep, i always talked her out of it. it makes no sense. BUT one does have the RIGHT to own this vehicle. the same way a person may choose to high power of a gun for home defense... they still have that right, but they must suffer the consequences if they use the gun improperly, shoot an innocent person or tear up someones property.

 

I had no choice but to quote this sudden outbreak of common sense. While I do own assault weapons, they are certainly not my go-to weapons in any given situation; I analyze and react appropriately. Just because some clown wants to smash my window, I won't automatically proceed to spray 7.62x39 rounds into my neighbors house! Sure if 5 armed robbers appear (which is becoming more frequent in my area, I will respond to them with the appropriate defense), things will be handled as I see fit. However, the majority of the time I am carrying a small capacity firearm and the only intent for its use is for an extreme situation which happens to spiral out of control and is characterized by a series of events set forth by a violent criminal who is hell bent on ending the lives of myself, my family, or other innocent Americans! Despite how much this may frustrate some liberals, I simply refuse to apologize for my desire to protect the lives of other innocent American citizens from the threats of what I ultimately consider to be ultimately "domestic terrorists"; despite the fact that you may consider them to be "misunderstood children" or "victims of circumstances."

[angelofdeath]

^^^^ amen

[shai]

No, the thing that's been more on my mind is rights versus the obligations and responsibilities that come with them.

 

About 90% of the reason I don't drive is because I have really bad peripheral and night vision. I would be as much of a hazard to myself as I would be to other people. But I see people driving and texting- TEXTING- at the same time.

 

A lot of people in America seem to think that just because they are capable of doing something, then by God, they're gonna do it. That bugs me.

 

This isn't about the constitution, it's more about a prevailing lack of common sense and place in society. No man is an island.

[lord_casek]

Except the worlds fattest man

He was going to be annexed to Mexico.

[the radiologist]

I can see why people want to legally own guns, I just really don't see why people need to own assault weapons other than the military

 

I don't know????? Maybe we should ask all the pretty much unarmed European nations that were invaded by Germany. I'm sure having assault rifles would've helped the smaller towns, instead of trying to defend with single shot bolt action.

 

History repeats itself, that much is true.

[russell jones]

 

Don't fuck with America!

 

Especially if you're Injun!

[OLD_STYLE]

Decyferon you are from the UK? This all makes sense now.

 

You see I live in Chicago, where cops love beating on people, where gangs run the streets and murder 40 kids every summer. Owning an AR-15 would make me feel very safe.

[Decyferon]

yea I'm from the UK, like i have said I understand the differences in America and if lived there would be a gun owner myself!

[LEVEL 75 PALADIN]

This retarded population needs more guns.

 

And rap.

[russell jones]

[twonpoo]

I do understand why is was enshrined in the bill of rights

 

but i also think it is my freedom to not have to worry about having a disagreement with some hot head in a bar or a shop and ending up getting shot by them.

 

like previously said I know there are a lot of responsible gun owners, i just think having them so easily available and readily at hand causes major crime issues - which is obvious when looking at gun crime figures in America

 

what happened to men settling things like men and using their fists (if everything else fails) to resolve an arguement - guns or weapons of any kind are for cowards in my eyes and should not be used to resolve arguements but i also ultimately think that the gun owners in America would not be able to stand up against the tyrany of government with them either, I know the military are supposed to support the citizens of the country but nowadays they are just patsies of the government otherwise we wouldn't be so entrenched in unjustified wars in the middle east

 

So why the hell should I have to go to a bar and wory about your dumb ass starting a fight with me? If I got a gun your drunk ass will walk away. You shouldnt be going and having "dissagreements" any damn way, keep the peace, and my piece wil keep you calm then Im all for it.

 

Guns arent meant to resolve arguments dumb ass , the're meant to keep people from climbing into my window. Or protect my family in bad times moving from point A t point B. Or in worst case senerio, hunting to feed my family. Another case being shooting for sport, at a range etc.

[twonpoo]

personally i think its becuase those people are to pussy to fight.its so much easier to intimidate someone with a gun or a knife then have to fight them and risk gettin an asswhoopin.and unfortunately it seems those type of people are on the rise.but the times are changing and we live in an ultraviolent society.we love shit like that...why do you think grand theft auto sells so well.theres nothing fun about being shot at or having guns pointed at your head or having a love one get shot but i think most people dont think aobut that when they decide to pull guns out.

 

Why the hell should I have to fight someone anyway? Stop walkin around trying to be a tough guy. And for the record, just because I own a gun, doesn't mean Im out to kill someone. But if you're planning on putting my life in threat, Im shootin your ass. But if me owning a gun keeps your insecure ass from flexxin your in public alpha male moncheezmo ass from starting a fight, and maybe acting mature and being cool for fear you might actually catch a bullet, then the gun kept your ass in check and no one even got shot.

 

 

 

Gun don't kill people, unless youre too stupid to think a bullet won't kill you. If youre aware of what the bullet can do, then youll be a calm as a priest, trust me.

[Decyferon]

I didn't say that I have fights in bars, I personally have never had to have a fight in a bar, but if someone was fucking with my wife and hassling her and things got to the stage where a fight broke out, it should be handled properly and not with weapons.

 

I am a very peaceful person I don't get drunk and aggressive I tend to chill at home and get stoned with my wife and have quiet evenings.

 

But sadly, some people do go out looking for fights and if one of them started something with me I would rather it be dealt with fists, and not have to worry about some idiot who has legally or illegally be given a gun which has upped his bravado to where he thinks it is fine to go around starting fights.

[twonpoo]

thats the point, people run around acting like asses because theyre no reprocussions. That didnt happen in the wild west, cuz youd get shot. You knew your limits.