We were actually talking about gun laws in Law class. The way I see it is that most of the people who use guns to commit crimes already receive guns illegally. Tighter gun laws will only prevent a few more accidents from happening but if people kept their guns away from other immature people, mainly children who don't know any better, then we wouldn't have any problems with that. Basically gun law is fine in my opinion but parents need to be more careful if they own guns. They should lock them up for sure.
Why Libertarians Support Equal Rights for America's Gun Owners
Libertarians, like other Americans, want to be able to walk city streets safely and be secure in their homes. We also want our Constitutional rights protected, to guard against the erosion of our civil liberties. In particular, Libertarians want to see all people treated equally under the law, as our Constitution requires. America's millions of gun owners are people too.
Law-abiding, responsible citizens do not and should not need to ask anyone's permission or approval to engage in a peaceful activity. Gun ownership, by itself, harms no other person and cannot morally justify criminal penalties.
Constitutional Rights
America's founders fought the Revolutionary War to throw off British tyranny. Most of the revolutionaries owned and used their own guns in that war. After the war, in 1789, the 13 American States adopted the Constitution, creating the federal government. Before ratifying the Constitution, the people demanded a Bill of Rights to prevent our government from depriving them of their liberties as the British had done.
One of the most important protections we have against government tyranny is that we are presumed innocent of any crime until proven guilty, before a jury, in a proper trial.
Gun control advocates would declare all gun owners guilty without trial, simply for owning guns, even though millions of them have never used their guns to harm another person. Such blanket condemnation is immoral, unfair and contrary to the principles on which America was founded.
The Prohibition Lesson
Gun control advocates are much like the prohibitionists of the early 20th Century. By making liquor illegal, they spawned organized crime, caused bloody, violent turf wars and corrupted the criminal justice system. Today's war on drugs has exactly the same results.
Prohibition didn't stop liquor use; the drug laws can't stop drug use. Making gun ownership illegal will not stop gun ownership.
The primary victim of these misguided efforts is the honest citizen whose civil rights are trampled as frustrated legislators and police tighten the screws.
Banning guns will make guns more expensive and give organized crime a great opportunity to make profits in a new black market for weapons. Street violence will increase in new turf wars. Criminals will not give up their guns. But, many law abiding citizens will, leaving them defenseless against armed bandits.
The Right of Self Defense
Libertarians agree with the majority of Americans who believe they have the right to decide how best to protect themselves, their families and their property. Millions of Americans have guns in their homes and sleep more comfortably because of it. Studies show that where gun ownership is illegal, residential burglaries are higher. A man with a gun in his home is no threat to you if you aren't breaking into it.
The police do not provide security in your home, your business or the street. They show up after the crime to take reports and do detective work. The poorer the neighborhood, the riskier it is for peaceful residents.
Only an armed citizenry can be present in sufficient numbers to prevent or deter violent crime before it starts, or to reduce its spread. Interviews with convicted felons indicate that fear of the armed citizen significantly deters crime. A criminal is more likely to be driven off from a particular crime by an armed victim than to be convicted and imprisoned for it. Thus, widespread gun ownership will make neighborhoods safer.
Foolish politicians and police now seek to ban semi-automatic "assault rifles". They ignore the fact that only honest citizens will comply; criminals will still have them. Such a ban will only increase the criminals' ability to victimize the innocent.
Personal Responsibility
Guns are not the problem. They are inanimate objects. Gun control advocates talk as if guns could act on their own, as if human beings cannot control them, so the uncontrollable guns must be banished.
Let us put the responsibility where it belongs, on the owner and user of the gun. If he or she acts responsibly, without attacking others or causing injury negligently, no crime or harm has been done. Leave them in peace. But, if a person commits a crime with a gun, then impose the severest penalties for the injuries done to the victim. Similarly, hold the negligent gun user fully liable for all harm his negligence does to others.
Rather than banning guns, the politicians and the police should encourage gun ownership, as well as education and training programs. A responsible, well-armed and trained citizenry is the best protection against domestic crime and the threat of foreign invasion. America's founders knew that. It is still true today.
Libertarians, like other Americans, want to be able to walk city streets safely and be secure in their homes. We also want our Constitutional rights protected, to guard against the erosion of our civil liberties. In particular, Libertarians want to see all people treated equally under the law, as our Constitution requires. America's millions of gun owners are people too.
Law-abiding, responsible citizens do not and should not need to ask anyone's permission or approval to engage in a peaceful activity. Gun ownership, by itself, harms no other person and cannot morally justify criminal penalties.
Constitutional Rights
America's founders fought the Revolutionary War to throw off British tyranny. Most of the revolutionaries owned and used their own guns in that war. After the war, in 1789, the 13 American States adopted the Constitution, creating the federal government. Before ratifying the Constitution, the people demanded a Bill of Rights to prevent our government from depriving them of their liberties as the British had done.
One of the most important protections we have against government tyranny is that we are presumed innocent of any crime until proven guilty, before a jury, in a proper trial.
Gun control advocates would declare all gun owners guilty without trial, simply for owning guns, even though millions of them have never used their guns to harm another person. Such blanket condemnation is immoral, unfair and contrary to the principles on which America was founded.
The Prohibition Lesson
Gun control advocates are much like the prohibitionists of the early 20th Century. By making liquor illegal, they spawned organized crime, caused bloody, violent turf wars and corrupted the criminal justice system. Today's war on drugs has exactly the same results.
Prohibition didn't stop liquor use; the drug laws can't stop drug use. Making gun ownership illegal will not stop gun ownership.
The primary victim of these misguided efforts is the honest citizen whose civil rights are trampled as frustrated legislators and police tighten the screws.
Banning guns will make guns more expensive and give organized crime a great opportunity to make profits in a new black market for weapons. Street violence will increase in new turf wars. Criminals will not give up their guns. But, many law abiding citizens will, leaving them defenseless against armed bandits.
The Right of Self Defense
Libertarians agree with the majority of Americans who believe they have the right to decide how best to protect themselves, their families and their property. Millions of Americans have guns in their homes and sleep more comfortably because of it. Studies show that where gun ownership is illegal, residential burglaries are higher. A man with a gun in his home is no threat to you if you aren't breaking into it.
The police do not provide security in your home, your business or the street. They show up after the crime to take reports and do detective work. The poorer the neighborhood, the riskier it is for peaceful residents.
Only an armed citizenry can be present in sufficient numbers to prevent or deter violent crime before it starts, or to reduce its spread. Interviews with convicted felons indicate that fear of the armed citizen significantly deters crime. A criminal is more likely to be driven off from a particular crime by an armed victim than to be convicted and imprisoned for it. Thus, widespread gun ownership will make neighborhoods safer.
Foolish politicians and police now seek to ban semi-automatic "assault rifles". They ignore the fact that only honest citizens will comply; criminals will still have them. Such a ban will only increase the criminals' ability to victimize the innocent.
Personal Responsibility
Guns are not the problem. They are inanimate objects. Gun control advocates talk as if guns could act on their own, as if human beings cannot control them, so the uncontrollable guns must be banished.
Let us put the responsibility where it belongs, on the owner and user of the gun. If he or she acts responsibly, without attacking others or causing injury negligently, no crime or harm has been done. Leave them in peace. But, if a person commits a crime with a gun, then impose the severest penalties for the injuries done to the victim. Similarly, hold the negligent gun user fully liable for all harm his negligence does to others.
Rather than banning guns, the politicians and the police should encourage gun ownership, as well as education and training programs. A responsible, well-armed and trained citizenry is the best protection against domestic crime and the threat of foreign invasion. America's founders knew that. It is still true today.
When was the last time America was invaded?Phantom2828 wrote:
Why Libertarians Support Equal Rights for America's Gun Owners
Libertarians, like other Americans, want to be able to walk city streets safely and be secure in their homes. We also want our Constitutional rights protected, to guard against the erosion of our civil liberties. In particular, Libertarians want to see all people treated equally under the law, as our Constitution requires. America's millions of gun owners are people too.
Law-abiding, responsible citizens do not and should not need to ask anyone's permission or approval to engage in a peaceful activity. Gun ownership, by itself, harms no other person and cannot morally justify criminal penalties.
Constitutional Rights
America's founders fought the Revolutionary War to throw off British tyranny. Most of the revolutionaries owned and used their own guns in that war. After the war, in 1789, the 13 American States adopted the Constitution, creating the federal government. Before ratifying the Constitution, the people demanded a Bill of Rights to prevent our government from depriving them of their liberties as the British had done.
One of the most important protections we have against government tyranny is that we are presumed innocent of any crime until proven guilty, before a jury, in a proper trial.
Gun control advocates would declare all gun owners guilty without trial, simply for owning guns, even though millions of them have never used their guns to harm another person. Such blanket condemnation is immoral, unfair and contrary to the principles on which America was founded.
The Prohibition Lesson
Gun control advocates are much like the prohibitionists of the early 20th Century. By making liquor illegal, they spawned organized crime, caused bloody, violent turf wars and corrupted the criminal justice system. Today's war on drugs has exactly the same results.
Prohibition didn't stop liquor use; the drug laws can't stop drug use. Making gun ownership illegal will not stop gun ownership.
The primary victim of these misguided efforts is the honest citizen whose civil rights are trampled as frustrated legislators and police tighten the screws.
Banning guns will make guns more expensive and give organized crime a great opportunity to make profits in a new black market for weapons. Street violence will increase in new turf wars. Criminals will not give up their guns. But, many law abiding citizens will, leaving them defenseless against armed bandits.
The Right of Self Defense
Libertarians agree with the majority of Americans who believe they have the right to decide how best to protect themselves, their families and their property. Millions of Americans have guns in their homes and sleep more comfortably because of it. Studies show that where gun ownership is illegal, residential burglaries are higher. A man with a gun in his home is no threat to you if you aren't breaking into it.
The police do not provide security in your home, your business or the street. They show up after the crime to take reports and do detective work. The poorer the neighborhood, the riskier it is for peaceful residents.
Only an armed citizenry can be present in sufficient numbers to prevent or deter violent crime before it starts, or to reduce its spread. Interviews with convicted felons indicate that fear of the armed citizen significantly deters crime. A criminal is more likely to be driven off from a particular crime by an armed victim than to be convicted and imprisoned for it. Thus, widespread gun ownership will make neighborhoods safer.
Foolish politicians and police now seek to ban semi-automatic "assault rifles". They ignore the fact that only honest citizens will comply; criminals will still have them. Such a ban will only increase the criminals' ability to victimize the innocent.
Personal Responsibility
Guns are not the problem. They are inanimate objects. Gun control advocates talk as if guns could act on their own, as if human beings cannot control them, so the uncontrollable guns must be banished.
Let us put the responsibility where it belongs, on the owner and user of the gun. If he or she acts responsibly, without attacking others or causing injury negligently, no crime or harm has been done. Leave them in peace. But, if a person commits a crime with a gun, then impose the severest penalties for the injuries done to the victim. Similarly, hold the negligent gun user fully liable for all harm his negligence does to others.
Rather than banning guns, the politicians and the police should encourage gun ownership, as well as education and training programs. A responsible, well-armed and trained citizenry is the best protection against domestic crime and the threat of foreign invasion. America's founders knew that. It is still true today.
It doesn't matter. Its also to protect us from the government taking over.
"The beauty of the second amendment is it will not be needed until they try to take it" Thomas Jefferson.
"This year will go down in history. For the first time a civilized nation has full gun registration. Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future." Adolf Hitler 1935
"The beauty of the second amendment is it will not be needed until they try to take it" Thomas Jefferson.
"This year will go down in history. For the first time a civilized nation has full gun registration. Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future." Adolf Hitler 1935
watch the news its happening right now - MexicoVilham wrote:
When was the last time America was invaded?Phantom2828 wrote:
Why Libertarians Support Equal Rights for America's Gun Owners
Libertarians, like other Americans, want to be able to walk city streets safely and be secure in their homes. We also want our Constitutional rights protected, to guard against the erosion of our civil liberties. In particular, Libertarians want to see all people treated equally under the law, as our Constitution requires. America's millions of gun owners are people too.
Law-abiding, responsible citizens do not and should not need to ask anyone's permission or approval to engage in a peaceful activity. Gun ownership, by itself, harms no other person and cannot morally justify criminal penalties.
Constitutional Rights
America's founders fought the Revolutionary War to throw off British tyranny. Most of the revolutionaries owned and used their own guns in that war. After the war, in 1789, the 13 American States adopted the Constitution, creating the federal government. Before ratifying the Constitution, the people demanded a Bill of Rights to prevent our government from depriving them of their liberties as the British had done.
One of the most important protections we have against government tyranny is that we are presumed innocent of any crime until proven guilty, before a jury, in a proper trial.
Gun control advocates would declare all gun owners guilty without trial, simply for owning guns, even though millions of them have never used their guns to harm another person. Such blanket condemnation is immoral, unfair and contrary to the principles on which America was founded.
The Prohibition Lesson
Gun control advocates are much like the prohibitionists of the early 20th Century. By making liquor illegal, they spawned organized crime, caused bloody, violent turf wars and corrupted the criminal justice system. Today's war on drugs has exactly the same results.
Prohibition didn't stop liquor use; the drug laws can't stop drug use. Making gun ownership illegal will not stop gun ownership.
The primary victim of these misguided efforts is the honest citizen whose civil rights are trampled as frustrated legislators and police tighten the screws.
Banning guns will make guns more expensive and give organized crime a great opportunity to make profits in a new black market for weapons. Street violence will increase in new turf wars. Criminals will not give up their guns. But, many law abiding citizens will, leaving them defenseless against armed bandits.
The Right of Self Defense
Libertarians agree with the majority of Americans who believe they have the right to decide how best to protect themselves, their families and their property. Millions of Americans have guns in their homes and sleep more comfortably because of it. Studies show that where gun ownership is illegal, residential burglaries are higher. A man with a gun in his home is no threat to you if you aren't breaking into it.
The police do not provide security in your home, your business or the street. They show up after the crime to take reports and do detective work. The poorer the neighborhood, the riskier it is for peaceful residents.
Only an armed citizenry can be present in sufficient numbers to prevent or deter violent crime before it starts, or to reduce its spread. Interviews with convicted felons indicate that fear of the armed citizen significantly deters crime. A criminal is more likely to be driven off from a particular crime by an armed victim than to be convicted and imprisoned for it. Thus, widespread gun ownership will make neighborhoods safer.
Foolish politicians and police now seek to ban semi-automatic "assault rifles". They ignore the fact that only honest citizens will comply; criminals will still have them. Such a ban will only increase the criminals' ability to victimize the innocent.
Personal Responsibility
Guns are not the problem. They are inanimate objects. Gun control advocates talk as if guns could act on their own, as if human beings cannot control them, so the uncontrollable guns must be banished.
Let us put the responsibility where it belongs, on the owner and user of the gun. If he or she acts responsibly, without attacking others or causing injury negligently, no crime or harm has been done. Leave them in peace. But, if a person commits a crime with a gun, then impose the severest penalties for the injuries done to the victim. Similarly, hold the negligent gun user fully liable for all harm his negligence does to others.
Rather than banning guns, the politicians and the police should encourage gun ownership, as well as education and training programs. A responsible, well-armed and trained citizenry is the best protection against domestic crime and the threat of foreign invasion. America's founders knew that. It is still true today.
All people against guns at this time are now required to attend the Knob Creek Full Auto Shoot in West Point, Kentucky before saying anything more.
Hitler was voted in by the German public, at no point did a majority disagree with his choices, infact the majority of Germans agreed with his policies as it made them richer. Your ignorance once again shines through.Phantom2828 wrote:
It doesn't matter. Its also to protect us from the government taking over.
"The beauty of the second amendment is it will not be needed until they try to take it" Thomas Jefferson.
"This year will go down in history. For the first time a civilized nation has full gun registration. Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future." Adolf Hitler 1935
I don't see how your comment has any relevance to the point he was making. So what if the majority supported him, it still came back and bit them in the ass.Vilham wrote:
Hitler was voted in by the German public, at no point did a majority disagree with his choices, infact the majority of Germans agreed with his policies as it made them richer. Your ignorance once again shines through.Phantom2828 wrote:
It doesn't matter. Its also to protect us from the government taking over.
"The beauty of the second amendment is it will not be needed until they try to take it" Thomas Jefferson.
"This year will go down in history. For the first time a civilized nation has full gun registration. Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future." Adolf Hitler 1935
Are you mentally retarded or do you just have ADD.Vilham wrote:
Hitler was voted in by the German public, at no point did a majority disagree with his choices, infact the majority of Germans agreed with his policies as it made them richer. Your ignorance once again shines through.Phantom2828 wrote:
It doesn't matter. Its also to protect us from the government taking over.
"The beauty of the second amendment is it will not be needed until they try to take it" Thomas Jefferson.
"This year will go down in history. For the first time a civilized nation has full gun registration. Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future." Adolf Hitler 1935
Yet again you bring moot arguments to the table.
It doesn't fucking matter if they voted him in the fact of the matter is that one of the FIRST things he did was take the fucking guns away so the people would be UNABLE TO DEFEND THEMSELVES. It doesn't matter one tiny bit that he got voted in.
Last edited by Phantom2828 (2006-11-04 16:37:49)
The fact is that the Germans supported Hitler, therefore they didnt want to rebel, the populace for the most part didn't mind that this came at a cost as they were finally out of the poverty that WWI left them in, therefore your point is pointless. You might want to read some biographies of Hitler or maybe a history book.Phantom2828 wrote:
Are you mentally retarded or do you just have ADD.Vilham wrote:
Hitler was voted in by the German public, at no point did a majority disagree with his choices, infact the majority of Germans agreed with his policies as it made them richer. Your ignorance once again shines through.Phantom2828 wrote:
It doesn't matter. Its also to protect us from the government taking over.
"The beauty of the second amendment is it will not be needed until they try to take it" Thomas Jefferson.
"This year will go down in history. For the first time a civilized nation has full gun registration. Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future." Adolf Hitler 1935
Yet again you bring moot arguments to the table.
It doesn't fucking matter if they voted him in the fact of the matter is that one of the FIRST things he did was take the fucking guns away so the people would be UNABLE TO DEFEND THEMSELVES. It doesn't matter one tiny bit that he got voted in.
My point is the FIRST fucking thing he did was take the guns away. Nothing else matters.Vilham wrote:
The fact is that the Germans supported Hitler, therefore they didnt want to rebel, the populace for the most part didn't mind that this came at a cost as they were finally out of the poverty that WWI left them in, therefore your point is pointless. You might want to read some biographies of Hitler or maybe a history book.Phantom2828 wrote:
Are you mentally retarded or do you just have ADD.Vilham wrote:
Hitler was voted in by the German public, at no point did a majority disagree with his choices, infact the majority of Germans agreed with his policies as it made them richer. Your ignorance once again shines through.
Yet again you bring moot arguments to the table.
It doesn't fucking matter if they voted him in the fact of the matter is that one of the FIRST things he did was take the fucking guns away so the people would be UNABLE TO DEFEND THEMSELVES. It doesn't matter one tiny bit that he got voted in.
The Germans would have rebelled if they found out that Hitlers actions would have caused the deaths of MILLIONS of them and the destruction of their homes.
people use guns to kill people....Phantom2828 wrote:
Ok lets debate gun laws.
--------------------------------------------
My opinion as I am sure you guys know is we need guns.
I will now explain why with various reasons.
----------------------------------------------------
Guns don't kill people people kill people.
sorry for joining this thing late... but i havent been on here much lately
OK,
Because I am a CCW (Carry Concealed Weapons) permit holder I'll chime in.
20,000 gun laws in the USA, gun crime always an issue. Solution. Use those 20,000 laws to put these people away. How many times have there been instances when somebody was busted on an illegal possession charge only to be let go. Why? Because they might do something more drastic to put them away longer! There have been two instances in Michigan where this happened. The law system was right, they let them go then the idiots killed two people. Hmmm, could have been prevented by putting them in jail for the mandatory 5 years! Nope, had to get them on something better....murder.
Its been said a million times. A well armed society is a polite society. Remember, the old west wasn't even the "old west". There were not shootouts every 10 minutes...regardless of what the movies say. Read your history books...ok, so that's a bad example...History is written by the victors!
Oh well. In the end, I'm for gun control meaning using 2 hands. I carry, and I know the responsibility for doing so. Its a BIG responsibility, and its not for everybody...believe me. I've never pulled my gun, and I hope to God I never have to...but if I had to, I'll be glad that I can.
Now repeat after me:
"Somebody dial 911"
"Officer, I was in fear for my life and I used the force I felt necessary to protect my life"
"Here is my firearm"
"I will answer no further questions without a lawyer present"
(all above is standard teaching's in your CCW class...if your state requires you to take one".
Because I am a CCW (Carry Concealed Weapons) permit holder I'll chime in.
20,000 gun laws in the USA, gun crime always an issue. Solution. Use those 20,000 laws to put these people away. How many times have there been instances when somebody was busted on an illegal possession charge only to be let go. Why? Because they might do something more drastic to put them away longer! There have been two instances in Michigan where this happened. The law system was right, they let them go then the idiots killed two people. Hmmm, could have been prevented by putting them in jail for the mandatory 5 years! Nope, had to get them on something better....murder.
Its been said a million times. A well armed society is a polite society. Remember, the old west wasn't even the "old west". There were not shootouts every 10 minutes...regardless of what the movies say. Read your history books...ok, so that's a bad example...History is written by the victors!
Oh well. In the end, I'm for gun control meaning using 2 hands. I carry, and I know the responsibility for doing so. Its a BIG responsibility, and its not for everybody...believe me. I've never pulled my gun, and I hope to God I never have to...but if I had to, I'll be glad that I can.
Now repeat after me:
"Somebody dial 911"
"Officer, I was in fear for my life and I used the force I felt necessary to protect my life"
"Here is my firearm"
"I will answer no further questions without a lawyer present"
(all above is standard teaching's in your CCW class...if your state requires you to take one".
one thing i would agree on is that if everyone were to carry guns, there should be incredibly harsh punishment for carrying a illegal, unregistered, or stolen firearm. somthing equivilent to attempted murder.
They didnt want to rebel thus making your point pointless.Phantom2828 wrote:
My point is the FIRST fucking thing he did was take the guns away. Nothing else matters.Vilham wrote:
The fact is that the Germans supported Hitler, therefore they didnt want to rebel, the populace for the most part didn't mind that this came at a cost as they were finally out of the poverty that WWI left them in, therefore your point is pointless. You might want to read some biographies of Hitler or maybe a history book.Phantom2828 wrote:
Are you mentally retarded or do you just have ADD.
Yet again you bring moot arguments to the table.
It doesn't fucking matter if they voted him in the fact of the matter is that one of the FIRST things he did was take the fucking guns away so the people would be UNABLE TO DEFEND THEMSELVES. It doesn't matter one tiny bit that he got voted in.
The Germans would have rebelled if they found out that Hitlers actions would have caused the deaths of MILLIONS of them and the destruction of their homes.
Even with guns they would have died in their thousands as the German army would have crushed them. THINK BEFORE YOU POST!
You don't think that some of the Jews in Germany would have tried to fight back once they saw what was happening if they had guns? And it wasn't an extreme majority that supported Hitler. And if you really study his rise to power there was quite a bit of opposition to it. And even if it was a small armed rebellion in Germany, how differently do you think the war would have turned out? Millions that would have been spent on invasions would have had to be spent to quell the rebellion. And who knows, someone could have pulled off a lucky shot and taken Hitler out of the equation. And with Hitler out of the equation the Nazi agenda would have basically fallen on it's face, as Hitler killed off all Nazi party members who he considered a threat to his power.Vilham wrote:
They didnt want to rebel thus making your point pointless.Phantom2828 wrote:
My point is the FIRST fucking thing he did was take the guns away. Nothing else matters.Vilham wrote:
The fact is that the Germans supported Hitler, therefore they didnt want to rebel, the populace for the most part didn't mind that this came at a cost as they were finally out of the poverty that WWI left them in, therefore your point is pointless. You might want to read some biographies of Hitler or maybe a history book.
The Germans would have rebelled if they found out that Hitlers actions would have caused the deaths of MILLIONS of them and the destruction of their homes.
Even with guns they would have died in their thousands as the German army would have crushed them. THINK BEFORE YOU POST!
we arent debating the past. In our current situation (USA) and society, is it necessary for. WE. AMERICANS. to own guns. i htink that is the question. Do americans. CURRENTLY. need guns to protect ourselves from A. the government. B. each other?
I say, the answer is no. we do not need guns.
I say, the answer is no. we do not need guns.
guns dont kill people,bullets kill people:P
BIG fucking guns with GIANT fucking bullets...
BIG fucking guns with GIANT fucking bullets...
Right now, I'd say we are closer to needing guns to protect our selves from the government than at any other time in our countries history. Look at the laws that have been passed in the name of "security" since 9/11. We are slowly loosing our freedom and I honestly think that if we were disarmed the government would just start to take over everything, not right away of course, but it would happen. I especially find it difficult to understand how anti-gunners who are usually liberal, can say that the government won't take over, but in the very same breath say that Bush is trying to take over.Naughty_Om wrote:
we arent debating the past. In our current situation (USA) and society, is it necessary for. WE. AMERICANS. to own guns. i htink that is the question. Do americans. CURRENTLY. need guns to protect ourselves from A. the government. B. each other?
I say, the answer is no. we do not need guns.
And saying, well we don't need weapons now is very short sighted. Do you honestly believe that the United States will always so strong as to not worry about another country invading? Or what about major natural disasters. New Orleans is a prime example. After Katrina police services disappeared, and many people had to use firearms to keep their homes and property from being looted. If you do a quick search there are many examples of this situation on NO. Just think if L.A. had a massive earthquake, and all the roads were destroyed and no emergency services were available. Remember the L.A. riots? Would probably be about 20 times worse. I know I sure as hell wouldn't want to be there with out a gun on me. There was a study actually done after the L.A. riots, gun purchases almost quintupled in the L.A. area for a few months after the riots.
i agree. At times, guns are necessary. But for the sake of progress. Shouldnt we ALWAYS be working toward a society in which violence is a rarity. Fighting Fire WITH fire, only works until there is nothing left to burn. If we used to guns, to stop violence. eventually. the good violence would be indistinguishable from the bad violence. Im saying, lets start working toward no more fire. Use some water, and put down the guns. IN OUR CONSITUTION, and by the voice of LOCKE. IF and when the governemnt compromises our rights, through illegalities. we have the right to Nullify their power. The thing is. our governemnt is the people. Our army, have guns, police, carry guns. Sales to those who use gun for recreation. NO!
that is unhelpful.
you are just making you + your argument look immature and stupid. /fail.
Last edited by Naughty_Om (2006-11-05 13:35:10)
awww you don't like it?
Do you honestly trust the police and army to do the right thing? I sure as hell don't, and you are deluding your self if you believe this country is still of the people, in the past 50 years it has turned into a country of the politicians.Naughty_Om wrote:
i agree. At times, guns are necessary. But for the sake of progress. Shouldnt we ALWAYS be working toward a society in which violence is a rarity. Fighting Fire WITH fire, only works until there is nothing left to burn. If we used to guns, to stop violence. eventually. the good violence would be indistinguishable from the bad violence. Im saying, lets start working toward no more fire. Use some water, and put down the guns. IN OUR CONSITUTION, and by the voice of LOCKE. IF and when the governemnt compromises our rights, through illegalities. we have the right to Nullify their power. The thing is. our governemnt is the people. Our army, have guns, police, carry guns. Sales to those who use gun for recreation. NO!
And the truth is, I really enjoy recreational shooting, I usually go shooting at least twice a week. My recreational shooting doesn't hurt anyone, and I find it to be a great stress reliever, especially when I go shooting at targets over 1km away. The challenge of it just takes my mind off everything else. Those who use guns for recreational purposes aren't hurting anyone, so why do you want to take away that hobby? I could say that we should ban all river rafting because hundreds die rafting in the united states every year, and it's just a recreational thing. Gun's are so prevalent that you will never be able to keep them out of the criminals hands, so why do you feel the need to punish those who use them in a way that hurts no one?
i too recreationally shoot......paintballs. ive been shooting, definately not the same rush as paintballing. Your right, the politicians are disjointed with the people. But how are guns going to solve that problem? I dont have the solution. GUNS is DEFINATELY not going to put power back into the people's hands. if anything, it will only make the problem worse by putting distance between us. Guns shuold have no place in a family home. Guns have no place except in the hands of a policeman or Soldiers. Life is nothing but one giant comprimise. Everyone wants their "ideal life". maybe that includes guns. Maybe that doesnt. Cant those with a little humanity or empathy or respect, comprimise and find alternative methods for fun. Guns dont have to exist. Guns are prevalent. you are right. Your are exaactly right. There are too many guns in the hands of Criminals. So lets stop guns at their source. THE CREATION of guns. Stop them except for military/civil protection.ts-pulsar wrote:
Do you honestly trust the police and army to do the right thing? I sure as hell don't, and you are deluding your self if you believe this country is still of the people, in the past 50 years it has turned into a country of the politicians.
And the truth is, I really enjoy recreational shooting, I usually go shooting at least twice a week. My recreational shooting doesn't hurt anyone, and I find it to be a great stress reliever, especially when I go shooting at targets over 1km away. The challenge of it just takes my mind off everything else. Those who use guns for recreational purposes aren't hurting anyone, so why do you want to take away that hobby? I could say that we should ban all river rafting because hundreds die rafting in the united states every year, and it's just a recreational thing. Gun's are so prevalent that you will never be able to keep them out of the criminals hands, so why do you feel the need to punish those who use them in a way that hurts no one?
Last edited by Naughty_Om (2006-11-05 14:55:40)