U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 05-13-2009, 10:15 AM
 
Location: MS
3,954 posts, read 3,857,112 times
Reputation: 1372

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
Liberals appreciate that, and have no quarrel with you. In fact, it looks like you aim very few (if any) of your rounds at harmless, defenseless animals.
I've killed more animals accidentally in my car than I have with a gun. Not that I don't believe in hunting. Proper population control is needed in most areas or the entire population is at risk of starvation, etc. Not that I don't like wild game. I love venison, rabbit, squirrel and duck. I've even eaten gator and rattle snake. I just don't want to field dress the animal after shooting it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tin Knocker View Post
Judging by the calibers he mentioned its real likely those 4 or 5 hundred rounds came from what you folks call assault weapons.
AR-15, Mini-14 in a tactical configuration, Chinese SKS, Beretta 92F and Springfield 9mm subcompact. In their current configuration, all banned in Kalifornia and a few other states.

It was actually easier to convince my co-workers in Mumbai, India that guns in the hands of a law abiding people are not dangerous than it is to convice some people on this forum. After sending them some pictures or a trip to the range, they called me Osama. I did not take offense since they were not educated in this area. I explained using the same arguments used here and they got it on the first attemp. These people have never seen a gun in real life much less held one. Their only exposure has been on TV news reports of terrorists (the attack on the Mumbai hotels) and mass shootings in the US.

-Robert

 
Old 05-13-2009, 10:20 AM
 
Location: NY
2,007 posts, read 3,362,880 times
Reputation: 905
Look at the crime rates in England and Australia since their gun bans. Look at virtually every despot that has come into power anywhere in the world and have disarmed their people. Genocide, murder rates through the roof. Yeah, great idea, disarm the law abiding and turn the criminals loose on them.
 
Old 05-13-2009, 01:21 PM
 
Location: Pinal County, Arizona
25,107 posts, read 34,374,882 times
Reputation: 4893
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
Liberals appreciate that, and have no quarrel with you. In fact, it looks like you aim very few (if any) of your rounds at harmless, defenseless animals.
I go deer and elk hunting. Any problem with that?
 
Old 05-13-2009, 01:36 PM
 
Location: Somewhere out there
9,616 posts, read 11,067,986 times
Reputation: 3717
Default Rant for the day.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
I feel threatened by people who think having a gun ready at hand is the most important thing in their lives.

By comparison, I feel threatened by people who think no-one should have guns, because they know best about such things and who are we citizens to interfere?

Not really threatened, I just feel uncomfortable in a society where there are so many people who have this fixation, and who feel obliged to shout so loudly about it every time the subject of guns arises.

The loudest shouters are, and always have been, the anti-gunners. They started it; we just want to be left alone in our law-abiding manner.

Why, after all, would you want to disarm a law-abiding citizenry? Answer me that?

What have we done wrong? I mean us good guys, not the criminals. They are, or should be, in jail. What do you have against that concept?


I also feel uncomfortable in a society where there are people who have the same kinds of single-minded fixation about gays, minorities, welfare, property rights . . .

So you're assuming we gun owners and sportsmen have an homogenous set of responses to your hot-button topics? Wrong. Quite demonstrably wrong, but if it makes you happy to cling to those pre-conceived ut erroneous fixations, so be it.

It's just not healthy for society to have so many people screaming so loudly about single issues that are a lot less threatening then they imagine they are.

So we should just let the liberal congress and senate decide how we should live based on clearly erroneous statistics? How pleasant.

Let's try this out: I hear that the majority of C-D posters who like the idea of gun control are also slightly mentally unbalanced. Based on that, perhaps we should round them all up. Yeah. That should work! Get busy on that legislation!


Nobody is trying to take your guns away. Period. Nobody.

Really!!! You should oughta read what Barama's and his new Attorney-General's game plan is about all semi-auto firearms, plus serial-numbering of ammo, plus new excise taxes, plus a re-establishment of the Assault-Weapons-Bill (Which sunsetted because it was proven by the Justcie Dept, the FBI and two University studies to be USELESS!) are.

If some off-the-wall legislation affected something you liked to do, and you were doing NOTHING WRONG, you'd perhaps get a bit hot under the collar like we are.

No-one's trying. to take our guns away? Sorry; that humorless joke won't fly!


Least of all, me. There may be people who think your have overarmed yourself with weapons that far exceed self-protective utility, and you don't really need 10,000 rounds of ammo to deter a prowler.

So you feel knowledgeable to determnibe how many rounds of ammo I should have? And you know how many guns I have? Do you also know how many baseball cards I have? Based on what criteria? Are yougoing to come around, door to door, bust it down and demand to count my guns? Am I a target shooter, a single-weapon home defender, an active Cowboy Action Shooter, a hobby reloader.. and on and on. You gonna classify me, and give me a yellow star to wear on my sleeve, with, say, a letter telling everyone how much ammo I am "allowed" to buy, make or use each year? Or how often I am "allowed" to practice, and where? And how many, and of what "type" of gun I own? [Hmm... they tried this in NAZI Germany didn't they?]

When I've done nothing wrong? And you don't tell us asll about yourself, your interests, your background? Why just gun owners, when our statistics are clearly supportive of reduced crime?

There may be people who think it would be a good idea for gun owners to be accountable for their awful fire power.

Any firepower can, in the wrong hands, be "awful. An old single-shot 12ga aimed into a crowd would injure twenty people, and kill perhaps 2 to 5 of them. Awful enough for you? You'd apparently like to label, evaluate, numerate and, and eventually, wear down, the innocent, law-abiding gun owners of this country, for no good reason other than your vast misunderstanding (and unjustified fear, apparently) of firearms.

But nobody is trying to take them away and leave you defenseless. The people who say they are, are delusional and paranoid, and I suggest you stop reading their websites, except for entertainment value.
I read the Congressional Review and see what the likes of Chuck Schummer, Eric Holder (the new AG) and the pre-Prez Barak Obama have actually stated. Perhaps you should too. If you value some parts of the Constitution that you feel apply to your life, why not support it all?

(PS: A majority of Americans, gun owners or not, now agree that the Obama Administration is intent on creating more stringent gun legislation. It's just that the element that's in favor of this approach utilize incorrect statistics that demonize law-abiding citizens, while they simultaneously crow for more lenient, warm/fuzzy sentencing for the criminals, never helping the victims. sound fair to you?)

Well tough for them. When they actually try to put such mis-directed punitive legislation through, it will ricochet right back in their faces.

I thought we American citizens were a team here, but obviously not. Some Americans think they're smarter, wiser and more knowledgeable than others about things they actually know nothing about other than their own emotional reactions.

Last edited by rifleman; 05-13-2009 at 01:43 PM.. Reason: typoz, clarity
 
Old 05-13-2009, 02:23 PM
 
Location: USA
4,980 posts, read 8,216,273 times
Reputation: 2506
The right to bear arms, specifically, the arms of the day, was given to us by our Forefathers. Thomas Jefferson specifically said that an unarmed populace was always close to tyranny, because a government that wasn't afraid of its people would become tyrannical.
But that a government that was afraid of the people would insure liberty.

The right to bear arms may provide us with some extra protection, and it certainly isn't the law-abiding citizen who is commiting crimes with guns.

The current motif is to make all gun owners look crazy. Yeah, some people have committed crimes with guns, that weren't seasoned criminals, but then knives, lead pipes, etc., have been used too.

If people think taking guns away from the population will insure no crimes, then take cars away from everyone, because there are bad drivers out there.

But remember, criminals don't go and buy their guns at a shop and register them. So when you take guns away from the common American, you make the criminal more powerful because he knows he can do more when you don't have self-protection.

It's your freaking liberty that our ancestors fought and died for that is at stake. You want to give up all control and have a totalitarian state, because make no joke about it, that is what you will get. Read your world history folks, because that is what our Forefathers did when they wrote the Constitution.
 
Old 05-13-2009, 03:23 PM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,668 posts, read 71,590,043 times
Reputation: 35874
Rifleman, I'm sorry you went to all that trouble to write all those things in those pretty fonts. Nobody is trying to disarm you or any other law-abiding American. If you had spent the same amount of time providing me with a quote from any credible person who said they want to disarm all American civilians, it would have been enlightening for me to see it. Next time you have that much free time, you might offer that up.

Everything I have stated in this thread has been fully supportive of the right to keep and bear arms. The reason you guys feel so threatened is because you insist on pizzing everybody off who actually supports you.
 
Old 05-13-2009, 03:42 PM
 
Location: In a house
5,230 posts, read 7,323,340 times
Reputation: 2558
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tricky D View Post
Originally Posted by Tin KnockerArm Sheep with guns and they still are sheep.
Educate the sheep and they'll stop looking for a shepherd to guide them.
Yep, Americans mostly arent sheep. We arent talking about you remember. We are talking about folks like this that want to live, College Student Shoots, Kills Home Invader - News Story - WSB Atlanta Whats your opinion on this link TD?

Quote:
Keep telling yourself that and whatever ya do don't try to examine why some other countries don't have the same gun toting maniac problem like in the good ol' US of A.
I dont care why other countries allow their civilians to be helpless. I care that these people are alive, College Student Shoots, Kills Home Invader - News Story - WSB Atlanta

Quote:
LoL we switched from a republic into a monarchy because of the infighting of several powerful Dutch families.
A monarchy ain't perfect (then again so isn't a republic), but it is better than to let a whole nation self-destruct because of the political infighting of a few powerful families.
I think these people deserve to live College Student Shoots, Kills Home Invader - News Story - WSB Atlanta and I dont care about your country, how it works or how its people think.

Now I reckon its time to ignore you a little. You bore me.
 
Old 05-13-2009, 03:44 PM
 
Location: In a house
5,230 posts, read 7,323,340 times
Reputation: 2558
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
Rifleman, I'm sorry you went to all that trouble to write all those things in those pretty fonts. Nobody is trying to disarm you or any other law-abiding American. If you had spent the same amount of time providing me with a quote from any credible person who said they want to disarm all American civilians, it would have been enlightening for me to see it. Next time you have that much free time, you might offer that up.

Everything I have stated in this thread has been fully supportive of the right to keep and bear arms. The reason you guys feel so threatened is because you insist on pizzing everybody off who actually supports you.
Thats funny. If you support the democratic party you support gun control.
Ask the party leaders how they feel.
 
Old 05-13-2009, 07:43 PM
 
Location: MS
3,954 posts, read 3,857,112 times
Reputation: 1372
One reason that the US will never be gun fee - posted in the industry section of a site that specializes in EBR's (Evil Black Rifles):

Quote:
We are currently over 160,000 rifles back ordered. We are producing over 3000 per week and have recently added a third shift to production. Any new rifle order is 12-24 months out depending on upgrades. That number may adjust downward once we start seeing the numbers added by the third shift.
Keep in mind that DPMS/Panther Arms is 4th or 5th in market share in the AR-15 industry. I've heard similar numbers for Rock River Arms (own 1 and 1 on back order).

-Robert
 
Old 05-13-2009, 08:25 PM
 
Location: Midwest
3,711 posts, read 6,722,140 times
Reputation: 5639
Quote:
Originally Posted by cap1717 View Post
Probably just an (unreachable) ideal. . . it is not possible to pass laws to change human nature, and the last thing I want to see is a "war on guns", similar to the war on drugs, etc., that kind of thing only makes it worse! I am having a hard time understanding why "assult weapons" cannot be banned, however. . . can anyone explain to me the NRA's logic on this one?
There are a lot of good posts above.


First, "AW" lets the ban-types use emotions rather than facts. Assault=Bad. Weapon=Bad. Bad. Bad.

There are several good reasons to not ban AWs.
The most important one is that the AW-banners have included just about all firearms, other than a blunderbuss, in their little secret list of "assault weapons."
What sounds like it could be good, emotionally, is factually a blanket ban on the right to self defense.

AWs are hardly ever used in crimes. They are mostly used by sport shooters. PDs also use them for SWAT and other specialty units.

Banning the classic AWs such as an AK47 or an AR15 or derivitives would mean about as much vs. crime as your sending five bucks to the feds asking them to apply it to the deficit.

AWs used to be called battle rifles, but AW makes for a better bogeyman-name. Criminal types usually use semi-auto pistols. Easier to hide, easier to buy, just easier.

So in a nutshell, an AW "ban" would include .22s, 30-30s, 30-06s, and anything that people like chuckie schumer didn't like...which means you can't defend yourself but he will have armed guards.

Given the advances that organized drug-crime gangs from Mexico are making, and given that a cop will NOT be at your house when something happens (unless your're a cop), but WILL investigate and tag your family's dead bodies, a free society demands responsibilities. One of them is protecting hearth and home.

Just suppose, just suppose that a perfect storm happened in the US. Say a combination of "24," "Jericho," and a couple of plague flicks occurred.
Maybe throw in a banking collapse, feed animal plagues, and crop failures.

It IS possible that central government and lawful order could break down. It IS possible that cities, towns, counties, and other areas could become responsible for their own well being.
Some AR15s or AK47s amongst the self-defense force would be far more useful vs. roving bands of thugs--and you can bet that that would be one of the first outcomes, it would not be friendly folks dropping off food baskets--than gramps' one-shot .22 or a snubbie .38.

The bad guys operate without rules, and you need read just a little history to understand that many people can be very ugly when unrestrained by laws, cops, national guard, and other forms of civilized control.


They say there are no atheists in foxholes. It would be amazing to see how quickly gun-ban liberals became self-defense-advocating conservatives given lengthy major riots, terror cell activities, civil unrest, or activated foreign cell activities.
In 1941, when Japan had the US reeling following Pearl Harbor, Admiral Yamamoto had no interest in testing the US citizens' cajones on the continental US.
"A rifle behind every blade of grass," was his logic in not putting troops on the ground in California.


If you think there are no radical, armed terror cells in the US today, I wish you were right.
Open borders and lots of land mean Russian, Chinese, MI13, al quaida, crips and bloods, motorcycle gangs, and every other violent group DOES have an armed organization inside the US.

If you will take a good look at what has happened to England, you won't have to re-read "1984." It's there.

To summarize:
In the micro, AW bans are feelgood concepts that would have an effect on crime. It would increase, because criminals are opportunists and cowards and preying on the unarmed would suddenly become open season.
They would have an effect on Constitutional America, on honest people having the right to defend themselves and their families.

In the macro, given a worst-case scenario, an AW ban could make the difference between good or evil triumphing. Given the absence of military or law enforcement support, it is decent, honest citizens coming together who can insure their own survival.

It's the same reason we have a few thousand nuke-armed ICBMs. In a worst case scenario, it would be terrible if we had to use them.
It would be far more terrible if we had none, and our enemies did.

Hope for the best, plan for the worst.
Civilization is a thin membrane.
The world is a dangerous place, humans are the most dangerous species.

Last edited by Dwatted Wabbit; 05-13-2009 at 08:50 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top