U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Happy Easter!
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 06-03-2009, 05:38 AM
 
Location: SWE
887 posts, read 1,334,536 times
Reputation: 796

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by glass_of_merlot View Post
Actually, I have been out in Sthlm at 3 am many many times. Right after the bars and clubs close. Instead of jumping on the subway or the night buss, I walk home. At 3 am during the summer it is not even dark outside.
Don't know about Stockholm, but go walk at 3 am during the summer in downtown Helsinki, especially near the railway station, or any kind of park, and if you are a man, you will be robbed and beaten. If you are a woman, you will be robbed and raped. You wont see any guns though.

 
Old 06-03-2009, 11:14 AM
 
Location: Somewhere out there
9,616 posts, read 11,064,818 times
Reputation: 3717
Unhappy Joan of Arc, where are you now?

As the current "recession" continues to expand, there will be many instances of our for-now-law-abiding citizenry running desperate as their nest egg's depleted, their jobs gone for two years or so, their medical bills piling up, the credit card companys getting nastier & more insistant every day... You get the picture.

They will be looking longingly (and menacingly) at those who were smart enough to think ahead and buy some extra rice, beans, flour & Bourbon (you know, the absolute necessities...). The numbers of acts of desperation will increase exponentially, I predict, and ownership of firearms may well come into question as more and more desperate folks use them for nefarious purposes.

Imagine for a moment a scene such as we're treated to on the Alphabet Evening News each night, of the starving masses in Darfur or anywhere else, scrambling for supplies as the rice truck arrives. I see people, mothers and children, hitting each other, tearing at the person beside them who actually got some rice, kiddies on the ground grubbing for dropped rice particles.

Imagine next if one or two of them suddenly had a couple of AK-47s. Think they'd refrain from using them to ensure their personal supply of rice? then remember that the thuggos with aformentioned AKs already hijack the rice trucks on a weekly basis? So, when only the thuggos have guns, it's alright by you?

Then cut to you, sitting in your urban New Jersey home, eating an admittedly sparce meal of only one pork chop, a small scoop of rice pilaf, only two sprigs of broccolli, and, horrors, only one small dish of Jello Insta-sugar pudding for desert. But, of course, no endless supply of Coke™ for the kids.... Ahhh the sacrifices, eh?

Times are gonna get tough, I tell yah..

And then "the boys" break in via your open rear slider door and, "surprise, surprise!" Drop-in dinner guests, and then your wife and 14 yr old daughter become "the entertainment" for the evening. Well, you get the picture.

Now. Wanna have that .45ACP tucked under your belt? Or will you call up the local neighborhood Baramanista offices....

"We're sorry, but if you're hearing this message, it's after our normal office hours! (Oh, and thanks loads for your support in the last election. We sure showed those gun and bible-hugging conservatives, didn't we?). Leave a detailed message and we'll try to get back to you in the morning. Of course, if this is an emergency, hang up and call 911. Thanks, and Kum-bay-yah!!"

Of course (the Netherlands aside, as they all have everything they'll EVER need in glorious over-abundance) the rest of the world is going to go this route before we do, because they have long been taught to be over-dependant on the hind tit of the government.

As an example, My friends in Canada say regularly that "Our country is so much better organized and less testosterone-driven than you guys in America! And BTW, at least we're NOT Americans!!" they say as they tip, head first, into their government subsidized bi-lingually labeled beer. They, having just come back from the government offices where they had their folding pocket knife stamp-serial numbered and then registered.

So. I expect some official US Government (and UN) hand-wringing over-reactions to some contrived or actual increases in gun violence (all violence, in fact) because the Baramanistaz will not tolerate the ability of the citizenry to be far more effectively "persuasive" in their arguments against government involvement in EVERYTHING.

But they will run into both official and street-level resistance at an intensity that is almost unimaginable in these last few quiet hours before a cultural revision on a truly global scale takes hold.

For a glimmer of what's a-comin', watch California this summer as the welfare state is officially terminated. Or is that "Terminatored"? Hey; at least he's calling a bankrupcy for what it is. It's tough that the Dems' Entitlement Society don't get it, and will be totally helpless. Remember also that the Greater LA Basin & San Diego number the population of all of Canada, right there in that small area, and water's already a bit scarce, and they are almost TOTALLY dependant on trucking and rail for their necessities. And then they'll be pretty much ready for a good old August LA Riot, only this time spreading down into Orange County for starters.

Viva le resistance! (Best thing the French ever thought up!)

Last edited by rifleman; 06-03-2009 at 11:20 AM.. Reason: clarifications
 
Old 06-03-2009, 01:11 PM
ECG
 
Location: In the minds of others
42,606 posts, read 2,466,169 times
Reputation: 10406
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greatday View Post
No, it is not possible.

Nor should it be gun free.
Everything is Possible ....specially if this country was to become a SOCIALIST Country.

Many in Cuba and other SOCIALIST country thought that the Government would not take away their guns, their properties, and their businesses and their way of life...well, think again...THEY DID...and it could very well happen to all of us, who are for keeping guns!!!

I do not agree that it should be gun free...I like having a weapon for self defense.
 
Old 06-03-2009, 07:55 PM
 
Location: vagabond
2,631 posts, read 4,832,193 times
Reputation: 1300
Quote:
Originally Posted by ECG1951 View Post
Everything is Possible ....specially if this country was to become a SOCIALIST Country.

Many in Cuba and other SOCIALIST country thought that the Government would not take away their guns, their properties, and their businesses and their way of life...well, think again...THEY DID...and it could very well happen to all of us, who are for keeping guns!!!

I do not agree that it should be gun free...I like having a weapon for self defense.
the problem is that even though the citizens were disarmed, illegal weapons are still out there, and unfortunately, they are not in the hands of those that would use them for defensive purposes. so, the criminals still have them, effectively making the gun ban useless, and as greatday said, impossible.

really, it is only the citizens that are not causing the problem that are being disarmed, and no one else.
 
Old 06-03-2009, 08:40 PM
 
Location: Oviedo, Fl formerly from the Philly Burbs!
1,012 posts, read 2,357,005 times
Reputation: 365
I feel like, (well, I have only read about the last 15 pages of this thread) that THE MAJOR point is being missed here. The Contitutional text is as follows...

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

The security of a free State....each state..., this ammendment was designed not for personal protection from criminal elements in our homes necessarily, but from criminal elements in our GOVERNMENT. A Militia is NOT the military. It is a band of citizenry.....the regular Army did not win the Revolutionary War....it was only with the help of the ragtag Militia and their non-military tactics that we gained the upper hand. Our forefathers knew that absolute power corrupts absolutely, and that the PEOPLE must maintain an absolute right to defend themeselves and their state(s) and always have the ability to regain control of a government that may get out of hand.

Any additional personal protections derived from the individuals right to keep and bear arms, in my opinion, are secondary to this first and foremost RIGHT AND RESPONSIBLITY to defend our Country and protect the Constitution. Let them try to take my guns.
 
Old 06-03-2009, 08:47 PM
 
9,912 posts, read 12,184,827 times
Reputation: 7257
Quote:
Originally Posted by Parrotrosie View Post
I feel like, (well, I have only read about the last 15 pages of this thread) that THE MAJOR point is being missed here. The Contitutional text is as follows...

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

The security of a free State....each state..., this ammendment was designed not for personal protection from criminal elements in our homes necessarily, but from criminal elements in our GOVERNMENT. A Militia is NOT the military. It is a band of citizenry.....the regular Army did not win the Revolutionary War....it was only with the help of the ragtag Militia and their non-military tactics that we gained the upper hand. Our forefathers knew that absolute power corrupts absolutely, and that the PEOPLE must maintain an absolute right to defend themeselves and their state(s) and always have the ability to regain control of a government that may get out of hand.

Any additional personal protections derived from the individuals right to keep and bear arms, in my opinion, are secondary to this first and foremost RIGHT AND RESPONSIBLITY to defend our Country and protect the Constitution. Let them try to take my guns.
Different constitution here, so that doesn't really apply to me.
 
Old 06-04-2009, 05:44 AM
 
Location: MS
3,949 posts, read 3,855,603 times
Reputation: 1370
Quote:
Originally Posted by Parrotrosie View Post
this ammendment was designed not for personal protection from criminal elements in our homes necessarily, but from criminal elements in our GOVERNMENT.
I disagree in that I think it does cover personal protection from ALL threats. Whether it is NV Plumber protecting himself and livestock from wolves or Great Day protecting his family or the governments of Oregon and Maryland asking the militia for help during WWII. It gives the people the ability to protect themselves.

-Robert
 
Old 06-04-2009, 05:55 AM
 
Location: Oviedo, Fl formerly from the Philly Burbs!
1,012 posts, read 2,357,005 times
Reputation: 365
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert_J View Post
I disagree in that I think it does cover personal protection from ALL threats. Whether it is NV Plumber protecting himself and livestock from wolves or Great Day protecting his family or the governments of Oregon and Maryland asking the militia for help during WWII. It gives the people the ability to protect themselves.

-Robert
I agree with you, but why beat to death the personal protection argument with those who (obviously) cannot carry a reasonable discussion, when I feel there was even a greater purpose as well. And true, back when the Constitution was written, there were even greater threats in the 'great wilderness' to defend froml. Squatting rights were how one aquired land to a large degree back then, and how else does one defend one's land and livestock...etc. Just trying to point out other reasons for our individual rights (which have grown to have many other purposes for our right to keep and bear arms)

I am a woman, I have a CCP, for self defense. I carry a .45

I am not a deranged crazy person. I have a child. My guns are in safes. One in my bedroom, the rest in the basement. We have taken several NRA safety courses. I volunteer at school, at church , and I am a Girl Scout leader. I am quite stable. Someone can take all the items out of my home before I would shoot them, but if they ventured up the stairs into my sleeping quarters....that is where the coroner would haul their dead body from.

I also would never run folks over with my car, nor do I drive while talking on my cell phone...
 
Old 06-04-2009, 09:10 AM
 
Location: NW Nevada
13,340 posts, read 10,905,899 times
Reputation: 12290
Quote:
Originally Posted by Parrotrosie View Post
I agree with you, but why beat to death the personal protection argument with those who (obviously) cannot carry a reasonable discussion, when I feel there was even a greater purpose as well. And true, back when the Constitution was written, there were even greater threats in the 'great wilderness' to defend froml. Squatting rights were how one aquired land to a large degree back then, and how else does one defend one's land and livestock...etc. Just trying to point out other reasons for our individual rights (which have grown to have many other purposes for our right to keep and bear arms)

I am a woman, I have a CCP, for self defense. I carry a .45

I am not a deranged crazy person. I have a child. My guns are in safes. One in my bedroom, the rest in the basement. We have taken several NRA safety courses. I volunteer at school, at church , and I am a Girl Scout leader. I am quite stable. Someone can take all the items out of my home before I would shoot them, but if they ventured up the stairs into my sleeping quarters....that is where the coroner would haul their dead body from.

I also would never run folks over with my car, nor do I drive while talking on my cell phone...
Your situation is actually the same as about 95 % of honest gun owners. However, there are quite a few folks out there who see firearms ownership as being indicative of being a nutcase. We call this 'hoplophobia". The irrational and unfounded fear of firearms. These types attach some sort of evil power to a firearm and leave out the human equation. I find it interesting, if a bit annoying. Some of the latter type of folks are extremely arrogant in their views and are very fond of slinging insults at firearms owners, all the while trumpeting their own 'intelligence' and moral superiority. They cannot admit that folks like you, who are responsible about their firearms, are the rule rather than the exception. Interest in, and ownership of, firearms, does not mean that someone is predisposed to violent tendencies. Usually quite the opposite is the case. Many of us have an inate distaste for the thought of rolling over and being a complacent victim, but that is a far cry from slobbering over the thought of shooting an intruder or attacker. That distinction is lost on some people.
 
Old 06-04-2009, 10:24 AM
 
Location: In a house
5,230 posts, read 7,321,196 times
Reputation: 2558
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert_J View Post
I disagree in that I think it does cover personal protection from ALL threats. Whether it is NV Plumber protecting himself and livestock from wolves or Great Day protecting his family or the governments of Oregon and Maryland asking the militia for help during WWII. It gives the people the ability to protect themselves.

-Robert

It covers the right to keep & bear arms in all capacities & for all legal reasons.
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