Would you support sending SWAT teams door to door? (school, governor, program)

[Woof]

Originally Posted by zombieApocExtraordinaire

If there are 10,000 people who'd initially fight, the government already has a catastrophe. Those 10,000 people would inspire more people to fight. That's how the revolutions in Libya, Tunisia, and now Syria built momentum.

If I were you, I'd be a little afraid of such a scenario. Since you're culpable for forcing people's hand to fight (you support the government taking away their rights), you're fair game to be executed in a backlash. And you won't have any guns to protect yourself or your family

No, not that many people hate their govt enough to want to overthrow it. And the way things are looking, most people WANT more restrictions on assault weapons. This is a democracy, right? Rule of the people?

I'm not in favor of taking away any rights, but of regulating them properly. A gun doesn't have to be able to carry 17 rounds, people got along very well with 6 shot revolvers. Single action would be even better - a Ruger Blackhawk is a fine weapon for self-defense, if not so good for shooting dozens of people. Rifles should have a maximum of 3 shots, nobody needs more than that for hunting.

As for angry mobs coming after me, it wouldn't matter if I were armed. Many people against one ...... wins any fight. But hopefully the cops will be able to protect the community against an angry mob of about 3 middle-aged rightwingers - I wouldn't call them Republicans since even they wouldn't attempt anything as hare-brained as an armed rebellion.

[zombieApocExtraordinaire]

Originally Posted by Woof

No, not that many people hate their govt enough to want to overthrow it. And the way things are looking, most people WANT more restrictions on assault weapons. This is a democracy, right? Rule of the people?

I'm not in favor of taking away any rights, but of regulating them properly. A gun doesn't have to be able to carry 17 rounds, people got along very well with 6 shot revolvers. Single action would be even better - a Ruger Blackhawk is a fine weapon for self-defense, if not so good for shooting dozens of people. Rifles should have a maximum of 3 shots, nobody needs more than that for hunting.

As for angry mobs coming after me, it wouldn't matter if I were armed. Many people against one ...... wins any fight. But hopefully the cops will be able to protect the community against an angry mob of about 3 middle-aged rightwingers - I wouldn't call them Republicans since even they wouldn't attempt anything as hare-brained as an armed rebellion.

Your number of 10,000 people is enough. If every single one of those 10,000 people was to kill just 1 cop, that's 10,000 dead cops in a short amount of time and the system is in trouble. Of course, these things snowball. A lot of people on the fence who will jump onto this thing when it gets going.

And no we don't live in a democracy. Democracy = tyranny of the majority. If the majority were to vote to execute all Jews (like they did in Hitler's Germany) would that make it right?

We live in a republic but who cares.

[ringwise]

Originally Posted by bchris02

Would you support sending swat teams door to door to every building in the nation to confiscate all firearms? For homes/businesses who refused to open for them, would you support them breaking down the doors? Do you think such a raid would be successful?

Is this 1930's Germany? Are you insane?

More importantly, do you support this sort of action. Because if you do, please let me know where you live, and I'll be sure to ignore you when you need saving of any kind.

[ringwise]

Originally Posted by PullMyFinger

Amendments were meant to be amended. The majority is sick of the insanity of the gun crazy minority in this country. Change is coming.

Please show me statistics where anti-gun is a majority over pro-gun? Not just shrieking the loudest, mind you. In fact, more in numbers.

Talk like this is quite treasonous. Taking guns is the same as taking away free speech, religion, etc.

[Seekingcreativity]

Originally Posted by bchris02

Would you support sending swat teams door to door to every building in the nation to confiscate all firearms? For homes/businesses who refused to open for them, would you support them breaking down the doors? Do you think such a raid would be successful?

I really hope it doesn't come to that. No, if I had a firearm they won't be able to take it. WOW they will have militia in the street to go door to door to take firearms yet they can't have them cleaning up the streets from gangs, drugs, human trafficking, and senseless murders that sometimes is not the subject of gun violence, nor can they actively pursue the existence of drunk driving and have laws in place for prosecuting white collared crimes to the full extent yet they want to take away guns from everyone? What next, will they take away our knives too? I see another prohibition coming maybe, hopefully that will cut down on drunk driving. How about let's start back with segregated schools, boys from girls, and minorities from majorities since those inferior nincompoops are the real reason the crime index has skyrocketed

[Seekingcreativity]

Originally Posted by PullMyFinger

First you get the 2nd Amendment repealed and pass some sweeping new firearms laws. After that is done you make it a felony to be in possession of these guns. The law abiding citizens will turn them in, I would say the vast majority would give them right up. Then you offer big rewards for tips on illegal guns and you search homes with warrants and you put the arrests on national TV. After that another significant amount of people would give up their guns on an amnesty program.

I'm not saying that is what we should do, but that is what we could do.

This has the story line of V for Vendetta

[Woof]

Originally Posted by zombieApocExtraordinaire

Your number of 10,000 people is enough. If every single one of those 10,000 people was to kill just 1 cop, that's 10,000 dead cops in a short amount of time and the system is in trouble. Of course, these things snowball. A lot of people on the fence who will jump onto this thing when it gets going.

And no we don't live in a democracy. Democracy = tyranny of the majority. If the majority were to vote to execute all Jews (like they did in Hitler's Germany) would that make it right?

We live in a republic but who cares.

There are nutters every year who think that killing people will spark some sort of revolution. Look at Breivik over in Norway - thought he'd spark off a rebellion by killing a huge number of kids ..... thought everyone would join him in his agenda of ethnic cleansing because it was right and good and just. Most mass-murdering evil people in history have thought they were doing good for humanity.

Sorry, it doesn't work that way. Everyone was simply disgusted. No one joined him in his crusade. And on a smaller scale there have been many like him. Almost everyone wishes that those with "minds that hate" would just go away, but they keep cropping up. "But if you want money for people with minds that hate / Brother I tell you you've got to wait." - Beattles

[Phil306]

First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.

Then they came for the socialists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the jews,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for the catholics,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a catholic.

Then they came for me,
and there was no one left to speak for me.


There are many different versions of this. However, I believe many others will understand its true meaning.

[no1brownsfan]

Originally Posted by Phil306

First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.

Then they came for the socialists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the jews,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for the catholics,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a catholic.

Then they came for me,
and there was no one left to speak for me.


There are many different versions of this. However, I believe many others will understand its true meaning.

Oh yeah. I certainly do.

[zombieApocExtraordinaire]

Originally Posted by Woof

There are nutters every year who think that killing people will spark some sort of revolution. Look at Breivik over in Norway - thought he'd spark off a rebellion by killing a huge number of kids ..... thought everyone would join him in his agenda of ethnic cleansing because it was right and good and just. Most mass-murdering evil people in history have thought they were doing good for humanity.

Sorry, it doesn't work that way. Everyone was simply disgusted. No one joined him in his crusade. And on a smaller scale there have been many like him. Almost everyone wishes that those with "minds that hate" would just go away, but they keep cropping up. "But if you want money for people with minds that hate / Brother I tell you you've got to wait." - Beattles

This is a little bit different than a spree killing. This is the police coming door to door to steal property. You're putting gun owners between a rock and a hard place. That's when revolutions spark.