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.
I will bet that you have never fully read the UN agenda 21,
There is a much bigger picture and it is already in motion.
It's no secret and all you do is type it in the browser.
2 - people can't build guns. During Prohibition anyone could gather the ingredients and brew booze.
Actually people can, quite easily. Most home builds right now are built using demilled parts kits of military weapons. The availability of such kits is the direct result of the 1989 import ban on non-sporting semi automatics. They cut the receiver and drill the barrel, and then sell the "kit" to people who make their own receiver and buy a barrel from one of a number of specialty suppliers. Unintended consequences are hilarious - rather than actually cutting down the number of these weapons, the federal government effectively created a huge cottage industry supplying parts to make these guns and incentive for enthusiasts to become garage gunsmiths (100% legally) rather than just purchase their guns.
Even were it not for the whole re-assembly bunch, building a gun is fairly easy. All that is needed is a lathe, mill, and the interest to make parts and learn. Conventional machining equipment is relatively cheap these days since so many pro shops have gone to CNC equipment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisFromChicago
3 - no one is actually asking to ban all guns. . I don't think. It really is a measurable line in allowing people to have guns, but preventing guns from falling into other peoples hands (IMHO). I.e. all guns are licensed, all sales registered, insurance requirements for stolen firearms or accidental use (like cars), etc.
A complete ban is not currently in the Democrat party platform. From the look of it, even further gun control measures are not mentioned in the platform.
On the other hand, past Democrat policies, legislation, and statements by elected Democrat officials makes most gun owners feel that a bit of paranoia on the subject is appropriate. Add to that the statements of sympathy with a full ban that are regularly expressed by the party base (the last one was deleted by it's poster in this very thread when I pointed it out to him )... and the paranoia seems pretty reasonable.
What the parties support has a way of changing when they realize the way it will affect the votes - but that does not mean it's not something they don't still desire. GOP does the same thing on their pet issues, I'm not trying to single the Dems out on this.
The comparison to cars is a weak one. A pickup truck that is used exclusively on private property - like a big farm or a ranch - need not be insured or registered. The driver of that truck need not be licensed. Similarly, show cars need not be registered or insured - as long as they are not driven on public roads.
The idea that you need a gun to "protect" you from violent assault is the greatest lie the devil (i.e. NRA) has told. It is funny that people would buy a gun to protect, when the introduction of a gun comes with it higher chances of misuse (accidental death or intentional) than getting robbed. . unless you live in a really bad area of Detroit.
Though its stupid, I'm not against people having guns for defense. Just as long as the gun sales are registered, that the guns are insured against theft (by law. . i.e. if you keep "loosing" your guns than your insurance gets to high, you can't buy a gun.), and that all sales transactions are traced
Stuff like this is unbelievable. Someone from Chicago wanting more gun restrictions. You seriously need to look around your city and see whats happening because of your excellent gun laws. Wake Up! Someday the criminals might be at your door. Oh I forgot, this is America, things are different here.
The other night on the way home from work, on a New Jersey Station, they were discussing gun control and how damaging it would be to Americans.
this guy calls in and literally suggests that taking away everyone's guns would end the murders of innocent people....one can only shake their head....
Didn't anyone learn anything from Prohibition? Same identical thing would happen if they'd outlaw guns....
You don't have to worry about those law abiding citizens who own guns, it is the criminals you'd have to worry about, and BTW, if you outlaw guns what are you doing? Your making a lucrative business for the criminals, b/c there will always be big bucks in something illegal....and always someone if paid enough, willing to break the laws to build guns for criminals....
It is so distrubing that some people refuse to see that and recognize what happened and is happening. Why do you think, they don't make drugs legal? Because there is so much money being made off of illegal drugs, and everyone has their hands in it, and if they don't, then those that do, are so rich and powerful, they would kill anyone who would cut into their life style of selling illegal drugs, i.e. Drug Cartels.
Why is it so difficult for people to see this....and still actually believe in the dellusional idea, that outlawing guns would end murders? My gosh, people could make all kinds of weapons that murder others...
Nice try there starting with the phrase "gun control" and then trying to make like gun control means taking away everybody's guns. It doesn't. "Gun control" is when a doctor can ask their patients if they own guns or have guns around the house if the DOCTOR, not the NRA, determines it's an important question that should be asked in that particular situation
Hitler banned guns, that worked out pretty well didn't it?
Oh, no, I guess not.
No Hitler did not ban guns. In fact gun rights increased under Hitler
"The 1938 law signed by Hitler that LaPierre mentions in his book basically does the opposite of what he says it did. “The 1938 revisions completely deregulated the acquisition and transfer of rifles and shotguns, as well as ammunition,” Harcourt wrote. Meanwhile, many more categories of people, including Nazi party members, were exempted from gun ownership regulations altogether, while the legal age of purchase was lowered from 20 to 18, and permit lengths were extended from one year to three years." The Hitler gun control lie - Salon.com
No Hitler did not ban guns. In fact gun rights increased under Hitler
"The 1938 law signed by Hitler that LaPierre mentions in his book basically does the opposite of what he says it did. “The 1938 revisions completely deregulated the acquisition and transfer of rifles and shotguns, as well as ammunition,” Harcourt wrote. Meanwhile, many more categories of people, including Nazi party members, were exempted from gun ownership regulations altogether, while the legal age of purchase was lowered from 20 to 18, and permit lengths were extended from one year to three years." The Hitler gun control lie - Salon.com
The ban was for the jews.
Further making them the subservient class to the ruling class. Saw how well that worked out for them.
You get Internet bonus points if you made the connection between the rise of gun control in America, the rise of gun control in pre ww2 Germany and the current push for gun control by the ruling class anti gun liberals.
Last edited by shooting4life; 08-25-2014 at 10:59 PM..
Something I've noticed among ALL people who favor stricter gun control, is their ignorance of guns and current gun laws. That is not meant as an insult. Being ignorant isn't necessarily a bad thing, it just means that you don't know something. The good news is, there is a cure for ignorance, it's called research. I've NEVER encountered not even one single gun-control advocate, who had a basic working knowledge of firearms or current laws that regulate firearms. As stewards of the 2A, it's our duty to try to educate those who are willing to learn. Our freedom literally depends on it.
The British control guns, manage to have a decent society, and have a murder rate 20% of what we have in the United States. Thinking the British are just a peaceable lot is incorrect. In many other areas their crime rate is higher than ours.
You guys love to use the UK as a brimming example of a "common sense" approach to guns, but you never want to delve in to the facts.... That can only be because 1.} you don't know the facts or 2.} you do know the facts and know that acknowledging them can not help your argument....
Fact is, the UK has always had better crime rates than the US. Their's was significantly lower before they brought n gun control and remains so today. However, in the years since they've banned handguns their gun crime rate has nearly doubled.
But, on the other hand, the strict regulations have done nothing to stop the
trade in illegal guns.The weapon Reeve used was, after all, a handgun, which
no one has been allowed to own in this country since 1997. And, a cruel irony
this, gun crime has doubled since then.
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.
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.
)... and the paranoia seems pretty reasonable. 
