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.
Finally, the enforcement of martial law (including gun confiscation) presupposes that county and local law enforcement personnel will be willing to carry it out on a national scale. It is one thing to suppress looters and arsonists, but requiring the military or state/county law enforcement to confiscate 350 million legally owned firearms is an entirely different proposition; especially if they are faced with determined resistance. Importantly, there are an increasing number of county sheriffs across the U.S. that have gone on record to refuse cooperation with federal initiatives that would lead to gun confiscation.
Doing house to house searches – whether vacant or occupied – is a very time-consuming and labor intensive process; not to mention the risks involved. Based on national averages, patrol officers number about 2 per 1,000 residents across the country. In rural communities, that number may be as low as one per thousand. In crime ravaged cities like Chicago, Washington DC and Baltimore, it can exceed four per thousand. When you consider housing and population density in urban areas, gun confiscation would be a daunting task to assign to any police force.---http://www.theprepperjournal.com/2015/11/12/martial-law-gun-confiscation-one-big-reason-why-it-is-unlikely/
Yes, but it was still the police who went around confiscating the peoples' guns; often at gunpoint. I think there are way more grunts who will 'just do what they're told' than we'd like to believe. For me, I don't have so much faith in most of my fellow Americans anymore.
One interesting note, though. After seeing how easily their rights were removed, residents of the area proceeded to apply for concealed carry permits at double the rate they had before.
For me the lesson learned is don't keep all your stuff in one place or tell anyone about what you have.
Plus, there was a real racial element going on in Katrina. I could see that happening again just like in any massive riot.
I think it's you who have problems in understanding definitions. Just because the UK is a constitutional monarchy, its power is vested in a parliamentary democracy.
You're probably one of those "the US is not a democracy, it's a republic"?
Completely delusional to think that some obese gunslingers could defeat the most powerful military on the planet, which happens to be your.
How about The Netherlands, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Belgium, France, Ireland, Switzerland, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Japan and South Korea instead of nazi Germany? All those countries vote government after government, and a malicious coup has never been even a remote possibility.
And Molyneux is Canadian, but you decided to quote him anyway. What the hell does he know? Canada isn't the US.
Blah blah blah. Delusion. Saddam had thousands of tanks, jets, artillery, scud missiles, and what did it take? Three weeks for you to run over the country completely?
BTW, what is "we"? If in some cases a Trump supporter cannot even talk to a Sanders supporter, what makes you think they would suddenly fight a guerrilla war together?
As I said above, all of your Western allies and friends have proven that an armed populace is not necessary to ensure that the government plays fair.
And how about your allies who has experience of corrupt dictatorships, like Italy, Spain and Argentina? Did the populace arm themselves to their teeth after the dictators fell so that it won't happen again? No, because they know a hot shot sitting on the porch with an AR can't really do much.
---
I understand the popular support for lax gun laws is quite high in the US regardless of party affiliation, and fine. I'm not criticising your gun laws, only the illusion that you need the 2nd amendment or otherwise Augusto Fidel Hitlery Busholini will attempt to seize power the next minute. The history of other countries simply show it isn't true.
Right. A Republic----not a Democracy.
The power of the Second Amendment is clear. No government entity would dare attempt any sort of crack-down.
You may not understand this being from one of the Countries in you paragraph above. Not one of those Nations allows a civilian or even active military personnel to personally own a Glock 19, or an AR/556 or 7.62 variant.
Keeping a weapon locked-up in some government controlled gun club isn't an answer.
How much ammunition can these same individuals possess? 1,000 rounds? 10,000 rounds?
The concept is so alien to you that you cannot truly understand the freedoms America has.
I'm not being critical of your system, but have to point out the distinct difference.
Your thread title is entirely disingenuous, and has already been thoroughly debunked. Your cited number of 11 includes suicides, and incidents near schools, but not on school property. Check your facts, and review the source data prior to relying of deliberately skewed numbers to support a given position on gun control. Before you jump to the expect reply, the same goes for 2A advocates as well. They are often guilty of cherry picking data to support their respective point of view.
What the hell do you know? Finland isn't the US either. Why don't you just mind your own business and stick to the problems within your own country instead of telling us how to run ours? By the looks of things in your own country you too may wish you had a 2nd Amendment. Envious are you?
I haven't told you how to run your country at any point in this thread. Try reading my posts again.
Quote:
Originally Posted by finalmove
The concept is so alien to you that you cannot truly understand the freedoms America has.
I'm not being critical of your system, but have to point out the distinct difference.
No, I cannot understand fully the obsession some Americans have towards guns, but I can try.
And it's not that I don't understand guns or have no familiarity with guns. We have mandatory conscription in Finland and I have spent a year in the military, therefore shooting all kinds of guns.
Vice versa, we have the right to affordable/free universal healthcare in our constitution, and many Americans have trouble understand that again.
I haven't told you how to run your country at any point in this thread. Try reading my posts again.
If you weren't then you wouldn't be commenting on this board regarding the gun laws in our country. Why don't you try reading your own posts again? Then ask yourself how else would you expect others to interpret them?
I haven't told you how to run your country at any point in this thread. Try reading my posts again.
No, I cannot understand fully the obsession some Americans have towards guns, but I can try.
And it's not that I don't understand guns or have no familiarity with guns. We have mandatory conscription in Finland and I have spent a year in the military, therefore shooting all kinds of guns.
Vice versa, we have the right to affordable/free universal healthcare in our constitution, and many Americans have trouble understand that again.
Unwittingly you provide another example of a Socialist construct. Confiscate all guns then place untenable restrictions on further gun ownership.
The other is the government issued healthcare ( bread and circuses) scheme that gives the masses a comfort in exchange for their liberty.
Being unarmed there is no reversal possible.
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.
Just because the UK is a constitutional monarchy, its power is vested in a parliamentary democracy.
