There have been 11 school shootings THIS year (crime, Saddam, dictators)
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.
So-called gun amnesties have worked successfully in many countries, for example Australia and Finland. I doubt many people love their guns so much that they would go to jail or worse - get killed for them. If your gun is more important than your family, then I wonder if one's priorities are in order.
Most countries who have very strict gun laws, the people also strongly support these policies. So therefore the "shoot people who resist, kick in doors, and throw people in jail, and so on; rip up families just to take away guns" thing isn't realistic.
The hint that a person is pro gun because he/she only wants the law enforcement and military to have guns is an odd thing to suggest, though I think Molyneux thinks that the state is inherently evil and thus an armed populace is needed. Doesn't make any sense, because there are stable democracies like the UK with hardly any civilian guns, and oppressive regimes with a massively armed populace like Saudi Arabia.
The UK is NOT a democracy. You must have failed government class.
So-called gun amnesties have worked successfully in many countries, for example Australia and Finland. I doubt many people love their guns so much that they would go to jail or worse - get killed for them. If your gun is more important than your family, then I wonder if one's priorities are in order.
Most countries who have very strict gun laws, the people also strongly support these policies. So therefore the "shoot people who resist, kick in doors, and throw people in jail, and so on; rip up families just to take away guns" thing isn't realistic.
The hint that a person is pro gun because he/she only wants the law enforcement and military to have guns is an odd thing to suggest, though I think Molyneux thinks that the state is inherently evil and thus an armed populace is needed. Doesn't make any sense, because there are stable democracies like the UK with hardly any civilian guns, and oppressive regimes with a massively armed populace like Saudi Arabia.
That's why we have a 2nd Amendment here in America. We fought and won a revolution with Great Britain because of that. The 2nd Amendment insures that it will not happen again.
The United States of America is not or was not ever intended to be a stable democracy. As Benjamin Franklin once stated that: "A Democracy is where you have two wolves and a sheep deciding what to have for dinner". We are a Constitutional Republic with a Bill of Rights to ensure that the sheep will never become a meal for the wolves. With a 2nd Amendment to back that up.
In a stable democracy there is no guarantee as to what type of government the majority may elect at any given time. History provides enough proof of that. In Germany the majority put Hitler in power. In Japan it was Hirohito and Tojo. In Italy it was Mussolini. In Russia it was Stalin. I could go on.
You want your gun laws the way they are in Finland, fine. But you've got no business whatsoever telling us here in America what ours should be. If you want to follow your leaders like blind sheep then so be it. Even if your leaders someday turn out to be wolves.
The United States of America is not the UK, Finland or Australia. There are an estimated 300,000,000 guns already in circulation. If you think that they can embark on a mass confiscation scheme or amnesty as you call it, and that the people here will willingly give up their arms you are grossly mistaken. Especially when you end up criminalizing people for the property they already lawfully own. Here in America we also have the right of due process before a court of law along with laws against unreasonable search and seizure and a right against self incrimination. Those would all have to be relinquished in order to enforce such measures. About the only way you could do it would be by the use of force. Which would be doomed to fail.
I've argued that point many times to those who think the military and police would slaughter their own family, friends and neighbors. Destroying their homes and neighborhoods in the process. There would be absolutely nothing for them to come home to. It is more than likely that they would turn against the government that ordered them to do so. There are millions of gun owning Americans who are retired law enforcement and military personnel who firmly believe in the 2nd Amendment and "Constitutional Law". Add to that the millions of us who know how to use firearms. Not to mention the quantity of guns and ammunition that are currently in private hands. We would indeed be a force to be reckoned with. The government could never win. Molyneux is indeed correct in the necessity of an armed populace being: "necessary to the security of a free state" as written in the 2nd Amendment.
Last edited by Ex New Yorker; 02-12-2018 at 02:37 PM..
gun-free zones are a great place to plan an attack because you can predict resistance might be lax as there will likely be less armed people to fight back
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.
Most of my gun buddies are either in the military or ex-military. Many also are in LE or were. They aren't going to do some bed wetting, liberal politician's dirty work for them. You'd be hard pressed to put together some force here that isn't already pro-gun, capable of door kicking and confiscating weapons.
Most of my gun buddies are either in the military or ex-military. Many also are in LE or were. They aren't going to do some bed wetting, liberal politician's dirty work for them. You'd be hard pressed to put together some force here that isn't already pro-gun, capable of door kicking and confiscating weapons.
I believed this right up until Katrina. I'd like to think it would be different if it were the entire US, but I'm not so sure anymore.
Most of my gun buddies are either in the military or ex-military. Many also are in LE or were. They aren't going to do some bed wetting, liberal politician's dirty work for them. You'd be hard pressed to put together some force here that isn't already pro-gun, capable of door kicking and confiscating weapons.
I am friends with most of the local sheriff's dept. They would walk instead of taking guns. The sheriff encourages people to carry.
I believed this right up until Katrina. I'd like to think it would be different if it were the entire US, but I'm not so sure anymore.
That was a lesson learned but they weren't shooting innocent people. I'm ok with them shooting looters. This was a police department run amok because they didn't handle it properly ahead of time.
That was a lesson learned but they weren't shooting innocent people. I'm ok with them shooting looters. This was a police department run amok because they didn't handle it properly ahead of time.
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.
You must be an NRA member. We cannot control the idiots who obsessed with guns and killing...
So, you want to outlaw knives, hammers, bats and rocks because they kill people also.
It is not the gun, it's the person with the gun that does the killing. Same is true for cars, knives, rocks etc.
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.
