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 like guns and have been shooting/hunting for well over 60 years. I cannot even think of the total of .22 ammo I have shot up just playing around over the years.
I never cared for assault type weapons as I don't see a need for them myself. I got my fill if assault type rifles and machine guns during my service with the Army '66-72. Sure, they are fun to shoot but I cannot afford to shoot an M60 with some 700+ rounds per minute down the barrel of .308 ammo.
We keep looking at gun control and that's not the answer in most cases. We need to control people, somehow, that that seems to be the big question.
It appears to me that doctors that care for the mentally ill don't want to report patients to the feds so that they cannot buy guns. I think that would help but you can buy a gun legally in most states used out of a newspaper. Then there are illegal methods.
OK so if somebody makes a post on social media that is not considered the "norm" do we put them on a non buy list???
I would hate to think that anyone could just state that you are not normal and you lose your rights to own a gun but I think that could happen.
I like guns and have been shooting/hunting for well over 60 years. I cannot even think of the total of .22 ammo I have shot up just playing around over the years.
I never cared for assault type weapons as I don't see a need for them myself. I got my fill if assault type rifles and machine guns during my service with the Army '66-72. Sure, they are fun to shoot but I cannot afford to shoot an M60 with some 700+ rounds per minute down the barrel of .308 ammo.
We keep looking at gun control and that's not the answer in most cases. We need to control people, somehow, that that seems to be the big question.
It appears to me that doctors that care for the mentally ill don't want to report patients to the feds so that they cannot buy guns. I think that would help but you can buy a gun legally in most states used out of a newspaper. Then there are illegal methods.
OK so if somebody makes a post on social media that is not considered the "norm" do we put them on a non buy list???
I would hate to think that anyone could just state that you are not normal and you lose your rights to own a gun but I think that could happen.
I don't think there is an answer to the problem.
But it's not just your right to own a gun that you stand to lose. Think about that.
If it ever gets to that point, people may begin to understand why the 2nd Amendment is just as important as the 1st or all the other amendments that constitute the "Bill of Rights" for that matter. If you are willing to forfeit one amendment for a false sense of security then you'll eventually forfeit them all. As each step fails to provide the security as promised, the erosion of the "Bill of Rights" will never stop. We'll be living in a police state ruled by statists and social elites with their "nanny state" mentality. Who's only desire is absolute power and control over every aspect of our lives.
There's a difference between assault weapons and their semi automatic counterparts. Assault weapons are selective fire where their semi automatic counterparts are not. The term "assault weapons" is a term conjured up by the media to gain public support to ban all semi automatic firearms that accept a detachable magazine. Once that is achieved they'll go after the rest. Shotguns will be labeled as "riot guns". After all nobody needs a "riot gun" unless you plan on attending or starting a riot. Bolt action rifles will be labeled as "sniper rifles". No one needs one of those unless they plan on being a sniper, like Charles Whitman or Lee Harvey Oswald for example. Handguns have already been labeled as "Saturday Night Specials" who's only purpose is to kill people. When it comes to banning guns and civilian disarmament the reasons for banning any particular type be relentless.
Quote:
The debate over gun control can be summed up thusly: Those of us who don't like guns in the hands of our non-costumed brethren, will vote to ensure men with guns, under the guise of the "law," will come and take the property that is rightfully yours, killing you should you resist our will sufficiently.
This is what we call "violence by-proxy" and makes the voter for violence no less culpable in the extortion and death that will ensue.
As Stefan Molyneux correctly observed; if a person claims they are non-violent and are for “gun control” they are not truly anti-gun nor are they non-violent people - because the reality is that guns and violence will be needed to disarm innocent law abiding people.
This is because those people who claim they are anti-gun and anti-violence, who claim to support “gun control,” will need the credible threat of police violence and the police’s guns to take away other people’s guns should they resist the attempt to further centralize their monopoly on violence.
So those who claim to be anti-gun and anti-violence are really very pro-gun and very pro-violence. They ultimately believe that only government officials (which are of course portrayed as reliable, honest, moral, and virtuous) should be allowed to have guns. This obviously flies in the face of reality as the 20th century has proven once and for all.
It’s important to note that those who advocate this type of centralized monopoly of violence do so as cowards, because it’s not their lives on the line, rather they advocate others using violence on their behalf in order to force their misguided views on innocent people who wish to do nothing other than protect themselves and other innocents.
There is no such thing as "gun control," there is only centralizing gun ownership in the hands of a small, political class and the forces they control which, as recent history has proven is a murderous nightmare for the peace loving, disenfranchised, and disarmed citizenry.--Ron Danielowski
The day that the government decides to give up it's guns is the day when no one will ever need a gun. Another thing to think about. As long as there is evil in the world both foreign and domestic that's just never going to happen. I think that I'll keep my guns, thank you.
I like guns and have been shooting/hunting for well over 60 years. I cannot even think of the total of .22 ammo I have shot up just playing around over the years.
I never cared for assault type weapons as I don't see a need for them myself. I got my fill if assault type rifles and machine guns during my service with the Army '66-72. Sure, they are fun to shoot but I cannot afford to shoot an M60 with some 700+ rounds per minute down the barrel of .308 ammo.
unless you have the proper FFL, you cant own an M60 anyway, let alone anything that has a full auto option. in the end however, what guns you choose to keep for yourself are your business, and your business alone.
i also want to thank you for your service to this country.
Quote:
We keep looking at gun control and that's not the answer in most cases. We need to control people, somehow, that that seems to be the big question.
It appears to me that doctors that care for the mentally ill don't want to report patients to the feds so that they cannot buy guns. I think that would help but you can buy a gun legally in most states used out of a newspaper. Then there are illegal methods.
we need to control criminals. commit a crime and get locked up for long periods of time, and no molly coddling while in prison either. make them do hard labor, and learn a trade. make prison a place they dont want to come back to.
as for the mentally ill, it isnt about what the doctors want, but rather what the government requires. its called doctor/patient privilege. a doctor isnt allowed to disclose information about their patients, otherwise they could lose their license to practice. lawyers are the same way, they too cannot disclose any information about their clients, past or present.
this is why mental cases need to be run through the courts and be properly adjudicated. that way if someone is adjudicated as mentally defective, then that information CAN be passed onto the feds, and can be used in a background check.
as for purchasing a gun, the only way to purchase a gun through the newspaper is to do it through a private party, and most guns used in crimes are not bought from private parties, but rather they are illegal in the first place.
Quote:
OK so if somebody makes a post on social media that is not considered the "norm" do we put them on a non buy list???
no, we investigate them first, find out about them, have they posts similar things in the past? etc. it should be done like any other investigation, remember we cant deny anyone their civil rights just because they post something offensive, or threatening.
Quote:
I would hate to think that anyone could just state that you are not normal and you lose your rights to own a gun but I think that could happen.
i agree with you on this. and this is why we need to follow proper procedure, do proper investigations, and go through the courts for proper adjudication of things like this. taking ones rights away is a serious business, and it needs to be done properly.
Quote:
I don't think there is an answer to the problem.
unless we become a country like the old soviet union, or other totalitarian regime, we will never stop the violence against people, in fact they couldnt stop it either. we are going to have to have a fundamental change in people around the world before we can end the violence, and unfortunately that wont happen in the next hundred or so years, if ever.
Oh, please - here we go again with the nonsense that a bunch of angry anarchists in a few pickup trucks are going to to "stop the evil government from taking over." This, of course, somehow justifies "guns for everyone, no questions asked," which is not only an illogical conclusion, but also not even supported by the 2nd Amendment.
A casual study of history should reveal the absurdity of the anarchist defense; every day, the US military easily blows away groups far more trained, equipped, and organized than these rag-tag bands of local "patriots" could ever be. And what then? The anarchists who think they are gonna "stop the government" never have any solution for what comes next? Only absurdities about "natural law" - which means "might makes right" and I guess appeals to people who love guns - and other nonsense.
Nearly every other developed nation on the planet has a vastly lower gun homicide rate and violence rate lower than the US, and a good number of them still have a respectable number of firearms among the people - they are not "free of guns" as the right-wing extremists like to claim.
To pretend that the US cannot do the same is absurd and in direct defiance of the facts and history as represented over and over again in numerous other nations. The only reason we continue to have so many firearms murders in this nation is because too many people value their arsenals and "patriot revolution" fantasies more than they value the lives of others or, in the case of our high gun suicide rate, themselves.
Oh, please - here we go again with the nonsense that a bunch of angry anarchists in a few pickup trucks are going to to "stop the evil government from taking over." This, of course, somehow justifies "guns for everyone, no questions asked," which is not only an illogical conclusion, but also not even supported by the 2nd Amendment.
A casual study of history should reveal the absurdity of the anarchist defense; every day, the US military easily blows away groups far more trained, equipped, and organized than these rag-tag bands of local "patriots" could ever be. And what then? The anarchists who think they are gonna "stop the government" never have any solution for what comes next? Only absurdities about "natural law" - which means "might makes right" and I guess appeals to people who love guns - and other nonsense.
Nearly every other developed nation on the planet has a vastly lower gun homicide rate and violence rate lower than the US, and a good number of them still have a respectable number of firearms among the people - they are not "free of guns" as the right-wing extremists like to claim.
To pretend that the US cannot do the same is absurd and in direct defiance of the facts and history as represented over and over again in numerous other nations. The only reason we continue to have so many firearms murders in this nation is because too many people value their arsenals and "patriot revolution" fantasies more than they value the lives of others or, in the case of our high gun suicide rate, themselves.
oh gee another antigun type failing to use a little common sense, and a little reading comprehension and actually understand what is being posted here. perhaps one day you will understand that the second amendment is what gives the other amendments their teeth, but not likely.
if you are stupid enough to do away with the second amendment, then you get what you deserve, tyranny.
Oh, please - here we go again with the nonsense that a bunch of angry anarchists in a few pickup trucks are going to to "stop the evil government from taking over." This, of course, somehow justifies "guns for everyone, no questions asked," which is not only an illogical conclusion, but also not even supported by the 2nd Amendment.
A casual study of history should reveal the absurdity of the anarchist defense; every day, the US military easily blows away groups far more trained, equipped, and organized than these rag-tag bands of local "patriots" could ever be. And what then? The anarchists who think they are gonna "stop the government" never have any solution for what comes next? Only absurdities about "natural law" - which means "might makes right" and I guess appeals to people who love guns - and other nonsense.
Nearly every other developed nation on the planet has a vastly lower gun homicide rate and violence rate lower than the US, and a good number of them still have a respectable number of firearms among the people - they are not "free of guns" as the right-wing extremists like to claim.
To pretend that the US cannot do the same is absurd and in direct defiance of the facts and history as represented over and over again in numerous other nations. The only reason we continue to have so many firearms murders in this nation is because too many people value their arsenals and "patriot revolution" fantasies more than they value the lives of others or, in the case of our high gun suicide rate, themselves.
How did the mighty US military do against the rural Jihadi fighters using old Russian weapons in Afghanistan?
Same thing with Vietnam, US thought it would be easy peezy, after all, its the US military! how wrong they were though!
I personally feel if enough people banded together, they could put up a pretty good fight and remove the govt from power if need be. I also feel, years down the road, anyone who took part would probably go down in history as brave patriots.
oh gee another antigun type failing to use a little common sense, and a little reading comprehension and actually understand what is being posted here. perhaps one day you will understand that the second amendment is what gives the other amendments their teeth, but not likely.
if you are stupid enough to do away with the second amendment, then you get what you deserve, tyranny.
Ever notice that Liberals are always claiming to be against stereotyping yet have no problem doing it themselves? ("bunch of angry anarchists in a few pickup trucks") Buncha' freakin' hypocrites.
The founding fathers were not worried about the deer or paper plates with holes.
No person gets to tell you how to defend yourself, your family or your property, or it would be outlined in the 2nd amendment as a privilege not a right of the individual.
The collective can pound sand, or kill me with their gun.
Oh, please - here we go again with the nonsense that a bunch of angry anarchists in a few pickup trucks are going to to "stop the evil government from taking over." This, of course, somehow justifies "guns for everyone, no questions asked," which is not only an illogical conclusion, but also not even supported by the 2nd Amendment.
A casual study of history should reveal the absurdity of the anarchist defense; every day, the US military easily blows away groups far more trained, equipped, and organized than these rag-tag bands of local "patriots" could ever be. And what then? The anarchists who think they are gonna "stop the government" never have any solution for what comes next? Only absurdities about "natural law" - which means "might makes right" and I guess appeals to people who love guns - and other nonsense.
Nearly every other developed nation on the planet has a vastly lower gun homicide rate and violence rate lower than the US, and a good number of them still have a respectable number of firearms among the people - they are not "free of guns" as the right-wing extremists like to claim.
To pretend that the US cannot do the same is absurd and in direct defiance of the facts and history as represented over and over again in numerous other nations. The only reason we continue to have so many firearms murders in this nation is because too many people value their arsenals and "patriot revolution" fantasies more than they value the lives of others or, in the case of our high gun suicide rate, themselves.
Let me put it to you this way. It's highly unlikely that the Pentagon's arsenal would be used against American civilians. If so the military would be destroying their own friends, family and neighborhoods. There would be absolutely nothing left for them to come back to. Not only that but if the civilian population were destroyed who'd supply the military with supplies? There'd be nobody left to work the factories and farm the fields. All commerce would come to a grinding halt. My guess is that they would disobey orders, and in all probability would use those weapons against those that ordered them to do so.
About the only way they could possibly do it would be to go on house to house searches where they would be met with overwhelming and fierce resistance. As the armed civilian population at around 100 million or so would vastly outnumber government forces. The United States with it's superior military force couldn't beat back the North Vietnamese, short of using nuclear weapons. In which case there would have been a third world war and the end of all life as we know it.
You seem to forget that a large percent of active duty and retired military and law enforcement personal are strong supporters of the 2nd Amendment and Constitutional Law. It wouldn't surprise me if they joined forces with the civilian population that takes up arms in the fight against a tyrannical form of government. Which is indeed the intended purpose of the 2nd Amendment.
If your so-called "rag-tag bands of local patriots never have any solution for what comes next" then how the hell did they do it in 1776? They don't have to come up with a solution. It's the principle of which this country was founded, a Constitutional Republic. You obviously have no idea what that is?
I don't think that you've thought this out very well?
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.
