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.
Doesn't mean they won't ignore it and trample on it. If Bush was able to get away with his invasions of the right to privacy (a right not spelled out as clearly as the right to keep and bear arms in the Constitution) and holding people without trial, just what makes you think the dems won't get away with trampling on this right?
Ow well yeah. I do belong to the NRA and keep focused on gun issues. I would never only trust what is written in the Constitution. You still have to fight to maintain your rights.
Then you admit the mere presence of a gun prevents crime. Thank you.
No, what I said was, like most thieves, they wait till you have gone out. We dont have guns in the UK, but the vast majority of thefts still take place when there is no HUMAN presence. What use is a gun then?
Quote:
Sorry to contradict you but, here in Arizona, Home invasions are far too common. People breaking into a persons home - while the homeowner / occupant is there. Often times has resulted in the occupant being killed or severely injured by the crooks.
And your crooks wait till you go get your gun so you can take pot shots at you? I would have thought they were a little bit smarter than that, and relied on the element of surprise. These folks who were killed or severely injured probably were given little or no time to defend themselves. If I was a crook who was bold enough to invade someones home while they were there, I think I would make sure that I didnt give the homeowner enough time or opportunity to defend themselves.
and most of soldier will never fire upon US citzens, after all they are neighbors, friends and family you will be asking them to shoot.
as a vet I knew that I would never shoot upon any US citizen even if ordered by a corrupt potus.
Yet, in every single instance of people being rounded up and exterminated that was listed, the soldiers who rounded the people up were the neighbors, and probably friends and family of those that were being rounded up and killed. I'd liked to point out also that this supposed reluctance to round up US citizens didn't stop the Japanese Americans from being rounded up and stuck in internment camps during WWII.
How many people do you think it takes to launch a nuke? Not very many.
No, what I said was, like most thieves, they wait till you have gone out. We dont have guns in the UK, but the vast majority of thefts still take place when there is no HUMAN presence. What use is a gun then?
This is not the UK
And, many of these home invasions occur while the home is OCCUPIED.
Perhaps some research on your part regarding this issue will help you to understand where the other posters are coming from
As an aside - my home was "invaded" while we were home - and the criminal treatened my wife and child with a gun -
I have lived in the UK for 50 years and have never heard of anyones door being broken down by crooks.
Well you are used to being a subject while we are citizens with natural rights that are guaranteed by our Constitution. One of those rights is gun ownership for self defense and to combat a tyrannical government like the one with threw out during the Revolution. Hmm, now what country was that???
Home invasions while people are home happen every day here all over the country. I'm sure they happen in the UK also, you just haven't "heard" of any. Having a gun levels the playing field, can act as a deterrent and can save your life. THe police can not protect you as they can not anticipate where and when a crime will occur. I'll keep my guns, thank you very much.
If I was a crook who was bold enough to invade someones home while they were there, I think I would make sure that I didnt give the homeowner enough time or opportunity to defend themselves.
I have one on my hip at home as many other do. Why have it anywhere else? If someone breaks in, then I am prepared. If nothing happens, then my insurance policy worked.
There are plenty of countries that have much more restrictive legislation on firearms than the US. I don't see Canada, Australia, and the UK rounding up their citizens for mass exterminations.
Not yet anyway, however crime in the UK and Australia has skyrocketed since the UK banned handguns in 1997 and Australia banned *all* semi-automatics. Don't take the power of defense away from people.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hesster
I own several handguns, but I think that those who are saying that their guns are going to protect them from the government if it goes bad are deluding themselves. Have you all forgotten that the US government has far more potent weapons than firearms? All the guns on Earth are not going to make a **** bit of difference if they decide to drop a nuke.
Yeah, nukes do a lot of good when they're used on your own country.
Look at plenty of past conflicts - Viet Nam, Yugoslavia, Chechnya, Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, etc. The ability of the people to defend themselves makes it MUCH more difficult for an invading force to quickly take over. There are plenty of successful revolutions in history from oppressive governments because the people were armed.
If China were to ship a hundred million troops to the California coast, we're going to need a LOT more than our military and police forces to hold them back. You can't predict the future in both national and world affairs. Every Superpower thinks their might will last forever. Some fade but remain strong nations - the UK, France, and Spain come to mind. Others have a government go too far and war/revolution ends with millions dead - Germany, Japan, USSR. It's better to have protection that is never used, than to not have it when you need it. "Speak softly and carry a big stick" applies to our personal lives as well as a form of protection.
In this country today, for every *innocent* life lost due to semi-automatic assault rifles, many lives and countless dollar values of property have been saved. The LA riots in the early 90's were a good example of people on video using assault rifles to protect their lives and property. Liberal media only loves to report those stories that portay guns in a negative light (VA Tech, Columbine, Maryland sniper, etc), and they rarely ever report gun use in the act of preventing crime and protecting innocent people. If just one student (or techer, aide, etc) at the VA Tech massacre were allowed to have a concealed carry permit on campus, a lot of lives would have been saved. The killer would have been taken out within seconds of firing his first shot.
ROTFLMAO....Are you retarded? You just posted what possibly could be your demise in a PUBLIC forum.....Ever heard of the ATF? I'll bet you a hundred dollar bill they NOW know who you are.Bad move on your part.
You obviously are a gun control nut who knows nothing about actual city, state, and national firearms laws. Most places do NOT require you to register firearms. If I buy a gun from another civilian, and it's a known fact that I'm not an ex-felon, there's no paperwork. If you buy a gun at an FFL dealer, the dealer is required to run a background check and paperwork to prove you're allowed to purchase a firearm. However, this is to keep dealers from selling guns to anyone who wants one. There's nothing wrong with his statement of "no paperwork" - read some legislation for a change instead of just spouting gun control nonsense.
tanks, planes and missles? who do you think shoot those?
they are soldiers, troops who say the oath to defend the Constitution, not some jerk that thinks that it is some old piece of paper that should be more modernized.
also, I am not of the freeman, and never did support their cause. but I do see some liberals do not like to read SCOTUS decisions, such as the ones that say that cops do not have to protect the individual, only the public at large.
therefore, individual citizens have to rely on themselves for their own protection.
You're right, I doubt Obama will get much respect from the men and women in our military. I'm sure they will watch him cautiously.
You're right, I doubt Obama will get much respect from the men and women in our military. I'm sure they will watch him cautiously.
I've already heard of people changing their minds about enlisting because of osama being elected. And a lot of current military people are nervous, probably because they know what clinton did to the military.
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.
