It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Mooradian
Originally posted by kevinunknown
I got into this debate recently but it seemed a little bit of topic so I thought I would take a risk and write a thread myself asking the above question “why do Americans need guns?”
Now to me I can understand why a farmer might own a few shotguns or a hunter might own a few hunting rifles but why does anyone need a semi-automatic, unless their objective is to kill. To me guns are inherently evil objects that have been designed to kill our fellow man and therefore are evil as is to use a gun to kill. Further to this there have been a number of high profile shootings in America were a gun man has committed multiple homicide or gang warfare has resulted in innocents being killed. Now with that in mind how can you possibly say that the right to bear arms is justified? Yes some people need guns to do their jobs such as game keepers, farmers and law enforcement but why does Joe the plumber really need one.
The argument is always that it’s for self defence, that way if someone pulls a gun on a knife on you, you can protect yourself. It’s a hard one to argue against, but surly if it were the case that gun’s were outlawed or heavily regulated it would lead to a overall reduction in the number of firearms owned and therefore the odds of someone pulling a gun on you would be greatly reduced therefore you wouldn’t have to own a fire arm and the odds would fall further. In any case you can never be sure it’s going to help your odds, if two gun men mug you or break into your house you’re already on the losing side. Now baring in mind that there are almost enough firearms America for every citizen the robbers are going to know you have a gun in your house, they are going to be prepared and have the element of surprise on their side.
Now am sorry to spit on your 2nd amendment right, but for me self defence is not a valid argument for defending the 2nd amendment. Also the ability to carry arms has been severely restricted by the Gun-Free School zones act of 1990 signed by Gorge H W Bush, which is ironic considering that 41% of republicans own a firearm compared to only 23% of democrats so kudos to Bush. This does mean though that as a law abiding citizen in a town or city you really can’t carry a gun knowing that you are not breaking a law. As such you would be better just not carrying one, so again if you get attacked by someone you shouldn’t have a gun to defend yourself in the first place because to be carrying said firearm you would be breaking the law.
The line that I love is this “we have places to keep people who can’t use their guns properly, they’re called prisons”. Very true, but you also have places called hospitals and mortuaries filled with the victims of the scum your keeping in prison, and thousands of homes full of grieving families. Would it not just be better to ban or regulate these guns out right that way no idiots going to prison and cheaper hospital bills and less tears.
Then we get to my favourite, the line that all gun loving conspiracy theorists loves. “ I need my guns to protect myself for when the government turn on its people and try to through us all in the FEMA camps”. If that is your reason for keeping a gun, then you shouldn’t be allowed to own a gun based on your sanity. This fantasy that one day the feds are going to come knocking at your door to put you on the FEMA bus, then you, in a spectacular move pull out your Glock and take them all out then spend the rest of your life like the incarnation of the movie Rambo: First Blood, is just a fantasy no more. It’s not going to happen and even if it does your guns won’t do you any good, you will either die or be put in the camps so again I don’t give that fantasy any credibility as a reason to keep a locker full of AR-15’s in bedroom.
So can someone please tell me why you need a gun? In the UK I know no one who owns a gun, and no one I know has ever been disadvantaged because of this why is it that the worlds “super power” is any different, Gun Laws are out of date, rip up the second amendment and join the 21st century .
You my friend are captain of the ss dumb ass.
I myself have defended my home against burglars with my ak47
Guns are the teeth of the people. It's our right.
most of the guns used in killings are not registered and would be there regardless if we had the 2md am,end,met.
You're a retard. Get your hippie ass out
Originally posted by xavi1000
You are clearly not very well informed about history.Hitler was not opposed .German vote for him and admire it .When Soviet union crushed, reason was not soviet citizens armed with guns but coup.edit on 15-12-2010 by xavi1000 because: (no reason given)
...
Regulations Against Jews' Possession of Weapons
11 November 1938
With a basis in §31 of the Weapons Law of 18 March 1938 (Reichsgesetzblatt I, p.265), Article III of the Law on the Reunification of Austria with Germany of 13 March 1938 (Reichsgesetzblatt I, p. 237), and §9 of the Führer and Chancellor's decree on the administration of the Sudeten-German districts of 1 October 1938 (Reichsgesetzblatt I, p 1331) are the following ordered:
§1
Jews (§5 of the First Regulations of the German Citizenship Law of 14 November 1935, Reichsgesetzblatt I, p. 1333) are prohibited from acquiring, possessing, and carrying firearms and ammunition, as well as truncheons or stabbing weapons. Those now possessing weapons and ammunition are at once to turn them over to the local police authority.
§2
Firearms and ammunition found in a Jew's possession will be forfeited to the government without compensation.
§3
The Minister of the Interior may make exceptions to the Prohibition in §1 for Jews who are foreign nationals. He can entrust other authorities with this power.
§4
Whoever willfully or negligently violates the provisions of §1 will be punished with imprisonment and a fine. In especially severe cases of deliberate violations, the punishment is imprisonment in a penitentiary for up to five years.
§5
For the implementation of this regulation, the Minister of the Interior waives the necessary legal and administrative provisions.
§6
This regulation is valid in the state of Austria and in the Sudeten-German districts.
Berlin, 11 November 1938
Minister of the Interior
Frick
...
It would be instructive at this time to recall why the American citizenry and Congress have historically opposed the registration of firearms. The reason is plain. Registration makes it easy for a tyrannical government to confiscate firearms and to make prey of its subjects. Denying this historical fact is no more justified than denying that the Holocaust occurred or that the Nazis murdered millions of unarmed people.
I am writing a book on Nazi policies and practices which sought to repress civilian gun ownership and to eradicate gun owners in Germany and in occupied Europe. The following sampling of my findings should give pause to the suggestion that draconian punishment of citizens for keeping firearms necessarily is a social good.
Himmler, head of the Nazi terror police, would become an architect of the Holocaust, which consumed six million Jews. It was self evident that the Jews must be disarmed before the extermination could begin.
Finding out which Jews had firearms was not too difficult. The liberal Weimar Republic passed a Firearm Law in 1928 requiring extensive police records on gun owners. Hitler signed a further gun control law in early 1938.
Other European countries also had laws requiring police records to be kept on persons who possessed firearms. When the Nazis took over Czechoslovakia and Poland in 1939, it was a simple matter to identify gun owners. Many of them disappeared in the middle of the night along with political opponents.
...
First mate of the ss dumb ass
LOL. Have you ever heard of Neville Chamberlain? Does "peace in our time" mean nothing to you?
Originally posted by xavi1000
reply to post by sonofliberty1776
You are clearly not very well informed about history.Hitler was not opposed .German vote for him and admire it
I truly feel that I am having a battle of wits with an unarmed man. Go in peace I hope your ignorance brings you no harm.
.When Soviet union crushed, reason was not soviet citizens armed with guns but coup.edit on 15-12-2010 by xavi1000 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by kevinunknown
To me guns are inherently evil objects that have been designed to kill our fellow man and therefore are evil as is to use a gun to kill.
Originally posted by kevinunknown
.....but surly if it were the case that gun’s were outlawed or heavily regulated it would lead to a overall reduction in the number of firearms owned and therefore the odds of someone pulling a gun on you would be greatly reduced therefore you wouldn’t have to own a fire arm and the odds would fall further.
Originally posted by kevinunknown
In any case you can never be sure it’s going to help your odds, if two gun men mug you or break into your house you’re already on the losing side.
Originally posted by xavi1000
Thanks,we humans can solve every issue with words ,we dont need guns
You know this old quote : word is stronger than swordedit on 15-12-2010 by xavi1000 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by xavi1000
Bad comparation again ,Hitler killed 6 milions jews ,when they were arrested they were all without guns ? NOT.
Originally posted by guyopitz
The best defense against tyranny is a well armed populace. We have it and you can't take it away. Ever.