Gun control

Are you in favour of gun control?








[Edited on 6-6-2003 by Militiaman]

To what nation is this poll aimed?

I believe it is every man's right to be armed, for his own protection, his family's and the weaker members of society around him, and also so that he, combined with the other members of the society, may stand their ground when they decide the government has gone too far and become a government of arbitrary rule.

But that is my feeling as an American beased upon my constitution and God's law upon which it is founded. Other nations and societies have the right to view it differently. If it is in reference to another nation's gun control law, please disregard my vote of "yea" as I have no business interfering.

I guess I'm a liberal in your eyes. Thanks for the stereotyping.


But I live in the UK. We have a totally different view of guns. Most of us here want to see them totally taken off our streets.

Nope, all we need is a background check to make sure no ex-convict gets a gun, and mandatory sentances for people who use guns in the commision of a crime. Other than that no gun control laws.

I'm referring to the American constitution, although I'm not an American myself. I wish Canada could become a nice constitutional republic and copy your constitution. Our's was signed by the queen so you can see the difference of a constitution signed into power by a monarch and a constitution signed into power by anti-monarchs (I'm also anti-monarch). Governments all over the world seem to be taking their citizens' freedoms away one bit at a time, and the citizens aren't noticing. Now Americans can't even buy assault rifles, so how are they supposed to defend themselves against their government/military which is armed with more than assault rifles, like their constitution says they're allowed to do? No person has the right to tell another person what they may not own. The UK's full of spineless citizens anyway- look how long they've had a monarch. It'd explain why many of them seem to believe that all they have to do to end violence is take away peoples' guns. The real criminals aren't going to hand in their guns to the UK police during their gun amnesties, and it's naive to think that they are.

I believe it is every man's right to be armed, for his own protection, his family's and the weaker members of society around him, and also so that he, combined with the other members of the society, may stand their ground when they decide the government has gone too far and become a government of arbitrary rule. Posted by Thomas Crowne

I'll go you one even better TC... it is every Americans DUTY to be armed, for the reasons you mention.

Anyone understand the significance of Kenesaw Georgia?

I agree with Jedimaster- why control all guns when the true people who commit crimes should be the ones paying the price of freedom. Of course people found guilty of non-violent crimes should be allowed to own a gun. Like I said, nobody has the right to say what a person may not own, but violent criminals shouldn't be considered people if they can't act humanely.

Originally posted by Militiaman
The UK's full of spineless citizens anyway- look how long they've had a monarch.

People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

Two young couples pic-nicking on a river in Tenn., when suddenly five would be robbers appeared. The leader had a 13" knife. As he approached he said, " We fixin to rob you MF'S. One of the men said not today and pulled out a 9mm and bang settled it. He shot the leader in the shoulder and the others ran off.

There is no telling where that story would have ended if one of the men among the couples had not had a gun. He did have a court date and was set free on self defense after much grief. The attacker got of scott free.

Interesting point about firearms registration laws in the USA - they don't apply to criminals. If you are a criminal (such as a drug dealer or bank robber) and own a firearm which should be registered, then registering your firearm is considered "self incrimination"; if you are an honest citizen and you own a unregistered firearm which should be registered, then you have commited a crime. Probably one of the best deterrents to using guns in criminal offences is the "firearms specification" to certain violent crimes (i. e., if a guy uses a gun to commit an armed robbery, he gets an additional five years added to his sentence - no arguments.) These types of clauses have been ruled constitutional by the Supreme Court.

I think that gun dealers should be heavily watched. I think that there should be a database keeping better track of guns. I think backround checks should be more thorough.

I do guns are needed for protection and just as Thomas said, to keep a corrupt, tyrannical government from coming into power. (looks like it's about that time)

Unfortunately, much like conception, some people just shouldn't have guns...

Yes- destroy the guns so people can't defend themselves against criminals and tyrannical government because I'm a liberal and like to tell people what to do.

You dont need to be protected... Your brain is still damaged...


[Edited on 6-6-2003 by Nans DESMICHELS]

" Yes- destroy the guns so people can't defend themselves against criminals and tyrannical government because I'm a liberal and like to tell people what to do. "

HA HA HA HA HA I LOVE that one.

Also, I like how some peoples are upset when you don't agree with them, and especially when you tell them that the peoples should have the right to protect themselves AGAINST everything and everybody.

Don't be surprised, I voted : " No, it's our right to.... "

I believe that if some one is to own a gun then they should hold a license, i dont know how the registration works but im all for licenses, any one that owns a gun should go to a course so that they learn how to fire it, keep it well maintained, and how to make there own ammo. I own 2 guns a 22 magnum rifle and a 303 rifle they are locked up in my gun safe and you damn near need dynamite to open it up. of course the safe is in my bed room and i can open it in less then 15 seconds, so if some one is gona try rob my house there gona be sore.

I'm against registration because it requires so much resource and tax money to do but think it would proabaly be okay to have a license, especially to carry concealed to prove you've taken safety courses and aren't a criminal. Thats only to carry concealed or be a minor using a gun to hunt with a supervised adult.

See there is a difference in controlling for safety as our forestry and conservationalist do and controlling to limit opposition to an oppresive government.

One aspect the gun control lobby doesn't take on is the use of guns by criminals. I am inclined to believe the soft stance on criminals using guns stems from the need to have a high number of gun violence incidence to back the claim of the need to ban them. Another words, they are willing to accept a certain level of violence if its the means to their desired end. Total disarmmament of the country and full movement into the socialist world community they are building. The old end justifies the means theory again. A dangerous and deadly way to think.

I bet you'll never guess where I stand
I agree with TC mostly. I do think that a certain amount of training should be mandatory before being able to own a firearm including a background check for criminal behaviour or psychological problems.
Registration on the other hand is a VERY bad idea. If the Govt. knows who is the best armed when/if the militia becomes necessary to retake the country, then they know exactly where to go first. (let's hope it never comes to that)

Originally posted by Militiaman
It'd explain why many of them seem to believe that all they have to do to end violence is take away peoples' guns. The real criminals aren't going to hand in their guns to the UK police during their gun amnesties, and it's naive to think that they are.

When 50 or so people a year are killed by guns we can afford to be blase. Our society is much. much older than yours. We don't hunt because there are no vast tracts of land to hunt in. The only reason any Brit would ever need a gun is for sport or for crime.
So we simply don't need them.

As for spineless? You forget. You're a colony. Canada didn't even have the balls of the US. They swallowed our culture, our laws, our monarchy, our system. At least the US went out there and did it for themselves.
I guess that makes you Canadians spineless doesn't it.
And then when I look at your relationship with the US another word springs to mind - parasite.

So you see, what works for you, doesn't necessarily work for the guy over the road. For you to assume otherwise is both arrogant and ignorant. For you to throw slurs into the equation demands that I put you straight.

You have no idea of what you are talking about. You can only compare with your own infant society and you don't have the mental capacity to do that. The fact is that we in the UK don't live like you do simply because we don't have to. As a result gun crime here is minimal. Sure you can massage facts and figures but in my life I have never met a single person who has been threatened with a firearm. And guess what? I was a cop when I was 19 and for the last 6 years I've been a bar owner. I would think somebody with those qualifications would be able to tell you that you know nothing.
Spineless indeed.


Like I said dude - Glass houses.

is useing two hands and hitting what you aim at. Please practice regularly for better control of your weapon.

Originally posted by ADVISOR
is useing two hands and hitting what you aim at. Please practice regularly for better control of your weapon.

Acknowledged.

All there should be is a background check.People should be free to choose.People do not have the right to tell me I can not own a gun,and I do not have the right force someone to have one.I wish people would get that through their heads.If you don't like em,don't buy on.Simple.