Why do Americans need guns? Rip UP the Second Amendment, problem solved.

Pretty sure his initial debate that started his whole thread was with me in this thread: abovetopsecret.com...

Having said that I am happy the majority here hanging him by his toes...

-If you rid yourself of the right to protect your freedoms, you inevitably and eventually lose those freedoms.

I argue that more people should own guns they are the biggest deterrent to violent crime.

Accidents happen yes that is a fact of life and no matter how many inanimate heavy objects you remove from "existence" (like that is even a realistic option? ) there will always be accidents.

Someone said:

People with guns aren't the problem, its people without guns that are the problem.

I completely agree...

reply to post by kevinunknown


Are you serious? It is about personal freedom. You don't have to like what I say. I don't have to care that you don't like it. Is it really that hard to understand?

If there was a modern day war,and it happened on U.S. soil,guns would offer alittle resistance to the terrorists/enemy. If no civilians had them,they would just get steam rolled.

reply to post by kevinunknown


Why do the top Corporations need to control Washington - and the need to control the Military Industrial Complex

Yeah - that's why we need guns - and lots of them!

You won't pull guns off the street with a law - because the black market sells twice as many and they are fully auto

Take the average citizens gun - and who is left with guns - the people who bought from the black market and will continue to buy them after any stupid law.

How stupid is that - take the legal guns away from those who use them legally and registered!

I hope if what you suggest ever happens - your house will be the first house that gets hit by criminals with guns looking to take what they want.

reply to post by Brood


how funny , but then again its one of the biggest CONTRIBUTORS to crime during summer days ,
if you dent that then i guess its not me who´s treading the shallow waters,..

I how ever can think of many contributing factors to as WHY crimes are done not HOW they done,
but here in this cold country of hell i can say that majority of homicides are done with:
knives , hatchets, beer bottles, power tools, fists and feets ,

there is about 120 homicides here in my country yearly and 16% of thouse are made with firearms and 7% out of the 16% is made by legal fire arms.

thats 0,012 promille out of all firearms owners that turn out unfit,

yet 95% of thouse involved crimes of "passion/jelousy" and alcohol,

and i guess theres 1 or 2 stray bullets during hunting ,

so sure, its easy to say that the 20 or so homicides a year made with firearms could be prevented from being made by firearms what about the 100 other ones ?

any good ideas as to why and how they happen and how they can be prevented ?

I can't begin to address all of the reasons the 2nd Amendment exists, but for someone to advocate simply eliminating one amendment of the Bill of Rights is ridiculous and terrifying.
First, without the 2nd Amendment, the other 9 are worthless. Got that?

If you don't like guns, then don't possess one. Unlike health insurance under Obama, it is a right, not an obligation.

If my girlfriend is alone at home, I feel much better that she is armed.
If my mother is alone at home, I feel much better that she is armed.
A gun makes my 98 pound mother equal to any 230 pound hoodlum trying to break into her home.
Don't you get that, Rosco?

If you are against violence, you are a perfect citizen. Little problem, however. What do you do about the hoodlums all around us? Call 911? The courts have ruled that the police have no obligation to protect you at all, They just clean up the mess and look for the perp.

Riot situation? Call the cops. Remember what happened in New Orleans? The cops ran home, leaving the nice citizens just like you to fend for themselves.

I have never needed a fire extinguisher or a gun to protect me, but I will be damned if I let you or anyone else take away my right to either one of those protections.

In every state where concealed carry laws have passed, the crime rates have plummeted. No media outlet or Democrat wants to mention that, and I am sure you have no idea that this is the case. Why would this be? Maybe you can figure it out all by yourself.

I read most of the comments here, and some were really moronic.
This debate will never be settled, and it is unfortunate there are people like you who want to impose your values on everybody else. Fortunately, I own guns, and so do so many other Americans. We like to cling to them, don't you know?

Isn't the National Guard the 'well armed militia'? What are they doing overseas? They are certainly well armed.
A Grumman A-10 or an F16 with laser sighted bombs is certainly 'well armed.' Oh, that's right, they are defending you against people who wouldn't guard an oil pipeline.... Sorry, fighting Brown Muslims.....er....no.....erm..........Not sure here......Something about 9/11 and the SAUDI ARABIANS who supposedly attacked New York.....Only....Saudi Arabia got VIP treatment........I'm still very confused...

Your country is in peril, under attack at the border in Arizona, California etc. Well, off you jolly well go to defend it (since your National Guard are off elsewhere). We'll send food... That's why you joined the NRA, right? So you could defend your country? No? So you could defend yourself against a government who would take your liberties? Didn't the Shrub boys do that with the Patriot Act? Where were you? To defend your home? Really? Because you can't trust the Government to do that for you? Well, off you jolly well go to overthrow them, right? No? Okay........I guess I see your point.....maybe not.....

Well, good job you hold precious the amendment that gives you the right to carry a gun. Was it that or a very pointy car?

I will defend, to the death, your "God" (Trademarked to mean "Only the Christian beardy one") given right to bear a single shot, muzzle loading, flintlock musket......
Well, if you're holding on to every word of the amendment, you have to take it in context. I'm sure the authors didn't have AR-15's with red-dot sights and flash inhibitors. I bet they thought flintlocks were more than anyone needed.....

Firearm ownership for law abiding citizens in the U.S. is a personal choice, a choice that our founders realized was an "inherent" right - for lack of a better description a "god given" right that cannot be given by men nor taken by men. It is and hopefully my peers agree a choice to be respected and revered. You can choose not to exercise the right but you cannot give it away or have it taken from you.

The founders were specifically respectful of free men to defend themselves against aggression and tyranny both internally and externally. This "inherent" right is the sound basis for protection of all other "inherent rights" enumerated in the constitution.

I have difficulty with attempting to separate any of these mutually supportive rights. The first amendment as well as the rest are easily abridged, ignored or usurped without the second amendment ultimately backing them up.

In the Federalist Papers our founders were not debating "sports-mans" rights, it was all about defending yourself, the republic and defending yourself from the republic were it to become tyrannical.

The average normal American has been docile if not asleep while our rights are progressively and quietly eaten away at by do-gooders, meddlers and not so subtle subversion and those whom deem themselves to know best. IMHO this is part and parcel why we are in such a mess now - values, what values?

Besides the issue of personal defense I believe most would indeed exercise their second amendment rights if tomorrow Banks, ATM's and Credit Cards did not work. As long as they have convenient access to money, credit/debt purchasing it seems all is good.

One event whether natural or man-made can change this almost overnight. We may argue amongst ourselves, be partisan, smart, ignorant or whatever label you may apply but when time is right the good will outweigh the bad in this country and we will come together in common defense.

Take those comforts away, have the bad elements of society riot and begin pillage, have the government declare martial law in response and see just how important our second amendment really is.

The veneer of civilization has and unfortunately will always be very thin.

I'll take my chance with having a choice over having no choice at all when the bell rings.

Phoenix

reply to post by kevinunknown


your such a misguided sheep

reply to post by kevinunknown

Funny you should mention the gunfree zone act in the o.p.!

School shooting in Columbine Colorado :"Gun free zone"!
Virginia tech shootings :"gun free zone"!!!

You see criminals don't give a rats fuzzy behind about feel good laws only law abiding citizens who worry about being arrested do..

Where I live out way in the boondocks in the middle of nowhere coutry, farmland, we do have guns. We have had problems with people coming out and trying steal gas out of our diesel gas tank for my FIL's tractor. We also keep them becasue years ago my inlaws had a break in when they weren't home and plus it never hurts to have one handy when some idiot thinks it is okay to try and break into our storage shed. I feel way safer having a gun, but have thought about keeping a can of wasp spray. I have been told that it works way better than pepper spray and will at least give you some time to get away and call the police. No I don't intend to ever kill anyone, but I will protect my family by any means necessary, even if that means shooting someone to save my or my kids lives.

i notice that a lot of people from europe really hate the fact that we have guns. why is this? they must really push that guns are bad in the media. let me lay out this scenario, guns become illegal and honest citizens turn them in fearing imprisonment. okay, now if you have a felony conviction among other convictions you are not allowed to own a gun in america under the penalty of federal prison. now do you think these people are going to turn in their guns? absolutely 100% no way in the world that would happen. so now what we would have is an honest unarmed population teeming with armed criminals. what would then stop us from having our homes burglarized, being car jacked, having our family raped by some armed strung out junkie intruder, or any other type of scenario? i mentioned this once to someone from the uk and they said "get a baseball bat" yeah, that is going to be really effective against someone armed with a handgun or an assault rifle, sounds pretty even to me. tell me, would you want to fight someone with an ak-47 with a knife or a ball bat or a tire iron? didn't think so. in america we arm ourselves for the same reason a small nation arms itself with nukes, to protect itself from bigger meaner people with mutually assured destruction. for example if north korea did not have nukes america could have easily smeared kim jong il off the face of the earth like he never existed. however we know if we do this he will start firing off nukes like crazy. it is the same situation with americans, if we did not have our guns our government could walk all over us, they could do anything they wanted to us and we would never have a way to defend ourselves. so our guns are that mutually assured destruction for the american people vs the american government. your country hasn't allowed firearms for quite some time, but our country was founded on several basic fundamental rights one of these including gun ownership. to give up our constitution, or ANY part of it, would amount to us giving away our country to the current people in power, and none of us want that to happen. telling us to give up our guns and get with the times is kind of like you telling a country in the middle east to stop making women cover their faces and killing homosexuals. this is just what their country has been doing for years and they aren't going to stop, no matter what some snobby europeans think. in all reality, it is none of your business and it doesn't concern you in any way. so why are you even worried about it? i would honestly like to hear how you would argue the points i have made in this post and look forward to doing so. peace

When debating this issue stateside I've always asked the anti-gunner this "If you believe so strongly that private citizens should not possess firearms are you willing to put up a sign in your yard that says - "There are absolutely no guns in this house" - yet to have a taker on that and the conversation seems to suddenly end soon after the question.

Case closed.

reply to post by 46ACE


And both of those examples (Shootings) were of kids on Psychotropic drugs and some of who had Hypnotherapy - planting a key word and committing an action without negative consciousness memory - in the case of Columbine they were instructed to turn the guns on themselves.

There has been several clear cut cases of programmed killers - from the CIA all the way to Oklahoma!

These shooters were programmed - and for the sole purpose of creating new gun laws! Most of them after an event - if they didn't commit suicide, they didn't even remember their actions.

If people did their homework they will see the truth!

reply to post by Brood


The topic here is the 2nd Amendment, not two by fours.
Arms are designed for offense and defense and hunting food. That's it. And that's why I will always be equipped with one.

Originally posted by Badgered1
Isn't the National Guard the 'well armed militia'? What are they doing overseas? They are certainly well armed.
A Grumman A-10 or an F16 with laser sighted bombs is certainly 'well armed.' Oh, that's right, they are defending you against people who wouldn't guard an oil pipeline.... Sorry, fighting Brown Muslims.....er....no.....erm..........Not sure here......Something about 9/11 and the SAUDI ARABIANS who supposedly attacked New York.....Only....Saudi Arabia got VIP treatment........I'm still very confused...

Your country is in peril, under attack at the border in Arizona, California etc. Well, off you jolly well go to defend it (since your National Guard are off elsewhere). We'll send food... That's why you joined the NRA, right? So you could defend your country? No? So you could defend yourself against a government who would take your liberties? Didn't the Shrub boys do that with the Patriot Act? Where were you? To defend your home? Really? Because you can't trust the Government to do that for you? Well, off you jolly well go to overthrow them, right? No? Okay........I guess I see your point.....maybe not.....

Well, good job you hold precious the amendment that gives you the right to carry a gun. Was it that or a very pointy car?

I will defend, to the death, your "God" (Trademarked to mean "Only the Christian beardy one") given right to bear a single shot, muzzle loading, flintlock musket......

Originally posted by Badgered1
Well, if you're holding on to every word of the amendment, you have to take it in context. I'm sure the authors didn't have AR-15's with red-dot sights and flash inhibitors. I bet they thought flintlocks were more than anyone needed.....

Now you're just being ignorant ! I have posted several times in various 2ndamendment threads here the following concept:" the founders documented the inalienable right to keep and bear arms to defend ourselves against a tyrannical govt( noto hunt; for "sporting purposes" or even "self defense"). their flintlocks of the day were every bit the equal if not better than the standard british "assault" military arm( the musket).,the Accurate kentucky long rifles the sniper rifleof the day.

I find it ignorant and offensive to try to submit such farsighted men fresh from a bloody battle including an amendment allowing future citizens to remove a tyrannical govt as they did; WOULD PURPOSELY WANT TO HANDICAP THESE SAME "FUTURE FREEDOM FIGHTERS " with one hand tied behind their backs

(i.e.The right to keep and bear arms but only those militarily ineffective ones100 years out of date). Sorry.but that comment is assinine.

These guys do as good a job as any explaining this as any :

Does Mr. Sahid, the Muslim in the house down the street have the "RIGHT" to cache as many weapons as Mr. Andrews, the Christian next door, or is Mr. Sahid's cache an obvious sign of him being a terrorist? Is he as welcome to bear arms against what he sees as a tyrannical government as Mr. Andrews is?

Depends on your views, and what you perceive.

The 'Patriots' of 1776 were simply terrorists in the eyes of the British. Perception....

Nobody seems to have mentioned the 4-8-12-15 year old who accidentally shot himself or his friend or his baby brother/sister with the handgun he 'found' in Granddad's closet. Where did the Columbine kids get the guns? Off the street from some felon looking for crack money? Dangerous, felonious criminals are not the only avenue toward gun ownership.

Gun ownership carries massive responsibility. Everyone on ATS talks about the sheep who believe everything they read/hear on the news, and how very stupid they are. Was Granddad one of these sheep? Or was he an NRA card carrying, patriotic member? Was he responsible as a gun owner? I argue that he wasn't. I know a lot of gun owners with safes and trigger locks will argue that it's the minority that are not responsible, but we hear that every single time some poor kid gets shot accidentally.

Guns don't kill people.....it's those pesky bullets.

reply to post by kevinunknown


I only own one gun and I've never killed anyone with it. If anyone manages to take it from me, from theft or otherwise, I intend to buy another or construct my own... the second of which would be much more dangerous to myself and others I'm sure. Quit arguing against rights. If you want to be a sheep, shut up and get in line... disarm yourself and wait for someone else to act upon you.

reply to post by Brood


Firearms aren't used for the sole purpose of killing people. They can also effectively be used to hunt animals and protect someone's life. If a gun owner is in a life-threatening situation, he can shoot someone in a non-lethal area. The gun owner doesn't always have to aim for a vital organ with the intent to kill. However, when faced by a crazed lunatic who wants you dead, there are only so many ways to defend yourself so that you aren't the one who's dead.

And really, what's nonsensical is your obstinate and fallacious belief that simply because something wasn't strictly manufactured for the sole purpose of harming another person, does not mean that a human (who's best quality is improvising and adapting) would not harm or kill someone with a knife or a car.

I mean seriously, have you seen a car speeding down the street? Do you know how many people get into car accidents each year? Cars are speeding bullets. So never mind firearms, should we prohibit automobiles as well simply because they cause fatal injuries?

Originally posted by Brood
This is exactly why I find it hilarious that people think "educational material" issued by the U.S. should be 100% trusted. American publications would have you believe that America has never lost a war ( 1812, Vietnam..

), and that "the troops" are always out there fighting for "our freedoms"

.

Wait, what do you have against Nazi Germany? You mean this nation that let corporations do whatever they wanted? Supported a military that touted their soldiers as heroes no matter how awful their acts were? Supported a Christian faith above all others? Waged war against countries... against the wishes of a collective group of surrounding countries? Well.... doesn't this sound familiar. Funny how America didn't care about WW2 until the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor.... yet not surprising. They were too busy copying everything they were doing to pretend they cared enough to fight against them. And here come the blissfully ignorant American "patriots" (or nationalists if you're stupid enough to think that is a positive term) saying that they are responsible for eradicating fascism and NWO.

while there may be a degree of truth to said assertions and whatnot, the obviously agenda-laden cloud of particulate inaccuracies and misspeaks is but just that. Obvious.

Carry on ... as you quite certainly will.

* i'd quote ron white, but it'd probably make no difference anyway. *