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

reply to post by xavi1000


Ghandi also said this about gun control:

I used to issue leaflets asking people to enlist as recruits. One of the arguments I had used was distasteful to the Commissioner: 'Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest. If we want the Arms Act to be repealed, if we want to learn the use of arms, here is a golden opportunity. If the middle classes render voluntary help to Government in the hour of its trial, distrust will disappear, and the ban on possessing arms will be withdrawn.' The Commissioner referred to this and said that he appreciated my presence in the conference in spite of the differences between us. And I had to justify my standpoint as courteously as I could.

Just sayin'

Originally posted by xavi1000

A well educated and well informed populace knows where the ammo should go.
Just sayin'

A well educated and well informed populace should know that you can't defeat advanced scientific dictatorship with handguns

That's why we have AR 15s

Originally posted by xavi1000
reply to post by projectvxn

 

Yes , like non american i learn some from this thread .But did americans learn something about our european mindsets from this thread?

I certainly did. The use of and knowledge to use arms is not important to your society. But this thread is about ripping up our most closely held traditions... Including our right to free speech as the OP has stated.

I love it when people use Ghandi as an example because they are so easy to shut down with a history lesson.

skip to 7:18 if you want just the bit about Ghandi - however the entire video is an informative watch.


Peter Gelderloos [Author: How nonviolence protects the state]:
"Advocates of nonviolence they frequently say that nonviolence works and the principles example they use of that are Ghandi in India and Martin Luther King in the US. The problem with that is that this constitutes a really great historical white washing. That in fact the resistance in India was incredibly diverse and Ghandi was a very mportant figure within that resistance but the resistance was by no means pacifist in its entirety. There were a number of armed guerrilla groups, a number of militant struggles, very important riots and other strong clashes which were a part of the struggle for Indian independence. So on the one hand Ghandi basically got negotiating power from the fact that there were other elements in the struggle which were even more threatening to British dominance. So the British specifically chose to dialogue with Ghandi because he was perhaps the least threatening of the important elements of the resistance. If those other elements had not existed they simply could have ignored Ghandi."

reply to post by projectvxn


I don't think that 2nd am will be ripped of after 240 years today or in close future .We just made a comparison of ideas , debating about this issue.My thoughts about this issue are clear as i stated in my previous posts. Maybe like a contrary some american should open a thread : " Why do Englishmen need a King or Queen ? Just confiscate their property and send them to history" .

reply to post by xavi1000


Yeah but that would be a misnomer...

Doesn't look like you actually need a queen and king...You just like to have them.
I feel the same about guns...

That is to say that human beings only really need food, shelter, and protection..Guns aren't the only thing the provide protection, but it certainly is the most effective.

In reading most, but not all, these post I have not seen anyone tell us "why" we Americans have the Second Amendment to our Constitution. It was put there for good reason in response to a very important event in the lives of the founders of our nation.

www.earlyamerica.com...

For those who will not bother to check the link, allow me to enclose this from wiki-pedia:

British General Gage learned that the colonists had stored supplies and ammunition at Concord, MA, some 20 miles from Boston. On 19 April 1775, he sent 700 of his troops to seize the munitions and, if possible, capture and arrest Samuel Adams and John Hancock. Gage had received information that those two “rebels” were hiding out in Concord. Warning the Americans that the British were marching to Concord were the trio Revere, Dawes, and Prescott, of the famous “Midnight Ride.” When British Major John Pitcairn arrived at Lexington, which was on the way to Concord, he found 70 American minutemen (actually, they were almost all farmers) in battle formation at the town square. Pitcairn ordered the Americans to disperse but when they didn’t move after the second order to do so, someone fired a shot. It is not known if the shot was fired by Americans or British. The British easily cleared Lexington and marched on to Concord. He found more Americans arming the bridge into the town so Pitcairn order the British to return to Boston. All the way back to Boston, the Americans sniped at the British from behind trees and rocks, inflicting serious injury to the British troops. When the Redcoats reached Boston, 250 had been killed or wounded.


So much for that "tea party" excuse.

I don't know about the rest of you, but this says a lot.

reply to post by JR MacBeth


that sir was a great statement and I hopexavier takes it to heart

Originally posted by xavi1000

A well educated and well informed populace knows where the ammo should go.
Just sayin'

A well educated and well informed populace should know that you can't defeat advanced scientific dictatorship with handguns

I think I am beggining to understand you...are you even a born american? if not how long have you been a legal american? this question matters because the longer you are american the more american blood you become. I have no issues with foreign people becomming american, I have issues with foreign people who do not understand american blood. There is a deep rooted history in our amendments that which our forefathers gave us as our freedoms and as a true american you understand this.

reply to post by prexparte


Mate i'm not american , that is clear from my previous posts

Originally posted by xavi1000
reply to post by prexparte

 

Mate i'm not american , that is clear from my previous posts

mate you never said you was not american, I and I believe the other american posters believed you were american

reply to post by prexparte



you are a deciever to the ut-most. I t

reply to post by prexparte



you are a deciever to the ut-most. I t

reply to post by prexparte



you are a deciever to the ut-most. I t

reply to post by prexparte


I percieved your post as your work took you all over the world however your residence is in america you deceiver

reply to post by xavi1000


How can you oppse my rights when you do not have my rights to oppse.

Originally posted by prexparte
reply to post by prexparte

 

I percieved your post as your work took you all over the world however your residence is in america you deceiver

again you are messing the thread ..with replying on your own posts

and i stated that i'm not american Yes , like non american i learn some from this thread .But did americans learn something about our european mindsets from this thread?

reply to post by prexparte


This is a debate ,i can oppose you with decorum on every issue .ATS is international ,this is not a ditch with you armed to the teeth.

Ok I was gone for the night and just read upward, you are obviously controlled by the wacky queen I apolgize for not knowing the facts befor I posted. However You have no RIGHTS, (being you are loosing your right) to tell us americans we should not be allowed to have guns, as I stated guns are infact part of the american blood. and here is another fact....there is no law official, no part of the government powerful enough to disarm us because my controlled neighbor of the UK we american people haev one thing the rest of the world gave this is called.."WILL"

I found this incredible link regarding gun control:

Gun Control Facts

Here's an excerpt from the page:

CONSIDER; In 1929 the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, approximately 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915-1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, 13 million Jews, gypsies, homosexuals, the mentally ill, and others, who were unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million "educated" people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

That places total victims who lost their lives because of gun control at approximately 56 million in the last century. Since we should learn from the mistakes of history, the next time someone talks in favor of gun control, find out which group of citizens they wish to have exterminated.

So now, an unarmed populace is a good thing.... why?