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

reply to post by lance_covel


To Lance:

"One never knows what tomorrow may bring".

"Time shall solve that question".

"I would rather have it and not need it than to need it and not have it".

When a shooter has the acquired "skill sets" needed to make shots at over 1000 yards (extreme long range) and consistently scores hits "in the blue" at that distance, shorter ranged shot "groups of 5" become "tighter" and more "accurate". Shooting "long range" (over 500 yards) will improve the shooters capability provided the shooter uses "correct consistency". IE: It helps to know how to shoot long range, it never hurts. Should you find yourself in the position of needing to take "that shot", you will know how. Who knows what tomorrow may bring? Would you be willing to bet your life or that of your family that you would never be in the position to have to make a shot at that "distance"? Train for every scenario. In the event that I was aware that some one was out to kill me or my family and friends, he better know that before he ever hears the shot that takes him out.......he's dead. He died "1400 yards short" of his weapons "ballistic capability". Use your ballistic advantage. Never let the enemy get close enough to return fire with any effect. For those that have "no clue" concerning Military Combat Tactics", this is exactly how it is done. The enemy got "wasted" before they ever got into the fight. When did Noah build the Ark? Before the rain came.


Scoutsniper

reply to post by lance_covel


Let him go,,,doers never talk and talkers never do...if he is lugging around all that gear he cant possibly be able to move tacticly

I will perform all my duties in a military manner

reply to post by kevinunknown


FYI, the second amendment doesn't mean squat anyway. The natural right to own property does not owe it's existence to any document. From the day you are born, whatever you can grab and hold onto IS your property. A gun is property, ammunition is property and so on. The government, which BTW was CREATED by MAN to serve, obey and PROTECT MAN, does not have the jurisdictional authority to limit or restrict ANYTHING man does. If we do not trespass on anothers rights, property or damage anything, there is no crime. No victim, no crime.

The legislature can legislate FOR the people but NEVER legislate TO the people. They can pass NO statute, code, ordinance or rule that would restrict the natural or inherent rights of man. They can pass no "law" that would "require" any license or other document to be held by a "Citizen" or one of the actual people, as this would be a restriction and NOT a liberty, but a constriction on your liberties.

FIREARMS REFRESHER COURSE A-Z


a. Gun control is not about guns, it’s about control.
b. Free men do not ask permission to bear arms.
c. An armed Man is a Citizen. An unarmed Man is a servant.
d. If you don’t know your rights, then you do not have any.
e. If guns are outlawed, can we use swords?
f. If guns cause crime, then pencils must cause misspelled words.
g. Those who trade liberty for security will have neither. "Benjamin Franklin"
h. A gun in the hand is better than a policeman on the telephone.
i. COLT; the original point and click interface.
j. Over 65 million firearms owners killed no one yesterday.
k. Guns only have two enemies, rust and liberals.
l. You don’t shoot to kill, you shoot to stay alive.
m. The Second Amendment is in place in case they ignore the others. (irrelevent really)
n. The United States Constitution © 1791. ALL Rights Reserved
o. What part of “shall not be infringed” do you not understand?
p. Assault is a behavior, not a device.
q. Criminals love gun control, it makes their job safer.
r. Know guns, know peace and safety. NO guns, NO peace or safety!!
s. If guns cause crime, then matches cause arson.
t. Enforce the gun control laws we have, do not make more.
u. 9-1-1 – government sponsored Dial-a-Prayer.
v. You only have the rights you are willing to FIGHT for.
w. The American Revolution would never have happened with gun control.
x. Only a government that is afraid of its Citizens tries to control them.
y. When you remove the people’s right to bear arms, you create slaves.
z. “....a government of the People, by the People, for the People…..”


“A government afraid of its Citizens is a Democracy,
Citizens afraid of their government is a Tyranny.”

Thomas Jefferson

Emphasis mine.

reply to post by Vicky32


Perhaps you should check the definition of racism...

The post youre referring to is emotionally charged, sure but based on statistics and facts...

Look at the continent of africa and their rape stats...HUGE and thats just whats reported probably alot more raping goes on in the middle of the wars that are on going there.

And if someone says they hate muslims they are not RACIST they are an anti-semite.

Not sure where you live, but the argument that less guns make people safer is rediculous. As others posters have put it 'Where there is a will theres a way'... You can talk about gun deaths in the United States vs that of the UK but how about the other ways to kill someone? Stabbings, Bludgeoning, Hanging... They data proves that the chaps over in the UK do that far more than us yanks...

Realize when our constitution was written we were trying to get away from the police state the UK had become... We were quite weary of tyranny and the ability to fight back an oppressive government... Unfortunately since gradual erosion of liberties is less detectable (frog in boiling water argument) it is important to go by the founding doctrine of this nation and keep its ideals as pure as possible since Tyranny over men apparently in the past 200 years hasnt gone out of style...

KevinUnknown, I'm going to be as civil as I can, but ill preface with saying this sort of logic really boils my blood

First of all, why is it that all the anti-gun rhetoric always discriminates against the people having guns, and not the historically biggest perpetrators of mass death, rape and pillage: governments, politicians and large organizations?

This is a big sign that common sense and sanity has left the building, because you are saying that you would rather trust polticians and their dangerously brainwashed lackeys, instead of your neighbour

Here is another reason why we have a right to bear arms, because we have a right to life. Period. If you don't have the right to bear arms for self-defence, you have some criminal politician somewhere who is saying there is some valid reason why you don't have a right to defend yourselves against governments and their MO-mass murder and slavery. This isnt an opinion its based on historical fact

Please read up on history and look at the last 100 years, let alone the last few hundred years with some objectivity and common sense, the studies on 'democide' shows the actions of governments have killed 200 million PLUS in the last 100 years

All this anti-gun rhetoric I see amongst the majority is mass insanity gone wild, and sadly its caught on in Australia, UK and elsewhere

Your comment that someone should be denied arms because they believe in FEMA camps or that their government is a threat, really only points to your own delusions, see point above about democide

My conclusion on this issue is that in reality anti-gun rhetoric signifies one's lack of respect of life, dignity and a morbid and sadistic acceptance of the murderous spirit of governments. I am truly glad that there are still gun-toting patriots in America who love freedom and will fight to defend it, and while I will fight for your right to speak freely on this issue, I wont pull any punches in letting you know that it closely resembles an ignorant acceptance of mass murder

Im sure you mean well but at this point I feel confident you have been infected with the retardo-logic of communistic atheistic cliche psuedo-science

Originally posted by BingeBob
reply to post by Vicky32

 

Perhaps you should check the definition of racism...

The post youre referring to is emotionally charged, sure but based on statistics and facts...

Look at the continent of africa and their rape stats...HUGE and thats just whats reported probably alot more raping goes on in the middle of the wars that are on going there.

And if someone says they hate muslims they are not RACIST they are an anti-semite.

Good point BingeBob. That was my comment (mea culpa), and in this politically correct age, it probably went a bit too far, I will grant that, and I certainly would never want to offend anyone unnecessarily, especially someone with a name like Vicky!

Another member I know, who self-identifies as a person of color, also had one of his posts deleted because he referred to the high murder rate of Jamaica, so the mods probably do try to play fair here. Was this poster "racist"? Well, most everyone is to some extent, in the usual sense, and this particular member I'm talking about has no problem admitting it. Which is certainly not a boast, but my hat is off to someone who is unafraid to simply acknowledge what is a human failing we ALL have, even if many of us have convinced ourselves otherwise.

In my personal experience, my perception is that it's most often the servile politically correct, self-righteous types, who come off as way more "racist" than they ever can imagine themselves as being. And it shows, they continually "project" their own veiled feelings, without even trying, with an "outrage", too often over-the-top.

The greater context is that ATS is a business, and it certainly would not want to end up classified as a "hate site", which means they do in fact have to bow to the realities out there, like it or not. And I have to say, that if it was my business, I would likely do exactly the same, even if my personal convictions had to stand aside. That's business.

JR

reply to post by JR MacBeth


I probably wouldnt have even posted that if Vicky had something to add to the conversation besides calling someone a dirty name that has lost its meaning...

The point is that the world has become SO politically correct that it is having a reverse effect...

Case in point:

Nigerian -What you call someone from Nigeria (proper)
nigerian -Also what you call someone from Nigeria except not capitalized (nigeria)

Where it says "n word" i actually typed "Nigerian" with lowercase "n"

Officially taking a non offensive word and making it offensive all in the name of political correctness.

Class dismissed

As far as in the U.S goes, this sums it all up.

If our country were ever invaded, the citizen soldiers would be our last line of defense. It was that way so long ago when the Americans kicked the Brits butts back over the ocean where they belonged. It'll be that way again if any body's got enough balls to try it.

Originally posted by BingeBob
reply to post by JR MacBeth

 

I probably wouldnt have even posted that if Vicky had something to add to the conversation besides calling someone a dirty name that has lost its meaning...

The point is that the world has become SO politically correct that it is having a reverse effect...

Case in point:

Nigerian -What you call someone from Nigeria (proper)
nigerian -Also what you call someone from Nigeria except not capitalized (nigeria)

Where it says "n word" i actually typed "Nigerian" with lowercase "n"

Officially taking a non offensive word and making it offensive all in the name of political correctness.

Class dismissed

edit on 18-12-2010 by BingeBob because: (no reason given)

That's interesting BingeBob, I think you make a good point about political correctness having the reverse effect.

But I also think that those who are marching to the political correct lock-step, will also be the most likely to miss, or rather , dismiss your point. These are the folks who don't think you even have a right to say what you just said, in spite of it's respectfulness.

And I also wonder how many of these same folks even realize that they are doing most of the "insulting", seldom really adding anything to a conversation, other than, "gotcha!". They imagine that they are the offended party, and yet somehow manage to actually do the most offending.

Well, this is ATS after all. I think we should all strive to have more "tolerance" than we think is "appropriate", and only after that, if something still manages to get under our skin, then maybe mention it, but don't go bananas, ya know. Thick skin not necessarily "required" for a good debate, but highly recommended. Otherwise, it becomes more about people's "feelings", and the issues can get lost.

JR

You have got to be kidding me.... The world is starting to come apart at the seams and you ask a question like this? When the UK government comes apart, How will you survive? Berries? I think not... I know my neighbors will be heading to my house when they are hungry and I am having a Venison BBQ... And then I will have to protect my next meal.... Very simple.

I will fight to keep this one freedom, because if we lose our second freedom, we lose them all.

T

This is the beauty part. It has nothing to do with need. I can have all I want and I don't have to need a single one. The Constitution and the Amendments are not based on need. They are based on rights. The Second Amendment is also based on the defense of the country, even from its own Government. We didn't like the last government we had so our citizens used their arms to fight them and we won. If it has happened once we can do it again if needed.

I believe this is the thread you were referring to and this was my reply to you in it.

Originally posted by kevinunknown
reply to post by RelentlessLurker

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Graph one: Murders by gun per Million in UK.

Graph two: Murders by gun per 100 000 in America

That for me says all you need to know about gun crime in America.

No. That says all YOU want to know. You want to have fun with numbers? We can do that. The police have said there are an estimated 120,000 firearms in circulation in the UK. The US has in the neighborhood of 250 Million privately owned firearms. That is over 2,000 time as many guns. The population of the UK is about 60 Million. The population of the US is about 300 Million. That's 15 times as many people in US as UK. The REAL numbers show that gun control does not reduce gun crime. Another stat that is seldome given is that almost half of all gun deaths in the US each year are suicides. That isn't exactly violent crime but they are included in the stats.

Then just for giggles and grins we can look at how knife crazy they are in the UK.
In 2006 there was one knife crime commited for every 374 people (rounded down) in the UK.
The US had about 0.4987 gun crimes per 374 people that year.
You are more likely to be stabbed in the UK than shot in the US. Why is the UK so knife crazy?
Numbers are fun

reply to post by xavi1000


From your post, and that of other Europeans, you are all too opinionated and beleive everyone must follow your flawed system that has more violent crimes per people than we do in the U.S.

Europeans LOVE to ignore facts, more so when such facts show your system is flawed, and your society spawns more violent crime than the U.S, and even Europe is more violent than south Africa, but Europeans are so high on yourselves that "facts, and evidence" don't change your minds.

Europeans, and some others, love to claim that "Americans having guns must be because we lack manhood" which in itself it must be some sort of reverse psychology for something Europeans themselves seem to lack.

Europeans, and some others, even though the facts show they are wrong, want everyone else to implement their flawed and violent society, which they adore no matter how much evidence and statistics we show you that prove European society is more flawed and more violent than the U.S.

Europeans love to claim Americans are arrogant, then right after they love to claim how much perfect your society is, even though the facts say something entirely different.

So, to make it short, Europeans are arrogant, selfish, and violent, yet you people love to claim the contrary...

I thought we have guns to defend ourselves against those would try to force their will upon us, as in government, gangs, other countries, and those who would try to take our guns away. Also good for self defense and shooting birds and wild game to eat. Did I mention I'm a member of Peta (People for the Eating of Tasty Animals). Fantastic organization, i participate daily!

reply to post by SKinLaB


Dude that is awesome.
I don't remember where I heard it first, but I've used that argument on the brain dead lefties and it shuts them down quick. "Fine", I say. "If you believe in gun control, why not put a sign outside your house saying: "This house is unarmed".

The OP seems to have a knack for posting these kinds of "point farming" threads.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

But really, do you actually believe a person does not have the right to defend themselves?

reply to post by JR MacBeth


woe hold on a minute,,why on this blog does anybody have to be referred to as a person of color or even "especially a person with the name of Viki ....I gotta say something about that. This is a forum we are all just people.Since damn few know anybody else nobody else is better or smarter than anybody else...the nam stories and the tomahok stories and the 1400yrd shot stories do get tiring as to the point but we are all just people here

Originally posted by mike184ever
reply to post by JR MacBeth

 

woe hold on a minute,,why on this blog does anybody have to be referred to as a person of color or even "especially a person with the name of Viki ....I gotta say something about that. This is a forum we are all just people.Since damn few know anybody else nobody else is better or smarter than anybody else...the nam stories and the tomahok stories and the 1400yrd shot stories do get tiring as to the point but we are all just people here

Well Mike, to answer that, you would actually have to READ the posts, instead of just looking for a lame "gotcha". Thanks for making my point though!

JR

PS: If your friend should refer to HIMSELF as a "person of color", would you feel the "need" to correct him? Would you perhaps "revise" / sanitize his self-identification, just because it makes YOU feel uncomfortable? Extra credit: What might that say about YOU?