Ban the Gun, Repeal the Second Amendment.

Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoinwhat I am saying is that you lot need to grow up

Actually that sentence there says it all.

Americans seem to believe that by not having guns they're somehow being "punished" as one person put it - like you couldn't live without one.

They bang on about "needing guns to protect themselves against a tyrannical government" - well they have a tyrannical government right now, they moan like hell about how unfair things are, but how can this be happening - they still have their guns.

The reality is that guns are useless as a form of protest against Govt., the only time they'd be useful would be if Govt soldiers came marching down the street - thats what the 2nd amendment was thinking of.

But of course in those days they didn't have tanks, Apache gunships, Sarin gas, or a zillion other types of weaponry. I'm sure even the dumbest gun advocate can see that even the biggest gun you can get would be useless in the modern world against a tyrannical Govt.

As for "protecting yourself from criminals" - like when? You're walking down the street and someone holds you up with a gun - are you going to have time to pull out your gun and shoot them before they put a bullet in your head?

It's utterly moronic, there's no thought that's gone into the reality of confronting another person with a firearm.

It's all well and good shooting paper targets, but when it's someone shooting back 99.9% of people would freeze.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


I also live in Britian and I will counter this argument easily.
Cars kill people - lets ban all cars
Cigarettes kill people - lets ban all cigarettes
Alcohol kills people - lets ban all Alcohol


All of the above by themselves kill more people than guns yet somehow they are not ever questioned.
Of all the guns that are in America only a tiny portion of these are ever used to kill people.

On ATS there is thread after thread about how tyranical and vicious the US goverment has become, can you imagine how bad there goverment would be if there citizens had no guns?

Guns are needed in America if only to keep the goverment in check. So in closing the whole stupid arguement of gun control is useless unless you agree that everything that kills people should also be banned.

Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin
reply to post by ArrowsNV

 

Yes, because banning things really works well to prevent their use.

Really look at how many mass shootings there have been in the UK since we banned handguns.

Not very many….

There were never many 'guns' in private ownership to start with, most Brits were too poor to own 'guns' ( actually, guns have wheels, anything else is either a rifle or pistol, pistols being revolvers, or automatics)

To be clear, I am not saying ban all guns or ban the gun overnight, what I am saying is that you lot need to grow up and some proper gun regulation. You need gun reform, it’s very simple, none of you gun enthusiasts needs 40 guns with 1200 rounds of ammunition.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


So it is the "gun enthusiasts" with 40 guns and lots of ammunition that you are worried about? You want to limit their guns? Please enlighten us all about how many of these mass shootings that would have prevented. Or how it is these people who are specifically and uniquely a danger. Simply more sensationalist hogwash.

Well said OP S+F but you know their fear outways the need for change.... It borders on Stupidity, even the numbers don't convince them...

Source

Originally posted by Liquesence
Because banning/making drugs illegal completely eradicated drugs, and the addiction and abuse and all.

It's not a gun issue, it's a societal and mental health issue perpetuated by the barrage of contradictions that overwhelm stimuli on a daily basis.

ETA: For every crazy SOB with a gun, there are 100 responsible owners.

edit on 14-12-2012 by Liquesence because: (no reason given)

How can you even compare guns to drugs?

I assume you are talking about the most commonly used illegal drug - marijuana. Marijuana can be grown by pretty much everybody everywhere.

Guns can't be manufactured by everyone everywhere.

The black market that will be there will have to be guns smuggled in from other countries.

The goverment/police has to fight against this and do their best to stop the illegal smuggling.

In the end some guns will still come to the US, but less than there were before. Which will result in less criminals having guns.

It's not hard to understand (sic).

The only problem there is, is the people already having guns.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


The problem with banning the 2nd is that its foundations are found in the peoples right to secure good government.

So in the last 100 years when did you take out your guns and march on Washington It's funny we here in the civilised world use Voting and Elections. So America isn't Civilised that in essence is what you and anyone supporting The Right To Bear Arms is saying
Very telling indeed.

Click here for more information.

It is far too late !!! There are WAAAY to many guns in America to take away, no gun amnesty will recover the amount of guns in circulation. When i was a little girl growing up in Scotland, i wished, oh how i wished, i lived in America, the land of dreams. Well, now i'm all grown up and thank God i don't, soon the teachers will be armed and God help all if they have a "bad" day. I feel sorry for America, its a sad country these days.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin

Passing more (ultimately ineffective) laws is not the answer. Certainly that is not what you are suggesting. You must already know we have many laws already regarding firearms. So you are certainly not suggesting yet another law in the wake of this tragedy. No, of course not. What you and others like you are advocating is an all-out gun grab. That is the ONLY act by the government that might actually stop this kind of thing from happening again.

The only thing that will be accomplished by additional regulation is that somewhere, somehow, some unsuspecting yet otherwise law-abiding gun owner will unwittingly break some rule and get the book thrown at them for it. And it will certainly not stop the next mass shooting from happening.

So that cannot possibly be what you are advocating. What you are really advocating is that citizens are to be forced by law to appear at the county courthouse and hand over all of their firearms, or face reprisal at the hands of the government.

reply to post by Liquesence


you said for every crazy sob that has a gun there are 100 responsible gun owners

you must have forgoten to contemplate ,

that this sob with a gun ( assault rifle ) could take out your 100 responsible people in one sitting . and unless you carry a concealed weapon ( i assume you must be liscenced to do so ) what good is it for example when u go to watch a movie or go to school ,or anything else for that matter

NONE !

i dont in any way want to get into a majour dispute over this , your comment stood out to me so i couldent resist just spilling a few words

i honestly do hope the usa sort their gun problems out ! so that no more inoscent lives are lost !
R.I.P little ones !!!

Rascal

There are roughly 80 million legal and law abiding gun owners. While my heart goes out to the victims of such gun related crimes, its still just anecdotal evidence the media puts out there so the gun grabbers get frothy at the mouth. This just makes it easier for the government to say, ok, give the
People what they want, lets take away their rights.

Lets say theres an umbrella factory that will do anything to sell their umbrellas. They decide to take all the reports of rainy days nationwide and report on them over a course of several weeks time. There will be some people who latch onto the idea that it must be raining everywhere, better buy that umbrella. The smart people will of course realize, well what about all the sunny days that werent reported on.

The government is selling you your own shackles and you are buying it.

Y'now, through all this back-and-forth, "ban guns", "we need them to defend against a corrupt government", etc.. nobody is stating one of the clear defensive reasons for have a firearm for personal protection (even a multi-shot semi-auto)......protection during a crisis. Yes, remember back to Hurricane Katrina? After the devastation, there were roaming gangs of thugs, looting and do other nefarious acts of violence wielding illegal weapons to intimidate and harm others. THIS is one of the most likely cases for self-protection, since natural (or man-made) disasters break down the thin line between civilization and anarchy. Sad, but all too true.

I would bet that if Britain was faced with a major natural disaster, their population would revert back to this mentality just the same. If it ever does happen, can I sit here and say, you should have fought for your right to own a weapon to protect yourself from those roving gangs.....huh?

Oh, and Brits, that weapons ban really helped fight the IRA and subway bombers didn't it? Killer will kill with whatever is available at their disposal. Until such a time as human nature changes to grow beyond that behavior, out of our adolescence as a species, personal protection will be needed. Wishing for things never works....praying for things never works, DOING things does work.

I'm out.............

The government wont take away guns



But I have a funny feeling that they are going to go after magazine size and tax the hell out of ammo,making it too expensive to buy in bulk

Originally posted by Krakatoa
Y'now, through all this back-and-forth, "ban guns", "we need them to defend against a corrupt government", etc.. nobody is stating one of the clear defensive reasons for have a firearm for personal protection (even a multi-shot semi-auto)......protection during a crisis. Yes, remember back to Hurricane Katrina? After the devastation, there were roaming gangs of thugs, looting and do other nefarious acts of violence wielding illegal weapons to intimidate and harm others. THIS is one of the most likely cases for self-protection, since natural (or man-made) disasters break down the thin line between civilization and anarchy. Sad, but all too true.

I would bet that if Britain was faced with a major natural disaster, their population would revert back to this mentality just the same. If it ever does happen, can I sit here and say, you should have fought for your right to own a weapon to protect yourself from those roving gangs.....huh?

Oh, and Brits, that weapons ban really helped fight the IRA and subway bombers didn't it? Killer will kill with whatever is available at their disposal. Until such a time as human nature changes to grow beyond that behavior, out of our adolescence as a species, personal protection will be needed. Wishing for things never works....praying for things never works, DOING things does work.

I'm out.............

Didn't happen during the London blitz when 28,556 Londoners were killed and 1,000,000 homes destroyed.

In case you missed it the IRA have now rejected violence and decommisioned their weapons.

The London tube bombers were not stopped by guns, agreed, but neither were your 9/11 lot despite all your guns.

Originally posted by ruderalis1
The government wont take away guns



But I have a funny feeling that they are going to go after magazine size and tax the hell out of ammo,making it too expensive to buy in bulk

You are likely correct on this one. Let us have the guns, but make the ammo prohibitively expensive and difficult to get. Right now, its the opposite from what I can see...which always seemed odd to me. I can purchase ammo relatively easy, then construct a zip gun out of a piece of wood, a nail, and some bubble gum. I now have a weapon capable of killing someone, all without having a "gun". So ,we should ban wood, nails, and bubble gum next huh? sheesh...unbelievable that people still treat the symptom while the disease goes merrily along to another host.

Originally posted by Alfie1

Originally posted by Krakatoa
Y'now, through all this back-and-forth, "ban guns", "we need them to defend against a corrupt government", etc.. nobody is stating one of the clear defensive reasons for have a firearm for personal protection (even a multi-shot semi-auto)......protection during a crisis. Yes, remember back to Hurricane Katrina? After the devastation, there were roaming gangs of thugs, looting and do other nefarious acts of violence wielding illegal weapons to intimidate and harm others. THIS is one of the most likely cases for self-protection, since natural (or man-made) disasters break down the thin line between civilization and anarchy. Sad, but all too true.

I would bet that if Britain was faced with a major natural disaster, their population would revert back to this mentality just the same. If it ever does happen, can I sit here and say, you should have fought for your right to own a weapon to protect yourself from those roving gangs.....huh?

Oh, and Brits, that weapons ban really helped fight the IRA and subway bombers didn't it? Killer will kill with whatever is available at their disposal. Until such a time as human nature changes to grow beyond that behavior, out of our adolescence as a species, personal protection will be needed. Wishing for things never works....praying for things never works, DOING things does work.

I'm out.............

Didn't happen during the London blitz when 28,556 Londoners were killed and 1,000,000 homes destroyed.

In case you missed it the IRA have now rejected violence and decommisioned their weapons.

The London tube bombers were not stopped by guns, agreed, but neither were your 9/11 lot despite all your guns.

Well said.

Also having guns never stopped all these massacres that have happened over the years did they? Infact they caused them.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


if you mean ban the guns so the government will stop killing its own people to pass a U.N resolution, hrm maybe

on the other hand
ARE YOU KNUCKIN FUTZ?

that exactly why we should keep them, just wait till they have the all the longer range weapons and ammo, and all you neighbor has is a pistol to protect himself/herself the family and then you? ha i can bet you last buddy ^^
when they knock on your door and have a free train ride waiting for and undesclosed location you can be glad they struck down second amendment

guns dont kill people...................................people kill people. id bet knives are even more dangerous if you really want to break it down. you can run up stab and slash peoples throats and there is no noise made. so why is it that all these people want to go out all glory . why not run down the mall stabbing slashing peoples throats blood everywhere covered in it and then slash own throat at end. sound way cooler than using a gun ^^.


there have been gun crimes and shootings with multiple people dead involved over the year and years such as a new jersey mall shooting where people died. didnt even hear of that till i started looking for cases similar to the other shootings. why is we are hearing about these specific cases, and why is it no matter how they got the weapon, its SEMI AUTOMATIC WEAPON they make damn sure you know its a SEMI AUTOMATIC weapon lol.



p.s is not a gun owner, but ill be damn glad my neighbors got 5 extra rifles when that day comes ^^

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


This op is so typical of the anti-gun crowd. You want to control guns to stop criminals. Others have said it, and there is a recent op that most excellently says the truth. You same people who want to ban guns have no problem with drunks getting in a car and killing people. Thousands upon thousands of innocent children are killed by drunk drivers, drunk abusive parents than by crazy gun toting criminals. I don't see you nut roots calling for background checks at bars to see if said customer has a drinking problem or alcohol / drug violation on their record. I don't see you using the same logic in a more costly alcohol related crime problem. It's called cognitive dissonance. Look it up! Yes, ban guns to stop criminals!

You see there is the rub. IT'S ILLEGAL TO MURDER. I think we banned murder. We even gave it the death penalty. You will not take away my right to defend myself, my family, or those around me from said criminals. You won't pass some stupid law giving me less ammunition than said criminal. We are on a bridge and we freedom loving law abiding citizens are blocking you from getting to the gun ban zone.

YOU SHALL NOT PASS!