Will, We the People Succumb To The Assault Of Our Second Amendment Right?

There is an estimate that there are about 350 million guns in America. That is, legal registered firearms. Add on illegal weapons (not talking stolen.. talking weapons that made it across the border, smuggled in, etc) and your talking probably half a billion.

They can pass whatever laws or executive orders they damn well please. Assuming they try and confiscate weapons, you tell me, what force is going to go out there and collect half a billion firearms? Police? I doubt it. They are not going to take on the extra risk of trying to take guns away from owners. The military? Perhaps... but I would venture to guess they would not fire on our own citizens.

So that leaves PMC's or UN forces. American's sure as hell will not tolerate UN forces on our soil, and there aren't enough PMC's to go around, much less they would be SERIOUSLY risking their lives trying to take our guns.

So that is that. Our guns aren't going anywhere. At best, the Government is going to make it harder to get weapons.. which I am not totally against. I'm sure they will attempt to ban weapons, such as the highly talked about AR-15 (of which I own) but it will be one hell of a fight down in DC.

I respect a society that can live without firearms.

Personally, any hunting I do is done with a bow. (Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation)

But I respect a country that can live in peace without having the issue of firearms. America though, values freedom above all else. And that means freedom to act as stupidly or irresponsibly as you are entitled to.

With freedom comes risk.

To sacrifice that freedom for security is something though, I think, untenable to most Americans.

I personally feel that with over 250 million firearms in the hands of Americans, we are going to have an uneasy peace with our own government because the idea that they could actually collect that number of firearms is ludicrous.

reply to post by CosmicCitizen


You must have missed this.

As I have stated before, as long as there are those with the ability to do harm with guns, I will retain the ability to stop them with guns! Truly, if you are able to convince those in power to relinquish their weapons, you may have a chance of convincing the rest of America to lay down their weapons. Come back and let us know when this has been accomplished, (with undeniable proof), of coarse!

I do realize the imbalance that would exist between those who would do harm and those who would not should our second amendment be lost.

reply to post by 1littlewolf

I have no doubt that within my lifetime I will see severe gun restictions placed on the States to bring you guys on par with the rest of the world.

You mean defenseless and vulnerable? Why on Earth would you want us easily controllable? Oh wait.......never mind.
l

reply to post by DerekJR321
reply to post by beezzer

Originally posted by DerekJR321
There is an estimate that there are about 350 million guns in America. That is, legal registered firearms. Add on illegal weapons (not talking stolen.. talking weapons that made it across the border, smuggled in, etc) and your talking probably half a billion.

Originally posted by beezzer
I personally feel that with over 250 million firearms in the hands of Americans, we are going to have an uneasy peace with our own government because the idea that they could actually collect that number of firearms is ludicrous.

Just because something is hard to do, doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be done. Besides, you guys are both looking at it from the wrong angle. In Australia after our last massacre in 1996 the government outlawed sporting firearms, including all semi-automatic rifles including .22 rimfires, semi-automatic shotguns and pump-action shotguns. They instituted a ‘buy back’ scheme and people voluntarily surrendered their guns. They got about 600, 000 of them. In 2003 they started and handgun buy back scheme for target arms of greater than 9mm calibre and got around 50,000.

Now no one believes they even got 1/3 of all the newly outlawed weapons, but the ones left behind are now closely guarded and hidden and as the owners know they will not ever be able to buy them ever again. So they too have been effectively removed from circulation. Nor can you source bullets for them anymore.

As these remaining weapons are hidden they are now no longer stored within the home which has significantly reduced accidental gunshot injuries especially amongst children. Suicide by firearm rates are also down significantly as they are not easily accessible by anxty teens with a grudge against the world. I can see this having some impact on school massacres in the States for the same reason.

So yes it works, just not quite in the way you guys think it should. No one’s sending in the troops to collect all the weapons, it’s all completely voluntary. But when you can’t buy bullets or take them down to the range to practice or display them in your homes they slowly become kinda useless.

After these schemes were implemented the crime rate in Australia for gun related violence (namely robbery and homicide) began dropping and despite yearly fluctuations the trend overall has continued to drop.

Originally posted by beezzer
But I respect a country that can live in peace without having the issue of firearms. America though, values freedom above all else. And that means freedom to act as stupidly or irresponsibly as you are entitled to.

With freedom comes risk.

To sacrifice that freedom for security is something though, I think, untenable to most Americans.

Beez I’ve said this before but it’s worth repeating.

For some perverse reason gun ownership in America has been linked with freedom. But everywhere else in the world not having to own a gun equals freedom...

reply to post by 1littlewolf

Beez I’ve said this before but it’s worth repeating.

For some perverse reason gun ownership in America has been linked with freedom. But everywhere else in the world not having to own a gun equals freedom...

I'm curious, how so?

reply to post by hounddoghowlie


The founders simply acknowledged the obvious -it is an inalienable right of all people to defend their life. As the power of weapons has increased, the need to have equally powerful weapons for self-defense is even more important, not less. A ban on weapons that level the playing field is going to lead to a powerless society.

reply to post by ajay59

Originally posted by ajay59
reply to post by 1littlewolf

 

I have no doubt that within my lifetime I will see severe gun restictions placed on the States to bring you guys on par with the rest of the world.

You mean defenseless and vulnerable? Why on Earth would you want us easily controllable? Oh wait.......never mind.
l

Defenceless and vulnerable to who? I feel pretty safe walking my streets knowing that NOBODY owns a gun. Or perhaps you mean the government? Must suck living in a country where you’re actually afraid of the officials you’ve elected to run the country.

But once again we’ve come full circle. Here you are again weighing up the odds between some future imagined NWO fear vs. the very real occurrence of children getting murdered in schools. And you’ve all just let your imagined fears win out.

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by 1littlewolf

 

Beez I’ve said this before but it’s worth repeating.

For some perverse reason gun ownership in America has been linked with freedom. But everywhere else in the world not having to own a gun equals freedom...

I'm curious, how so?

I'd say not living in fear of your fellow man or the government is the ultimate freedom. And when you don't have this fear, you don't feel the need to stockpile guns like security blankets which will and do fall into the hands of those who would use them for nefarious reasons.

reply to post by 1littlewolf


Just a little what if for you. What if the "Elite" ARE real, ARE a real threat and wish to further enslave the populace? What would be the thing to hold them back? You guessed it, fear! Do your people have the ability to instill fear in your government to keep them at bay? Well we do, and nothing you or anyone else can say is going to change that anytime soon!

Originally posted by 1littlewolf


I'd say not living in fear of your fellow man or the government is the ultimate freedom. And when you don't have this fear, you don't feel the need to stockpile guns like security blankets which will and do fall into the hands of those who would use them for nefarious reasons.

I just wish we could trust our fellow man or our government.

Unfortunately, both have proven themselves unworthy of trust.

reply to post by beezzer


If you can't trust your fellow man then that's the best reason to remove as many guns as possible.

As for the government, well I don't trust them either. The amount of guns in circulation throughout the general populace has absolutely no bearing on the honesty level of politicians however...

Originally posted by sconner755
reply to post by hounddoghowlie

 

The founders simply acknowledged the obvious -it is an inalienable right of all people to defend their life. As the power of weapons has increased, the need to have equally powerful weapons for self-defense is even more important, not less. A ban on weapons that level the playing field is going to lead to a powerless society.

So let me know when you're able to buy nukes and rocket launchers. Also I've always wanted one of those unmanned drones. That would be fun...

Originally posted by 1littlewolf
reply to post by beezzer

 

If you can't trust your fellow man then that's the best reason to remove as many guns as possible.

Actually, that's a better reason to have protection as illustrated by the indiscriminate mass-killings.

As for the government, well I don't trust them either. The amount of guns in circulation throughout the general populace has absolutely no bearing on the honesty level of politicians however...

It's keeping the "government" honest, or at least, off our backs.

What I have a hard time understanding is, why would someone in another country be so bent on our disarmament? Maybe they are not who they claim to be or where they claim to be from? One more time for the slow learners.

As I have stated before, as long as there are those with the ability to do harm with guns, I will retain the ability to stop them with guns! Truly, if you are able to convince those in power to relinquish their weapons, you may have a chance of convincing the rest of America to lay down their weapons. Come back and let us know when this has been accomplished, (with undeniable proof), of coarse!

That is fairly well cut and dried!

reply to post by 1littlewolf


Let me just ask you this, do people still get murdered in your country? Do they still get robed, beaten, do criminals still act like criminals? If the answer is yes to the first question then why are you so concerned over what the tool was that they killed with? If you answer yes to the other questions then why do let them have the advantage?

BTW are by chance boarded to a third world country?

reply to post by beezzer

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by 1littlewolf
reply to post by beezzer

 

If you can't trust your fellow man then that's the best reason to remove as many guns as possible.

Actually, that's a better reason to have protection as illustrated by the indiscriminate mass-killings.

Allow me to post this again……….


You can come up with a million 'one off' situations where surficially it may seem better to have a gun than not, but this has little bearing on the fact that if you live in a society where there are 88 guns per 100 people more people will get shot overall, more massacres will occur in schools and society as a whole become more fearful and violent.

Gun ownership per country


Making guns illegal = less guns overall = less chance that guns will be used to commit a crime.

What part of this equation do you not understand?



So urce

As for the government, well I don't trust them either. The amount of guns in circulation throughout the general populace has absolutely no bearing on the honesty level of politicians however...

It's keeping the "government" honest, or at least, off our backs.

As far as I can tell from the state of US politics at the moment it doesn’t seem to be working too well…

reply to post by Grimpachi


Please check the response to a similar question which I posted here

Does anyone else feel that it's about time for the old shoulder tap to send in one's tag-team partner/s? I have seen this tactic a lot. When one seems to be ineffective they switch out or gang up.

reply to post by 1littlewolf


Freedom is a double-edged sword

My response.