I think it's everybody's right to own a gun for his/her protection.

The answer is no. and the guns issue is not really similar to drugs or freakin' soccer balls (see earlier example mentioned here).
why? simple: guns are weapons, drugs are not weapons. duh

To say that "people kill people, not guns" is both true and a bit nonsensical. A gun allows pretty much anyone to instantly kill other people, so it does increase death rates. Imagine a sociopath kid who arrives at his school to start a massacre with a knife : now that won't work so good huh

Regarding the hunting thing: don't like it, but accept it and it could be easily regulated: Guns will only be given to you at the hunting grounds..why would anyone need a huge ass rifle in their home!? in case a deer pops in for a visit ?

Written by Grey Wind on 28.06.2012 at 17:00

why would anyone need a huge ass rifle in their home!? in case a deer pops in for a visit ?

uhhh, yeah, actually.

I live 15 miles from city limits, and with permits, I can shoot a deer, or fowl that is on my property, and even in Town you can, provided you have the permits.


As for getting guns at the hunting grounds, well that just shows limited knowledge of guns and hunting itself. A hunter and his gun are like a guitarist and his guitar, it takes a feel to use it correctly. Hunters spend countless hours zeroing in their guns so that they know EXACTLY where their bullet will hit. I know if I went to a "Hunting ground" and got some random gun, I wouldn't be very happy, plus being that they would be a public gun, they probably would be in really shitty shape.


I don't think guns should be banned, I think anyone with a record shouldn't be allowed to own one though.

Another thing, specifically about Canada, is that our gun laws are retarded. A gun has to be over a certain barrel length for it to be allowed in canada, so we don't have pistols, which I don't mind, but to get a hunting license and just to won a rifle costs about $400 a year, not to mention hunting permits, and actually buying the gun. I don't understand why our government places such a tax on firearms, I mean you probably go hunting, once, maybe twice a year, why should you have to pay so much|? It's ridiculous.

Written by [user id=20536] on 21.02.2012 at 04:54

I love guns. They are fun to shoot. Great for competitions. And the only evil connected with them are the evil men that use them for wrongful acts. Man would find another adequate tool for killing if the gun was never invented. I'd much rather be shot than stabbed anyway.

I agree that guns are fun to shoot


Kind of off topic, but what firearms to you own?

Written by Boxcar Willy on 29.06.2012 at 00:34
Another thing, specifically about Canada, is that our gun laws are retarded.

Don't you worry, if Harper has it his way we'll be like Texas soon enough.

Yee-haw.

Written by Troy Killjoy on 29.06.2012 at 06:02

Written by Boxcar Willy on 29.06.2012 at 00:34
Another thing, specifically about Canada, is that our gun laws are retarded.

Don't you worry, if Harper has it his way we'll be like Texas soon enough.

Yee-haw.

Well, I dont want it like Texas, where you can carry an assualt rifle in public, but our taxes, and regulations don't help gun crime, but hurt innocent hunters.

TIL hunters are victims.

*insert various links to hunting statistics regarding over-hunting and poaching*

The guns are not the problem people stab people to death everyday hit people with lead pipes and hammers etc. guns are fun to shoot for fun and are great for protection. gun control takes the guns out of law abiding citizens hands but criminals dont give a fuck about gun laws and will get their hands on them.

Im not a gun toting redneck. . . but we do need guns.. . . and we don't.


why and if we do:
they protect us
iearning how to use a sword takes years of practice,a gun takes seconds.
making a sword or axe takes months or weeks (depends on the type) and you need lots of materials (iron,steel,silver etc)
our forefathers used them so by george we will too.
we would go devolve (going back a step since guns were a step forward)
they are easy to conceal and to hold.
our troops couldn't use swords (again back to point 1 and 3)
if not a sword or axe then would you like to use a rolled up newspaper against some criminals?
the NRA wouldn't exist
we have to follow the second amendment (if american)
fighting with our fists would be tiring after awhile.

if we didn't have guns then we would more then likely have to get closer to the enemy
guns don't kill people, people kill people.
WE NEED TO PROTECT OUR COUNTRY.
to hunt for our food.




why and if we don't:
we could all learn to like each other and achieve world peace (unlikely)
guns KILL
a sword or axe is a much better tool and is deadlier (if used properly)
you can kill with a rolled up newspaper. (hey it's possible)
we could fight with our fists
we could save up on resources (guns don't appear magically)
less violence in the world and crime
all war movies would be spartacus or fight night x1000
we could save up on money too (shipping guns overseas and such)
we could all become vegans.



so to answer your question: YES WE NEED GUNS. the main point is: if we don't have guns, how else would people take their anger out? or protect our country?
surely not with a sword or stick. i rest my case.

Written by Troy Killjoy on 29.06.2012 at 07:15

TIL hunters are victims.

*insert various links to hunting statistics regarding over-hunting and poaching*

Because all hunters poach.


>>

Written by axelx666 on 30.06.2012 at 16:36

...

Written by Boxcar Willy on 30.06.2012 at 19:40
Because all hunters poach.

I was implying those statistics were separate, not limited to one general stereotype.

I love how people keep on coming back to "we need guns to hunt for food"

In the US/Canada or any normal modern country we do NOT need guns to hunt for food. We buy our food in stores and such so absolutely no need for everyone to own a gun.

Written by Troy Killjoy on 01.07.2012 at 00:09

Written by Boxcar Willy on 30.06.2012 at 19:40
Because all hunters poach.

I was implying those statistics were separate, not limited to one general stereotype.

Well, you were implying that hunters are terrible poaching asshats

I don't hunt actually, my Grandpa did before he passed away. And the costs for tags, and licnesing for ONE Moose was well over the $600 mark.

Written by Marcel Hubregtse on 01.07.2012 at 00:30

I love how people keep on coming back to "we need guns to hunt for food"

In the US/Canada or any normal modern country we do NOT need guns to hunt for food. We buy our food in stores and such so absolutely no need for everyone to own a gun.

Also, it's not like we'd need them even if we didn't have stores. How do you think people got meat in the 1000's?

Need guns to make the government accountable to the will of the people

compare the amount of violent crime in UK to Sweden. Crime is caused by poverty not guns.

"Do we need guns?"

Who is we? If you meant America, you should have put it. We aren't all American.

Either way, I think America should have some regulations at point-of-sale like background checks, but banning won't work. Just look at the drug war and how spectacularly it has failed.

Written by matthewlwry@gmail.co on 12.04.2013 at 01:08

"Do we need guns?"

Who is we? If you meant America, you should have put it. We aren't all American.

Either way, I think America should have some regulations at point-of-sale like background checks, but banning won't work. Just look at the drug war and how spectacularly it has failed.

Oh, no, no, no, no, the "War on Drugs" did not fail, because it never happened. Although the "War on Drugs" we have today, is a success, for the prison industrial complex

We need guns to protect us from each other and the government. By removing all firearms, you will still have the bad guys running loose, and you might end up in another "Stalinist Sweep."

Where does everyone think these 'bad guys' get their guns from? They don't just fall out of the sky into someones hands, there isn't some chump at the factory going 'muahaha im going to sell 1,000 of these 9mm's to the crips' rubbing his hands together (maybe there is tbh). I think more often than not it is either bought legally from a store by someone without a felony which is then passed on to the criminals (I've seen documentaries of mexican cartels saying they buy all their stuff in the US because its way cheap and the process is quick, by my own experience I can see why).

Also, I lived in Missouri I had a Ruger p95, when I sold it I asked the authorities if I needed to fill out any forms, they told me they don't track firearm saies. I also get the impression that this practice is similar in other counties/states/cities. So if firearm ownership is not tracked past the initial buyer, how exactly would it surprise someone if criminals have access to so much weaponry? And to be frank, the term 'illegal' firearm in the states is misleading, because the access to weapons is made possible by the law, or lack there of (I guess you would get in trouble if your weapon was used in a shooting, but then again if that gun ends up in mexico or the serial number is scratched out, it won't make a difference).

Another thing that confuses me is people quoting the second amendment. It clearly says 'well regulated' militia in the text in terms of ownership of a weapon, what exactly is so regulated about buying a chinese ak47 clone for $400 as if you were walking into a mall shop? Secondary sales are not tracked, how does that support the argument? I really think people use the 2nd amendment to their arguments without really knowing the text. Militia implies a trained group of people in the use of weapons, and I see no such regulation on individuals buying guns. Tbh I was actually kind of shocked at how careless people were with their guns which in Israel you would never see. As for the cartel problem, really the gun laws don't just affect America, it's also affecting Mexico.

As for me, I think it would be impossible to ever completely ban guns from American society. It's too deep into the culture and the gun manufacturers are here to stay. Its unrealistic imo. I think the best thing Americans can hope for is maybe, just maybe treat gun ownership like you were buying a car such evaluating mental state, vision, credit into the whole equation.

What makes me sick is the way people are taking advantage of the situation (mass shootings) to promote their own political agenda. 'Oh, don't let them regulate our toys! wah wah, this is just another communist take over from the marxist obama'. It's so childish and the sad thing is that people buy into it. To me this is nothing more than right wing fear mongering ala Fox News crowd. I was truly surprised by how convinced people were in the midwest that the national guard or the UN was going to knock on their doors and take their guns from them like they were invading Iraq. I guess it just shows how stupid people are. To be frank, I think 90% of the people I met were not responsible enough to own a gun in the first place.

Written by Sunioj on 16.04.2013 at 10:26

Where does everyone think these 'bad guys' get their guns from? They don't just fall out of the sky into someones hands, there isn't some chump at the factory going 'muahaha im going to sell 1,000 of these 9mm's to the crips' rubbing his hands together (maybe there is tbh). I think more often than not it is either bought legally from a store by someone without a felony which is then passed on to the criminals (I've seen documentaries of mexican cartels saying they buy all their stuff in the US because its way cheap and the process is quick, by my own experience I can see why).

Also, I lived in Missouri I had a Ruger p95, when I sold it I asked the authorities if I needed to fill out any forms, they told me they don't track firearm saies. I also get the impression that this practice is similar in other counties/states/cities. So if firearm ownership is not tracked past the initial buyer, how exactly would it surprise someone if criminals have access to so much weaponry? And to be frank, the term 'illegal' firearm in the states is misleading, because the access to weapons is made possible by the law, or lack there of (I guess you would get in trouble if your weapon was used in a shooting, but then again if that gun ends up in mexico or the serial number is scratched out, it won't make a difference).

Another thing that confuses me is people quoting the second amendment. It clearly says 'well regulated' militia in the text in terms of ownership of a weapon, what exactly is so regulated about buying a chinese ak47 clone for $400 as if you were walking into a mall shop? Secondary sales are not tracked, how does that support the argument? I really think people use the 2nd amendment to their arguments without really knowing the text. Militia implies a trained group of people in the use of weapons, and I see no such regulation on individuals buying guns. Tbh I was actually kind of shocked at how careless people were with their guns which in Israel you would never see. As for the cartel problem, really the gun laws don't just affect America, it's also affecting Mexico.

As for me, I think it would be impossible to ever completely ban guns from American society. It's too deep into the culture and the gun manufacturers are here to stay. Its unrealistic imo. I think the best thing Americans can hope for is maybe, just maybe treat gun ownership like you were buying a car such evaluating mental state, vision, credit into the whole equation.

What makes me sick is the way people are taking advantage of the situation (mass shootings) to promote their own political agenda. 'Oh, don't let them regulate our toys! wah wah, this is just another communist take over from the marxist obama'. It's so childish and the sad thing is that people buy into it. To me this is nothing more than right wing fear mongering ala Fox News crowd. I was truly surprised by how convinced people were in the midwest that the national guard or the UN was going to knock on their doors and take their guns from them like they were invading Iraq. I guess it just shows how stupid people are. To be frank, I think 90% of the people I met were not responsible enough to own a gun in the first place.

Bad guys are going to get guns no matter what, because the government agencies like ATF will have to allow some smuggling in order to justify their existence. Plus, America loves selling guns, that is one if its main industries that are still left. On top of it all what is your solution? Surrender all the weapons, and have a dictatorship? No thanks, I rather deal with crazy people with guns, than the government and bad guys with guns alone.

Written by Rasputin on 16.04.2013 at 21:57

Bad guys are going to get guns no matter what, because the government agencies like ATF will have to allow some smuggling in order to justify their existence. Plus, America loves selling guns, that is one if its main industries that are still left. On top of it all what is your solution? Surrender all the weapons, and have a dictatorship? No thanks, I rather deal with crazy people with guns, than the government and bad guys with guns alone.

In the status quo of how american law is right now, you are certainly right - bad guys will always have access weapons. But for example, theres many bad guys in the place I live (you used to be able to buy guns off the black market, now its impossible here thanks to the government), however if they had the same kind of laws the do in america i guarantee you they will be killing each other non stop.

I am not a politician or an expert in sociology for that matter, but what I would do if someone wanted to buy a gun, screen them for mental disorders, medical (if you have narcolepsy etc you shouldn't have a gun for instance), vision, mandate a safety course, gun lock (doesn't have to be a locker), and of course limit how many weapons you can buy. There is no reason for one person to have 10 different semi autos unless you are a legitimate collector or seller, therefore you would need a different kind of license, these are things designed to kill people, not toys. Driving is a huge responsibility as is owning a firearm, in the army they don't just throw you an assault rifle unless you are proven responsible through training and evaluation. I'm sick of seeing this mumbling idiots who can't even open up a peanut butter jar handle a weapon, that is scary. This isn't just about people flying off the handle and shooting up a school, but also preventing junior from blowing your head off with a Glock .40.

Here's something that interests me too. Let's say in theory that the government did try to take over the populace as people fear would happen, why would they care if you had an assault rifle or a pistol, wouldn't they just bomb your house instead? I mean, we aren't really talking about the lybian army but the american military...

The fact is there is an apparent problem with the gun laws and something needs to be changed. Whether you think the government will rape your family, that's the cold, hard truth and the sooner people dispose of their rhetoric about dictatorship, the sooner people can think agree of a solution.

Another thing that interests me is when people in america are so untrusting of their government that they wouldn't hesitate to use words like 'dictator', this is language that is fear driven and is without consideration of how it is under a real dictatorship. Yes, some things do suck in America but the freedom you already have is infinite if you compare it to places like Egypt, I think people focus too much on the negative parts of America rather than the good things and blow it wayyy out of proportion.

I wrote too much, but I'm high anyways. Fuck it.

Written by Sunioj on 17.04.2013 at 00:36

Written by Rasputin on 16.04.2013 at 21:57

Bad guys are going to get guns no matter what, because the government agencies like ATF will have to allow some smuggling in order to justify their existence. Plus, America loves selling guns, that is one if its main industries that are still left. On top of it all what is your solution? Surrender all the weapons, and have a dictatorship? No thanks, I rather deal with crazy people with guns, than the government and bad guys with guns alone.

In the status quo of how american law is right now, you are certainly right - bad guys will always have access weapons. But for example, theres many bad guys in the place I live (you used to be able to buy guns off the black market, now its impossible here thanks to the government), however if they had the same kind of laws the do in america i guarantee you they will be killing each other non stop.

I am not a politician or an expert in sociology for that matter, but what I would do if someone wanted to buy a gun, screen them for mental disorders, medical (if you have narcolepsy etc you shouldn't have a gun for instance), vision, mandate a safety course, gun lock (doesn't have to be a locker), and of course limit how many weapons you can buy. There is no reason for one person to have 10 different semi autos unless you are a legitimate collector or seller, therefore you would need a different kind of license, these are things designed to kill people, not toys. Driving is a huge responsibility as is owning a firearm, in the army they don't just throw you an assault rifle unless you are proven responsible through training and evaluation. I'm sick of seeing this mumbling idiots who can't even open up a peanut butter jar handle a weapon, that is scary. This isn't just about people flying off the handle and shooting up a school, but also preventing junior from blowing your head off with a Glock .40.

Here's something that interests me too. Let's say in theory that the government did try to take over the populace as people fear would happen, why would they care if you had an assault rifle or a pistol, wouldn't they just bomb your house instead? I mean, we aren't really talking about the lybian army but the american military...

The fact is there is an apparent problem with the gun laws and something needs to be changed. Whether you think the government will rape your family, that's the cold, hard truth and the sooner people dispose of their rhetoric about dictatorship, the sooner people can think agree of a solution.

Another thing that interests me is when people in america are so untrusting of their government that they wouldn't hesitate to use words like 'dictator', this is language that is fear driven and is without consideration of how it is under a real dictatorship. Yes, some things do suck in America but the freedom you already have is infinite if you compare it to places like Egypt, I think people focus too much on the negative parts of America rather than the good things and blow it wayyy out of proportion.

I wrote too much, but I'm high anyways. Fuck it.

Well the control would work, if it would be inforced properly, however, it is not enforced. Laws are only working on law abiding citizens, criminals don't give a shit, that is why I see this as a futile attempt.

I agree with you that some training should be in order, and not everyone should have an access to a firearm, however, if you read the constitution, nothing speaks about it. So it falls on the Legislative branch to interpert the law, and you have to be careful with it, because if you give the goverment an inch, they take a mile.

It all boils down to control. They are attacking so called "assault weapons" because they are easiest to attack. Throw some pictures in front of the ignorant liberal public and they go nuts. When they said that an AR-15 was more powerful than .306, I knew that they had no clue what they were talking about. You always have to see the bigger picture. Let's say they take away these so called "assault weapons" do you think they will stop there? No, they won't. If you start removing certain weapons from the list, you are giving way for more things to be taken from you. They started with real assault weapons, and those I agree, need special permits, but the rest I do not see how them taking away semi-auto weapons would help. Again, this is a war against law abiding citizens, not criminals. Give it another 10 years, and they will go after another weapon, and another weapon, and soon it will be like it is in England or Australia, where they almost have no gun rights.
I think they are trying to make it easy for them, when the time comes for a takeover, also, this is just a front to keep people occupied, when something worse is brewing behind closed doors.

America is not free, that is a misconception. I lived under a dictator and I was freer under that regime, than so called democracy. Granted, there are some rights here that I did not have there, but overall, USA is already a totalitarian oligarchy, people just don't see it.

Written by Rasputin on 17.04.2013 at 01:37

Well the control would work, if it would be inforced properly, however, it is not enforced. Laws are only working on law abiding citizens, criminals don't give a shit, that is why I see this as a futile attempt.

I agree with you that some training should be in order, and not everyone should have an access to a firearm, however, if you read the constitution, nothing speaks about it. So it falls on the Legislative branch to interpert the law, and you have to be careful with it, because if you give the goverment an inch, they take a mile.

It all boils down to control. They are attacking so called "assault weapons" because they are easiest to attack. Throw some pictures in front of the ignorant liberal public and they go nuts. When they said that an AR-15 was more powerful than .306, I knew that they had no clue what they were talking about. You always have to see the bigger picture. Let's say they take away these so called "assault weapons" do you think they will stop there? No, they won't. If you start removing certain weapons from the list, you are giving way for more things to be taken from you. They started with real assault weapons, and those I agree, need special permits, but the rest I do not see how them taking away semi-auto weapons would help. Again, this is a war against law abiding citizens, not criminals. Give it another 10 years, and they will go after another weapon, and another weapon, and soon it will be like it is in England or Australia, where they almost have no gun rights.
I think they are trying to make it easy for them, when the time comes for a takeover, also, this is just a front to keep people occupied, when something worse is brewing behind closed doors.

America is not free, that is a misconception. I lived under a dictator and I was freer under that regime, than so called democracy. Granted, there are some rights here that I did not have there, but overall, USA is already a totalitarian oligarchy, people just don't see it.

But that's thing, it is to protect law abiding citizens because like I said, I think the main issue in america is not people breaking in and holding your family at gunpoint, but rather who, with what kind of mental aptitude or sense of responsibility can handle having a piece and making sure that no accidents happen, or that a gun is not handed to someone mentally unstable and even more important - to use the gun in the right situation IF someone by a chance it happens.

There's this cowboy mentality of 'well, if I saw that happening I would shoot him' which a lot of people use as justification to get a gun, this is the wrong reason to have one. Life isn't an Arnold movie, and you don't just trust any idiot with a gun to 'protect' you because most likely it would backfire. When a shootout happens, you don't think clearly and unless you are specifically trained to react in that situation, most likely you will react on your primal instinct and adrenaline to shoot back rather than switching your brain on in the right manner. How fucked up would it be if police came to a shootout call to see multiple people shooting at each other? They wouldn't even know who the 'bad guy' is.

Besides, law abiding assumes a nature of a person because of the language, but in reality just because my record is clean doesn't mean that I am physically and mentally capable of possessing a firearm. It's a very limited and loopholed way of judging people. Why is limiting guns really that bad to begin with? I mean, how bad would it be to have a gun/murder rate like England or Australia? That's actually great. Btw, I suggest limiting guns. Not taking it away, just because owning a car requires evaluation doesn't mean that it's not available.

I see it differently, I think law abiding citizens don't give a shit and that's why all this is happening. They are too focused on what they are untitled to and are completely abstaining any attempt for even negotiating on something.

You know how I see it? I see the whole argument against gun control as a distraction by the tea party/right wing/conservatives to keep the firearm companies in business who are in turn supporting those same governments. As long as people in the ghetto, crazy assholes and irresponsible dicks are blowing each others heads off, they are making more money and get the next vote.

I think you would benefit from watching this video, it talks about how people are convinced that the government is completely against them, but unable to understand that governments are in fact completely inept to extreme capitalism, or like you say (which I do agree with) is America being an ogliarchy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZkJ_ZiX_Tek

Written by Sunioj on 17.04.2013 at 02:07

Written by Rasputin on 17.04.2013 at 01:37

Well the control would work, if it would be inforced properly, however, it is not enforced. Laws are only working on law abiding citizens, criminals don't give a shit, that is why I see this as a futile attempt.

I agree with you that some training should be in order, and not everyone should have an access to a firearm, however, if you read the constitution, nothing speaks about it. So it falls on the Legislative branch to interpert the law, and you have to be careful with it, because if you give the goverment an inch, they take a mile.

It all boils down to control. They are attacking so called "assault weapons" because they are easiest to attack. Throw some pictures in front of the ignorant liberal public and they go nuts. When they said that an AR-15 was more powerful than .306, I knew that they had no clue what they were talking about. You always have to see the bigger picture. Let's say they take away these so called "assault weapons" do you think they will stop there? No, they won't. If you start removing certain weapons from the list, you are giving way for more things to be taken from you. They started with real assault weapons, and those I agree, need special permits, but the rest I do not see how them taking away semi-auto weapons would help. Again, this is a war against law abiding citizens, not criminals. Give it another 10 years, and they will go after another weapon, and another weapon, and soon it will be like it is in England or Australia, where they almost have no gun rights.
I think they are trying to make it easy for them, when the time comes for a takeover, also, this is just a front to keep people occupied, when something worse is brewing behind closed doors.

America is not free, that is a misconception. I lived under a dictator and I was freer under that regime, than so called democracy. Granted, there are some rights here that I did not have there, but overall, USA is already a totalitarian oligarchy, people just don't see it.

But that's thing, it is to protect law abiding citizens because like I said, I think the main issue in america is not people breaking in and holding your family at gunpoint, but rather who, with what kind of mental aptitude or sense of responsibility can handle having a piece and making sure that no accidents happen, or that a gun is not handed to someone mentally unstable and even more important - to use the gun in the right situation IF someone by a chance it happens.

There's this cowboy mentality of 'well, if I saw that happening I would shoot him' which a lot of people use as justification to get a gun, this is the wrong reason to have one. Life isn't an Arnold movie, and you don't just trust any idiot with a gun to 'protect' you because most likely it would backfire. When a shootout happens, you don't think clearly and unless you are specifically trained to react in that situation, most likely you will react on your primal instinct and adrenaline to shoot back rather than switching your brain on in the right manner. How fucked up would it be if police came to a shootout call to see multiple people shooting at each other? They wouldn't even know who the 'bad guy' is.

Besides, law abiding assumes a nature of a person because of the language, but in reality just because my record is clean doesn't mean that I am physically and mentally capable of possessing a firearm. It's a very limited and loopholed way of judging people. Why is limiting guns really that bad to begin with? I mean, how bad would it be to have a gun/murder rate like England or Australia? That's actually great. Btw, I suggest limiting guns. Not taking it away, just because owning a car requires evaluation doesn't mean that it's not available.

I see it differently, I think law abiding citizens don't give a shit and that's why all this is happening. They are too focused on what they are untitled to and are completely abstaining any attempt for even negotiating on something.

You know how I see it? I see the whole argument against gun control as a distraction by the tea party/right wing/conservatives to keep the firearm companies in business who are in turn supporting those same governments. As long as people in the ghetto, crazy assholes and irresponsible dicks are blowing each others heads off, they are making more money and get the next vote.

I think you would benefit from watching this video, it talks about how people are convinced that the government is completely against them, but unable to understand that governments are in fact completely inept to extreme capitalism, or like you say (which I do agree with) is America being an ogliarchy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZkJ_ZiX_Tek

I think we could not determine that even if we tried. Let's say a perfectly sane individual gets triggered in some way by a traumatic event. No level of training, screening or otherwise could mandate him to be an "adequate candidate" to have a firearm. I agree that to an extent we can limit who can get a weapon at the entry level, but after that, it is up in the air.

I agree with that as well, but I see far less of that cowboy mentality in my state, or even on the news. Yeah, occasionally you will see a shootout or something like that on TV, but overall those incidents are not in a such great number to pose an alarm. If we had 50 shootouts every day, that would be a different story.

While I agree with you that those countries have low murder rates, I think in the case of USA, that law would lead to total disarmament, because of the bloody liberals.

And I agree with that as well, the gun trade is big in the USA, and for right now, I do not have a solution to that.

Thanks for the video

I advocate gun rights (for those of age with background checks) and less interference by the government, but protection when necessary for the citizens of the country (foreign war can suck my dick, 'Murca's been "fighting for our country" in Afghanistan for more than enough time against a terrorist group that we armed ourselves to fight against those evil Russian commies ... nice to be in history class and learning about that stuff to be able to apply it now).

There's this kid in my grade that I eat lunch with who for awhile had been wanting to be a cop, but seems to want to join the Army National Guard now. I regularly facetiously say, "Fuck the Guard," and he just says "fuck you" back. But today, when he brought up how the Guard helps with natural crises, I asked him, with all humor aside, "Who was it that illegally confiscated weapons from legal owners during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina ['05], to keep order, but in reality kept them from being able to defend themselves against people shooting shit up?" I should have specified that by "people shooting shit up" I meant looters, whom the Guard and police were unable to control, but to that the kid laughed and, assuming I meant the Guard and police "shooting shit up," replied, "Yeah, we [in the military and police] have fun."

I honestly don't care that he was joking, because he completely missed the point of what I was saying (and could have easily not taken a word of what I said seriously because of how in the dark a lot of unpleasant events are kept nowadays. Funny how the news is seen as being what the weird kids watch nowadays, when it's really almost the single show worth watching out of anything ...). That reckless, carefree, insensitive mentality of "we have fun shooting shit up" that more of our troops and police than we'd like to admit have (especially the teenagers and early 20-somethings), is one of the few things that REALLY fucking pisses me off, and makes me resent the government and respect the right to bear arms all the more.

Written by nasmith on 24.04.2013 at 08:11

I advocate gun rights (for those of age with background checks) and less interference by the government, but protection when necessary for the citizens of the country (foreign war can suck my dick, 'Murca's been "fighting for our country" in Afghanistan for more than enough time against a terrorist group that we armed ourselves to fight against those evil Russian commies ... nice to be in history class and learning about that stuff to be able to apply it now).

There's this kid in my grade that I eat lunch with who for awhile had been wanting to be a cop, but seems to want to join the Army National Guard now. I regularly facetiously say, "Fuck the Guard," and he just says "fuck you" back. But today, when he brought up how the Guard helps with natural crises, I asked him, with all humor aside, "Who was it that illegally confiscated weapons from legal owners during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina ['05], to keep order, but in reality kept them from being able to defend themselves against people shooting shit up?" I should have specified that by "people shooting shit up" I meant looters, whom the Guard and police were unable to control, but to that the kid laughed and, assuming I meant the Guard and police "shooting shit up," replied, "Yeah, we [in the military and police] have fun."

I honestly don't care that he was joking, because he completely missed the point of what I was saying (and could have easily not taken a word of what I said seriously because of how in the dark a lot of unpleasant events are kept nowadays. Funny how the news is seen as being what the weird kids watch nowadays, when it's really almost the single show worth watching out of anything ...). That reckless, carefree, insensitive mentality of "we have fun shooting shit up" that more of our troops and police than we'd like to admit have (especially the teenagers and early 20-somethings), is one of the few things that REALLY fucking pisses me off, and makes me resent the government and respect the right to bear arms all the more.

I think in the USA the only thing standing in the way of government coming in and terrorizing are the weapons, that is why they want them gone. Just look at that thing in Boston. Did you notice that the Guard, stormed in people's houses without a search warrant and kicked them out so they could do a sweep. And people were ok with that, and that is just wrong. They are just pushing the issue, trying to see how far they are able to go with it.

Yeah, I agree with you, that is the wrong mentality to have. You need to respect your weapons, but the culture tells you not to respect a god damn thing, and then when you have shootouts, they always point fingers. But who is really to blame?
I just love when they keep bringing the shootings to the game, stating that gun control will solve the issue. Why punish X million of law abiding citizens for something that one or few idiots did, it makes no sense, but they do not care about any sense, it all boils down to control.

DHS just recently purchased either 40 million or 3.5 billion rounds of hollow point ammunition, and to what end? They said at one point it is all for target practice. Since when do you use hollow points for target practice?

Written by Rasputin on 24.04.2013 at 18:51

Written by nasmith on 24.04.2013 at 08:11

I advocate gun rights (for those of age with background checks) and less interference by the government, but protection when necessary for the citizens of the country (foreign war can suck my dick, 'Murca's been "fighting for our country" in Afghanistan for more than enough time against a terrorist group that we armed ourselves to fight against those evil Russian commies ... nice to be in history class and learning about that stuff to be able to apply it now).

There's this kid in my grade that I eat lunch with who for awhile had been wanting to be a cop, but seems to want to join the Army National Guard now. I regularly facetiously say, "Fuck the Guard," and he just says "fuck you" back. But today, when he brought up how the Guard helps with natural crises, I asked him, with all humor aside, "Who was it that illegally confiscated weapons from legal owners during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina ['05], to keep order, but in reality kept them from being able to defend themselves against people shooting shit up?" I should have specified that by "people shooting shit up" I meant looters, whom the Guard and police were unable to control, but to that the kid laughed and, assuming I meant the Guard and police "shooting shit up," replied, "Yeah, we [in the military and police] have fun."

I honestly don't care that he was joking, because he completely missed the point of what I was saying (and could have easily not taken a word of what I said seriously because of how in the dark a lot of unpleasant events are kept nowadays. Funny how the news is seen as being what the weird kids watch nowadays, when it's really almost the single show worth watching out of anything ...). That reckless, carefree, insensitive mentality of "we have fun shooting shit up" that more of our troops and police than we'd like to admit have (especially the teenagers and early 20-somethings), is one of the few things that REALLY fucking pisses me off, and makes me resent the government and respect the right to bear arms all the more.

I think in the USA the only thing standing in the way of government coming in and terrorizing are the weapons, that is why they want them gone. Just look at that thing in Boston. Did you notice that the Guard, stormed in people's houses without a search warrant and kicked them out so they could do a sweep. And people were ok with that, and that is just wrong. They are just pushing the issue, trying to see how far they are able to go with it.

Yeah, I agree with you, that is the wrong mentality to have. You need to respect your weapons, but the culture tells you not to respect a god damn thing, and then when you have shootouts, they always point fingers. But who is really to blame?
I just love when they keep bringing the shootings to the game, stating that gun control will solve the issue. Why punish X million of law abiding citizens for something that one or few idiots did, it makes no sense, but they do not care about any sense, it all boils down to control.

DHS just recently purchased either 40 million or 3.5 billion rounds of hollow point ammunition, and to what end? They said at one point it is all for target practice. Since when do you use hollow points for target practice?

I know. I've heard a rumor from an independent far-right source on YouTube (the audio from a radio talk show) about a decent-sized unit of avidly anti-American Palestinian troops being made part of the U.S. military and brought to the United States for training, but I've found absolutely no proof of it being legit. Still, it makes you wonder....

Written by nasmith on 25.04.2013 at 01:13

Written by Rasputin on 24.04.2013 at 18:51

Written by nasmith on 24.04.2013 at 08:11

I advocate gun rights (for those of age with background checks) and less interference by the government, but protection when necessary for the citizens of the country (foreign war can suck my dick, 'Murca's been "fighting for our country" in Afghanistan for more than enough time against a terrorist group that we armed ourselves to fight against those evil Russian commies ... nice to be in history class and learning about that stuff to be able to apply it now).

There's this kid in my grade that I eat lunch with who for awhile had been wanting to be a cop, but seems to want to join the Army National Guard now. I regularly facetiously say, "Fuck the Guard," and he just says "fuck you" back. But today, when he brought up how the Guard helps with natural crises, I asked him, with all humor aside, "Who was it that illegally confiscated weapons from legal owners during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina ['05], to keep order, but in reality kept them from being able to defend themselves against people shooting shit up?" I should have specified that by "people shooting shit up" I meant looters, whom the Guard and police were unable to control, but to that the kid laughed and, assuming I meant the Guard and police "shooting shit up," replied, "Yeah, we [in the military and police] have fun."

I honestly don't care that he was joking, because he completely missed the point of what I was saying (and could have easily not taken a word of what I said seriously because of how in the dark a lot of unpleasant events are kept nowadays. Funny how the news is seen as being what the weird kids watch nowadays, when it's really almost the single show worth watching out of anything ...). That reckless, carefree, insensitive mentality of "we have fun shooting shit up" that more of our troops and police than we'd like to admit have (especially the teenagers and early 20-somethings), is one of the few things that REALLY fucking pisses me off, and makes me resent the government and respect the right to bear arms all the more.

I think in the USA the only thing standing in the way of government coming in and terrorizing are the weapons, that is why they want them gone. Just look at that thing in Boston. Did you notice that the Guard, stormed in people's houses without a search warrant and kicked them out so they could do a sweep. And people were ok with that, and that is just wrong. They are just pushing the issue, trying to see how far they are able to go with it.

Yeah, I agree with you, that is the wrong mentality to have. You need to respect your weapons, but the culture tells you not to respect a god damn thing, and then when you have shootouts, they always point fingers. But who is really to blame?
I just love when they keep bringing the shootings to the game, stating that gun control will solve the issue. Why punish X million of law abiding citizens for something that one or few idiots did, it makes no sense, but they do not care about any sense, it all boils down to control.

DHS just recently purchased either 40 million or 3.5 billion rounds of hollow point ammunition, and to what end? They said at one point it is all for target practice. Since when do you use hollow points for target practice?

I know. I've heard a rumor from an independent far-right source on YouTube (the audio from a radio talk show) about a decent-sized unit of avidly anti-American Palestinian troops being made part of the U.S. military and brought to the United States for training, but I've found absolutely no proof of it being legit. Still, it makes you wonder....

They may not be a part of the military, but of private security firms like Blackwater, now that would surprise me at all. Also, you have UN troops, mostly Russian Spetsnaz in the Colorado State, running drills somewhere. You also have Craft Industries, the company that Chris Kyle created running amok before the Boston bombing. Things just keep on piling up my friend.

You people should really trim your quotes.

Written by Stoned Crow on 26.04.2013 at 10:12

You people should really trim your quotes.

The string of quotes before gives context for someone just coming into the discussion, so they don't have to search for earlier comments to get the context.