disarming the public

[jonn]

Just a little note from a man who thinks taking guns away for the general public is the right thing to do

"quote"

This year will go down in history. For the first time a civilized nation has full gun registration. Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future....
"unquote"

stated by: Adolph Hitler 1935

now if this isnt true, dont blame me, just something i read on a news article.

 

[Scouzer]

...and Hitler is a total psycho. I support gun registration, but using Hitler to prove a point is unconvincing...

 

[Gooberlx2]

...and Hitler is a total psycho. I support gun registration, but using Hitler to prove a point is unconvincing...

Yeah I'd have to agree. It's like using Osama bin Laden as a reference point for MidEast ideals.

 

[jonn]

No one is trying to convince you of anything...... as i said, i just saw that in a article, sure he was what he was, i know we have no phycho's now days lurking in the shadows either..And for gun registration, well ill still have mine when they come take yours.

 

[BlueApple]

grow up :disgust:

 

[N8Magic]

<< Just a little note from a man who thinks taking guns away for the general public is the right thing to do

"quote"

This year will go down in history. For the first time a civilized nation has full gun registration. Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future....
"unquote"

stated by: Adolph Hitler 1935

now if this isnt true, dont blame me, just something i read on a news article. >>

x 887943298734298743272356325324432432

 

[LordMaul]

<<

x 887943298734298743272356325324432432 >>




Is that exact of aproximate?

I think it's nearer to 42!

 

[b0mbrman]

Woah...For a second there, I was wondering what happened to John's 20k other posts...

 

[KthxBye]

<< ...and Hitler is a total psycho. I support gun registration, but using Hitler to prove a point is unconvincing... >>


um yea...thats the point. Was I the only one who understood that this quote is meant to oppose gun control?

 

[Orsorum]

<<

<< ...and Hitler is a total psycho. I support gun registration, but using Hitler to prove a point is unconvincing... >>


um yea...thats the point. Was I the only one who understood that this quote is meant to oppose gun control? >>



I think it's meant to illustrate the point that complete gun registration is dangerous, can lead to a totalitarian type of state, and can lead to complete, and unwavering control of a populace.

Hitler was the one who made the statement, it was the German people who allowed themselves to be registered like that.

Just because we don't have a psycho in office (like Hitler) who would take advantage of that now doesn't mean we won't in the future. An armed populace is a safe populace (look at Switzerland).

 

[sandorski]

Well, would the Germans have used their guns against Hitler if they had them? Jews likely would have, but most Germans probably wouldn't. Using 1 quote from Hitler is a faulty and even erroneous arguement, IMO.

 

[Ramses]

one of my favorite quotes. Illistrative and appropriate.

I hope I live long enough to see the looks on the faces of the anti-gun folks when things go awry one day. But not long after that look.



Alternatly, I hope I see the day the government tries to take away southerners high powered hunting rifles. THAT will be interisting to say the least, and it's the next logical step...

 

[jlee]

<< one of my favorite quotes. Illistrative and appropriate.
Alternatly, I hope I see the day the government tries to take away southerners high powered hunting rifles. THAT will be interisting to say the least, and it's the next logical step... >>



Not to mention the northern part of the US...I know several people who have gun stores up there - they could outfit quite a few guys

 

[MrBond]

<< Well, would the Germans have used their guns against Hitler if they had them? Jews likely would have, but most Germans probably wouldn't. Using 1 quote from Hitler is a faulty and even erroneous arguement, IMO. >>

The Jews did, in the Warsaw Ghetto. Had the rest of the jewish populace been armed, the geshtapo would have had a harder time arresting them.

Registration is a good idea, only in theroy, and only at the present time. Say we register all firearms (new firearms are basicly registered now anyway if you buy them at a shop) with a government that promises to not go further than registration. Then, 8-12 years down the road, we get a big change in government (new president, new congress, new party holding congress/the presidency) and they decide it's time to sieze all firearms. Well, they've got a nice database of LEGAL (mostly) law abiding citizens, whoes doors they can knock on, walk in, and take their firearms.

While registration might help track down 1 killer out of 1000, it's going to do nothing when a law abiding citizen's home is broken into and their guns stolen, or for Joe Criminal, who buys his guns out of the back of a truck in the red light district. They instituted registration in Austrailia, and confiscation followed shortly. I will support NO politician that is an advocate of gun registration.

 

[A5]

IMO, the reason the second amendment is in place is so the citizens could overthrow the government if a psycho like Hitler came into power (hence the militia part).

I'm not advocating a mass attack on DC just because you don't like the president, I mean something like if they tried to repeal the entire Bill of Rights, or some other change to our basic ideals and structure(e.g. abolition of the legislative branch).

Our military could crush any group of citizens that did something like this (unless it was about 100 million people), so it's all really a moot point anyway.

 

[A5]

One other reason I think it's in place is that so if the government ever tried to confiscate all the guns, then we could shoot 'em in the face when they came to get them

 

[Ramses]

<< Our military could crush any group of citizens that did something like this (unless it was about 100 million people), so it's all really a moot point anyway. >>




This is true, but most of the military personell I know would have to be given some pretty good reasons to do much of anything to US citizens that werent activly rioting or something. There regular people too, just like you and I, they just have a different kinda job. And many of them are gun lovers, not surprisingly..

I just cant believe that people are nieve enough to think crimanals actually buy guns from dealers or at a show. Or that they use $1500 "asualt" rifles either. The only thing a nice G3 or FAL will assualt is your wallet...

people are dumb.

It's just like that whole .50cal thing, they want to make the 50's into class 3's, the one you have to pay out the rear for a liscense and transfer fees, it's easier to buy plutonium than a class 3 weapon. And there's no reason, none, zero, zip. No one has ever been killed by one in a crime, there big and heavy, you cannot lay hands on one for less than $2500 bucks, and then it's a single shot affair that you have to disademble practicaly to reload. It's silly. Nazi law if I ever heard one. Period...

 

[ElFenix]

i used to have that quote as my icq away message but it was too big to fit.

 

[rgwalt]

Registration could potentially be used to take guns away from the citizens, but do you really think that could happen? Our country has been under a democracy for over 200 years. The government has a system of checks and balances for a reason, and getting a large majority in BOTH houses of congress as well as the presidency would be difficult without the consent of a large portion of the population.

Ryan

 

[Mookow]

<< Registration could potentially be used to take guns away from the citizens, but do you really think that could happen? Our country has been under a democracy for over 200 years. The government has a system of checks and balances for a reason, and getting a large majority in BOTH houses of congress as well as the presidency would be difficult without the consent of a large portion of the population.

Ryan >>



I do believe it has been mentioned that that has already happened in Aussie-land (I havent heard that it has, but it sure wouldnt surprise me).

 

[Ramses]

I think it's possible, but it isnt the part that concerns me most.


I'll tell you bigest complaint in simple terms.

Say I buy a cut up 50 yeear old rifle kit, I mean cut in the middle with a huge saw, no use, not workable at all, crusty and wore out usually. But interisting historicly, and I can refinish it and make it pretty again.
People like to do this kinda thing. Nothing wrong so far, right? Now. The part the big saw attacked and distroyed, that was the "heart" of the rifle, usually right in the middle and everything else bolts to it. Now for a modest ammount of money, I can buy a nice legal canter section, one that is engenered in such a way that it's usually not easily to make it into the dreaded full auotmatic, which is another issue in itself. Now I get my shiny new center section, known as a reciever, and I have the tools and skill to assemble the old parts from my kit, which I have cleaned and refinished to a nice color, but wait! I have to take a certain number of parts, around 7 or so, and replace them with the EXACT same part that's been manufactured in THIS country. Now there are a number of problems I have with this as a free man and as a technician. The main one is that the before mentioned reciever is almost always not of the quality as the original, requiring hand fitting and filing and many hours of attention to make it work at ALL, not to mention safely. Then the same problem applies to the US parts I have to replace, being that we cant seem to make anything worth a crap in this country anymore, the US parts either dont fit, dont hold up, or need refinishing to look decent. AND there expensive, cause they have you over a barrel. You must pay their $50 for these few ounces of metal in each of these 7 or so parts that SOMETIMES have identafieing stamps on them, that cost about $5 to make, or you can chance 10 FRICKING YEARS in prison and loosing your right to have ANY arms at all. Wonderfull isnt it? A nice little extortion setup, highway robbery, what ever you want to call it. That isnt the half of it either, but it's a good simple example. You'll spend many many hours, require a decent bit of knowledge and mechanical skill, and no small amount of money to have one of these rifles. That ticks me off. A lot.

I dont mind the background check at all, it's just commen sence, but some of the laws, like the above one's I mentioned are absolutly silly. No reason for them at all...

 

[Ramses]

There are other things, some rifles I can leave the bayonet on, and some I cant. The same rifle, same bayonet, same, same, same, but one was originally imported or sold earlier than the other. That also makes it cost WAY more. They even have a little catch phrase for it, "pre-ban", and dealers use and misuse it to screw people out of money in various ways. I dont understand, you have two IDENTICAL little hunks of steel and wood, and one is legal to put a knife on it, and doing so with the other may put you in federal prison. Explain? Does it make you happy to know your tax money goes into stuff like this?
Even if you dont like guns, it's got to bother you.

Or the dreaded "flash hider"! Oh boy, that's gonna make me kill little children. You know what a flash hider does? It does NOT hide you at night, what it does is direct the little flash away from you, just like dimming your headlights at night so you dont blind another driver. It's not that big a deal normally, who shoots at night regularly? BUT! When I go through the trouble of digging up the afore mentioned 50 year old military rifle from some odd ball country on the other side of the earth, I WANT that thing to be just like the original when I'm done. Same sling, same stock, same little thingy on the tip of it(flash-hider), same thing that the little pictures in the history books show, cause I like that, it's my hobby, and you can generally do things that dont hurt other people in America. Yes? No. Not always...

I could go on, trust me, with equally silly things. I'll spare you the rest though, beyond this it starts to get to technical, but it's there, and only getting worse....