Why do we, as citizens, really need guns?

[daniel1113]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: nerp

Originally posted by: JDMnAR1

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: CKent
We don't need them, but we need a broad definitiion of freedom, which allows us to own them, smoke pot, marry a person of the same gender, or basically whatever else we want so long as it doesn't affect others. Unfortunately people on both sides of the political spectrum want to turn us into a western Afghanistan by systematically destroying freedom.

Yeah, it's funny how the conservatives want to protect gun rights but couldn't care less about the rights of homosexuals.

Which constitutional amendment addreses marriage again, I can't seem to remember?

EDIT: And if a homosexual wants to own a gun, more power to him or her.

You act as if the constitution has never been amended . . . nor can it ever be amended again.

You want to amend the constitution to specifically disallow homosexual marriage?

Is that what the constitution has become? A playground for opposing parties to get their will through? If so you can just scrap it like GW wanted to do since it would just be "a goddamn piece of paper".

What's sad is that people have been conditioned to think that if an issue is not addressed in the constitution, it's not allowed. Pretty pathetic when you consider that the constitution doesn't even apply to citizens. It merely set limits on federal government powers.

 

[IGBT]

why do you need a front door on your house??

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: daniel1113

Originally posted by: nerp
Reading this thread, I've come to the conclusion that many ATOT members are delusional paranoid whackjobs who watch too much TV and seen way too many movies. Where the fuck do you live that you need to worry about a home invasion? Your own stats you barf out about cars being more dangerous proves my point -- you're living in fear of a wholly unrealisitc view of the world. Home invasions rarely happen and most burglars don't carry weapons (being busted for B&E is easier to deal with than armed robbery) and are scared off and go running as soon as they hear a cough or th lights go on. Second, burglars tend to hit houses when you're on vacation or away. Thus, your trusty gun is more likely to be stolen during a break-in than actually used.

Where the hell do you all live? Kabul? Life must suck living in such a state of fear that you'd be willing to risk the lives of your family with a weapon in the house.

Where to begin... where to begin.

Unlikely is not the same as "doesn't happen". You're also unlikely to die in a house fire, but I have a feeling that you probably have both a fire extinguisher and smoke detector in your home. Paranoid much? Now, if you're ok with your odds, more power to you. But in the unlikely event that something terrible were to happen, some of us like to be prepared. Reasonable preparation is not paranoia.

Reasonable paranoia doesn't include a gun in your cupboard.

And if you feel the need to do so, then either grow some fucking balls or if you really do live in a war zone, get the fuck out of there.

 

[JDMnAR1]

Originally posted by: nerp

Originally posted by: JDMnAR1

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: CKent
We don't need them, but we need a broad definitiion of freedom, which allows us to own them, smoke pot, marry a person of the same gender, or basically whatever else we want so long as it doesn't affect others. Unfortunately people on both sides of the political spectrum want to turn us into a western Afghanistan by systematically destroying freedom.

Yeah, it's funny how the conservatives want to protect gun rights but couldn't care less about the rights of homosexuals.

Which constitutional amendment addreses marriage again, I can't seem to remember?

EDIT: And if a homosexual wants to own a gun, more power to him or her.

You act as if the constitution has never been amended . . . nor can it ever be amended again.

Sorry - but I have no clue where you drew that conclusion from. I am talking about the US Constitution as it exists today, not how it might be in some far off day and time. There are a number of rights that are explicitly protected by the constitution, and gun ownership is one. Marriage, gay or otherwise, is not.

 

[daniel1113]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: daniel1113

Originally posted by: nerp
Reading this thread, I've come to the conclusion that many ATOT members are delusional paranoid whackjobs who watch too much TV and seen way too many movies. Where the fuck do you live that you need to worry about a home invasion? Your own stats you barf out about cars being more dangerous proves my point -- you're living in fear of a wholly unrealisitc view of the world. Home invasions rarely happen and most burglars don't carry weapons (being busted for B&E is easier to deal with than armed robbery) and are scared off and go running as soon as they hear a cough or th lights go on. Second, burglars tend to hit houses when you're on vacation or away. Thus, your trusty gun is more likely to be stolen during a break-in than actually used.

Where the hell do you all live? Kabul? Life must suck living in such a state of fear that you'd be willing to risk the lives of your family with a weapon in the house.

Where to begin... where to begin.

Unlikely is not the same as "doesn't happen". You're also unlikely to die in a house fire, but I have a feeling that you probably have both a fire extinguisher and smoke detector in your home. Paranoid much? Now, if you're ok with your odds, more power to you. But in the unlikely event that something terrible were to happen, some of us like to be prepared. Reasonable preparation is not paranoia.

Reasonable paranoia doesn't include a gun in your cupboard.

And if you feel the need to do so, then either grow some fucking balls or if you really do live in a war zone, get the fuck out of there.

Please explain how a gun in a cabinet/closet/holster is unreasonable?

Considering it takes me all of about 5 second each morning to holster my gun for the day, and another 5 at night to unholster, how is that unreasonable?

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: daniel1113

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: nerp

Originally posted by: JDMnAR1

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: CKent
We don't need them, but we need a broad definitiion of freedom, which allows us to own them, smoke pot, marry a person of the same gender, or basically whatever else we want so long as it doesn't affect others. Unfortunately people on both sides of the political spectrum want to turn us into a western Afghanistan by systematically destroying freedom.

Yeah, it's funny how the conservatives want to protect gun rights but couldn't care less about the rights of homosexuals.

Which constitutional amendment addreses marriage again, I can't seem to remember?

EDIT: And if a homosexual wants to own a gun, more power to him or her.

You act as if the constitution has never been amended . . . nor can it ever be amended again.

You want to amend the constitution to specifically disallow homosexual marriage?

Is that what the constitution has become? A playground for opposing parties to get their will through? If so you can just scrap it like GW wanted to do since it would just be "a goddamn piece of paper".

What's sad is that people have been conditioned to think that if an issue is not addressed in the constitution, it's not allowed. Pretty pathetic when you consider that the constitution doesn't even apply to citizens. It merely set limits on federal government powers.

I agree with you, of course homosexual marriage is allowed PER THE CONSTITUTION, since it's not disallowed in there.

And it DOES apply to citisens since it DOES mention citizens rights in it.

Christ, go read your own constitution before you argue more with this man who isn't even an American but an Englishman currently in Afghanistan.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: daniel1113

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: daniel1113

Originally posted by: nerp
Reading this thread, I've come to the conclusion that many ATOT members are delusional paranoid whackjobs who watch too much TV and seen way too many movies. Where the fuck do you live that you need to worry about a home invasion? Your own stats you barf out about cars being more dangerous proves my point -- you're living in fear of a wholly unrealisitc view of the world. Home invasions rarely happen and most burglars don't carry weapons (being busted for B&E is easier to deal with than armed robbery) and are scared off and go running as soon as they hear a cough or th lights go on. Second, burglars tend to hit houses when you're on vacation or away. Thus, your trusty gun is more likely to be stolen during a break-in than actually used.

Where the hell do you all live? Kabul? Life must suck living in such a state of fear that you'd be willing to risk the lives of your family with a weapon in the house.

Where to begin... where to begin.

Unlikely is not the same as "doesn't happen". You're also unlikely to die in a house fire, but I have a feeling that you probably have both a fire extinguisher and smoke detector in your home. Paranoid much? Now, if you're ok with your odds, more power to you. But in the unlikely event that something terrible were to happen, some of us like to be prepared. Reasonable preparation is not paranoia.

Reasonable paranoia doesn't include a gun in your cupboard.

And if you feel the need to do so, then either grow some fucking balls or if you really do live in a war zone, get the fuck out of there.

Please explain how a gun in a cabinet/closet/holster is unreasonable?

Considering it takes me all of about 5 second each morning to holster my gun for the day, and another 5 at night to unholster, how is that unreasonable?

I already said it wasn't unreasonable to keep it in a locker/safe (cabinet is useless) in fact i want it in there.

READ what i write and argue against it, don't make up assumptions out of thin air and go with that.

 

[oznerol]

Originally posted by: daniel1113

Originally posted by: nerp
Reading this thread, I've come to the conclusion that many ATOT members are delusional paranoid whackjobs who watch too much TV and seen way too many movies. Where the fuck do you live that you need to worry about a home invasion? Your own stats you barf out about cars being more dangerous proves my point -- you're living in fear of a wholly unrealisitc view of the world. Home invasions rarely happen and most burglars don't carry weapons (being busted for B&E is easier to deal with than armed robbery) and are scared off and go running as soon as they hear a cough or th lights go on. Second, burglars tend to hit houses when you're on vacation or away. Thus, your trusty gun is more likely to be stolen during a break-in than actually used.

Where the hell do you all live? Kabul? Life must suck living in such a state of fear that you'd be willing to risk the lives of your family with a weapon in the house.

Where to begin... where to begin.

Unlikely is not the same as "doesn't happen". You're also unlikely to die in a house fire, but I have a feeling that you probably have both a fire extinguisher and smoke detector in your home. Paranoid much? Now, if you're ok with your odds, more power to you. But in the unlikely event that something terrible were to happen, some of us like to be prepared. Reasonable preparation is not paranoia.

I don't think either of these arguments are really merited.

The question is really if you think law-abiding citizens should be allowed to purchase a gun. The reason for owning one varies - be it paranoia, protection, collection, hunting, hobby - but I don't think they matter so much.

It comes down to whether or not you think an armed population is more dangerous than an unarmed one.

If you don't see both the pros and cons to both sides, then discussing it isn't particularly useful.

 

[daniel1113]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
I agree with you, of course homosexual marriage is allowed PER THE CONSTITUTION, since it's not disallowed in there.

And it DOES apply to citisens since it DOES mention citizens rights in it.

Christ, go read your own constitution before you argue more with this man who isn't even an American but an Englishman currently in Afghanistan.

No, it does not apply to citizens. It applies to the federal government (and in many instances, to state governments). The Constitution is a contract between the government and the people, or the states. It merely outlines what the federal government can and cannot due. It does not specify what citizens can or cannot do, aside from the few powers set aside to the federal government (coining money, managing wars, etc.).

 

[daniel1113]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: daniel1113

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: daniel1113

Originally posted by: nerp
Reading this thread, I've come to the conclusion that many ATOT members are delusional paranoid whackjobs who watch too much TV and seen way too many movies. Where the fuck do you live that you need to worry about a home invasion? Your own stats you barf out about cars being more dangerous proves my point -- you're living in fear of a wholly unrealisitc view of the world. Home invasions rarely happen and most burglars don't carry weapons (being busted for B&E is easier to deal with than armed robbery) and are scared off and go running as soon as they hear a cough or th lights go on. Second, burglars tend to hit houses when you're on vacation or away. Thus, your trusty gun is more likely to be stolen during a break-in than actually used.

Where the hell do you all live? Kabul? Life must suck living in such a state of fear that you'd be willing to risk the lives of your family with a weapon in the house.

Where to begin... where to begin.

Unlikely is not the same as "doesn't happen". You're also unlikely to die in a house fire, but I have a feeling that you probably have both a fire extinguisher and smoke detector in your home. Paranoid much? Now, if you're ok with your odds, more power to you. But in the unlikely event that something terrible were to happen, some of us like to be prepared. Reasonable preparation is not paranoia.

Reasonable paranoia doesn't include a gun in your cupboard.

And if you feel the need to do so, then either grow some fucking balls or if you really do live in a war zone, get the fuck out of there.

Please explain how a gun in a cabinet/closet/holster is unreasonable?

Considering it takes me all of about 5 second each morning to holster my gun for the day, and another 5 at night to unholster, how is that unreasonable?

I already said it wasn't unreasonable to keep it in a locker/safe (cabinet is useless) in fact i want it in there.

READ what i write and argue against it, don't make up assumptions out of thin air and go with that.

Wow. I direct;y addressed your comment, and you are calling me out?

So, its reasonable to keep a gun in a safe, but not in a cabinet or holster? I can't wait to hear your explanation for this one.

 

[daniel1113]

Originally posted by: ducci
It comes down to whether or not you think an armed population is more dangerous than an unarmed one.

No, it does not come down to that. Safety is such a small part of the equation that's it's nearly negligible. The issue is almost completely about government power.

Once you decide that X should be allowed since it makes us safer, there's nothing the government cannot do. Case and point, the Patriot Act and all the government wire-tapping.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: daniel1113

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: daniel1113

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: daniel1113

Originally posted by: nerp
Reading this thread, I've come to the conclusion that many ATOT members are delusional paranoid whackjobs who watch too much TV and seen way too many movies. Where the fuck do you live that you need to worry about a home invasion? Your own stats you barf out about cars being more dangerous proves my point -- you're living in fear of a wholly unrealisitc view of the world. Home invasions rarely happen and most burglars don't carry weapons (being busted for B&E is easier to deal with than armed robbery) and are scared off and go running as soon as they hear a cough or th lights go on. Second, burglars tend to hit houses when you're on vacation or away. Thus, your trusty gun is more likely to be stolen during a break-in than actually used.

Where the hell do you all live? Kabul? Life must suck living in such a state of fear that you'd be willing to risk the lives of your family with a weapon in the house.

Where to begin... where to begin.

Unlikely is not the same as "doesn't happen". You're also unlikely to die in a house fire, but I have a feeling that you probably have both a fire extinguisher and smoke detector in your home. Paranoid much? Now, if you're ok with your odds, more power to you. But in the unlikely event that something terrible were to happen, some of us like to be prepared. Reasonable preparation is not paranoia.

Reasonable paranoia doesn't include a gun in your cupboard.

And if you feel the need to do so, then either grow some fucking balls or if you really do live in a war zone, get the fuck out of there.

Please explain how a gun in a cabinet/closet/holster is unreasonable?

Considering it takes me all of about 5 second each morning to holster my gun for the day, and another 5 at night to unholster, how is that unreasonable?

I already said it wasn't unreasonable to keep it in a locker/safe (cabinet is useless) in fact i want it in there.

READ what i write and argue against it, don't make up assumptions out of thin air and go with that.

Wow. I direct;y addressed your comment, and you are calling me out?

So, its reasonable to keep a gun in a safe, but not in a cabinet or holster? I can't wait to hear your explanation for this one.

I ALREADY WROTE that keeping it on your person or in a gun locker is ok by me.

"Reasonable paranoia doesn't include a gun in your cupboard. "

Was what you responded to.

Either you are confused or you can't comprehend words written on the internet.

 

[Glavinsolo]

Here are some quotes on topic.

'Those who hammer their guns into plows will plow for those who do not.'

~ Thomas Jefferson

The American Revolution would never have happened with gun control.

 

[daniel1113]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: daniel1113

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: daniel1113

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: daniel1113

Originally posted by: nerp
Reading this thread, I've come to the conclusion that many ATOT members are delusional paranoid whackjobs who watch too much TV and seen way too many movies. Where the fuck do you live that you need to worry about a home invasion? Your own stats you barf out about cars being more dangerous proves my point -- you're living in fear of a wholly unrealisitc view of the world. Home invasions rarely happen and most burglars don't carry weapons (being busted for B&E is easier to deal with than armed robbery) and are scared off and go running as soon as they hear a cough or th lights go on. Second, burglars tend to hit houses when you're on vacation or away. Thus, your trusty gun is more likely to be stolen during a break-in than actually used.

Where the hell do you all live? Kabul? Life must suck living in such a state of fear that you'd be willing to risk the lives of your family with a weapon in the house.

Where to begin... where to begin.

Unlikely is not the same as "doesn't happen". You're also unlikely to die in a house fire, but I have a feeling that you probably have both a fire extinguisher and smoke detector in your home. Paranoid much? Now, if you're ok with your odds, more power to you. But in the unlikely event that something terrible were to happen, some of us like to be prepared. Reasonable preparation is not paranoia.

Reasonable paranoia doesn't include a gun in your cupboard.

And if you feel the need to do so, then either grow some fucking balls or if you really do live in a war zone, get the fuck out of there.

Please explain how a gun in a cabinet/closet/holster is unreasonable?

Considering it takes me all of about 5 second each morning to holster my gun for the day, and another 5 at night to unholster, how is that unreasonable?

I already said it wasn't unreasonable to keep it in a locker/safe (cabinet is useless) in fact i want it in there.

READ what i write and argue against it, don't make up assumptions out of thin air and go with that.

Wow. I direct;y addressed your comment, and you are calling me out?

So, its reasonable to keep a gun in a safe, but not in a cabinet or holster? I can't wait to hear your explanation for this one.

I ALREADY WROTE that keeping it on your person or in a gun locker is ok by me.

"Reasonable paranoia doesn't include a gun in your cupboard. "

Was what you responded to.

Either you are confused or you can't comprehend words written on the internet.

How is a cupboard any different than any other location?

 

[GenHoth]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: sourceninja

Originally posted by: nerp

Originally posted by: UberNeuman
Why do we need cars? They kill more people than bicycles!

Excellent point. BTW, I ride a MP-40 to work every day!

I might consider it if they make a heated bike that can handle 2 foot deep snow.

An MP-40 is a sub machine gun.

:laugh:

And why is this still in OT, P&N for sure!

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: daniel1113

Originally posted by: ducci
It comes down to whether or not you think an armed population is more dangerous than an unarmed one.

No, it does not come down to that. Safety is such a small part of the equation that's it's nearly negligible. The issue is almost completely about government power.

Once you decide that X should be allowed since it makes us safer, there's nothing the government cannot do. Case and point, the Patriot Act and all the government wire-tapping.

No it isn't, you think your pea shooters are going to do SHIT against a tank? How about a chopper with rockets or a jet, how about haubitses that can self correct within four meters?

It has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with government power and if you think you nutters could wage guerilla warfare against your own government supported by the armed forces you're daft, that would be THEIR arses on the line and not just soldiers in far away lands, they wouldn't pull any stops on that one and once the first one hits and everyone realises that this is war, everyone will calm the fuck down and lay down their weapons, well almost everyone, you included.

If the armed forces ARE on your side, you won't need guns at all.

In short, you don't need shit but your vote, same as any other democratic nation, this is just an excuse because tiny boys need their toys to feel safe from the boogeyman.

 

[Atheus]

Originally posted by: Glavinsolo
'Those who hammer their guns into plows will plow for those who do not.'

~ Thomas Jefferson

Errr... I'm not sure he meant that's a good thing... are you suggesting that's a good thing? Power to those with weapons and slave labour for those without?

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
No it isn't, you think your pea shooters are going to do SHIT against a tank? How about a chopper with rockets or a jet, how about haubitses that can self correct within four meters?

Oh the fucking irony. A brit underestimating American civilians. When has that happened before?

Oh yea, when you got your ass kicked by a bunch of peasants.

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

In short, you don't need shit but your vote, same as any other democratic nation, this is just an excuse because tiny boys need their toys to feel safe from the boogeyman.

Says the guy in the Armed Forces :laugh:

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: daniel1113

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: daniel1113

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: daniel1113

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: daniel1113

Originally posted by: nerp
Reading this thread, I've come to the conclusion that many ATOT members are delusional paranoid whackjobs who watch too much TV and seen way too many movies. Where the fuck do you live that you need to worry about a home invasion? Your own stats you barf out about cars being more dangerous proves my point -- you're living in fear of a wholly unrealisitc view of the world. Home invasions rarely happen and most burglars don't carry weapons (being busted for B&E is easier to deal with than armed robbery) and are scared off and go running as soon as they hear a cough or th lights go on. Second, burglars tend to hit houses when you're on vacation or away. Thus, your trusty gun is more likely to be stolen during a break-in than actually used.

Where the hell do you all live? Kabul? Life must suck living in such a state of fear that you'd be willing to risk the lives of your family with a weapon in the house.

Where to begin... where to begin.

Unlikely is not the same as "doesn't happen". You're also unlikely to die in a house fire, but I have a feeling that you probably have both a fire extinguisher and smoke detector in your home. Paranoid much? Now, if you're ok with your odds, more power to you. But in the unlikely event that something terrible were to happen, some of us like to be prepared. Reasonable preparation is not paranoia.

Reasonable paranoia doesn't include a gun in your cupboard.

And if you feel the need to do so, then either grow some fucking balls or if you really do live in a war zone, get the fuck out of there.

Please explain how a gun in a cabinet/closet/holster is unreasonable?

Considering it takes me all of about 5 second each morning to holster my gun for the day, and another 5 at night to unholster, how is that unreasonable?

I already said it wasn't unreasonable to keep it in a locker/safe (cabinet is useless) in fact i want it in there.

READ what i write and argue against it, don't make up assumptions out of thin air and go with that.

Wow. I direct;y addressed your comment, and you are calling me out?

So, its reasonable to keep a gun in a safe, but not in a cabinet or holster? I can't wait to hear your explanation for this one.

I ALREADY WROTE that keeping it on your person or in a gun locker is ok by me.

"Reasonable paranoia doesn't include a gun in your cupboard. "

Was what you responded to.

Either you are confused or you can't comprehend words written on the internet.

How is a cupboard any different than any other location?

I guess that if you don't get the difference between a cupboard and a gun locker i really can't offer you any help understanding it, ask any kindergarten teacher to draw you a fucking picture and explain it to you.

Before you reply, try to READ and UNDERSTAND my previous replies. You obviusly didn't read nor understand them the first time so make a point of it to read until you comprehend.

 

[daniel1113]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
I guess that if you don't get the difference between a cupboard and a gun locker i really can't offer you any help understanding it, ask any kindergarten teacher to draw you a fucking picture and explain it to you.

Before you reply, try to READ and UNDERSTAND my previous replies. You obviusly didn't read nor understand them the first time so make a point of it to read until you comprehend.

Dense, are we? I already know the answer. I'm not asking because I need your help.

So, in your opinion, the only reasonable gun is one either locked in a locker/safe or under one's direct control, such as in a holster?

Is that what you meant to say? Or do you just like pulling ad hominem attacks out of your ass?

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
No it isn't, you think your pea shooters are going to do SHIT against a tank? How about a chopper with rockets or a jet, how about haubitses that can self correct within four meters?

Oh the fucking irony. A brit underestimating American civilians. When has that happened before?

Oh yea, when you got your ass kicked by a bunch of peasants.

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

In short, you don't need shit but your vote, same as any other democratic nation, this is just an excuse because tiny boys need their toys to feel safe from the boogeyman.

Says the guy in the Armed Forces :laugh:

You are so retarded that an answer will fall on deaf ears, the French saved your arses when it was rifles against rifles and cannons against cannons but what now? You're going to go up with the biggest caliber that you can own that might chaff the paint off a tank against a tank? Yeah, you're a REAL bright one, aren't you?

Well of course any nation needs it's armed force.

Anything more or are you done being an idiot for tonight?

 

[natto fire]

Originally posted by: MotF Bane
Jesus fucking shit, why was this troll fed so well?

Every week when this or the drug thread pops up people can't help but pretend like they aren't beating a dead horse. I honestly believe that some posters here have their response to these flamebait threads saved in a text file to use for next weeks "I know this has been over before, but my thread is somehow better!" threads...

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: daniel1113

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
I guess that if you don't get the difference between a cupboard and a gun locker i really can't offer you any help understanding it, ask any kindergarten teacher to draw you a fucking picture and explain it to you.

Before you reply, try to READ and UNDERSTAND my previous replies. You obviusly didn't read nor understand them the first time so make a point of it to read until you comprehend.

Dense, are we? I already know the answer. I'm not asking because I need your help.

So, in your opinion, the only reasonable gun is one either locked in a locker/safe or under one's direct control, such as in a holster?

Is that what you meant to say? Or do you just like pulling ad hominem attacks out of your ass?

"what you meant to say"?

Word for word, that is EXACTLY what i wrote, word for word.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: NeoV
Get serious ZM

the BATF has neither the money nor the resources it needs to get serious about tracking down 'straw' buyers - the NRA loves to point out some mistaken case where a war vet has his gun taken away or some sob story like that, but the truth of the matter is that the ATF is seriously undermanned and underfunded to do any serious policing of the gun dealers around the country. They audit gun dealers no more than once per year - and that is during a good year - and gun shops aren't even required to report quantity details - they aren't looking for 'straw' buyers at all - in fact, there is no law that requires a gun dealer to report a buyer - regardless of how many guns they buy - how stupid is that?

Dealers report every buyer. Every buyer has to fill out a 4473 form and be called in to the NICS check database. You buy more than one firearm at a time, guess what, every firearm gets reported in the NICS check. While there is no separate notification, persons making multiple purchases are indeed noted when the NICS check is made.

Clearly you're unfamiliar with firearms law.

Furthermore, 71% of firearms used in crimes were stolen. (?Feasibility of a Ballistics Imaging Database for All New Handgun Sales?, Frederic Tulleners, California Department of Justice, Bureau of Forensic Services, October, 2001.)

The Brady Bunch likes to parade isolated instances of straw purchases as "commonplace", but the actual numbers don't back them up. Most firearms used in crimes are stolen or smuggled into the US, only a very small minority are actually acquired through straw purchases.

Originally posted by: NeoV
Those 'special sessions' that are just political grandstanding have resulted in England and Germany passing very restrictive gun laws in the last two decades - I'd hardly call that grandstanding, I'd call that taking action - agree or disagree with the outcome - at least they had the balls to do something.

Yup, they had the balls to pass laws that disarmed law-abiding people and caused the crime rates in their countries to increase. You are now more likely to be mugged in London than you are in New York City. But hey, the politicians were "tough on guns", so it's all OK. At least they did something, even if that something made things worse, right?

There's a difference between movement and action. What the politicians did was movement, but it sure as hell wasn't any form of action.

ZV

 

[Kelvrick]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
No it isn't, you think your pea shooters are going to do SHIT against a tank? How about a chopper with rockets or a jet, how about haubitses that can self correct within four meters?

Oh the fucking irony. A brit underestimating American civilians. When has that happened before?

Oh yea, when you got your ass kicked by a bunch of peasants.

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

In short, you don't need shit but your vote, same as any other democratic nation, this is just an excuse because tiny boys need their toys to feel safe from the boogeyman.

Says the guy in the Armed Forces :laugh:

You are so retarded that an answer will fall on deaf ears, the French saved your arses when it was rifles against rifles and cannons against cannons but what now? You're going to go up with the biggest caliber that you can own that might chaff the paint off a tank against a tank? Yeah, you're a REAL bright one, aren't you?

Well of course any nation needs it's armed force.

Anything more or are you done being an idiot for tonight?

Look at a regular squad of infantry and their issued weapons can't do much against a tank either. You always chime into these threads as a gun owner but you're one of the reasons why laws got so restrictive. You're willing to keep conceding you're right to bear arms until you barely have any left.

Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq shows how a modern military runs them over in open battle, but the attrition really wears down when you have the citizenry fighting back unless you're going to start a genocide.