Guns, guns, guns

[Hexis]

the chances I will ever own/shoot a Colt Model 1911 are very remote.

If your ever in the Minneapolis are drop me a PM. I'll take you to the range and let you blast off some .45 ACP through my 1911.

[teufelhunden]

oddly enough,
did you know that the world record for a "Sniper Kill Shot" belongs to a Canadian Sniper.

http://www.snipercountry.com/articles/killingshot_2430metres.asp

http://www.macleans.ca/canada/nation..._126689_126689
did you know that the USMC Sniper Program was based upon a book called "A RIFLEMAN WENT TO WAR" written by a Canadian WWI Sniper.

http://www.warbooks.com/RWTW.html

to bad our government has some of the policies it does.
but i can't tell you what those policies are,
if i did, word might get out
and the illusion that we have no real defenses might be lost.

You're lacking real defenses against your government. Nobody is saying that the Canadian government has no defenses against threats to itself. What should be troubling though, is that the Canadian government has armed defenses [which coincidentally can become offensive just as easily] but the people have no way to defend themselves against the Canadian government.



read first.

[angrysasquatch]

You all worry about the crooks stealing the guns. Do you realize how many guns there are??? Do you realize how easily it is to make one? Do you realize that people have been stealing, murdering, raping people since BEFORE the invention of GUN POWDER???? Do you realize that HUMANS FIGHT!!!!! With a gun, a club, a stick, a stone, a NUCLEAR FREAKING WARHEAD!!!!! IT DON'T CHANGE YOU HARD HEADED, IGNORANT, SELF RIGHTEOUS, DELUSIONAL FREAK!!!!

TAKE EVERY GUN EVER MADE OFF THE PLANET IN ONE MOVE OVER NIGHT THROUGH THE POWERS OF DAVIDFREAKINCOPPERFIELD AND PEOPLE WILL STILL FIGHT AND THERE WILL STILL BE DEATH AND THERE WILL STILL BE SOMEONE OUT SOMEWHERE THINKING THAT THE WORLD IS A BETTER FREAKING PLACE BECAUSE OF IT!!!!!

GUNS for the most part are about the most easily accessible, easily used, uniform and all around most common and most efficient means to protect ones self and their belongings and family from those that wish to do them harm. At one time it was a fancy stone on the nightstand, then it migrated to a wooden club or sharp blade, then it evolved to something that uses black powder. SEEEEEE IT DON'T MATTER!!!! IT will always be something!!! So they are the most common denominator. Why do you think that is????

So you keep your head in the sand, and keep believing your fairy tale dreams that the world without guns will be utopic and all will live in happiness with an XMag in every freakin household and there will be no crime, no pollution, no harm, no foul and there will be me and mine brandishing the boom sticks helping to make sure that someone don't come into your house in the middle of the night and run their ideas and their wants and desires up your derierre while you have it up and open for em!!!

Sheesh!!! Some folks just don't get it.... And I'm not even touching upon the "RIGHTS" it "ENSURES" us from the governments that wish to do things to it's populace that we'd rather not have done to us.

Why don't you go and study Hitlers grand plan you tard! Do you realize that he stated to be bringing Germany into the history books as "The First Civilized UNARMED NATION IN THE WORLD!!!!" Why don't you study up on that and see what you think that may have been different if the common folk of Germany had not been DISARMED before he went around inducing the worst case of Genocide to be known in modern times.

You don't want guns.... DON'T BUY EM!!!!! Me.... I'll choose to protect myself and I'll do it with any and all means possible and hell or high water it'll be MY RIGHT to do so. If you want to place YOUR protection in the hands of the government and the police forces then by all means do so. But DO NOT try to push your beliefs and your thoughts on me and try and tell me how I need to live or protect my life.

There seems to be a common thing amongst folks that BELIEVE in FREEDOM and that is... WE don't go around trying to tell everyone else what to do. We leave it up to them to CHOOSE their life and how they want to LIVE it. Then there are those that think FREEDOM means they can go around and PUSH THEIR NOSE INTO EVERYONE ELSE'S FACE and tell them how WRONG they are for doing something. THAT'S NOT YOUR FREEDOM any more than it's MY FREEDOM to shove your nose back through your skull to get it the hell out of MY way.

Now you want to start passing the laws that say I can run you over for getting in my way because I want to go somewhere and you think I shouldn't be there, or that I can FORCE you out of MY way because you stand in front of me and think I shouldn't be going somewhere or make it legal for me to flatline your heartbeat when you decide that YOUR FREEDOM means you can come into MY HOUSE and take things FROM ME because society dealt you a bad hand then maybe you'll have an ear that will listen.

Funny how everyone thinks that it's THEIR RIGHT to try and force others to see/do things the way they think they should be done.

DM

It is a discussion. If you feel that I am impeding on your free will, you can steer clear of the thread. I am not trying to take your guns away, I simply don't have any means by which to do so. Nor do I want to. I am simply trying to understand a stance I see a lot of Americans take. And possibly make them see it the way I do. I am sure my outlook on the issue will change as well. That's how a discussion works.

And wow, that whole Hitler thing came right outta left field. The reason people ELECTED Hitler's party was because life was utter crap for them, due to the depression and paying the French for WW1 ontop of that. Hitler had some very radical views, and they believed that it would take a radical change to get them out of their rut. And ya know what, Hitler pulled that country out of that rut, he turned it from basically a third-world country into the greatest single power in the world (although less than the sum of all others). Yeah, disarming them and then handing all the able-bodied men rifles and tanks.

[CoolHand]

LK13 - You totally missed what I was talking about. Don't think other countries VS Canada, think Canadian Civilians VS Canadian Government. Like I said, Fundamental Disconnect.

And wow, that whole Hitler thing came right outta left field. The reason people ELECTED Hitler's party was because life was utter crap for them, due to the depression and paying the French for WW1 ontop of that. Hitler had some very radical views, and they believed that it would take a radical change to get them out of their rut. And ya know what, Hitler pulled that country out of that rut, he turned it from basically a third-world country into the greatest single power in the world (although less than the sum of all others). Yeah, disarming them and then handing all the able-bodied men rifles and tanks.

Ok, you just made a post on an internet forum talking about all the good that Hitler did for Germany.



/thread

[angrysasquatch]

The fundamental disconnect between the Canadians (Eh?) and us Americans, is that from our outset, the people have always been encouraged to be suspicious and even distrustful of the government, and rightly so. Ever see any fascist dictators take over our country by using the blind obedience of the people? Nope, and you're never gonna either. Ever see a government official overstep their boundaries and get hauled back in and called to the carpet to explain/face punishment? You're damned right you have, 'cause there is always someone watching and making sure the people we ALLOW to steer the power of our government, don't misuse it.

Checks and balances, the ultimate form of which is armed public revolt. I **** you not. This is EXACTLY how things were set up here, ON PURPOSE. The folks who founded this nation had lived under the thumb of a king, and had seen what the aristocracy did to their countries (and others). They would not have it here, so the limited the power of the government intentionally with all manner of checks and balances to prevent what they saw happening time and again in Europe and elsewhere. If all else failed, the arms in the hands of the people could "hit the reset button" again, just as they had done in 1776. That was their intention. To suggest otherwise is to twist the words on the page to your own devices, and is an insult to the great men who founded this country, and all the great men who've since died defending it.

Be happy that you Canadians have a benevolent dictator, for one day if you should find that you are no longer so fortunate, you will also find that you have no recourse.

"A government large enough to give you everything that you want, is strong enough to take everything that you have." - Thomas Jefferson

That's the disconnect.

You're trustful of your elected officials (I cannot fathom why, but it's your country), and you're confident that the police will be there to protect you (again, I believe this to be a delusion, but it's your life, spend it as you will).

We do not trust our politicians any farther than we can throw them, and we know that our personal protection is our personal responsibility.

This is our country, and this is how we like it to be run (there are problems we need to fix, but a fundamental reshaping of our way of life is NOT the solution we're looking for). We don't need your, or anyone else's permission to conduct our affairs as we see fit, just as you do not need ours.

If you're happy not being able to own an AR-15, fine. But I enjoy mine, and all it's brothers and sisters as well. They are mine, and as a free man, it is my right to own and enjoy them as I see fit.

I tell you what, I'll not speak ill of Canadians for having the system of government they do, if you'll not speak ill of us for ours? Deal?

Otherwise, this is going to get ugly, 'cause there's no way I can make you understand how important our weapons are to us, and there is no way you are going to be able to convince me that your way is "better".

Well said. Yes, I am confident that the majority of voters has picked a party who is in the best interest of the people. If it isn't, there are many political avenues before a rebellion of sorts would be considered. Do you seriously think that other countries wouldn't step in if there were some sort of genocide or something against the will and well-being of the general populous? And do you really think that, if America were in the same circumstance, that the general populous of America could really hold off the army? That is, of course, assuming the army did what they were told, but they are human and more than capable of seeing that they are only harming the country.

[angrysasquatch]

oddly enough,
did you know that the world record for a "Sniper Kill Shot" belongs to a Canadian Sniper.

http://www.snipercountry.com/articles/killingshot_2430metres.asp

http://www.macleans.ca/canada/nation..._126689_126689
did you know that the USMC Sniper Program was based upon a book called "A RIFLEMAN WENT TO WAR" written by a Canadian WWI Sniper.

http://www.warbooks.com/RWTW.html

to bad our government has some of the policies it does.
but i can't tell you what those policies are,
if i did, word might get out
and the illusion that we have no real defenses might be lost.

We've basically just got diplomacy. Canada has always had a rather insubstantial (in comparison to superpowers) army. (please don't be offended)

[angrysasquatch]

LK13 - You totally missed what I was talking about. Don't think other countries VS Canada, think Canadian Civilians VS Canadian Government. Like I said, Fundamental Disconnect.



Ok, you just made a post on an internet forum talking about all the good that Hitler did for Germany.



/thread

Someone's gotta play devil's advocate. Is it not true? Does it not prove my point? I see no reason that it wasn't completely relevant.

[angrysasquatch]

You're main arguments that I see are that

a. there is no situation that requires self defense.


b. Guns should be systematically rounded up and destroyed because people might steal them.


Both are flawed.


a. is flawed because there simply are situations where one will need to defend themselves.


b. is simply


BTW, I'm not getting the whole The Guess Who thing. I do enjoy them though.

Got so caught up in all the serious business I almost forgot to come back to this one. The Guess Who have a song called "Guns, guns, guns". Unfortunately the only bits I can remember are the title being said a lot and something about "god speed, mother nature"

More serious business:

b. Do you not think that what allows gangs to function in the way they do is guns? Don't you think that if they were taken the means to dispatch somebody quickly, from some distance, possibly quietly that gang violence would die down? Or at least that would be no innocent bystanders?

[DevilMan]

b. Do you not think that what allows gangs to function in the way they do is guns? Don't you think that if they were taken the means to dispatch somebody quickly, from some distance, possibly quietly that gang violence would die down? Or at least that would be no innocent bystanders?

Wow!!! You've gotta be kidding me.... You mean to tell me that gangs are only gangs and only in existence because of firearms? hmmmmm.... never thought of it that way....

You may be on to something.

Yes.... Yes I think you are.... but I also think that thing that you may be on is CRACK!!!!

I can't believe that noone has ever figured out before that the removal of firearms will reduce/eliminate GANGS.... I mean hell.... Prisons don't have gangs, CANADA don't have GANGS... Hell I've NEVER seen or let alone heard of a GANG in England or Australia... And every gang I've ever known of has definitely been brought into existence by a firearm and the ability to get one.

What allows gangs to function is the INABILITY for someone to think for themselves, to stand up for themselves and to make the RIGHT and PROPER choices in their life.

What is the definition of a GANG??? Could church organizations not be considered as such??? What about any grouping of people who have similar interests??

WOW!!!! So Guns cause Gangs and Gangs cause Crime....

The revelation has been made.



DM

[angrysasquatch]

function in the way they do is guns

The devil's in the details

[DevilMan]

function in the way they do is guns

The devil's in the details

So you believe there were no gangs before there were guns right?

DM

You want to solve the worlds problems and make things right with the universe the first place to start is to make each and every person responsible for their actions. If you are under the rule of your parents up to the age of 18 then your parents have each and every right to make you do anything they see appropriate in the general sense of the words.

After you hit 18 you are allowed to smoke, to drink, to do whatever it is that you wish to do. BUT when you FAIL at life and find yourself on the street you have noone to blame but yourself. You want to turn that to a life of crime??? So be it. Break into my home and try to take from me and get shot in the face doing so then guess what... You're not living on the street anymore and you got corrected on what you thought you could do.

There IS NOONE that can read this message right now that can honestly stand up and tell anyone else here that they have a terrible life that prevents them from all joys and all things they SHOULD be entitled to.

Take a walk over to the phillipines... to china... to africa... Live there for a few years and then maybe you can come back and tell me what SUFFERING is.

This is AMERICA. You mean to tell me that you can't go flip burgers to earn a living??? BS!!!! What is it BELOW you??? Is running with a gang and breaking and entering a better life than earning honest money????? If so then when you get your butt handed to ya by someone who is unwilling to be stepped on then it's your own doing.

Why don't you try and run this little thought through your head.... What if we gave guns to each and every law abiding person who has no criminal or mental record who asked for one and passed the background check and told them they could carry said weapon anywhere they wished up to places that folks wish you not bring them??? Say if you don't want weapons in your store then you have a sign up stating such. Now you take that and couple that with the roll of the dice that the mugger takes on who his next victim is.... What do you think the chances that the guy with a 357 on his hip is going to be the target over the guy who is rolling around with patches on his jacket supporting anti-gun laws???? Tell me really....

Anyway... this really is a lost cause. America and the second amendment are less about the protection of people from people and more about the protection of people from corrupt governments.

DM

[grEnAlEins]

Well said. Yes, I am confident that the majority of voters has picked a party who is in the best interest of the people. If it isn't, there are many political avenues before a rebellion of sorts would be considered. Do you seriously think that other countries wouldn't step in if there were some sort of genocide or something against the will and well-being of the general populous? And do you really think that, if America were in the same circumstance, that the general populous of America could really hold off the army? That is, of course, assuming the army did what they were told, but they are human and more than capable of seeing that they are only harming the country.

What if those political avenues were no longer respected by your government? This is something that is a norm for dictators.

Do I seriously think other countries would step in in the cause of genocide? NO! Has any country done so in the past? NO!

Can the American populace hold off an army? Absolutely we can. We have done so in the past if I am not mistaken. Could the American populace hold off the American Military? The Confederacy (whose army was created on a whim, and of mostly common southerners) did a decent job at it. It is entirely possible and has occurred before, but nobody can be certain. I would be willing to be that the vast majority of American Servicemen would not attack the American populace in the manner in which we are discussing. I am fairly certain that many would desert and take up arms along with the populace. Even if this were not the case, the American populace could hold off the army for a relatively lengthy period of time, certainly more than the Canadian citizenry could hold of the Canadian army. There are more populace than military, and we have the luxury of an armed populace in this country (for now).

Since someone played the Hitler card already... Why is it that Hitler never took Switzerland, which had the most heavily armed civilian population in history? Why is it that every other nation followed a plan of appeasement instead of stepping in? Why do you think that things are somehow different today than ever before? What makes you think people learn from history? You sure as *DOOKIE* have not...

If you have faith in God, remember God helps those who help themselves.

If you have faith in your fellow man, you are a fool.

If you rely on your government, you are even more of a fool.

If you have faith in yourself, then you have a snowballs chance in hell.

[maxama10]

Got so caught up in all the serious business I almost forgot to come back to this one. The Guess Who have a song called "Guns, guns, guns". Unfortunately the only bits I can remember are the title being said a lot and something about "god speed, mother nature"

More serious business:

b. Do you not think that what allows gangs to function in the way they do is guns? Don't you think that if they were taken the means to dispatch somebody quickly, from some distance, possibly quietly that gang violence would die down? Or at least that would be no innocent bystanders?

Well, there is this thing called the black market, as mentioned. Not all the guns are stolen from citizens. Thousands and thousands of weapons are stolen from the militaries of many different countries, including your own.

So good luck convincing Russia and their sattelites to stop producing the AKs that often end up in the hands of those who would use them for evil.

Remember that movie, Lord of War?

The Amnesty research shows that G-8 countries--the United States, Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Canada, Japan, and Russia--account for more than 80 percent of global supplies of arms. Six of them are among the top 10 arms exporters in a trade valued at about $28 billion a year.

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0111-05.htm

I'm not saying my country isn't also guilty, but more to the point of I would expect most guns used in crimes come from other sources than (stolen) private citizens.


Also, the thing about Hitler, once people realized what was going on the Nazi's power in Germany prevented the citizens from doing anything out of fear. Even when they were armed they were still too afraid to rebel. Who would you have trusted? What about your family? What would you have done?

Most Germans are very happy we liberated them from the Nazis.

-Max

[CoolHand]

Well said. Yes, I am confident that the majority of voters has picked a party who is in the best interest of the people. If it isn't, there are many political avenues before a rebellion of sorts would be considered.

There are also numerous avenues available here too, do not assume that I mean armed revolt is the first thing we think of if an election doesn't go our way. That's an asinine assumption at the least, and willfully obtuse at the worst. Either way, it's a pointless thing to point out, unless you honestly think Americans are so brutish and simple minded as to be unable to fathom another recourse besides violence.

Do you seriously think that other countries wouldn't step in if there were some sort of genocide or something against the will and well-being of the general populous?

In a word: You're damned right I think nobody would step in.

Speaking for me personally, I find it to be irresponsible to depend on others to assure my own well being. So, it logically follows that I would also find it irresponsible to depend on other countries (who may or may not give a crap about us) to step in and stop genocide or whatnot, should things go all pear shaped.

The UN and other countries in no way "have your back" when it comes to mass killings or state sponsored ethnic cleansing. Want evidence of this? Ever hear of a country name Rwanda? There's 800,000-1,000,000 Tutsis folks over there that would agree with me, had they not been systematically slaughtered in a three month period, during which the UN did everything it could to NOT get involved. They succeeded too. They drug their feet long enough that everyone that was going to be killed was already dead . . . . . then they sent troops to help doze the bodies into big pits.

Yeah, great help the UN and other countries (the US included) were in stopping that genocide.

And do you really think that, if America were in the same circumstance, that the general populous of America could really hold off the army? That is, of course, assuming the army did what they were told, but they are human and more than capable of seeing that they are only harming the country.

It's not a matter of deciding whether we could win or not. It's a matter of it being a founding principal of this nation. I don't want to fight a war against the federal government, (who the hell would?) but the fact remains that the ability to do so is a basic tenant of our country's founding. It's not for someone to come along and decide one day "Hey! It's impossible to win a war against the government, therefore the second amendment is null and void." It doesn't work like that, and never will.

Someone's gotta play devil's advocate. Is it not true? Does it not prove my point? I see no reason that it wasn't completely relevant.

No, it's not true. It's hardly even quasi-true. Hell, if anything, it proves MY point.

On the top, "Hitler made Germany better" seems like at least a partially true statement, but when you stop and think about it, you realize that Hitler never did any real good for Germany. The autobahn was a good idea, but it was NOT Hitler or the Nazi's idea. They continued to fund it, but it was not conceived of or it's implementation begun by them.

Hitler and the Nazis united Germany against a common internal foe, created for the role by propaganda and enabled by latent human racism and urging from on high. By giving the people someone to direct their hate at, Hitler was able to unify the country and get pretty much whatever he wanted done. Didn't hurt anything that dissenters were usually beaten or killed outright. It's easy to have political change when you can simply kill anyone who doesn't agree with you. How is that possible? A disarmed populace that yearned for change so much that they were willing to ignore the tyranny they were marching head long into.

More serious business:

b. Do you not think that what allows gangs to function in the way they do is guns? Don't you think that if they were taken the means to dispatch somebody quickly, from some distance, possibly quietly that gang violence would die down? Or at least that would be no innocent bystanders?

Do you think that gangs will somehow begin to respect the law if you ban all firearms? If so, why?

Banning guns will not remove them from the world. If they exist anywhere, then criminals will have them. There is big money in moving illicit products, it's called the black market, and it really does exist. Hell, what do you think propped up the Russian economy for so many years? It's illegal to produce knock off products and import them into the US, but somehow million upon millions of counterfeit products get sold here every year. They aren't being produced here, they are totally illegal and banned from importation, but somehow they're all over the place. How can that be?

Now, revisit the above, but substitute "Gun" for "Counterfeit Product", and you will probably see where I'm going with this. If guns were banned, and every gun in America evaporated tomorrow, there'd be new ones for sale to criminals the day after that. Laws in no way effect those who choose not to abide by them. It's just that simple.

Hell, if every gun on earth evaporated tomorrow, someone would start working on a design to build a new one the day after. You can build a gun out of household items, with hand tools. You will never, ever be able to totally remove guns from any society. The only people that gun laws disarm are the folks who follow the laws in the first place. Think about it.

[drg]

There are 2 aspects to the gun control debate that most discussions fail to reconcile, availability and culture. Fact is, availability DOES indeed have a huge impact on gun violence and crime. You get rid of most of the guns in a given area, there won't be much gun crime. Japan is a good example of this.

HOWEVER such a situation cannot arise without a culture that accepts it, one that places cooperation and societal unity in high regard. Places where conflict and competition are part of the culture will have trouble with such a proposition.

Independence is ingrained into American culture by the very fact of its founding. The 2nd amendment enshrines guns themselves into law such that it will be next to impossible to remove the individual right to own them.

This means that America will always 1) have plenty of guns and 2) have a widespread mindset that encourages their use. Politicians should probably accept that and look for ways to work WITH it rather than against it.