Send Message
Weather | Buy&Sell | Forums |  |
Weather | Buy & Sell | Gallery | Forums | |
I will believe that Americans need to own weapons when, the next time some nutter starts to spray bullets at a school/mall/cinema/office building, everybody shoots back and stops him.
Carrying a gun to prevent someone shooting you is about as useful as carrying an axe to prevent tree branches falling on your head.
That si why I posted the media guide to the AR15 as it shows the crap they go on with
Let alone the need to have firepower (the ability to provide supressing as well as accurate fire) able to match your enemy. The second Amendment is to ensure the peoples freedom, at anytime necessary in the future, from a goverment over stepping its bounds (as happened prior to the war of independance. You hope you would never have to use guns in a fight for your freedoms, but need to have them just in case. This is of course the American perspective.
I still remember seeing video footage of the poor people of Kosovo (or close to there) walking off to defend themselves from the Serb army with their double barrel shotguns. Not to much effect or course, and you could argue they should have surrended....but then we know what happened under Serb control. 
Both correct I believe. Though I think he was comparing .223rem/5.56x45 and 7.62x39 'assault rifle' rounds, to the .308win/7.62x51 and .303 (not generally considered assault rifle rounds, although I think the Sig's/G3's might blur the lines). Maybe the argument could have substitutes such as .243, .270win and .300winmag, etc.
Waco-style and racist? Not that I've read much about who was involved at Waco, but racism is a good reason to think about self defence issues for one's family (not needed so much in this country thankfully).
edit: beat me to the post 
going off on a slight tangent here- regarding the mess at WAKO a few years ago with that David Koresh bloke.
After the shooting stopped, the smoke cleared, and the investigation was done and dusted- it was found that koresh and his mob had done nothing illegal to warant the BATF and federal govt. to stomp them into the dirt.
The allegations of child abuse, illegal weapons dealing etc were found to be just that- dodgy allegations, but the feds could not afford to be seen to back down as they would have lost face...so the federal steamroller kept on rolling until the job was over- shooting from helicopters (later denying it- but the bullet holes were found to be fired from above where there were choppers hovering), pumping lethal amounts of tear gas into sealed buildings- and not letting the occupants out, then they went and destroyed as much evidence as they could- pushing wreckage and shot-up vehicles over with bulldozers and tanks.
Recently, the USA federal govt. arranged for thousands of weapons to be supplied to mexican criminals- supposedly in an effort to track how weapons smuggling was being organised. but they forgot to tell the mexican govt.
then these firearms started showing up in the hands of drug smuggling operations crossing the border into the USA- and US border patrol blokes were killed by these weapons.
Now Obama's boys are trying to hush it all up!
I always thought "Well regulated" mean't well equipped and trained. Training being the part you can do when needed. That is if you don't view what shooters do now (ie: hunting, target shooting, plinking) as a form of training. From what I've read a militia group is formed from the general population, and is only formed when the need arises.
It does also say "...right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." for the very purpose of being able to successfully form militia groups (doesn't work so well if they are unarmed, which is the point the 2nd Amendment addresses).
You know what? These debates always go waaaay off topic. I think it's simple. Very, very, blatantly obviously simple:
More guns = more people being killed with guns.
More smoking = more people dying from smoking related issues
More cars = more deaths from car crashes
More wind = more chance of sport related injury
More surfing = more chance of being eaten by shark
etc. etc. etc.
When you have more of something dangerous or "dangerous" there is more danger.
Simple. Very blatantly, obviously, simple.
I like the map of the world.
Most of the ones with light green (low ownership) are the ones with political instability, dictators, refugees fleeing oppression in the last 20 or 30yrs..
Interesting - all the sh!t countries none of us would want to live it.
That si why I posted the media guide to the AR15 as it shows the crap they go on with
On the other side of the coin you could then argue why the crime/murder rate isn't the same throughout the USA? 
From my perspective, I think they should bring in a federal firearms licence with associated safety course and background criminal/medical checks. In theory I would then say firearm registration to prevent guns being channeled to the black market, BUT this systems use by anti-gun groups/governments in other countries to restrict the rights of firearms owners is well documented and therefore I would class as too risky to the peoples freedom. And considering the saturation of the USA with firearms its arguable it would do any good, considering its predominant target are law abiding citizens. Maybe instead of an individuals firearm collection in detail, just the number of guns they have bought/have in total (maybe even divide this into longarms and handguns).
In the USA, as is the case here, improving crime rates (total) appears to be improving the demographic of a population. Watching the state of housing and living in London, I can't blame some desperate people turning to crime in order to get by/try to attain some degree of improved living (as opposed to crim's who conduct crime to get rich, no sympathy for them).
I think the discussion is not as concerned with gang violence, or even robberies.
It is about how easily people can go on killing sprees with a cache of assault rifles and shotguns, how easily they were able to purchase or steal them.
Why?
You feel you could protect yourself and family from some thug/thugs who come into your home some random night, are you willing to bet the lives of your family members on it? How many times times can you afford to be wrong (I hope the answer is 0)?
It may never happen, but if it did and you failed to protect them because you were KO or stabbed first, how would you feel?
The video I posted earlier in the thread is, what I thought, a good example of my arguments validity, let alone what we hear on the news every week.
