0
Nataly

Who needs an AR-15???

Recommended Posts

Bignugget

******civilized nations have all sat down and decided allowing people




(looking under the hood at the engine)
"well, THERE's yer problem"



sucks for you...... living in a country where the people decide what the government gets to do, and not the other way around


All in the eye of the beholder.

I'll take the government deciding that RUSHMC doesn't get a gun, and a 1/4 of the homicide rate we have now.


You vote for guns and homicide. Different strokes.

Too late
I have many
Along with the tools to build some and reload

And to date, all the guns I own and have maybe built, have all turned up defective. Because as of today, none have ever put a round down range into human. I hope they stay broken but, like having a spare tire to fix a flat, I have the supplies to take care of some situations should I have time to prepare.
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dmcoco84

Quote

Without the 2nd amendment, none of you guys have guns.



Wrong... I have already addressed this; above and my past thread.

First amendment is also not necessary for Freedom of Speech.

You seem unable to be grasping the concept of Limited Government.



He is trolling
Have fun with him:)
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bignugget

***His age and location don't matter. He's just another one f those folks who think they should be the one to decide what decisions you are allowed to make, and what's just too much for you, regardless of what the law may be. He prefers domination by others (so long as they agree with him) over the idea of free will and individual rights and their attendant possible misuse or abuse.



You sure feel the need to attack the person opining much more than the opinion itself.

Is that because you were raised improperly?

It could matter... if he told me he was in his 40s and lived in Vermont, I would not be the least bit surprised.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bignugget


Otherwise we would be like almost every other 1st world nation. Nice tight gun control, TENS OF MILLIONS less guns, and 1/4 the intentional homicide rate.

You know why? Because other civilized nations have all sat down and decided allowing people like RUSHMC, Regulator, Turtlespeed, and Gravitymaster to own a means to kill lots of people is not the wisest choice of action.



OTOH, those civilized first world nations denied their citizens general freedom for another century, and this last century started 2 world wars that killed over 100 million people. It takes America 100 years just to kill 1 million people with guns.

Most of them still don't enjoy the protection of the 1st Amendment, either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dmcoco84

Quote

Without the 2nd amendment, none of you guys have guns.



Wrong... I have already addressed this; above and my past thread.

First amendment is also not necessary for Freedom of Speech.

You seem unable to be grasping the concept of Limited Government.




What about my opinion makes you think I don't grasp the concept of "Limited Government"

I simply don't agree the government serves no role in personal life.

I firmly believe the government has a RESPONSIBILITY to provide laws and protections for everyone, such that I don't have to worry about being murdered at a rate 4x higher than the UK.

In my opinion one of the fastest ways to bring our homicide rate in line with that of Europe, is to bring the number of guns in line with that of Europe.

I see this as a perfect example of where the government should be working for the people.

I simply do NOT agree that the governments role is to sit back and let any random asshole do whatever he pleases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bignugget

***

Quote

Without the 2nd amendment, none of you guys have guns.



Wrong... I have already addressed this; above and my past thread.

First amendment is also not necessary for Freedom of Speech.

You seem unable to be grasping the concept of Limited Government.




What about my opinion makes you think I don't grasp the concept of "Limited Government"

I simply don't agree the government serves no role in personal life.

I firmly believe the government has a RESPONSIBILITY to provide laws and protections for everyone, such that I don't have to worry about being murdered at a rate 4x higher than the UK.

In my opinion one of the fastest ways to bring our homicide rate in line with that of Europe, is to bring the number of guns in line with that of Europe.

I see this as a perfect example of where the government should be working for the people.

I simply do NOT agree that the governments role is to sit back and let any random asshole do whatever he pleases.

I can only conclude from this that you think, you alone, or you that have the same mind set, are able to tell everyone else what is good for them,, because they obviously don't know and without you, they would be completely lost.

Personal responsibility is out the door. You would live in a Nanny State and rejoice in it.
I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
turtlespeed



Personal responsibility is out the door.




Yes.


That is why we have 4x the homicide rate of the UK.

That is why we have so many people 'milking' the system.

Etc.

Etc.

Personal responsibility is in fact, long gone. As such, we need some grown ups to tell people what is OK and what is not OK.


Surprisingly we are one of the last 1st world countries to have this issue still outstanding.

Europe, Japan, etc have already addressed this problem, and greatly reduced it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bignugget

***

Personal responsibility is out the door.




Yes.


That is why we have 4x the homicide rate of the UK.

That is why we have so many people 'milking' the system.

Etc.

Etc.

Personal responsibility is in fact, long gone. As such, we need some grown ups to tell people what is OK and what is not OK.


Surprisingly we are one of the last 1st world countries to have this issue still outstanding.

Europe, Japan, etc have already addressed this problem, and greatly reduced it.


Nice Fantasy...

Quote


#10 Despite the very strict ban on guns in the UK, the overall rate of violent crime in the UK is about 4 times higher than it is in the United States. In one recent year, there were 2,034 violent crimes per 100,000 people in the UK. In the United States, there were only 466 violent crimes per 100,000 people during that same year. Do we really want to be more like the UK?

#11 The UK has approximately 125 percent more rape victims per 100,000 people each year than the United States does.

#12 The UK has approximately 133 percent more assault victims per 100,000 people each year than the United States does.

#13 The UK has the fourth highest burglary rate in the EU.

#14 The UK has the second highest overall crime rate in the EU.
- See more at: http://www.thedailysheeple.com/18-little-known-gun-facts-that-prove-that-guns-make-us-safer_082013#sthash.9oLFXFYp.dpu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bignugget

***His age and location don't matter. He's just another one f those folks who think they should be the one to decide what decisions you are allowed to make, and what's just too much for you, regardless of what the law may be. He prefers domination by others (so long as they agree with him) over the idea of free will and individual rights and their attendant possible misuse or abuse.



You sure feel the need to attack the person opining much more than the opinion itself.

Bullshit. I've been knocking down your ridiculous points wherever I see them. Claiming that I'm attacking you personally because I'm attacking your views is like claiming that I'm personally attacking people who think the earth is flat when I tell them they're wrong. Grow up.

You really don't appear to understand limited government. The bill of rights was written to acknowledge existing rights and codify their protection into the constitution. The amendments should not be read as granting rights. They should be read as recognizing individual rights and as strictly and specifically restricting government.

If you need clarification for what constitutes a personal attack, see below:
Quote

Is that because you were raised improperly?


witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
beowulf

******

Personal responsibility is out the door.




Yes.


That is why we have 4x the homicide rate of the UK.

That is why we have so many people 'milking' the system.

Etc.

Etc.

Personal responsibility is in fact, long gone. As such, we need some grown ups to tell people what is OK and what is not OK.


Surprisingly we are one of the last 1st world countries to have this issue still outstanding.

Europe, Japan, etc have already addressed this problem, and greatly reduced it.


Nice Fantasy...

Quote


#10 Despite the very strict ban on guns in the UK, the overall rate of violent crime in the UK is about 4 times higher than it is in the United States. In one recent year, there were 2,034 violent crimes per 100,000 people in the UK. In the United States, there were only 466 violent crimes per 100,000 people during that same year. Do we really want to be more like the UK?

#11 The UK has approximately 125 percent more rape victims per 100,000 people each year than the United States does.

#12 The UK has approximately 133 percent more assault victims per 100,000 people each year than the United States does.

#13 The UK has the fourth highest burglary rate in the EU.

#14 The UK has the second highest overall crime rate in the EU.
- See more at: http://www.thedailysheeple.com/18-little-known-gun-facts-that-prove-that-guns-make-us-safer_082013#sthash.9oLFXFYp.dpu




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate



UK ----1.2


US ---- 4.8


What about my post was unclear when I said

"
That is why we have 4x the homicide rate of the UK. "

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
http://violentdeathproject.com/

I am just googling around looking for some stats to back you guys up.

http://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/cause-of-death/violence/by-country/

Still looking.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

http://www.mapsofworld.com/world-top-ten/countries-with-highest-reported-crime-rates.html


Well shit, time for lunch and another cup o coffee.

I will keep looking when I am done eating. In the meantime maybe you guys can debunk all those stats, and find some that show the opposite?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
http://people.duke.edu/~gnsmith/articles/myths.htm

what you have been suckered into
Quote

These editorial opinions expressed by two of the nations most widely read newspapers represent the absolute extreme in the firearms controversy: that no citizen can be trusted to own a firearm. It is the product of a series of myths which--through incessant repetition--have been mistaken for truth. These myths are being exploited to generate fear and mistrust of the 60-65 million decent and responsible Americans who own firearms. Yet, as this document proves, none of these myths will stand up under the cold light of fact.


"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bignugget

***

Quote

Without the 2nd amendment, none of you guys have guns.



Wrong... I have already addressed this; above and my past thread.

First amendment is also not necessary for Freedom of Speech.

You seem unable to be grasping the concept of Limited Government.




What about my opinion makes you think I don't grasp the concept of "Limited Government"

I simply don't agree the government serves no role in personal life.

I firmly believe the government has a RESPONSIBILITY to provide laws and protections for everyone, such that I don't have to worry about being murdered at a rate 4x higher than the UK.

In my opinion one of the fastest ways to bring our homicide rate in line with that of Europe, is to bring the number of guns in line with that of Europe.

I see this as a perfect example of where the government should be working for the people.

I simply do NOT agree that the governments role is to sit back and let any random asshole do whatever he pleases.

What you just wrote here, proves flat out, you do not understand Limited Government.

If you are not simply trolling, what you just wrote is absurd... and you are also confusing the things that actually are your opinions, with Constitutional Truths.

Read this: DEFINED: Small and Limited Government

Then read what I wrote, read what you wrote before it... and then re-read what you last wrote:

Then I'll continue to respond, if you make coherent statements, or state that you don't want the US Constitution, you want a national government whose scope of influence has no bounds; the exact opposite of the Republic those old guys gave us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is all related

Quote

National violent crime rates that soared for 30 years from the early 1960s began to decrease markedly since 1993. Last December the FBI reported that murder and other violent crime rates fell again by 6.4% during the first half of 2011 compared with the same period in 2010. A Gallup poll indicates that “Americans’ preference regarding gun laws is generally that the government enforce existing laws more strictly and not pass new laws.”

Caroline Brewer of the anti-gun Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence has reported that “The research we’ve seen indicates fewer and fewer people owning more and more guns.” Yet one can only wonder where they are getting that information. In reality, public support for personal gun ownership is growing. According to Steve Sanetti, president of the National Shooting Sports Foundation, a trade group that represents about 7,000 firearms manufacturers and related companies, in 1959 some 70% of the American public favored handgun bans, whereas today that number has flipped. This support is reflected in the marketplace. Sanetti observes that the $4.1 billion gun industry “has had nineteen months of growth in an otherwise anemic economy.”

Recognizing these positive trends, most states now issue permits allowing qualified law-abiding people to legally carry handguns outside their homes. Unprecedented numbers are becoming licensed to do so, now totaling an estimated 10 million Americans, contributing, in turn, to a dramatic growth in gun sales.



It is a shame you favor higher crime rates

http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2012/02/21/disarming-the-myths-promoted-by-the-gun-control-lobby/
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dmcoco84

******

Quote

Without the 2nd amendment, none of you guys have guns.



Wrong... I have already addressed this; above and my past thread.

First amendment is also not necessary for Freedom of Speech.

You seem unable to be grasping the concept of Limited Government.




What about my opinion makes you think I don't grasp the concept of "Limited Government"

I simply don't agree the government serves no role in personal life.

I firmly believe the government has a RESPONSIBILITY to provide laws and protections for everyone, such that I don't have to worry about being murdered at a rate 4x higher than the UK.

In my opinion one of the fastest ways to bring our homicide rate in line with that of Europe, is to bring the number of guns in line with that of Europe.

I see this as a perfect example of where the government should be working for the people.

I simply do NOT agree that the governments role is to sit back and let any random asshole do whatever he pleases.

What you just wrote here, proves flat out, you do not understand Limited Government.

If you are not simply trolling, what you just wrote is absurd... and you are also confusing the things that actually are your opinions, with Constitutional Truths.

Read this: DEFINED: Small and Limited Government

Then read what I wrote, read what you wrote before it... and then re-read what you last wrote:

Then I'll continue to respond, if you make coherent statements, or state that you don't want the US Constitution, you want a national government whose scope of influence has no bounds; the exact opposite of the Republic those old guys gave us.


'We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights. That among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men. '


Yes that is what I said when I posted:

" firmly believe the government has a RESPONSIBILITY to provide laws and protections for everyone, such that I don't have to worry about being murdered at a rate 4x higher than the UK. "

God granted me the right to life, and it is the governments job to do all they can to ensure that right is left to me.


What am I missing?

I don't feel this is an issue the states can resolve as individuals. The world is much smaller than it was when we formed the nation. You can't "vote with your feet" nearly as effectively. It doesn't take 2 weeks of horse travel to get to the next state and procure a weapon banned in your home state.

I feel this is something that should be handled on a national scale.

Amend the constitution. Remove the 2nd amendment, start collecting guns, and lets re-explore the issue in 50 years.


Again I grasp the concept of the federal government playing no role in personal life. I just don't agree with it when it deals with things that effect others. (I have no issue with what you do to/for/with yourself that does not effect me) I see the ability for anyone to acquire a gun as something that most definitely effects me.

If you really think I am trolling I don't know what to say to that. I take you as sincere, I believe what I have posted sincerely as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rushmc

It is a shame you favor higher crime rates



that's an unfair generalization: you can only determine that he favors: rape, assault, and burglary

not high crime in general

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rehmwa

***It is a shame you favor higher crime rates



that's an unfair generalization: you can only determine that he favors: rape, assault, and burglary

not high crime in general

Point taken
I'm sorry:$
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nataly



Paradoxically, if nobody has a gun, nobody needs a gun to be safe. .



Absolutely not true. A gun is the great equalizer. A gun is what lets a 90 lb grandma defend herself against 3 200lb intruders and keep from being raped / killed. A gun is what lets an unskilled person stay alive and drive off an assailant wielding a knife or a hammer. Taking away guns is what will drive "survival of the fittest" even more. Taking away guns is what lets the group with the most numbers, the person who's the strongest, etc. do whatever they want because the victim can't stop it. Whistles, "safe zones" and peeing on yourself won't do a damn thing, despite what some people promise.

When you get down to it, two people with guns are at their most civilized (or should be) as neither has the brute force advantage over the other. Any differences will need to be worked out peacefully, otherwise you risk a good chance of getting killed (at least, as good as killing the other guy).
You stop breathing for a few minutes and everyone jumps to conclusions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
devildog


When you get down to it, two people with guns are at their most civilized (or should be) as neither has the brute force advantage over the other. Any differences will need to be worked out peacefully, otherwise you risk a good chance of getting killed (at least, as good as killing the other guy).




MAD at work on the micro level.

An interesting thing to consider for sure. I don't think it plays out in real life as well as the nuclear version, but my buddy and I were discussing this last night and he made the same point.

You would have to go the opposite of my position, literally arm and train everyone. Make it mandatory that you learn to use a gun, and have one on you. It would make a good sliders episode for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0