Gun control

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 6 2003 @ 04:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Militiaman
Leveller what's your problem with people in the UK being allowed to bear arms? Weapons control in your area dates back to medieval times when Scots/Irishmen weren't allowed to carry weapons unless in the armed forces, so that they couldn't uprise against the tyrannical monarchy. It's nobody's business except for there's if they have a gun- stop interfering with others' lives.



Well, I guess I'll reply to you even though you seem to be clearly looking for a fight rather than a debate.

Firstly. "Medievil times". It's 2003 now. Move with the times.

Secondly. "It's nobody's business except for there's if they have a gun- stop interfering with others' lives."
It is my business if some retard is pointing a gun at me.
My society knows nothing of guns. It doesn't know how to handle them. Dunblane and Hungerford proved that.

Thirdly. "Scots and Irishmen". Who cares? If it's a dig at the monarchy it's a poor one.



I guess you have to live here to appreciate our attitude to weapons. It's OK for somebody from the other side of the world to say that guns are cool, but what the hell do you know about my country. I mean. REALLY KNOW.
Have you ever walked over here on a dark night in a poor neighbourhood here? Have you ever met anyone here who has been a victim of guncrime here? Have you ever met somebody (other than a kid) who advocates arming our people or our police?

The answer is no. You don't know my country. Although I've been to the US and Canada about 20 times, I can say that I don't really know how your systems work. To say otherwise is arrogant.

I'm a Brit. I've lived in the UK almost all my life. My jobs have been the kind where physical danger from other people were and are higher than most other professions.

I don't fear my fellow countrymen. No way am I naive. I justy know that arming UK citizens would end in disaster.


As for the NRA article. It doesn't educate me. It offends me. A US political body has no right to tell me how to live my life.
Think about it.




posted on Jun, 6 2003 @ 05:11 PM
link   
I meant no offence. Second the NRA is not a political body. It receives ZERO funding from the US Govt. And thirdly where did it tell you how to live your life?

I mainly wanted to show you that the UK used to have the same gun rights as the US and there were very few problems.

Hypothetically, what would you all do if Tony Blair, with the support of the military, proclaimed himself supreme ruler of Great Britain and just shot all members of parliament who opposed him? (I know it's kind of far fetched but look where the US is going right now
)

You say that you have no reason to fear other brits yet your violent crime rate is skyrocketing. What about those criminals that shot those teenagers a couple months ago? If an armed citizen was there they may have prevented the whole ordeal.

Oh well, I tried but I guess the cultural devide is just too great now that you have gotten so used to not having these rights anymore.

Once again, no offence.



posted on Jun, 6 2003 @ 05:19 PM
link   
Dude. I never took offence from you. I took it from the article because it proclaims to understand my country and it's people.
I'd argue as to wether the NRA is political but I'll save that for another day.


See, Hitler is gone. Stalin is gone. The threat of an invasion is just not there any more. And even if some bigger power were to try it's luck, we still have our island mentality, nuclear weapons and a damn good army.

We have never had the same mindset as the NAs. We weren't born out of rebellion. Yes, there was an invasion in 1066 and a civil war 400 years ago but in relative times we in the UK don't have the same view of our governments as some of you guys do.

No we don't trust our politicians, but we don't believe they're out to get us either. The thought of Blair declaring himself as supreme ruler is a scary one but to tell the truth, I can't think of anything more unlikely.

We have a monarchy to keep our government in check. The Queen is boss of the army. What she says goes in the eyes of the military. No government could ever wrest our army away from the Queen (and therefore the people) and could therefore never take away our freedom.

Tradition counts for a lot over here. We're kept in check by our British reserve. Our history.

Guns in civilian hands aren't part of our history whatever the NRA would like us to believe.



posted on Jun, 6 2003 @ 05:29 PM
link   
It's not cultural divide, it's a government agent trying to make people feel wrong and guilty about owning firearms.

Oh, and the whole "it won't happen to me". Uh, yeah, took me about ten minutes to stop laughing at the ignorance in that simple statement. It will, you are a person living in the real world, sooner or later you will be robbed. On the street, home, or work. Working a Sweet Feed had a couple break ins. Guess what? Second we posted a "We are Armed" sign, no more break ins.

Been robbed several times, twice at home, once here at my apartment. At home nothing stolen cause my dad owns several guns. First had a screwdriver, my dad's 12 gauge scared him off. Second time, guy had nothing, was a freind of my dads. He no longer is.

Here was simple. Some moron broke in by using fire escape. He also used it to get out when I walked out of my bedroom with my 9mm I keep inbetween the mattress and box spring.

All three times guns saved money and heart ache.

Oh, and in England, they have higher crime rate then Switzerland, and Switzerland has far more guns. In fact, Switzerland has lowest crime rate, and probably most guns per person. Makes you think.



posted on Jun, 6 2003 @ 05:36 PM
link   
Doesn't make me think.
Statistics mean nothing.


Yeah, you need a gun. Keep it.


But I don't.


As for being a government agent? You're the dude who pays the license fees, the taxes, the firearms manufacturers - basically money to yuor government to defend yourself from the very people that they should be protecting you from. They owe you. You don't owe them.

Government agent? Yup. That's you dude. You're doing your government's job for them.



posted on Jun, 6 2003 @ 05:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fry2
I bet you'll never guess where I stand

I agree with TC mostly. I do think that a certain amount of training should be mandatory before being able to own a firearm including a background check for criminal behaviour or psychological problems.
Registration on the other hand is a VERY bad idea. If the Govt. knows who is the best armed when/if the militia becomes necessary to retake the country, then they know exactly where to go first. (let's hope it never comes to that)


Training should not be an issue. I say, should not, but I know that in reality it is. No child should grow up without a father or an uncle teaching him how to shoot. Heck, even a mother or an aunt; my ex-wife as well as my current wife can put a round through a gnats arse at 300 meters.

Unfortunately, with society being whimpened as it is, and the fact that it is probably a little more difficult for a big city dweller to find a place to shoot some cans, people aren't trained as they should be.

As far as an earlier poster suggesting that we should purchase a license, I say, Nuts!"

A license is permission, issued to the licensor to the licensee, so that the licensee may do that which is otherwise illegal or unlawful. You might want to reread the second amendment, and then look at the definition of "infringed" Your idea is contrary to the God-given liberties recognized and protected by the documentation written by the Founding Fathers.

Most states have some sort of licensing, though. In the "State of" Alabama, for example, you'd be led to believe you must purchase a permit to carry your sidearm in a concealed manner. This is not violating the constitution, although it would in Alabama state.



posted on Jun, 6 2003 @ 06:26 PM
link   
Constitutionally we should not need such things. Realistically, as you said, we do need some oversight. I would suggest a third party qualification authority such as the NRA to do the training and certification.
Note: I did NOT say the L word


Unfortunately here in Connecticut you need to jump through hoops for a concealed carry permit. I find that odd considering I could do much more damage with my long guns than with my sidearms.

Furthermore, I COMPLETELY agree with the father/uncle part of your post. I was taught at the age of 4 how to handle a firearm by my father and 2 uncles. There are some lessons you never forget and that was definitely one of them.



posted on Jun, 6 2003 @ 07:07 PM
link   


Originally posted by Leveller
Firstly. "Medievil times". It's 2003 now. Move with the times.

Secondly. "It's nobody's business except for there's if they have a gun- stop interfering with others' lives."
It is my business if some retard is pointing a gun at me.
My society knows nothing of guns. It doesn't know how to handle them. Dunblane and Hungerford proved that.

Thirdly. "Scots and Irishmen". Who cares? If it's a dig at the monarchy it's a poor one.


First, just because policies were founded a long time ago doesn't make them any less evil. And you left out the kilt/tartan, bagpipes ban that I spoke of. How was that policy justified? The KKK was founded over 100 years ago, and I'd consider that to be a long period of time. That doesn't make it any less evil.

Second, you say your society knows nothing of guns. That's the reason so many gun owners are against socialism. People like you believe that society's lack of responsibility should decide whether or not a gun owner is a criminal. Society's ignorance causes problems for the gun owners even though they've done nothing wrong. Criminals going on a shooting rampage is a bit different than a moral, responsible citizen owning a firearm just in case a criminal invades his home or the government imposes martial law. What gives you the idea that if you get rid of gun control "some retard" is going to point a weapon at you? FYI, that's a criminal offence in Canada, so I'm assuming the same can be said for the UK. If "some retard" points a firearm at you, they will be charged with a criminal offence. Also, "some retard" should not decide whether or not a morally decent citizen can own a firearm. Your philosophy seems to be that if one person commits a crime, punish everybody.

Third, you don't care about Scots and Irishmen, which demonstrates your ignorance. "Who cares?" Read the poem, "The Hangman."




Originally posted by Leveller

We have a monarchy to keep our government in check. The Queen is boss of the army. What she says goes in the eyes of the military. No government could ever wrest our army away from the Queen (and therefore the people) and could therefore never take away our freedom.



Having your country controlled by one person is freedom? The queen keeps your government in check with the military. Nobody could win a rebellion against the military. Martial law, or damned close to it? "The Queen (and therefore the people)." The queen IS government. And I believe you're referring to Parliament when you say government, so I'll straighten something out for you. The people in Parliament are elected by the people for the most part. The queen is not. The politicians in parliament represent the people, so if the monarch puts their power in check, the monarch is putting the peoples' power in check, so according to you, the people put the peoples' power in check since the monarch who is born into power no matter how tyrannical they are somehow represents you?



posted on Jun, 6 2003 @ 07:12 PM
link   
Militia, give it up, obviously the "queen" has too much control over her "subjects". Those within a "colony" can't see more than the "queen" allows. Openmindedness blown out the _..



posted on Jun, 6 2003 @ 07:23 PM
link   
There is the reason for my very first post.

I have no business telling a citizen of another nation how they ought to lead their lives or allow the government to rule them. If it doesn't affect me and mine why should I meddle? Why should anyone else?

Brit friend, if you wish to throw all your weapons away, and if all your countrymen want to do the same, who am I to say otherwise?



posted on Jun, 6 2003 @ 07:31 PM
link   
Hehe Advisor- This I'll offend: The queen. Anyway I live in what some like to call the commonwealth, although I'd like it to be a Republic. Forget Iraq, that's a phony war. I'm asking you to liberate us from the queen's martial law. Of course it might be offensive to some religions as certain Brits seem to worship her as a God, thinking she's all powerful, flawless, and out to help them (the American Revolution against the monarchy was completely groundless).



posted on Jun, 6 2003 @ 07:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Militiaman
Hehe Advisor- This I'll offend: The queen. Anyway I live in what some like to call the commonwealth, although I'd like it to be a Republic. Forget Iraq, that's a phony war. I'm asking you to liberate us from the queen's martial law. Of course it might be offensive to some religions as certain Brits seem to worship her as a God, thinking she's all powerful, flawless, and out to help them (the American Revolution against the monarchy was completely groundless).


I accept your request, my passport is active and awaiting use. Just send me the travel details via u2u and we can discuss this more directly. Of course I won't accept money, I'm not a merc. I hope your not pulling my chain I could use a vacation.


Oh, nm your a canook, I live about 8 hrs away, just send me and address and I'll drive up from Michigan.


[Edited on 7-6-2003 by ADVISOR]



posted on Jun, 6 2003 @ 07:54 PM
link   
Before you get all fired up, how can we, those who live under martial law (even though it has long ago simmered to martial rule) save someone else from the same fate? We haven't been the Republic to which you refer in over a hundred years.

First, the doctor must heal himself. Instead, years of dumbing down is lessening that chance of it ever happening.



posted on Jun, 6 2003 @ 07:54 PM
link   
Hahahaha. Go for the queen. That's how you liberate. Eliminate the disease, not the symptoms. God bless America- my uncle bought an AK 47 and forgot about it for 10 years, leaving it unopened and becoming surprised when he found it stashed in his attic.



posted on Jun, 6 2003 @ 07:57 PM
link   
Hey Advisor are you in the Michigan Militia? Unorganized that is, not National Guard. BTW please u2u me if you have time- I have a request from one right winger to another, but it'd be best not to have socialists read it.



posted on Jun, 6 2003 @ 08:27 PM
link   
He doesn't have to give it up.
This is my last reply on the subject.
He doesn't understand my country, it's society, it's economy, it's people or it's psychology and just keeps spouting crap that's relevant to his country.

I've never claimed that you should give your guns up. I have very deep and well thought out beliefs why guns are not good for the UK. But your country is different. I don't know it. I've been there and heard people talk and I've chatted on the net about firearms, but I don't know your society's psyche and guns are a part of that psyche.
The vast majority of the people in the UK feel the same way as I do. It's as much a part of our national identity not to have guns now as is the opposite for you.

We don't have the space or temperament for guns. Our society is smaller than the US, yet we are crammed in a lot closer together on our little island. Physically and mentally. And we are a very, very, violent people. We have always been at war. Look at our history. When we had guns we were always fighting overseas, they were a necessity. Our population needed training. Most of the people with guns weren't using them on their countrymen though and when they returned home they returned to a white society which had hardly any immigrants in it who could challenge white authority.

Our society has been without firearms for too long. We wouldn't be able to adapt to their power again. In that time our ethnic makeup has changed massively. With no
conventional, overseas enemy to fight we would end up turning them on ourselves. Not just black against black, or white against white. We are very integrated here. We whites don't want our black and Asian people to have guns - we don't trust them with guns. In the past we used guns against them when we took thier countries away from them. We haven't forgotten that. We fear them. We see guns as a tool that they and others can use to hurt us more than we're being hurt at the moment than if they're legalised and we have access to them. We know that if we were given guns to defend ourselves we wouldn't be able to resist using them. And if there is one thing us Brits are good at doing - it's killing people. Our present society is close and multicultural - it would be a massacre. So we suffer our losses because we see the alternative as civil war.

We are frightened of guns. To us that is the right way to feel. To you it isn't.

No statistics nor propaganda or maybe even solid facts from overseas would deter our fear of guns in the UK. We look at the US and say "Damn. How many people shot that year?" Their number of gundead is so huge that it scares us enough to want to keep guns away. We believe we would go the same way. We don't see ourselves as being in a position where guns are enough of a deterrant to crime for the disadvantages that we will get back in return. We look at the US and believe that we are so closely tied to their culture and (they to ours) that if we get hold of firearms we will follow their path and there will be shootouts everywhere - our ethnic minorities live amongst us. Then we look at our houses, our streets, our towns and villages, our cities. We think "do we really want to hear the echo of gunfire in them?"




I'm not saying guns are wrong. They are wrong for here. I believe I could handle a gun. I don't believe that my society could though.
It's not equipped physically or emotionally to take the risk of having them in our midst.

We can live with our present echoes of gunfire. When those echoes become too much who knows what we'll do? But by trying to keep guns out now we believe that we can preserve ourselves for the forseeable future.


I see US foreign policy similar to our society here at the moment. Try to take the guns away from everyone else and leave only the policeman armed.


[Edited on 7-6-2003 by Leveller]



posted on Jun, 6 2003 @ 08:34 PM
link   
You swallowed the anti Canada/ Queen troll quite well.
I have nothing whatsoever against Canada (in fact I love it there) and those weren't personal views. I decided to bait you to show you the glass house.

As for the Queen. I couldn't give a crap about her. I follow the throne. Not the person sitting on it.
And you dudes need to kick her out in my opinion. I can't see why other countries still have her as a figurehead.
I gave up long ago being offended by foreigners attitudes to the Queen. I can see their point of view.

The throne works for England though. And that's why I follow it.



posted on Jun, 6 2003 @ 10:33 PM
link   
Leveller, I haven't spent anymore time in your country than being laid over in Heathrow. I know it is an island, and I can imagine that makes for small room, stacked people and claustrophobia. I imagine if it were me crammed in a city, it'd be best for all concerned that I not be armed, either. People are great - from a distance!

On the same hand, because the area isn't as expansive, I'd think that an entire population belonging to the butterknife Brigade could really push the government into rethinking stupidity if you all decided to put your foot down, do you think?



posted on Jun, 6 2003 @ 11:12 PM
link   
Nice reply and I must say well written.
I'll digest that overnight and get back to you in the morning (afternoon
).



posted on Jun, 6 2003 @ 11:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Militiaman
Hey Advisor are you in the Michigan Militia? Unorganized that is, not National Guard. BTW please u2u me if you have time- I have a request from one right winger to another, but it'd be best not to have socialists read it.


I never claimed to be in the "Militia", of course those who are have called me family. But I never claimed it. And just to make things clear, since the National Guard became the official militia, those in the militia would rather you call them "Irregulars", I think its fitting.



Originally posted by Leveller
And you dudes need to kick her out in my opinion.


SWEET!
I now have permission to invade canada and whatever country

...
Ok, perhaps I can start a new trend. Volunteer Realignments of leaders.

Guess thats why I'm the ADVISOR.


[Edited on 7-6-2003 by ADVISOR]






top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join