It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Should Americans be unarmed?

page: 3
<< 1  2   >>

log in


posted on Apr, 29 2005 @ 04:50 PM
While I'm no fan of guns or see the need (I just loathe them sorry), I've given up the fight vs. people who own them.

Also, there have been studies that show owning a swimming pool is in fact far more dangerous than owning a gun. While I always ponder over adults who boast about all the guns they own (insecure much?), it's their perogative and they are free to do so.

posted on Apr, 30 2005 @ 01:37 PM
What the hell is an assualt weapon?

posted on May, 1 2005 @ 11:35 AM

Originally posted by menjo

#1 NO NO NO. When Canada and Australia banned firearms their crime rate sky-rocketed. Reason is that criminal no longer had anything to worry about, they know that they would never be shot at during a breaking and entering. Besides, anyone who wants a gun can get one whether you ban them or not, banning firearms only hurts the decent people who follow the rules, I mean... come on, most firearms that are used for illegal purposes were obtained illegally anyway, so why would a ban stop criminlas.

Where did you get that BS from ? Since we've had strict gunlaws here we have had NO gun massacres and very few gun murders. Quite simply for the mentally challenged gunlaws do work, if the country hasn't already been flooded.
However the US is so far gone gunlaws won't make a bit of difference, your country is awash with them, enjoy your shootings because unfortunately it is an incredibly sad fact of life over there.

THANK GOD, I live in a country where people don't think the government is out to enslave them, but then again we've always been much more informed and sensible here.

posted on May, 1 2005 @ 11:38 AM

Originally posted by Lecky

Also, there have been studies that show owning a swimming pool is in fact far more dangerous than owning a gun.

Yep, you've got to watch out for those swimming pools, they could attack you at anytime.

posted on May, 16 2005 @ 11:51 PM

Originally posted by LiquidationOfDiscrepancy
I started this topic knowing similar topics may have been brought up in the past, but I think this is a very serious issue, so I bring this issue up again. The topic to this discussion relies in the significance in your opinions, because I ask you to post your opinions, and feelings towards this subject. Below is the list of questions I ask you to answer.

1. Should all guns be banned to America citizens? If so what kind? Why or why not?

NO. WAY. No kind should be banned at all.

2.Do you think assault weapons should be legal? Why or why not?

Under the Second Amendment they're legal. What's illegal is banning them.

3.Do you think crime rate would increase, decrease, or stay at an equilibrium if guns were made illegal? Why or why not? Would you feel safer if all guns were banned? Why or why not?

Most definitely increase. If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns. If all guns were banned, I would be looking over my shoulder constantly!

4. What kind of problems in society do you think would arise if guns were banned?

Huge increase in crime rate. Look at NYC and DC for examples.

5. Do you feel safe with, or without a gun? Why or why not?

With. That way I know I have defense.

6.Do you trust in the Federal Government enough for protection without owning a gun? Why or why not?

NO WAY. In fact, the Second Amendment was written because the founding fathers foresaw a time when we might have to defend ourselves against a tyrannical government.

7. In what situation would you shoot someone?

In a nutshell, self-defense.

8.Would you shoot a stranger in your home that you felt threaten by?

Depends on what said stranger was doing. If they're robbing stuff, they can also take a bullet in the behind on their way out!

9.Should you be allowed to carry a gun wherever you go with a permit? Why or why not?

We shouldn't need permits. The Second Amendment is your gun permit.

10.Would you be willing to give up your gun, if all guns were banned? Why or why not?

If I had one, no way. If it's coming down to where guns are being banned, that means we're under a tyrannical government.

11.What kind of gun/guns do you own if any?

I personally don't have one...but it doesn't sound like a bad idea.

12.What do you feel like is the appropriate age group to own a gun?

Whenever someone can handle the responsibility and know that it isn't a toy, that it's potentially deadly.

13. Similar to question 9, should you be allowed to carry a gun with you in a bar? Why or why not?

Self-defense, and Second Amendment right.

14. Add any other comments you would like to add.

Any banning of any weapons is infringing on Second Amendment rights. I think the gummint deliberately classified some guns as "assault weapons" to justify banning some of them.

And banning guns won't prevent terrorists from getting any. A terrorist by definition is a criminal--laws banning guns are pointless!

posted on Aug, 9 2005 @ 09:18 PM
"An armed civilization is a friendly civilization."

That pretty much sums it up. I don't remember who originally said that (it wasn't me), but it speaks volumes of logic as to why Americans should remain armed. Think about it. Would a thief be so wanton about his target selection if he knew that anyone could be carrying a weapon? Would fights break out so often if people knew they could easily lose their lives over a minor dispute?

In addition to the simple logic behind that statement, remember why Americans have the Right to Bear Arms in the first place. The reason is twofold:

1) Americans are allowed (and originally urged) to own firearms in order to defend this country against attack by a foreign nation. The reasoning behind this, was that if an enemy would find resistance, not only from the military, but also from the citizenry, they would be less likely to attack, and would be more likely to be defeated in the event of an attack.

2) Americans need to be armed if the government needs to be overthrown because it no longer serves the needs of the people, and is not working according to the original intentions of the founding fathers (sound familliar, anyone?). The reasoning behind this, is that America was always intended to be a nation by the people and for the people. It was never intended to have a strong central government that served its own needs, but rather a widely distributed government that could better serve the needs of smaller portions of the population as needed. This aspect of the right to bear arms was to ensure that the people had the means to keep the government in check. Our current firearms restrictions have nullified this aspect of the right to bear arms. Unless every man, woman, and child in the US banded together to take just a single military installation, our attampts at reclaiming the government would be thwarted quickly and easilly by the better armed and better trained military.

In conclusion, yes, Americans should remain armed. It is the ability to arm ourselves that ensures our freedom. The less we are allowed to arm ourselves, the less freedom we retain.

I post this as an American who own no firearms, but believes firmly in his right to own them.

[edit on 9-8-2005 by obsidian468]

posted on Aug, 9 2005 @ 09:22 PM
I guess the real question is, can the masses really protect themselves from the government if the government decides to "turn" on us.

We def. couldn't keep them in check if the only thing we had was a shotgun, compared to a 10 megaton hydrogen bomb.

[edit on 093131p://222 by LiquidationOfDiscrepancy]

posted on Aug, 9 2005 @ 09:26 PM

obsidian468: technology as well as gun control laws have made the notion of keeping the government in check by force completely obsolete
obsidian468: in the event of an invasion, the founding fathers wanted the citizenry to be able to defend the nation along with the military
obsidian468: SO, that's part of the reason that it was stated that the government would have to be completely rebuilt 200 years after the signing of the declaration
obsidian468: because the founding fathers were wise enough to realize that the world would be a very different place after that duration

Obs, I thought the points you made were very interesting.
Hope you didn't mind me quoting you

<< 1  2   >>

log in