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.


Guns, Why do many countries not trust there citizens with them?

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in


posted on Feb, 8 2008 @ 11:13 AM
Urm, are you aware of the high rate of gun crime in the USA? Guns aren't the problem. Violence is the problem. But guns make violence easier to do. If you don't believe me, first kill someone with say a pencil, or even a hammer. It's messy and takes time. Now do it with gun. Ban all guns other than hunting weapons that are licensed and controlled.

posted on Feb, 8 2008 @ 11:52 AM
reply to post by rizla

Actually a pencil is a very clean method to kill someone. It produces little actual trauma and little or no blood loss. Yes I know how. I bet you would rather have me defend you with a gun if you needed it, because I can't see you doing it yourself.


[edit on 8-2-2008 by reluctantpawn]

posted on Feb, 8 2008 @ 01:05 PM

Originally posted by rizla
Ban all guns other than hunting weapons that are licensed and controlled.

First the Second Amendment isn't about hunting though it is an added perk, Second wtf is a hunting weapon, can you please tell me?

posted on Feb, 8 2008 @ 01:48 PM

Originally posted by reluctantpawn
reply to post by mad scientist

Ever try walking to a christian church in China?



Lol, why would I want to. I don't believe in god or a business such as the church which controls the feeble minded through fear.
On the other hand I have been to more than a few Buddhist monastaries in China, a religion far superior to Christianity.

BTW, this has what to do with gun control ?

posted on Feb, 8 2008 @ 02:10 PM
reply to post by mad scientist

I thought you had lived in China? Christians are regularly rounded up and severely punished for practicing their religion. Apparently Christianity is at odds with Communism, though for the life of me I can't find the difference between a Statist belief like Communism and organized religion.

ReluctantPawn's point being (the way I took it anyway) is that if they had guns they could defend their freedom to choose and practice the religion of their choice.

As far as buddhism being superior to Christianity, I don't get it. Religion is religion, which one is best is all opinion. Folks should be able to choose which ever fairytale they like to believe in. Regardless of what someone else judges to be "better". Kind of like guns. You do not have to own one but just because you do not want to, does not mean that you can force me not to. Seems to be a trend with gun control proponents. They usually think they know what's best for everyone on just abouty every subject; Healthcare, Education, Religion, etc etc.

posted on Feb, 8 2008 @ 02:12 PM
reply to post by mad scientist

You cannot. You will be arrested. Why are the authorities so afraid of "feeble minded" people? You would think that a religion that governs "from fear" would not be of any concern to the authorities. Do these people also have freedom to speak openly in dissent? We all know what road that takes there. My friend if you felt comfortable and safe on those streets then Auschwitz may well have been your Nirvana. An armed society is a free society. This cannot be disputed historically.



posted on Feb, 8 2008 @ 02:52 PM
reply to post by rizla

That's a recipe for disaster. You have to consider one fact: the United States is still largely a rural nation. Half the population lives in rural areas and the country itself has a far lower population density than most of its western European counterparts. The point? The police aren't as close as a phone call and 5-10 minutes away for these people. Criminals know that, too. So why are violent crime rates usually low in rural areas? Because they also know that gun ownership rates in those same areas is also generally very high.

Take away the guns and, in those rural areas, you tip the scales heavily in the favor of criminals. You'd be inviting a crime wave in the rest of the country, while doing little to curb violence in cities, where the organized gang element will keep the flow of guns coming in regardless.

posted on Feb, 8 2008 @ 05:29 PM
My personal Opinion

I'm no fan of gun control laws but I really don't think just because people live

in rural area's and own firearms thats why crooks and or whatever aren't as

prevalent in small places.

I think that people in small rural area's tend to know their neighbors and the

crooks know they have less chance or being caught in the city even if the

police are 15 - 20 minutes away in rural towns etc.

But hey this is just my opinion and it's not like I'm infallible, it could be any

number of things.

posted on Feb, 8 2008 @ 06:26 PM
reply to post by Miishgoos

I can't disagree with that. However, as you say, criminals tend to look for an easy mark and that's part of the reason they do operate mostly in cities. The point is, if you enact strict gun control, you're potentially opening up the entire country to that type of activity, and the people in the rural areas will be much more vulnerable than even those in cities because of the lack of police coverage.

posted on Feb, 8 2008 @ 08:19 PM

Originally posted by reluctantpawn
reply to post by mad scientist

You cannot. You will be arrested. Why are the authorities so afraid of "feeble minded" people? You would think that a religion that governs "from fear" would not be of any concern to the authorities. Do these people also have freedom to speak openly in dissent? We all know what road that takes there. My friend if you felt comfortable and safe on those streets then Auschwitz may well have been your Nirvana. An armed society is a free society. This cannot be disputed historically.

Hmmm I didn't see guns helping all the people being persecuted in America under McCarthyism. In fact guns repressed these people. I guess historically an armed society isn't a free society.
If you think America is free then you truly are brainwashed, sorry for the wake up call.

As for Christians being rounded up and punished, it really doesn't happen. The vast majority 99.99% are left alone. The comaprison to Auschitz indeed shows your ignorance. Hvae you ever even left America ? Didn't think so, it shows.

posted on Feb, 8 2008 @ 10:21 PM

Originally posted by Lonestar24
Hmm, again one of these "2nd amendment and you" threads... and like most of them it started with the usual misconception....

There are no "free" societies that do NOT "trust" their citizens with guns. In about every country there are ways to get firearms. And in most places it is easier and less restricted than the UK. If I wanted to I could get firearms in a couple of weeks in my country, and that with less restrictions than in many US states.

Now, the main difference is that...well... all societies apart from the USA do not see the mythical quality arms seem to possess for some over the pond. US people are not the only ones who fear a return to an unequal society. That would be grossly overestimating the importance of the american independence event, and at the same time ignoring the political struggles many other societies have gone through since then. But people just believe that civil liberties, the basic rights that keep the democratic wheels turning, should be something meaningful; the mere thought that anyone could rate arms as something important enough to be a civil liberty seems ridiculous to us. Why is that? It is not because the USA were that beacon of light running in front of all those still-a-little-repressed societies that have yet to taste "true freedom" in a six-shot package.

It is because these societies treat the possession of arms as a nice personal gimmick and tool, not as a prerequisite for the functioning of the civil order. And in comes the aforementioned climate of fear that somehow seems to hold large portions of the american society in its grip - the fear of being physically defenselessness. The fear of some universal bogeyman that has come to take away all their precious possessions, be it money, life or liberties.

The thread starter mentioned he couldn´t imagine living in such a state of fear that we wouldnt trust our neighbour with guns. In the same fashion I say, how can one live in a society that fears the neighbour unless packing heat themselves? How could I walk the streets comfortably when it is the knowledge, or rather BELIEF, that only my CC gun keeps people in check, and not their own moral restraints? How can I reasonably expect my government to turn into a tyrannical bogeyman any minute (at which point I, with all my arsenal, personally have to slaughter everyone in the White House) and still honestly support it UNTIL it turns "evil"? Thats like planning how to break up with a woman BEFORE you even had the first date.

The most well balanced and constructive argument I have read on this thread. Its good to see there are people on here that retain a good level of common sense, unlike the starter of this thread. To the thread starter, if you want to experience this so calledfear of a society without access to firearms, come to Australia for a week, Im sure you would be trembling by the end of your stay. Trembling at the number of gun related crimes in Australia in any given year. P.S. I could count them on two hands.

posted on Feb, 9 2008 @ 10:05 AM
reply to post by Tonka

Yes, but it has ALWAYS been that way in Australia. Murder rates have always been low in Australia (around 2 per 100,000) and in total, Australia usually has less than 300 murders per year, regardless of cause. Its been that way for decades. Throughout the 90s and even before the ban, Australia was suffering fewer than 100 firearm related homicides per year.

posted on Feb, 9 2008 @ 12:38 PM
reply to post by mad scientist

Your right, historically an armed society is not necassarily a free society. An armed society has the ability to free itself. When needed a people can defend themselves from Authoritarianism when they are armed.

Your also right that America is not free and those who believe that are brainwashed. Unfortunately the 2nd Amendment to the Constittution is used by the Elite as a tool to proove how free their slaves are. Even cattle on the farm are allowed to leave the barn and roam freely around the pasture. When the time comes that the People have had too much, than if needed, we could use our arms in attampt to free ourselves. As of right now most of the cattle are content with the barn and pasture. Those who are not are working within the system for change in the hope of avoiding unwanted violence.

As far as Christians in China?
"They hung me up across an iron gate, then they yanked open the gate and my whole body lifted until my chest nearly split in two. I hung like that for four hours."
Since 1999, the U.S. State Department has designated China as a country of concern for religious freedom violations.

Even now the Chinese Gov is cracking down on folks who have church services at their homes. Burning bibles, beating people, and sending the religious leaders to labor camps, seizing homes. I am no Christian, yet I find this deplorable.

Now if the Government knew that these church members were armed?
The outcome may be different.

I come back again to the Warsaw Ghetto. Those people were using outlawed firearms to fight to the death against a Totalitarian Regime that had been democratically elected and was working within the realms of German law to detain, deport, and ultimately work to death these same people. A Government acting completely within it's own legal framework was being fought by a people who had had their own right to defend themselves taken away by a democratic power!

Religious persecution is a perfect example of why people must be able to defend themselves.

Truly, comparing modern China to Aushewitz is extreme but the issue is very similar. In the eighties and early nineties Chinese Christians suffered in the tens of thousands in labor camps and reasonabley they still may. China is an enormous country with strong trade partners who have willingly and happily overlooked and even helped conceal their human rights violations.

As many people especially on this site are noting most of the gun violence in the US is not due to the fact that we have legal access to firearms.

1. Most gun crimes are commited by stolen or illegally purchased firearms

2. Most gun crimes are drug and gang related followed closely by domestic violence. Without guns these crimes would be commited anyway. I refer you to the UK, the stabbing capital of the World or Africa where machetes seem to be the weapon of choice. Violence is violence. Although if attacked by a guy with a machete I would prefer a gun to defend myself with everytime!

3. Most high profile shootings in the last 20 years share one single thing in common every single time. Mental illness and mind altering drugs such as Ritalin, Zoloft, Lithium, Risperdal, etc. From mental illness going untreated by needed meds to the over medication of Americas youth on drugs that should never have been approved by the FDA or prescribed in their case in the first place. Also, for every high profile mass shooting you can find mass stabbings, slashings, chopping, hammering, screwdrivering, car crashing cases as well, th edifference being that guns ar ethe boogeyman and shootings will always make bigger news. "Guns are everywhere!"

4. Most high profile public shootings could be stopped by a single person carrying a concealed weapon but for some reason these high profile shootings always happen to take place in "no carry zones" such as government buildings, shopping malls, and schools. I wonder why?

posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 12:53 AM
Hai Guys.

I just won this thread. Have a nice day.

Also, 'gun crime' is a crock. I'm only concerned about the total numbers of murders commited, not the tool used.

Sure, more people get shot here, but fewer are stabbed. But conversely, in England a great deal more people get stabbed.

Funnily enough, last time I checked, the UK was gonna crack down on KNIFE CRIM!!!!!(bum bum buuuuuum) next.

Because, ya know, banning guns didn't make people less violent so it must be pointy things, right?

Sorry guys, you can't change underlying social issues and human nature by placing arbitrary restrictions on an inanimate object.

Also, just so you know, for decades America's violent crime rate has been decreasing, despite all of these gosh darned evil guns.

So if more guns - laws = more violence, why is it that the UK has one of the highest violent crime rates in the developed world, rather than being a happy gum drop forest, and america is fairly average in the violent crime department rather than something like downtown Mogadishu, even though the civilian populace here has more than one third of the worlds small arms and light weapons?

[edit on 10-2-2008 by aklover]

posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 01:06 AM
Simple, look what your country has become with guns, people are murdered every minute. Other countries are smarter and less crazy than USA.

posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 01:09 AM
reply to post by C0le

My perception of this would be the fact that any world government is afraid of their citizens owning guns, because if the citizens are armed, they can overthrow that government when it becomes too powerful, and or corrupt. When the citizens decide their government is out of control, the usual response is for riots and an uprising, which is not always the best solution of course.

The problem I see here is that if the citizens do not own guns but the government does, is that government necessarily trustworthy? Well, let's see, what is a gun for? Protection. To protect people from what? Fear. Fear of what? Being killed. Okay, who generally kills someone else? Someone who wants what they have, or something they value, or just to be plain mean. Generally people do not kill people, to make them enjoy being killed. Correct?

People with guns, have power, plain and simple. Citizens or government, with guns, have power. If the citizens have guns, they have power. If the government has guns, they have power. Pretty simple exampe there, right? Now, if the citizens do not have guns, they have no power, correct? If the government has no guns, they have no power, correct? Well, that's not exactly correct either way. Citizens have power through voting, but what about that politicians rarely listen to their constituants? If government weren't to have guns, they would still have power, to an extent.

Citizens - Guns = Less Power

Government - Guns = Less Power

Something doesn't quite add up. The government isn't going to give up it's guns, or power, correct? Are the citizens going to do that? Highly doubtful.

posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 11:10 AM
The very simple answer to this of course, is the people with the guns have control. The people without them have none. Should either side be fighting about it? Not really. Why would anyone want to fight though? I don't want to fight, I want to change the way things are. The rich getting richer, the poor staying poor or getting poorer.

posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 01:05 PM
It's indisputable that in 20th century Government killed more people than any other single culprit. Why do we the People trust our Governments with guns?

People do not start wars, Government does.

Why don't you gun control people try to ban the government instead of taking away my right to protect myself. They certainly have killed more people than I ever have (0 for me, over 200 million for government).

posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 05:38 PM

Originally posted by xion329alpha
Simple, look what your country has become with guns, people are murdered every minute. Other countries are smarter and less crazy than USA.

What has the USA become with guns you ask, how about we start with "a nation free of foreign dictatorship", or "the World's richest and most powerful nation", or " the only country where the right to happiness is enshrined in a constitution".

We crazy Americans seem to have done quite well with all our insane firearms ownership.

I'm not sure which country you're from, but let's take a look at how many of your citizens are emigrating here to the US, versus how many of our citizens are desparate to live in your gun free utopia.

Want to play?

posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 08:51 PM
reply to post by mad scientist

Sir people were not rounded up and persecuted they were legally prosecuted in a court of law not sent to reeducation camps, and or forced labor camps. While I don't agree with all that my country has done, Until recently it was done with some regard to the human spirit. To compare the witchhunts of McCarthyism to those that wish to live a free life shows a lack of understanding of historical facts. If you really believe that the christian faith is not persecuted than your head is really in the clouds.
If you have been in China then I am sure you have seen Tianemen Square. Was that just a mistake on the part of the government? The people that gave their life for freedom I am sure didn't see things that way.
Yes I believe I live in a freer society than most. I can say what i feel against or for anyone or anything. I can choose how many children I may have. I am free to worship or not as I feel. I can travel unimpeded to all parts of my country. It may not be what it was but it is a damn bit better than anything else out there today. And yes I have been outside the conus, and not on some tourist junket to see the sights and talk to the govt. approved locals. Perhaps you have never helped smuggle out a dissident family that has lost loved ones merely for speaking out against the govt. You Sir do not know the tenuous ground on which you walk. I'm sure that there are others out there who will confirm my story.
It is not just about religious freedom but freedom from tyranny.

top topics

<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in