It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com 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: 6
10
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 26 2008 @ 07:19 PM
link   
Just a thought for you folks that really think that it would be a cake walk for our governent to just walk over us should a revolt take place.Its not going to be weapons that make the differance. Its going to be the soldiers who will refuse to shoot at they're families and those of they're brother and sister soldiers. It might start that way but all the military I know have conciences and it won't take long for orders to be ignored and 'fragging' to take place. Defections to the citizens will also be prevelant. Those of you who remember Viet Nam know how long a 'butter bar' lasted if he tried to send troops into super hot LZ's to many times or walked through bush situations known to be ambushes. Oh and for you folks that think owning the same weapons as that of our military is illegal. Take a ride to Knob Creek, Kentucky in April and October. You will be amazed at the weapons owned by every day US citizens legally.
Zindo




posted on Apr, 28 2008 @ 05:57 PM
link   
Let me ask you this question:

What would you need a AK-47 for? Sure, I would completely agree with you that it would be amazing for plinking and target shooting, but would you hunt big game with it?

Absolutely not!

Automatic weapons are "spray 'n pray" weapons, simply used to induce fear and drive the enemy behind cover.

Let's go back to WWI, when automatic weapons were first introduced on the battlefield. They were introduced because there was THOUSANDS of troops advancing across the battlefield, and Bolt action, 5rd rifles simply could not stop all the troops, so Automatic machine guns were intoduced.

If you ever come across a field FULL of deer, go ahead and unload your 30rds from the hip and get yourself some deer, but otherwise, there's no sense driving the deer behind cover and flash-banging them!


I'll stick to a LEGAL M1A.



posted on Apr, 28 2008 @ 07:00 PM
link   
reply to post by hpsfl
 



This thread was primarily created for an outside perspective, but form a 2A perspective first and foremost one must realize that the 2A has nothing at all to do with hunting, Its purposes were given numerous times by the founders of these Unites States and hunting was not one of them.

But if one wants to approach it from a hunting angle, First 7.62x39 and 30-30 are very similar in terms of power and size, Second a misconception is that the AK is fired from the hip is getting old to be honest I guess the butt stock is for looks?, Also the (fully automatic through the woods with a 30 round magazine) deal, is just wow... It just doesn't happen...
What would incline anyone to believe that one would fire two Distinct types of rifles, Any differently then they were raised and trained to shoot a rifle?
If one is trained to fire a rifle from the shoulder they will fire said rifle from he shoulder regardless of what type of rifle it is...

There are these things Called semi automatic AK's which account for 99% of the AK's in the U.S, These Semi automatic rifles are no different functionally then ANY purpose build semi automatic hunting rifle, They just look different,

With a 5 round magazine they are no more or no less functional then any comparable semi auto purpose build tube or mag fed hunting rifle,

RAAC, imports various models of the AK with traditional Hunting style stock sets, www.raacfirearms.com...

I myself have Multiple AK's two of which I've taken hunting numerous times,




I think I'll stick to my LEGAL AKM and AK-101.


Btw that M1A was designed to replace the M1 Garand, the M1 Carbine and two "spray and pray" weapons, The M3 Grease gun and M1918 BAR...

Its now build in a semi automatic version just like my AK's. I can also get AK's in 308, just like your M1A, And your M1A can also sport a Sage Stock, So there difference between mine and yours is what again?


and also just for for PSA purposes,



[edit on 28-4-2008 by C0le]



posted on Apr, 28 2008 @ 07:22 PM
link   
I was using the AK-47 as an example, because of its ubiquity, as well as hunting. I was in no way trying to actually say you shouldn't hunt with a semi-auto weapon, and I was trying to conjure up the image of unloading your clip at deer, not emphasize it!

The M1A is a civilian conversion of the 1950's vintage M14, and has no capability of fully automatic fire

As this thread is about governments not trusting thier people with firearms...why would they? I'm quite confident the government will not stop you from having a semi-auto rifle/shotgun, as long as you register it and have a background check. Heck, if your really looking for firepower, the Barrett M82 (Semi-auto .50!) is always out there (and legal too!)

So, I'm guessing this is about governemts not trusting thier people with AUTOMATIC firearms, which I can see is a no-brainer decision. As I previously mentioned, an automatic firearm has absolutely no reason to be in the hands of civilians. You don't need 30rds in 3 seconds to shred a target, hit a pop can, or bring down a deer. I doubt the deer will be wearing kevlar, or will be returning fire.

The only reason automatic weapons exist is to KILL OTHER HUMANS.



posted on Apr, 29 2008 @ 12:51 PM
link   
When so many people here readily except the fact that the .gov and the media intentionally misleads them and gives them false opinions on things, I can't believe how many of these same people don't see past these tactics with firearms. People only fire rifles from the hip and mow down groups in the movies, it just doesn't work that way in real life.



As this thread is about governments not trusting thier people with firearms...why would they?


"The Constitution of the United States of America
makes clear the intentions that the founding fathers
had for this nation. It was to be a nation ruled not by
an elite few, but governed by the consent of the
people. It was for this reason that the Bill of Rights
was amended to the Constitution. Those rights, (not
privileges) were included with this document not to
grant “permission” to the public, but to remind
future politicians where their power ended.
The addition of the Bill of Rights brought with it
another safeguard against tyranny, the Militia.



“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security
of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear
Arms, shall not be infringed.”
- The Second Amendment


The revolution against British tyranny, and the birth
of our nation was only made possible by the actions of
the armed civilian population. And this was
considered by the Founding Fathers when they forged
our government. The right to bear arms is not about
“sporting purposes” as so many politicians would have
you believe, it is about checks and balances, a
reoccurring theme within the Constitution."

The fact is that the issue is not about hunting or sporting purposes, it is about checks and balances. All you have to do to see this is look at how drastically nations start militarizing their police once they begin disarming the civilian population.




The only reason automatic weapons exist is to KILL OTHER HUMANS.

BTW, I notice you have a sports car in your avatar. Why would a civilian need something like that just for driving to work and back, those things were built to exceed the speed limit. The only reason they exist is for reckless driving.
Seems kinda silly when you put it that way doesn't it? Like it or not though, it's the same argument.



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 10:27 AM
link   
reply to post by N1cotine
 


Yes, they do exceed the speed limit, but then so does every single production car made in the last 30 years. What high-performance cars do offer, though, is superior acceleration. European and Japanese ones even have superior acceleration round corners, unlike US ones



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 02:08 PM
link   
That wasn't exactly the point I was making, but good argument.


My point is that stating a firearm is made for breaking the law or for murder is silly. I have an AK-47 and have owned several other types of so called "assault weapons" such as the much despised MAC10, or the deadly, deadly SKS rifle, and have never been possessed by these firearms to go out and lay waste to the community.


Anyways, I believe the OP was about why nations don't trust us with firearms. The answer is obvious, power.

Many years ago, when our nation was more free than it has become today, everyone owned guns. Every household had at least one gun in it, and oddly enough, crime was much lower than it is today. If this mentality towards guns had not been tainted by decades of fictional depictions of bad guys with guns, it would not be unreasonable to expect to see a modern "assault rifle" in every home in the country. How far do you thing a fascist government would get trying to oppress a population like that?



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 05:43 PM
link   
The point I'm trying to make is that Guns (in civilian hands) have lost their purpose in the modern world. Old uses that have been replaced:

Food-Grocery Store
Militia-Oh No, the Mexicans/Canadians (me) are attacking! (Anyways the army. And don't worry, Canada will never invade)
Defending you land against natives-...

Guns are purely recreational in modern times, and an automatic firearm is NOT sporting equipment. I don't care if your Jesus, automatic firearms shouldn't be in the hands of civilians.

The fact that the american constitution gives americans the right to bear arms was simply a sign of the times. It was 1776, with a british occupation and thousands of aboriginals running around in the west. The south was also unstable, with violent political upheavals in mexico, as well as border raids. It was a necessity that Americans should protect themselves and their possesions, as it was necessary to enforce white, american control over their land. This, in effect, was also a political strategy.


And if you start to cry about self-defence, go to the gym and work out. Besides, if you find yourself in a situation is pointing a gun with you, its probably because you did something to piss that guy off: either you didnt get him his drugs in time, you stole his girlfriend/boyfriend, insulting him, your both drunk, so and so forth.

I know your going to bring up the argument with random acts of "bad", but these usually target those who cannot put up much of a fight, such as the elderly. If your going to suggest that 80 year olds should carry Desert Eagles, by all means go ahead. But how many times do you see random attacks on fit 20 year olds?

As a side note, why is this thread so american-centric?



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 09:09 PM
link   
You say that in most cases where a "bad-guy" would be pointing a gun at you, it's more than likely because you did something to deserve it right? That people don't just shoot people for no reason.

So why shouldn't guns be in the hands of civilians, since they are so responsible and generally good people?



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 09:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by hpsfl
The point I'm trying to make is that Guns (in civilian hands) have lost their purpose in the modern world. Old uses that have been replaced:


Really? then why do many of us own them?

If they had no purpose then we wouldn't be buying them.


Canadians (me) are attacking!
Believe me if Canada ever did decide to invade, Our first reaction would be uncontrollable laughter...


Guns are purely recreational in modern times,

Thats your opinion.


and an automatic firearm is NOT sporting equipment.

The U.S. Constitution makes no mention of this "sporting purpose" you speak of...


I don't care if your Jesus, automatic firearms shouldn't be in the hands of civilians.
Yet they are owned legally throughout the U.S and the last time a crime was committed with one was by a COP.


The fact that the american constitution gives americans the right to bear arms was simply a sign of the times.

History repeats itself, Our Constitution is timeless.



And if you start to cry about self-defence, go to the gym and work out. Besides, if you find yourself in a situation is pointing a gun with you, its probably because you did something to piss that guy off: either you didnt get him his drugs in time, you stole his girlfriend/boyfriend, insulting him, your both drunk, so and so forth.
Wow classism at its best, Whats it like blissful suburbia, trapped in your bubble of illusion, and a false sense of reality and safety?


I know your going to bring up the argument with random acts of "bad", but these usually target those who cannot put up much of a fight, such as the elderly. If your going to suggest that 80 year olds should carry Desert Eagles, by all means go ahead. But how many times do you see random attacks on fit 20 year olds?

I've had two guns pointed right in my face once when I was 17, and once when I was 20, Both instances people in the area came out and saw what was going on and the thugs took off...

what they planned idk,


As a side note, why is this thread so american-centric?
Is that a problem?



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 11:21 PM
link   
reply to post by C0le
 


Just a quick question:

Where were you when these "events happened"? Did you do anything to provoke these guys? What type of gun were they using (If you remember?)

Just to let you know I'm not being at all hostile/prejudice. I just don't think civilians should have access to automatic weapons. That's just an opinion.

Just as a side note, I think it's kinda crazy that automatic .22
s are banned, but not .50 cal weapons. Do you think there should be a cartridge restriction instead of a firearm restriction?



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 11:38 PM
link   
reply to post by hpsfl
 


Walking down my street to friends house up the road, Other instance was at local park.

Nope nothing to provoke anyone, just minding my own business.

One was a Semi auto of some sort, The other was a 22 revolver, I know this because a witness saw him ditch the gun, cops picked it up.

My area isn't the Suburbs, But its not the projects either, it's your typical American neighborhood, in the City, There are some bad areas about 1/4 mile away , But its generally fine around here, Though most of the homes on this block have been broken into or had some sort of theft with the exception of mine, It's well known I carry a gun, I open carry, And everyone in this house has access to and knows how to use a firearm.

It would be unwise to try anything here.



[edit on 30-4-2008 by C0le]



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 11:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by hpsfl
reply to post by C0le
 

I just don't think civilians should have access to automatic weapons. That's just an opinion.


They already do, Fully Automatic weapons aren't illegal...

Neither are silencers, Grenade Launchers, RPG's etc.. ANY citizen that can pass a background check can buy them....

There are plenty of em out there, Whens the last time you seen one used in a crime?



Just as a side note, I think it's kinda crazy that automatic .22
s are banned, but not .50 cal weapons. Do you think there should be a cartridge restriction instead of a firearm restriction?

Nope, that is a firearms restriction.



posted on May, 1 2008 @ 12:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by C0le

They already do, Fully Automatic weapons aren't illegal...

Neither are silencers, Grenade Launchers, RPG's etc.. ANY citizen that can pass a background check can buy them....

There are plenty of em out there, Whens the last time you seen one used in a crime?



I don't think we're on the same page here. In Canada, civilians are NOT allowed to posess Automatic firearms, NO silencers, NO form of any explosive-launcher, and NO firearms under a certain size. I think I'm trying to analyze US laws, based on a Canadian viewpoint.

My grandfather used to be in the RCMP (Equivalent of FBI) in the 50's, and at one point confiscated an "original build" AK-47, but never took it back to the station. After reforms in the 80's and 90's, this weapon became "grandfatherd", meaning it's legal to own, but there's a crazy amount of permits you must have for it, including permission to MOVE it. Because of all the new laws, he sold the AK for $3,200 (Much more then it's $150 unit cost). Theres a thompson M1928 at my local gun shop going for $4,000, and I've been at a gun show where a G3 has fetched $7,000.

Going back to yourquestion, the largest weapon I've SEEN in a crime is a Katana (Samurai Sword). I've never seen a Automatic firearm used in a Canadian Crime, not even on the news. The big weapon for crimes is semi-auto pistols, usually in isolated gang violence.

The No automatics rule seems to be working fine here, because the average gang member isn't going to spend 4K on a gun that needs *special* government permission, not to mention a 1 year course to *maybe* acquire one.



posted on May, 3 2008 @ 02:27 AM
link   
The answer to the question is pretty simple.

1st: Most ppl that buy firearems NEVER get any kind of training or instruction at
all! Most often these ppl end up shooting themselves on accident or are
dumb enough to say, take their spiffy new AR/AK clone out in the back
yard and shoot at beer cans while not caring enough to notice the school
bus letting off kids a couple dozen yards directly behind the fence their
blasting beer cans off of.

2nd:Most governments HATE it when the ppl they "represent" are as well armed
if not even better than said governments own armies and the whole "How
can they rise against us if we take their guns?"thing...

3rd:US massacres using firearms have pretty much made the US the poster
child for gun control in other countries. I would say I agree with them but
having personally lived through the DC Sniper nightmare instead of
beating the gun control drums I went and got a cheap AK clone so I
could at least shoot back.....

4th:I am unaware of any other nation having the right to bear arms written
into their constitution/mandate.....



posted on May, 4 2008 @ 05:05 AM
link   
Guns, Why do many countries not trust there citizens with them?

Help me understand why so many "free" countries around the world live in so much fear of there fellow citizens?

If these countries are so "free" and great why are they so afraid to trust there citizens with the right to defend themselves not only from a fellow citizen but their own Government?

I cannot even imagine living in such a place and living in constant fear to simply trust another citizens morals and better judgement, I mean what type of upbringing are they raised in that would suddenly make some one go on a killing spree if a gun magically appeared in their hand? I mean damn...

I just don't understand...





couldn't be arsed reading 4 or 5 pages............







And [ i assume your American] why do you have the highest rate of gun crime in the world?

You think your free?

I had an american friend over, He just couldn't understand how we all walk down the street, go shoping, Live our lives with out fully automatic weapons slung over our shoulder

What if some gangbanger tryes to mug us?

We don't have a gang problem because they can't get gun's to point at us.
The only "gangs" with guns are the bikies, hells angles ect, and they don't shoot at each other that often. and never directly at a citizen
Bring down the heat is bad business for all involved

They stop more crime then they committed
media.www.bgnews.com...



Australia is seeing a record number of people getting firearms licenses.
yet gun crime is going down.
Is this because John Q citizen can get gun easier then a junky.




Real freedom is being able to walk down the street and go about your life without fear of others, not walking around with a gatlin gun incase someone else has a gun too.



posted on May, 4 2008 @ 06:35 AM
link   
It's not a question of trust. It's a question of acclimating the public into believing they have no right to defend themselves.

When you indoctrinate people to the idea that government is responsible for you, you abdicate responsibility for yourself. If the rulers of the world could get everyone to do this, taking over would be easy.


The truth is that only YOU can save yourself. Only YOU are responsible for yourself. Only YOU know what is best to ensure your safety and happiness.


"When seconds count, the police are just minutes away."


Self Defense is a Civil Right.

I'm always packing, and you should too.





posted on May, 4 2008 @ 07:37 AM
link   
This is American ideology. Seems in America if you are not constantly exercise your constitutional rights that makes you unpatriotic. America wrote in the right to bare arms (mostly out of fear of the Brits invading again) now Americans think they have to own guns or they are bad Americans. America has a big fear of there police and their government. In America the people came first and the government military and police was created secondary. Causing alot of mistrust between the public and those in power. In alot of other countries the government, military, police was set up first and the people came afterwards. So they never saw the police and government as a threat. Also America is very divided. The whites don't live the black, or the Chinese, or the Latinos, or the natives and vice versa. You have kkk and neo nazis, and religious nut bars everywhere in America. You see some of these problems in other places in the world but not to the extent as in America. Seems in America they see immigration as a threat. Foreigners taking "their" jobs take "their" land take "their" culture. This is mostly a American trait most of the world doesn't see immigration as threat or something to be hostile about.



posted on May, 4 2008 @ 03:43 PM
link   
reply to post by UltimateSin
 


My point I was trying to make in my previos posts.

And now for the NRA response...



posted on May, 7 2008 @ 04:52 PM
link   
Now...I could be wrong...but I was under the impression countries with soft gun laws/easy gun access (United States comes to mind) have much bigger Gun-related Homicide ratios that countries that have tougher laws?

Imho I see no reason for anyone to be allowed to own automatic rifles/large amounts of guns/high caliber guns (maybe not so for Areas with...say...bears, lol) mainly because:

1) If you were to in fact do a "revolution" and the Army was on the Governments side, you're screwed, even if you have 10 Automatic rifles.

Bombs > Rifles
Artillery > Rifles
Gas > Rifles

2) The chances of said "revolution" are slim to none in your lifetime, while the chances of one your kids getting hurt with one of your guns is much more likely.

Gun Accidents > "Safety"

3) It is much more likely if someone breaks into your property they use your own gun against you than you suddenly wake up in the middle of the night and shoot them.

Aware Thief/Bad Guy > Sleepy You.

Not to even mention automatic gun school shootings.

Just my 2 cents...but it seems just as a false way to make people feel "secure"




top topics



 
10
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join