It's official, Obama to make AWB permanent

page: 2
14
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 25 2008 @ 10:23 AM
link   
This is how the two-party system works. Freedoms from one end of the spectrum are removed by the democrats, and freedoms from the other side of the spectrum are removed by the republicans. Between the two of them we'll be a full-blown fascist or communist state in no time - if we're not there already.

They manipulate you to believe that you're stuck between voting for the "lesser of two evils". Turns out there's actually other candidates running for president. I didn't even know this till a few years ago.

I wouldn't touch one of these mainstream globalist-endorsed clowns with a 10 foot pole.




posted on Sep, 25 2008 @ 10:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by stikkinikki
Thank you for such clear and concise answers to my questions.


Most welcome.




I used to be for a ban on certain guns as a way to prevent tragedys like Columbine or the LA shootout but it really was more about the sickos behind those crimes and keeping the guns out of their hands in the first place.


There are several issues and problems with these kind of bans.

For one thing, several studies have been done with hard-time criminals, and universally, their biggest fear is encountering an armed citizen. Encountering police is a distant second.

For another, consider that drugs such as coc aine and meth are "banned", yet anybody that wants either can get it. Gun bans work the same way, and result in only the less desirable component of society having them.

Finally, as uncomfortable as it may be to discuss, the US culture worships violence. This can be demonstrated in a variety of ways, which I won't go into here (unless requested...
). But one effect of this worship of violence is that the US culture is a violent one. If we want to reduce (we will never, in any kind of free society, eliminate) incidents like Columbine, we must work to modify our culture such that violence is not held in such high regard, and considered a solution to so many issues.



I don't know why anyone would need a machine gun unless they are at war


This argument may be applied (as you have in fact done) to many other situations... how many people 'need' golf clubs? Yet golf clubs are used to kill people... a friend from my child hood was nearly killed by a whack job with a golf club.

And the possibility of war is a good enough reason, IMO, to own such weapons if someone chooses to do so. I'm a Vietnam-generation type. One of my best friends is of North Vietnamese descent, whose family fled the North when the Communists took over. He grew up in the South with the war going on, and took part in it. He left the South just a few months before the collapse of the whole situation. He owns at least one full-auto assault rifle, fully licensed and legal. His reason? He has had enough of running, and will not do it again. If a truly repressive government comes to be here, he will be one of the many fighting it.

Plus they are fun to shoot, for some. Expensive, but fun...




Maybe I'll get one someday.


If we all do our jobs correctly, you will have the freedom to make that choice... whether to own a firearm or not.



posted on Sep, 25 2008 @ 10:30 AM
link   
Long before the Klinton gun ban came to fruition, many Americans saw the need to have weapons and amunition saved in such a manner that no one, including any government entity could find them. I can tell you unequivocably that thousands if not \millions of weapons for protection of an out of control government are hidden throughout this country. Its a simple process. You buy a 6 -7 ft long piece of 12 -18 inch PVC drain pipe and two end caps. You buy several military ammo boxes and a well made PVC rifle case. Place those with a minimum of 1000 rounds of your choice with the associated weapons ( Rifle and at least one pistol/revolver) into the recepticle and close off one end with PVC glue. Add packets of silica to wardoff moisture and make sure your weapons are appropriatly oiled and greased and seal them into the gun cases with silicone gel. Close off the other end using the same silicone very liberaly. Bury said conveyence in a hole not less than 4 but not more than 6 ft in a DRY area. The best place to bury them are on Government land such as national parks on hilltops. Make appropriate maps and do not trust GPS because those can be turned off or encripted and will be in an emergency. I know it sounds paronoid but when the Germans started their crap, many of the weapons used to harrass them where those buried by people who saw it comming. Just another random thought by:

Zindo

[edit on 9/25/2008 by ZindoDoone]



posted on Sep, 25 2008 @ 10:34 AM
link   
An armed citizenry is the greatest deterrent to crime there is. Police do not prevent crime. All the police can do is take a report and try to apprehend the perps who will be gone like the wind back to their country of origin.

Here in Arizona, the kidnapping capitol of the United States, we have to worry about home invasions by criminals from Mexico. Once we call in the report, we can wait hours for the police to arrive. We called in a stolen car report and the police never did come in person to investigate, but did say that the car was " Probably in Mexico by now".

It is a pretty slick maneuver by the Democrats to try and classify Semi-Auto repeating rifles as assault rifles.

I do not understand how Biden keeps getting elected. His district must be populated by uneducated fools. Every time he talks he sticks his foot into his mouth. He is like the drunken uncle at your wedding who doesn't know what a joke he is. I will bet that he actually looks up to Ted Kennedy.



posted on Sep, 25 2008 @ 11:46 AM
link   
i fear i may have strayed into an argument that goes beyond alot of my understanding, but ill try and sum up my feelings on what has been said.

if guns were banned, and some sort of amnesty took effect AND it became an offence to even own a gun (like in the uk) then you wouldnt need to worry about how long the cops took, as everyone woudl be in the same book.


I understand that it says people should be allowed to bear arms in the usa constitution, but when exactly was that written ? and how much relevence has that actualy got to modern day life ... its also not like the constitution hasent already been chewed up, crapped on and puked out by the corrupt US government.

the fact that people in the usa feel the need to own a gun out of fear is very saddening, why shoudl people fear that much where they stay, i never ever ever get scared that someone will come and try get me that much that i woudl need to arm myself, mainly because i know guns are illegal.

the police / government willl ALWAYS need guns, just in case, luckily in the USA most of teh cops know how to use and respect their weapons, not like in the uk where out armed police have probably hurt more than they have done good.

one final though, in america, most (well all) of the people will have lived under teh constitution, born and raised on it for many a year, it was good and relevent when it was written, bear arms incase of invasion.. but its that same rule that shoudl have had a clause, that if their is no conflict then their are no guns needed, unfortunetly that never happened and now we have a massive nation where most of the people think its their god given right to own a gun. noone deserves teh right to own or posess anything that can kill or mame people so easily.



posted on Sep, 25 2008 @ 11:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by boaby_phet
i fear i may have strayed into an argument that goes beyond alot of my understanding, but ill try and sum up my feelings on what has been said.

if guns were banned, and some sort of amnesty took effect AND it became an offence to even own a gun (like in the uk) then you wouldnt need to worry about how long the cops took, as everyone woudl be in the same book.



So what you're saying is that no criminal in THE UK has a gun?

news.bbc.co.uk...
www.guardian.co.uk...
www.telegraph.co.uk...

Do I need to bring up THE ridiculous knife crime and THE parents frantically searching for "stabbing-proof" backpacks and clothing for their kids over there?

*Please note the spelling of THE.



posted on Sep, 25 2008 @ 12:05 PM
link   
reply to post by stikkinikki
 





posted on Sep, 25 2008 @ 12:28 PM
link   
reply to post by boaby_phet
 


I have an AK in my house and havent gone on any killing sprees. I did use it to kill a few deer the past couple of years however. Nice firearm, cheap, accurate, never breaks, ammo is cheap. Great hunting gun.

I never thought about owning an AK until the Clinton ban was gaining ground. There are alot of guns I didnt think about owning until then.

When people ask me why I own what I do, from "ugly guns" "black guns" high cap mags, etc..., my answer is simple. When was the last time the government passed any law that made any sense whatsoever that actually benefitted my life and well being? They want to pass laws to take something away from me, therefore I load up on it. Ever since Obama won the Dem nomination, I have been buying again like crazy. If he wins, its only a matter of time before I lose more of my freedom in this area. Just because the govt says its bad, doesnt mean it always is.



posted on Sep, 25 2008 @ 12:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by boaby_phet
if guns were banned, and some sort of amnesty took effect AND it became an offence to even own a gun (like in the uk) then you wouldnt need to worry about how long the cops took, as everyone woudl be in the same book.


Sadly, this is not true. If firearms are outlawed, the criminals will still have them. The vast majority of firearm owners are law-abiding citizens, which is of great concern to the criminal element. So a ban will not have this effect.



I understand that it says people should be allowed to bear arms in the usa constitution, but when exactly was that written ? and how much relevence has that actualy got to modern day life ...


The right to bear the means of self-defense is a basic human right. The US Constitution is just a formal recognition of such. So it does not matter when the Constitution was written or how much relevance it has now, or how badly BushCo has corrupted it.



the fact that people in the usa feel the need to own a gun out of fear is very saddening, why shoudl people fear that much where they stay, i never ever ever get scared that someone will come and try get me that much that i woudl need to arm myself, mainly because i know guns are illegal.


Not everybody owns firearms out of fear. Part of it is recreation, part is food gathering and part is a recognition of the ineffectiveness of the various police forces.



the police / government willl ALWAYS need guns, just in case, luckily in the USA most of teh cops know how to use and respect their weapons,


To maintain a truly free society, it is of prime importance that the civilian police is no better armed than the general citizenry. (that is my opinion)



it was good and relevent when it was written, bear arms incase of invasion..


The primary reason behind the Constitution's formal recognition of this basic human right is to repel oppression from within or without. There are a ton of examples where the worst oppression visited on various populations come from the domestic government. Given the rate of firearm ownership in the US, that will be very difficult to happen here. Although they are doing their best, sadly.



posted on Sep, 25 2008 @ 02:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Open_Minded Skeptic
 


Hell just shipped me a popsicle because I agree completely with your post and starred it.



posted on Sep, 25 2008 @ 02:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by sos37
reply to post by Open_Minded Skeptic
 


Hell just shipped me a popsicle because I agree completely with your post and starred it.


LOL! Thanks...


All kinds of crazy stuff happening in these end days!



posted on Sep, 25 2008 @ 03:22 PM
link   
This would be a dream come true for me. I have what seems to be a mentally ill neighbor who keeps telling me he saving up for a AW. The last person I would want owning such a weapon.

The largest clip you can install legaly I believe is a 5 round clip with one in the chamber. What concerns me more then the actual weapon is owners using larger banana clip types which stores much more ammo. Now instead of six shots they have 30-100. I don't want to be out hunting with somesone that has that kind of firepower or live next to someone whos home gets broken into and they unload 75 rounds with 10 of them jumping through my wall.



posted on Sep, 25 2008 @ 03:30 PM
link   
reply to post by TheHunted
 



Yeah, nobody is going to do that. Not only do hunters not want to bother with the extra weight but turning a deer into swiss cheese is not a good way to get sausages or steaks plus every hunting license I know of requires the hunter to abide by certain rules one of which is ammunition capacity.

As far as a break-in goes. It would be beyond useless to let fly high-power rifle rounds in your home especially a large amount of them. Home defense is a shotgun or a pistol. Anyone who cares to defend their home most likely isnt willing to put holes through the walls with rifle cartridges.

Now if somebody is stupid or crazy and doesnt think or abide by the law then no amount of banning is going to keep your paranoid self safe from them.



posted on Sep, 25 2008 @ 03:58 PM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


Just to clarify that I base my opinion not off being paranoid but by experience. The reason why I mention the home invasion scenerio because it actually has happened less then 1/4 mile from my house 3 years back. An innocent man nearly died while sleeping because of a stray bullet.

To be honest I'm tired of gun freaks crying about losing their AW because itsunconstitutional. Fact of the matter is the "The Right To Bear Arms" was written well before these types of weapons were even invented. The accuracy and power of these newer type Assault Rifles don't even compare to the weapons being used during the era that amendment was written. Now you have take in account how much more populated areas have become. You have to revise some of these Bills to fit current times. I believe this is one of those that need it. As technology advances so should some of the constitution.....



posted on Sep, 25 2008 @ 04:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
As far as a break-in goes. It would be beyond useless to let fly high-power rifle rounds in your home especially a large amount of them. Home defense is a shotgun or a pistol. Anyone who cares to defend their home most likely isnt willing to put holes through the walls with rifle cartridges.


Of course you are a responsible gun owner with a common sense. Common sense tests and gun knowledge isn't (necessarily) required to purchase.

If I were in an apartment I might be concerned about the neighbors. In today's world a shot through a wall seems more likely from a drive by then one's neighbor shooting at someone.

Regardless of where I live, I believe I and others have the right to own a firearm, even semi-auto, for protection.

I can live with the full auto restrictions. But given to wide spread use by military, IMO it shouldn't be in effect. I suppose we are protected from negligent people but obviously not from the criminals.

Edit:sp

[edit on 9/25/2008 by roadgravel]



posted on Sep, 25 2008 @ 04:06 PM
link   
reply to post by TheHunted
 


The Constitution you took an oath to defend? I'm assuming you're an enlisted man by the avatar.

There goes the theory that should government become tyrannical the average enlisted man would fight beside the citizenry.


By the same token. The Fathers could have never expected there to be blogs and message boards. We better get right on amending that whole free speech dealy to censor all the scary stuff.



posted on Sep, 25 2008 @ 04:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by roadgravel

If I we in an apartment I might be concerned about the neighbors. In today's world a shot through a wall seems more likely from a drive by then one's neighbor shooting at someone.


I feel this way about candles, stoves, smoking and alcohol. I live in a duplex. What am I to do if the drunk next door sets the house on fire? Losing all of my property and my life because some idiot likes to drink and falls asleep smoking a cigarette is higher on my list of concerns and far more likely to occur than a stray flying through the wall.



posted on Sep, 25 2008 @ 04:21 PM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


Yes a military man but I am also a realist. SOMETHINGS that were written 200 years don't apply to us anymore. We are more advanced then we were then. So some of the constitution should be revised to fit us now.

Speech hasn't changed since then. Maybe a few more slang and cuss words but it hasn't advanced like technolgy to the point where it will mangle a person.

I never said that the constitution should be completely edited, just that some things should be updated for the world we live into day. The "Right To Bear Arms" is just one.



posted on Sep, 25 2008 @ 04:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

Sorry, but there is absolutely no way in hell that I'm going to live through another ban Mr. Obama. I fled my state when it refused to give up the ban after the expiration and my friends and family had more than one legal run-in under Clintons worthless experiment just for doing what they had always done that was one day arbitrarily made illegal.

Not again.



Okay I have to ask...What is it that your "family and friends" were doing (as they have always done?) involving automatic weapons that led to "legal run-ins"? This doesn't sound like deer hunting.

Also...I think if you uprooted and moved your family from their home simply because you were no longer permitted to purchase automatic weapons there...you have some soul searching to do.



posted on Sep, 25 2008 @ 04:50 PM
link   
Let's look at the actual facts as presented by the FBI shall we?



Murder
by State, Type of Weapon, 2005

www.fbi.gov...

Total murders............................14,860.....100.00%
Handguns..................................7,543......50.76%
Other weapons (non firearm, non edged)....1,954......13.15%
Edged weapons.............................1,914......12.88%
Firearms (type unknown)...................1,598......10.75%
Shotguns....................................517.......3.48%
Hands, fists, feet, etc.....................892.......6.00%
Rifles......................................442.......2.97%

Murder
by State, Type of Weapon, 2006

www.fbi.gov...

Total murders............................14,990.....100.00%
Handguns..................................7,795......52.00%
Other weapons (non firearm, non edged)....2,158......14.40%
Edged weapons.............................1,822......12.15%
Firearms (type unknown)...................1,465.......9.77%
Shotguns....................................481.......3.21%
Hands, fists, feet, etc.....................833.......5.56%
Rifles......................................436.......2.91%

Murder
by State, Type of Weapon, 2007

www.fbi.gov...

Total murders............................14,403.....100.00%
Handguns..................................7,086......49.20%
Other weapons (non firearm, non edged)....2,043......14.18%
Edged weapons.............................1,753......12.17%
Firearms (type unknown)...................1,819......12.63%
Shotguns....................................436.......3.02%
Hands, fists, feet, etc.....................827.......5.74%
Rifles......................................439.......3.05%


Note: To get the totals, you have to download the Excel and use the AutoSum feature to sum the columns. Otherwise, it can be done by hand but it is far less convenient.

So what is this telling us? It looks to me that there are several things we can take away from this data:

1. The percent of murders committed with all rifles, not just semiautomatic, but all rifles including bolt actions, lever actions, single shots, and all other types account for only 3% of murders. The number commited with semi-automatic rifles is clearly even lower.

2. Rifles represent the lowest danger of all weapon types, including hands and feet. The number of murders committed with no weapons at all is almost double the number of murders committed with rifles. The number of murders committed with a knife or other edged weapon is more than quadruple the number of murders committed with rifles. The number of murders committed with a blunt weapon is almost quintuple the number of murders committed with rifles. In fact, a person is more than eleven times more likely to be murdered with a knife, blunt object, or no weapon at all as compared to a rifle of any type.

3. Despite the fact that these weapons are said to be 'super dangerous' and are also said to be increasingly used by criminals by the Brady Campaign (I would like a quote for this but I can't find it), the percentage of murders committed with all rifles dropped from 3.0% to 2.9% between 2005 and 2006.

I didn't use to care one way or the other on gun control until I took responsibility for my own self and my family. Once I actually took the time to educate myself on the "real" statistics of firearm ownership, I get angry every time one of these "proposals" starts to make the rounds.

The reality is this: in areas where gun/firearm ownership is unrestricted, in the sense that you still pass background checks, aren't a felon, etc., crime rates go DOWN!

Rather than cause myself carpal tunnel syndrome, please, take the time to educate yourself by reading the following, especially the section on "Crime and Guns." I think most will be surprised by the truth of the matter.


www.gunfacts.info...

[edit on 9/25/08 by surfinguru]





new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join