History of Un-armed Citizens

page: 13
89
<< 10  11  12   >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 23 2009 @ 08:24 PM
link   
reply to post by AgentMoulder[/i
 

How about his voting record from his legislative career-as short as it was.
Even in his campaigning,he stated that it is the government that is responsible for protecting the people,not the people protecting themselves.




posted on Feb, 23 2009 @ 08:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by liesnomore
I do not own a gun and I do not want a gun. Any firearms promote a violence.
The most people what "scare" me with guns are the Law Enforcement in any form. The can kill innocent person and "walk away" free of any charges.
If you want to feel safe - write petition to your Governor to enforce existing gun law.Draft all gang members to serve in military - that will solve the shortage and disarm all Law Enforcement officers. That way the law obedient citizens will have no reason to fear and firearms will not be needed.
There are many ways to stop the opponent without taking a life.

The History Channel ran a program yesterday on gang members in the military. You obviously did not see it. Not a good idea!



posted on Feb, 24 2009 @ 01:34 AM
link   
I've Read several times here that gun control would have kept school shootings from happening. I would like to respectfully disagree. You can blame firearms for the actions of a few depraved people as much as you could blame the media and the demoralization it has brought about. Television and movies broadcast the most vulgar and disturbing images that I have ever seen, and I was deployed in support of Hurricane Katrina and have recently returned from Iraq. Our children are becoming more and more desenitive to death, blood, gore, and violence, yet we still see it potrayed on prime-time T.V. on a daily basis. When characters such as the phsycotic joker played by the late Heath Ledger are idolized by America's youth, we wonder why society is slaughtering each other. I blame the media not the guns.
See how I did that, I shifted the blame exactly where I wanted it. I could blame any number of things for anything with enough rethoritic. I could play on the American people's sympathies and advocate Gov. controls on the media (That far excede what the FAA already does) i.e. (Those poor souls would still be alive today if not for slasher flicks and slipknot. Maybe we need to look back over the First Amendment and see if maybe the forefathers meant something else when they said free speech.)
People were killing each other before there were guns. Anything can be utilized as a weapon I know three ways to kill a person using an ink pen. All close combat weapons aside the hands and feet are formidable enough weapons even for the unskilled. ( smashing a mans face with your fist comes natural when fight or flight kicks in) A weaponless utopia will never exist. Why you may ask? Anyone can improvise a weapon that will propel a projectile with lethal force. That is how guns came into existence in the first place. Guns just preform the task more efecientley.

My question to the narrow minded Gun control nuts out there that follow certian political leaders mindlessly like cattle to a slaughterhouse, yet have the audacity to call freedom loving patriots "racist dumb red-necks" is

In your gun-less utopia after all the dust is settled will law-enforcement still carry guns? There would be no need to cary a side-arm policing an unarmed populace. That has not even crossed your mind has it? You just want to dis-arm America and then sort it out from there. The NRA may be full of poor dumb red necks but at least we exercise our freedom to have our own opinion unlike the bunch of brainwashed, mindless liberals that will believe everything they hear, or read.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 01:38 AM
link   
Before i begin, i would just like to say "lern 2 spel".




Originally posted by liesnomore
Let see how this work. You got to store and by a rifle with ammo. Then bunch of a solders are showing up and demand you to go with them. You live in a normal house and have wife and kids with you in that house. You decided to refuse to go and start firing with your rifle. The solders return fire and you and your family are dead.


This situation bears no context to reality in any way. If the soldiers are demanding that you go with them, then it is because they are under orders to do so, in which case, most of us are already screwed, because martial law has been enacted. Once you decide to open fire on a group of soldiers, they are justified to return fire. This is a conscious decision made by the person holding the firearm.


Question #1: Who give to you a right to decide of life of your wife and kids. Did you ask them before you open a fire?


If I feel that someone is threatening to take my freedom away from me without due process of law, or is attempting to put me into a "FEMA" or concentration camp, then I would rather die than go willingly to my own death, or to let any harm come to my family.


#2: Did you really think at that moment that you can defend their life's?.
The brave one will exit the house and draw attention to himself so his family could escape(small chance but it is a chance). You could pay for that with your life, but you will give to your family a chance to live.


Where would the family escape to? the forest? How could I, as a man, run out into open gunfire, as you are suggesting, and leave my family to fend for themselves, when I could fight for my freedom like any true brave american should. Either way, I run the risk of losing my life, but if it's to be at the hands of an oppressive regime, then by God, I will not go alone.


Now imagine another scenario: You are( and your family) living in a mountains. You build a house inside a mountain, Not too low and not at the top. You have a food supply and water to last for at least 5 years. You have a mine field surrounding that mountain and heavy gun machine. Few missile to take a planes down. The whole complex is good enough to sustain even a nuke blast,
Noe the solders are coming to get you and you respond. They run for their life's.
You have a chance to defend your and your family life`s.
That would be a smart.


Who's going to build this immense fortress in the mountains.... you? I dare say that the situation you have proposed is very grand on a logistical scale. How many people do you know that can just up and carve out a house in a mountain, and further more, arm it with missiles capable of shooting planes out of the sky, and mines all around the mountain?
Before you suggest a situation, at least apply some common sense to it.


As I said before - there it is a difference between being brave and being stupid.
With one are you?
Sport hunting - what it is a sport have to do with?. You get a rifle with a scope and shut an animal from a distance without any chance that any harm can be done to yourself. In my book - that it is not a sport - it is a "chicken #" game. Real man will chase that animal on foot and combat "hand to hand".


While I do agree with you that hunting animals should be done without firearms in order to be called "sport", i prefer archery myself, as it is much more challenging. Secondly, we aren't cavemen. fighting animals with our bare hands? I'll let you do it first. Let me know how that works out for ya chief runningdeer...


I guess that will be too much for most of those "hunters" as they are too fat to make 20 yards.


you make too many assumptions, and draw illogical conclusions based on those assumptions.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 04:06 AM
link   
''While many Americans don't know it, one of President Obama's main goals while in office is to ban firearms for the public and abolish the 2nd ammendment. I'm here to tell you all why that is a very bad idea.''

What an excellent idea! We did it here in the UK and now we all just use knives instead!


Well it would actually be a good idea if the Police & FBI...etc gave them up too!
Why not just have an Armed response unit for emergency's?

[edit on 25-2-2009 by paulcottrell84]



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 05:20 AM
link   
I wish for more cameras and guns and privatized communities not compounds.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 06:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by liesnomore
Kids are joining a gangs because they see no future or they was told by their parent of easy way to a wealth. If you put a military uniform on them and give them a proper discipline and education- they will turn out to be a good solders.
If you love your gun so much - at least use a rubber bullets or taser gun. How many of you are attending a church and claim that you love the God, but in the some time you are violate( or willing too) the God Law- "Thau shall no kill".
Seems like you do whatever it is convenient at given moment.

The "Thou Shalt Not Kill" is actually a mistranslation from the original language, which I convienently forgot, it was orginally something along the lines of, "Thou Shall Kill No Innocen." An innocent in biblical terms defined as someone who has committed no crimes in their life and is a good person. So according to the Bible, not only is it acceptable to kill criminals, but as pointed out in other parts, it is encouraged.



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 10:10 PM
link   
reply to post by W3RLIED2
 


Interesting article. Back in the '90's when I was a Compuserve user I entered a link to the English language St. Petersburg [Russia]Times and found a similar article. The Reds had spread the fiction that it would be a peaceful meeting and to leave their weapons at home. When the crowd arrived the Reds showed their armament and took control. To put it mildly.

From other sources:

When the Russians threw out the Czar a lawyer named Kerensky formed a fairly liberal government -- something the Reds would never tolerate so they revolted; Kerensky tried to use the army to quell the riots without success and the Reds gained control.

When Stalin became dictator he instituted a policy making self-defense a crime -- one that has been copied by American politician politicians ever since. Criminals got little more than a slap on the wrist while those who defended themselves were sent to the gulags. Solzhenitzyn's "Gulag Archipelago Two" is hard to come by this day and age (and expensive to buy if you find it) because it spells out the facts. One could not draw his knife (pistols were taboo) until the attacker drew his and could not stab the attacker until the attacker stabbed first. The intended victim was expected to flee instead. As the people were conditioned into not resisting crime they were also conditioned into not resisting the tyranny that "Uncle Joe" had in store for them.

Interestingly, gun ownership was permitted under certain conditions: the buyer had to be "politically correct;" the guns had to be for "sporting use only" (does that look familiar?) and they were to be kept in an armory instead of at home (something else that has been proposed for the USA).

Some interesting figures as to the number of murders that governments have been able to commit on unarmed civilians has been published by Jews For the Preservation of Firearms Ownership at www.jpfo.org ; JPFO also has pointed out that our 1968 Gun Control Act was brought home by Thomas Dodd -- literally, in the original German -- and, when Dodd was elected to the Senate, translated by the Library of Congress; and Hitler's 1938 Weapons Act was written into US law by Dodd.

An appalling number of US officials seem to have had their fingers crossed when they swore to "protect the Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic" when they took the oath of office.



posted on Mar, 2 2009 @ 08:36 AM
link   
reply to post by Rorschach51
 


Bible was written by a Piso family to create a religion in opposition to a existed Jews religion and all the characters in that book are fictional. People are interpreting that book to apply for their own convenience. Killing it is wrong.
There are many ways to stop a opponent without taking a life. The problem with guns exists of because a law enforcement are not doing their job and "law obeying" people do not follow the rules. There would be no school shutting if the firearm owner secure it properly and law enforcement will uphold a current gun law. Illegal firearm sale it is the problem, but it is "too dangerous" to enforce that law. Two reason of why the government do not was to disarm a gangs:
1) Too dangerous to enforce
2) Let them kill each other
I forgot to mention of a TV ratings.



posted on Mar, 7 2009 @ 08:17 PM
link   
reply to post by W3RLIED2
 


Excellent post W3RLIED, It amazes me how stupid some people are when it comes to guns. Criminals dont give a flying rats ass about gun laws, THEY'RE CRIMINALS FOR GOD'S SAKE! They can and will either get their hands on a gun, or use a different weapon (pitchfork anyone?) to commit murders and robberies. I'm a future police officer and I am telling you all right now, go buy a weapon, learn how to use it, and NEVER give it up. Stop letting the government trample your rights, and defend yourself. Even as I type this, a 12 gauge Mossberg shotgun sits about a foot away from me, ready for any would be robbers, rapists, or murderers to come busting through a door/window, because when they do, I swear to everything holy it will be the last mistake said jackass will ever make. You cannot, and will not impede my rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and YOU Mr. Obama, sure as hell will not be taking any of my weapons away, and if you try, you will no doubt have a revolution on your hands.

Good luck out there folks.



posted on Mar, 16 2009 @ 02:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Vodo34861
reply to post by freighttrain
 


Please support your argument with facts. And by facts I mean the actual numbers. These numbers should represent the deaths by guns measured as a ratio to the total percentage of the population and by clasification. Such as self defense, murder, police used, accidents and such.

Anyone can come on here and make a claim. Please support your claim with proof.


EASY and sad how far America is fallen into the trash can.


ATLANTA -- The United States has by far the highest rate of gun deaths -- murders, suicides and accidents -- among the world's 36 richest nations, a government study found.
The U.S. rate for gun deaths in 1994 was 14.24 per 100,000 people. Japan had the lowest rate, at .05 per 100,000.
The study, done by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, is the first comprehensive international look at gun-related deaths.....

.....The study used 1994 statistics supplied by the 36 countries. Of the 88,649 gun deaths reported by all the countries, the United States accounted for 45 percent, said Etienne Krug, a CDC researcher and co-author of the article.

The study found that gun-related deaths were five to six times higher in the Americas than in Europe or Australia and New Zealand and 95 times higher than in Asia.
Here are gun-related deaths per 100,000 people in the world's 36 richest countries in 1994: United States 14.24; Brazil 12.95; Mexico 12.69; Estonia 12.26; Argentina 8.93; Northern Ireland 6.63; Finland 6.46; Switzerland 5.31; France 5.15; Canada 4.31; Norway 3.82; Austria 3.70; Portugal 3.20; Israel 2.91; Belgium 2.90; Australia 2.65; Slovenia 2.60; Italy 2.44; New Zealand 2.38; Denmark 2.09; Sweden 1.92; Kuwait 1.84; Greece 1.29; Germany 1.24; Hungary 1.11; Republic of Ireland 0.97; Spain 0.78; Netherlands 0.70; Scotland 0.54; England and Wales 0.41; Taiwan 0.37; Singapore 0.21; Mauritius 0.19; Hong Kong 0.14; South Korea 0.12; Japan 0.05.


www.guncite.com...


The facts always speak for themselves. What's sad is that so many Americans have so little faith in their country and government that they need guns to feel safe.

As someone said before what would happen if every American had guns ? Al Qaeda wouldn't even need to carry out any terrorist operations in America, we would be killing ourselves far more efficiently than they ever could.
Guns don't guaranteee a persons freedom, only brainwashed people think that. Education guarantees freedom, something which America is sadly lacking. I see high school math being taught in Sophomore University degrees in this country where in England or Australia this would be Year 12 mathematics.



posted on Mar, 16 2009 @ 02:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by gibbs1189
reply to post by W3RLIED2
 


Excellent post W3RLIED, It amazes me how stupid some people are when it comes to guns. Criminals dont give a flying rats ass about gun laws, THEY'RE CRIMINALS FOR GOD'S SAKE! They can and will either get their hands on a gun, or use a different weapon (pitchfork anyone?) to commit murders and robberies. I'm a future police officer and I am telling you all right now, go buy a weapon, learn how to use it, and NEVER give it up. Stop letting the government trample your rights, and defend yourself. Even as I type this, a 12 gauge Mossberg shotgun sits about a foot away from me, ready for any would be robbers, rapists, or murderers to come busting through a door/window, because when they do, I swear to everything holy it will be the last mistake said jackass will ever make. You cannot, and will not impede my rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and YOU Mr. Obama, sure as hell will not be taking any of my weapons away, and if you try, you will no doubt have a revolution on your hands.

Good luck out there folks.


Erm right so you are going to become a police officer to enforce the very laws that you claim are taking away peoples rights. You sound about as redneck as they come and of course the police don't attract the smartest people in the world. Look up the word contradiction and then look up hypocrit - do hey describe ? you



posted on Mar, 16 2009 @ 02:58 AM
link   
reply to post by gibbs1189
 


Excellent, well thought out post. I wish you the best in your career in law enforcement! We need more like you!



posted on Mar, 16 2009 @ 01:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by plumranch
reply to post by gibbs1189
 


Excellent, well thought out post. I wish you the best in your career in law enforcement! We need more like you!


LOL well thought out......once again an example of the dismal American education system. Please show me how it was well thought out and not just some rant ?



posted on Mar, 16 2009 @ 02:33 PM
link   
Great thread. I am a unwavering supporter of the 2nd. I am proud to see so many people discuss and question the Constitution. The founding fathers would be proud to see it also.

My personal opinion on firearms is that they even the playing field in the game of death and murder. Everyone has an equal chance to kill. Nothing stops a rapist cold in their tracks like a piece of metal traveling at high velocity. I know it is impossible to go back in time but just imagine if all of the people ever killed in concentration camps had been armed with even just small arms? They might still have been killed but I believe they would have at least died in their homes with dignity and pride rather than watch the wife and child be forced into a work camp and starve to death or be executed. They might have taken enough of the bad guys with them to prevent them from killing anyone else.

No one likes to think that their government would ever do anything to hurt them. History on the other hand has shown time and time again that humans can be very greedy, very violent and very controlling.



posted on Mar, 16 2009 @ 03:21 PM
link   
reply to post by AgentMoulder
 





At the moment there are bigger fish to fry. Mainly the economic turmoil most of are in at the moment.


THAT is the problem.

In Sept. 14, 1994 David Rockefeller, speaking at the UN Business Council,.
"This present window of opportunity, during which a truly peaceful and interdependent world order might be built, will not be open for too long - We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order.". And WTO was ratified a year later.


Obama promised a chance to look at and comment on laws and regs. He promised to stop any Bush Regs for a set number of days. Meanwhile the USDA has rushed NAIS through the Federal Register (so far there are over 6000 negative comments),and Obama has already signed The funding for NAIS. The WTO and The Politics of Food

I have seen NOTHING that shows me Obama is not "business as usual" With International Corporations running the USA (NAIS comes from WTO)

"Aims to ensure that governments do not use quarantine and food safety requirements as Unjustified trade barriers.. It provides Member countries with a right to implement traceability {NAIS} as an SPS measure." WTO AoA

Given the attitude of the farmers who I have talked to I can understand WHY a gun ban is needed and it has nothing to do with terrorists or criminals. Stalin used a no guns, no food policy to great effect, and Kissenger said "food is power" if that does not give you sleepless nights I do not know what will. exhibits: Ukraine Starvation 1933-1934





new topics
top topics
 
89
<< 10  11  12   >>

log in

join