Obama's Gun Ban List Is Out

Originally posted by Northern Raider
I joined this thread to try and get it stopped as this was a survival forum until the guin nuts and conspracy theorists turned up...

Free men who own guns.... you mean idoits who massacrs workmates and schoolfriends.

We do have mods on this board. If they're leaving the topic open, then they apparently consider it to be an appropriate topic of discussion.

Make your case and leave it at that.

BTW, blanket insults smearing all American gun owners like that final sentence I also quoted certainly isn't going to help you change any minds.

I keep rolling back to this thread to see if it has returned to the topic, but I see that it hasn't.

Northern Raider. Im gonna make a debate thread for just me and you to debate the issues of guns, you can argue your fact less blanket statements and I will gather all the hard data to prove my facts. Although people like you can have facts put in your face all day but it wont penetrate your all ready made up mind. In the mean time we can have u2u wars, Ill give you a heads up im striking first.

reply to post by larphillips


I don't think it was ever on topic to begin with. But as for the actual topic at hand, I don't think its going anywhere anytime soon. For one, gun bans in the US typically have more opposition than support. Second, the Obama administration has blown its credibility on the issue by blaming Mexican gun violence on the US. No one really bought it, and it seems that instead, they see it as a pathetic justification to possibly ban a class firearms in the US. Any further attempts at justifying a ban will likely be seen with a very skeptical eye by the public.

Originally posted by vor78
reply to post by larphillips

 

I don't think it was ever on topic to begin with. But as for the actual topic at hand, I don't think its going anywhere anytime soon. For one, gun bans in the US typically have more opposition than support. Second, the Obama administration has blown its credibility on the issue by blaming Mexican gun violence on the US. No one really bought it, and it seems that instead, they see it as a pathetic justification to possibly ban a class firearms in the US. Any further attempts at justifying a ban will likely be seen with a very skeptical eye by the public.

While I agree that using the Mexican situation as an attempt to push through gun legislation was clumsy at best, potentially back-firing at worst; my conspiratorial mind thinks otherwise. While even the most extreme anti-gun nut can see that the pieces don't fit, it DID succeed in putting the gun debate back out onto the table. In fact, while tragic (and possibly 100% staged and/or instigated) the recent rash of shootings and gun violence seemed to be timed perfectly to further that debate now that it was firmly in the public eye. It seemed to instantly, and rather perfectly, destroy any 'win' that the pro-gun crowd got out of laughing at the implication that the Mexican drug gangs were using US guns in their war. These deaths have given the gun-control folks plenty of ammo (pun intended) to use to further their cause, and they have a wave of momentum to ride.

reply to post by larphillips


The anti-gun crowd will politicize it as they always do, but I don't really think those incidents will change any minds. If there were any real anti-gun momentum, we'd be hearing a great deal more out of Congress, yet outside of the usual suspects, they're not really saying anything.

And don't get me started on the timing of this crap. Isn't it odd how several of these major incidents happen all together anytime the government starts pushing gun control? I'm not much of a conspiracy theorist, but it just seems a bit convenient to me.

Originally posted by vor78
reply to post by larphillips

 

The anti-gun crowd will politicize it as they always do, but I don't really think those incidents will change any minds. If there were any real anti-gun momentum, we'd be hearing a great deal more out of Congress, yet outside of the usual suspects, they're not really saying anything.

And don't get me started on the timing of this crap. Isn't it odd how several of these major incidents happen all together anytime the government starts pushing gun control? I'm not much of a conspiracy theorist, but it just seems a bit convenient to me.

Yes, very, very convenient.

As far as congress acting, I think that any anti-gun legislation suffers when given enough lead time. My guess this time is that there will be a very quick strike that will be pushed through either over a holiday or buried in some "emergency" bill. It'll get fast tracked all the way through before gun supporters have time to act. My guess is that we won't see it coming.

Here are the facts about the first AWB (assault weapon ban) When clinton signed the bill.
Clinton signed the AWB
Economy suffers loss of sales (multi millions per year)
Law abiding Americans can no longer buy several types of firearms
Crime stayed the same
Murder stayed the same
Shootings stayed the same
AWB expires:
crime does not rise
murder does not rise
Millions is pumped into the economy.

the majority of all the mass shootings that happen in the U.S. are carried out in towns or states with the strictest gun laws and where citizens are not allowed to carry a concealed weapon. In all the states or towns where citizens can carry a concealed firearm, their crime rate is lower than any state that does not allow concealed carry. It is what it is, facts are facts. We are safer with fire arms. Look at the U.K. they dont have guns to kill people so what do they do...... 1-give up for lack of a gun? 2-cool off and forgive and forget? OR 3-get a knife or baseball bat and then kill that person? Has anybody seen the U.Ks knife related deaths?

Please forgive my exchanges with Mr. Raiders’ having hijacked this discussion; I make no other plea than the petulant wines of a British crown surf against the evils of the Second Amendment’s guaranty of our continued freedom is at best ‘cheeky’, at worst hypocritical fallacious garbage; especially when one considers that the Second Amendment was written with the British crown’s attempt to disarm the American colonist still fresh in mind.

After reading some of the delusional revised history he presented, I should have realized that continued exchange would be counter productive, as he seems to need anti-psychotic medication to return to reality. Indicative of this is the thread he started on the capabilities of air guns, while espousing ‘gun club freedom’ in the UK; sad and pathetic. Enough said on this.

Now, as to Mexican drug violence being blamed on America’s legally brought guns going to Mexican drug cartels, did anyone notice that the pictures of most of the rifles displayed were full auto US military weapons? What I know for sure is that in several photos there were racks of M-16 A2’s and M203 grenade launchers on M4 carbine rifles shown; these rifles are not sold in civilian gun shops. Mass quantities of them have been sold to different departments of the Mexican government however; which means that the CIA intelligence report to Congress in 2007 that weapons being sold to the Mexican government were being resold to cartel members was indeed true. This would answer a LOT of questions as even LEGAL full auto weapons are next to impossible to buy in the USA now. Also note that EVERY picture seen of shot up autos and building reflect the scars of full auto fire, not being something you can stroll into a gun store and purchase in California, or any other state for that matter.

This is just another example of the attempt to whip up the public sentiment to except more restrictions of our God given right to self- defense from governmental thugs. If we allow this to happen, we too will be fantasizing about our freedom while attempting to increase the lethality of air-guns; anyone want to be a surf too?


[edit on 4/7/2009 by SGTChas]

reply to post by tac109


Hey Brother Patriot, how about cutting us dog faces some slack, we are on your side ya know!

While the infantry practices ‘advancing to the rear’, the US Airborne, Rangers and Green Berets most certainly do not. Remember that it was special ops teams that Reagan sent into Lebanon when Israel invaded to teach the Hezbollah not to mess with the US after they truck bombed the Marines; we first were used to unbury our fellow Americans (Marines), THEN he sent us in. Tagged and bagged over 3500 the first day with the memories of our dead brothers still fresh in our minds; even left death cards so they KNEW who had arranged their fellow terrorist meeting Allah; why they did not mess with us again for quiet some time.

The Survival Forum:

This forum is for the discussion of techniques and strategies related to surviving major catastrophes that may effect very-large regions or entire countries.

The relevance between this topic and the Survival Forum, was slim to begin with . Since everyone seems intent on discussing theory rather than Survival techniques, I'm moving this to Politics.

Further Off topic posts will be removed.

The Topic:

Obama's Gun Ban List Is Out

I'd have to agree wholeheartedly with the statements of firearm control, since many American citizens that own guns obviously will vote against them. Those that oppose them need to look at facts and realize that in most states, if you're convicted of a felony, it's illegal for you to own a gun.
I honestly believe a thorough psychological evaluation should be required as well as a background check. It'll inconvenience avid gun lovers, and maybe even first time buyers but a little. I'd go through a psych-evaluation to buy a firearm, I'll do the classes every year that are required for a Concealed carry permit in my state, but I also agree that far too many stupid people have guns.

Marines are a little overrated, they have done amazing things in the past, but they're not the same Marines as they are today. Amazing people make amazing Marines, Rangers, Green Berets, SEALs, and what have you, not even the most excellent training can cure stupidity.

I know what gang violence can do to a neighborhood, and so I can on some level understand what the gun control advocates are thinking, but if the criminals know that people don't have any weapons, while they're strapped with a TEC9 or Glock, they're going to be bolder than before. There's a town somewhere in Virginia I believe, that Requires that every household has at least one gun. Crime rates are some of the lowest in the country. Why? Because criminals know that people have guns.

psychological evaluation? Well who decides whos crazy or not? The government? They can create their own "go no go" standards. It will sound something like this.... Have you ever rolled through a stop sign? Yes. Im sorry but your too unstable to own a gun. If you add up all the gun owners in America its only a small small number that go crazy.

[edit on 9-4-2009 by tac109]

I don't think it'll be quite that strict, but I think it should be like the Concealed Carry classes, you take it once every X-number of years, and are given a card or license that you present at the time of your purchase with an ID. It's not a concrete idea, I'm just stating what I think. The Government, in all of their intelligence would find a way to f--- it up, but they always find a way to F--- things up.

Anywho... I understand that only a majority of legal gun owners are crazy, but most people don't.

reply to post by tac109


That's the problem with a psychological test. In theory, I have no problem with it, but I do not trust the people who would be designing and administering it. We all know what would happen: the test would be used as a defacto ban.

There have been widespread reports of cities doing this with handgun registration and licensing. You can own a handgun, but you have to fill out a form available only at the city clerk's office. You go to the clerk's office and guess what? They're out of forms. In fact, they're always out of forms, because they only print up about 1/1000th of the number they actually need. But that's OK. You can come back and try again next month when they get their next shipment of half a dozen forms for a city of 500,000.

The same would happen with psychological testing. They'd make the test so difficult that no one could pass it or they'd administer it in a way that only a small fraction of applicants could take it in a given month, resulting in a huge backlog.

[edit on 10-4-2009 by vor78]

I agree mate. It's like I said, the government can F--- up a totally fool proof plan.

It's one of the strange things that happens. One person comes up with a good idea, and the next person in line screws it up.

reply to post by SGTChas


I am sure I have seen people tell you this before and I am going to say it again. Don't put your whole freakin post in bold. It just makes it hard to read, in fact I tried to read it and gave up because it was hurting my eyes. Please only use bold when you reach an important part in a post.

-Cauch1
Look I can post in freakin bold as well!!!

Now my view on all this is that banning guns does not help. I have said this before. If you make it a crime to own a gun in order to prevent people committing crimes then your head must be thicker than the walls of the presidents bunker. I mean come on please think about it people. If they are going to commit a crime with a gun then making it a crime to have the then they don't give a **** because they were already going to commit a crime anyway. Besides if I want to kill someone I can just take a kitchen knife walk up beside someone and stick it in them. Its actually a lot easier than trying to get away with it when you are using a gun. In Britain all violent gun crime has gone up since the gun ban. If I want to get a gun for illegal purposes I know people who can get me them .

Then when the government realises that they have screwed up they say that they meant something different so what they said when they banned the guns out. First they said that they were banning guns to stop them being used for illegal purposes and to harm people. Then when they realised that they had messed up they turned around and said that what they meant was that they didn't want people being accidently harmed by legally owned guns. WTF!?! That is the compete opposite of what you originally said and there never was a problem with people being accidently harmed. *sigh* Sometimes I just want to give up on the people in this world and say F it I will do it my way.
Right who is next up .

-Cauch1

Originally posted by tac109
Our USMC base camp pendleton is almost half the size of your country alone.

That's plain silly

195 sq mi - Camp Pendleton
94,526 sq mi - UK