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 or No Guns?? Your views.

page: 15
19
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 08:50 AM
link   
reply to post by Freeborn
 


Define "readily available"

There's an all out ban on the island of Jamaica and their police are currently locked into a military conflict with a drug gang.

By the UK's own admission and reports criminals are still getting their hands on guns.

To make them not "readily available" we have to go back to impossibilities like removing every firearm from existence and ceasing to permit physics and chemistry to be studied subjects.



I guess the lesson from those maybe that if you live in a gun owning society it is best not to have any 'no guns allowed' areas.


That right there is key. You cant have guns all over the place save a handful of selected areas. Anyone wishing to cause harm will simply follow the path of least resistance making any "gun free" zone the ideal target.

[edit on 4-6-2010 by thisguyrighthere]




posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 09:00 AM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


Trust me, the vast majority of criminals in this country do not have guns.

The major drug running gangsters may have them, apart from that they are very rare.

Yes, people can get hold of them, but it takes time and a lot of money and you have to 'know' the right people.

And guns tend to be used in Armed Robberies of banks, jewellers, etc and not in the average run of the mill shop robbery and most definately not in burglaries.

A lot of the increase in gun crimes has been in black on black shootings in the major cities like London, Manchester, Liverpool and Birmingham.



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 09:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Freeborn
 
I am not looking to start a go-round here, but I can build a functional, KILL somebody gun, in 30 minutes using instructions from the internet(posted by a British guy- no less!) and components from any hardware store.

No ammo needs to be purchased, nor do any chemicals need to be mixed to make the ammo.



[edit on 4-6-2010 by butcherguy]



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 09:32 AM
link   
reply to post by butcherguy
 


So could I, but I haven't....and neither has the vast amount of other people in the UK.

Why?

Guess it's because WE JUST DON'T WANT TO!

I really don't know how many times it has to be said, we just don't see thing's like you in the US do.
It's inherent in your national psyche.
And that's ok.
I, and no-one else in the UK I assume, wishes to take that right away from you.
We just don't see the need to have the same right.

Read throuh this thread and see how many times that has been said and by how many different people.



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 09:45 AM
link   
15 pages within 2 days!


I say this and if they take away all our guns, then we are just easy targets for total take over by either our own country or any other country that decides to invade America.



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 09:53 AM
link   
reply to post by dragnet53
 


No-one has succesfully invaded Britain for nearly a thousand years.

The shear logistics involved with invading the USA would be immense and utter folly, regardless of whether the population is armed or not.

[edit on 4/6/10 by Freeborn]



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 10:01 AM
link   
Thats correct. Why did Japan not invade the USA? Because its citizens were armed?

Nope.

It was too far away and its Navy was decimated at Midway, thats why.



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 10:03 AM
link   
I am for strict gun control means, but not a ban on people getting them. I mean if you just let everyone walk in off the street and get a gun, then you will probably have more gun crime. You open it up to criminals getting them easily, mental patients, anyone could have one. I'm for restrictions and permits for ownership. Register that you have a firearm and be made to get the proper facilities to store it (so your kid doesn't accidentally get into it, or a robber). Have a mental health check to see if you are unstable, have a criminal record check, have a police inspection of the firearm half yearly to make sure you haven't sold it illegally. Have everyone who gets one go through training and gun safety classes just as you would for getting a car. Make sure everyone with a firearm is a responsible person, and have checks in balance where they renew it every few years and regularly make sure they still have them to cut down on the illegal trade. I think that is ideal.



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 10:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Freeborn
reply to post by dragnet53
 


No-one has succesfully invaded Britain for nearly a thousand years.

The shear logistics involved with invading the USA would be immense and utter folly, regardless of whether the population is armed or not.

[edit on 4/6/10 by Freeborn]


All it takes is one crazy person to do something. 1000 years though sounds about right. The last country to invade Britain was Rome. But I thought Germany also invaded Britain and won?

bah, off topic a little , but I believe guns are necessary. It protects us from criminals who can easily obtain guns within a day. Gangs are getting so bad there has to be some protection civilians need if police can't be reached if in harms way. Some say cops are bad, they haven't met MS13 gang members.






[edit on 4-6-2010 by dragnet53]



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 10:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by waynos
Thats correct. Why did Japan not invade the USA? Because its citizens were armed?

Nope.

It was too far away and its Navy was decimated at Midway, thats why.


From what i am told our troops made it too Japan shore. One of my Japanese friends told me the US troops made it close to the shrine where they keep the infamous katana that protects Japan. Forgot the name of the katana. It was given to them by the goddess. Citizens of Japan protected that shrine to the death.



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 10:10 AM
link   
reply to post by waynos
 


The Japanese did invade. They came into Alaska and took a foot hold.


The Japanese foothold on Alaskan soil placed a new sense of urgency on the completion of the Alcan Highway. U.S. military buildup slowly began when the highway was finished in October 1942. But because of other urgent military needs for the war in Europe and Pacific, troops and equipment were difficult to allocate for an offensive to drive out the invaders.

Read more at Suite101: Alaska Under Attack www.suite101.com...



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 10:18 AM
link   
reply to post by dragnet53
 


Sorry, way off target.

The Normans were the last people who successfully invaded Britain.
en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 10:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Freeborn
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 




Yes, people can get hold of them, but it takes time and a lot of money and you have to 'know' the right people.

Well it was one of your countrymen that posted the info that I read about building firearms at home.

And I was just saying that guns are not that hard to get, when you tape(literally) one together in a matter of minutes with commonly available parts.

Not saying you are forcing anything on us over here, we are all good.

I was just getting some more info out in the open.



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 10:22 AM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


Would love to have this discussion but it is way off topic....but I must admit, I never knew that Japan invaded Alaska....but we mean SUCCESSFULLY invade.

Now if a thread on this subject were to appear I'm sure i'd contribute.

Anyhow's, that's me off to read up on that!



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 10:28 AM
link   
I'm for guns and I'm for gun safety. I feel safer knowing that right-minded people can own and carry guns here in the United States. God help us, we need to preserve the 2nd amendment! More Guns, Less Crime. by John Lott provides well researched statistics and facts about the issue, cutting through the B.S. of the anti-gun groups. Gun Owners of America is another good resource.

Of course, if you ask Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot (if they were still alive), Richard Daley, Micheal Bloomberg and the Queen (who are all alive), gun (bans) control is a great idea!

[edit on 4-6-2010 by IGottaBeMe]



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 10:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by dragnet53
The last country to invade Britain was Rome. But I thought Germany also invaded Britain and won?



Er..... Rome is not a country. :shk:
And no, we were never invaded by Germany nor conquered, had they followed us back over from Dunkirk then who knows... But no.

I suggest brushing up on your history mate



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 10:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by IGottaBeMe
I'm for guns and I'm for gun safety. I feel safer knowing that right-minded people can own and carry guns here in the United States.




The guy who shot the people here in the UK was a legitimate gun owner too... had no mental health issues and was well liked within the community.

All it takes is one "right-minded" person to flip and this is the result...



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 11:53 AM
link   
reply to post by dragnet53
 


Hate to derail this thread, but I have never heard of US forces landing on any of the main Japanese islands until 29th August 1945 which was 15 days after Japan agreed to the unconditional surrender.

Whilst there may have been resentment to their presence, understandably, there are I have never come across any reports of armed conflict.

I don't know anyting about a holy katana and definately not about fighting associated with it.

Sources if possible as I'd like to read any accounts of these events, in another thread preferably,



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 12:15 PM
link   
O/T but the French invaded Britain in 1797. Popular legend has it they surrended to a bunch of Welsh women wielding pitchforks ......

(in reality a handful some did, though this was a minor part of the event)

en.wikipedia.org...

Anyway, forget guns - all we need to defend Britain is a few women in big hats with pitchforks



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 12:52 PM
link   
I am sorry if this has been said before on this thread but i feel like we need guns. I am all for strict policies and all the hoopla that goes with it. I feel that if you make a law to disarm the LAW ABIDING citizens then all thats going to do is hurt the law abiding citizens. The criminals can get guns, no matter how strict the laws are they will get them. Its just like drugs and alcohol in the prohibition era here in the US. If you want it bad enough there is always a way, so all that making laws against guns does is hurt the people that follow the laws. If a criminal feels like breaking into a home here in the US they at least have to think well maybe this guy has a gun, this in turn may psych a lot of wanna be thieves out from doing crimes. Although if there is a complete and total ban on guns then they know for a 100% no guns no problems for me. sure you could have a ball bat or a knife or whatever but at the end of the day when u play rock paper scissors GUN always wins. I feel like arming the public would be great because last time i checked a gun is an inanimate object and can only work when something is working it.



new topics

top topics



 
19
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join