Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Guns or No Guns?? Your views.

page: 2
19
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 09:09 AM
link   
I am for guns because they stopped the invasion of the United States mainland from Japan.




posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 09:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Essan
 


I have to ask this...are you by any chance a
member of the NWO?Your post seems to smell
like you are!

I am an armed, american grandma.I also don't
have the neccessary equipement for castration.
That having been said,what do you think should
be my punishment for being a gun owner?

FYI,I practice shooting at least once a month.
This last time,I had two bullseyes out of five shots.
My "baby" is a .357,five shot revolver.



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 09:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by queenannie38
i'm american and this is what i would do, if it were up to me:

get rid of ALL guns
no matter who or why or where

all guns going into the ocean
NO EXCEPTIONS

this includes cannon, missile launchers, etc.

hell, if i'm gonna do all that, then i might as well say that anything of a violent weapon nature that has no other purpose other than to KILL man or animal must GO!

no exceptions.

that's what i would do.
Living under the rule of a foreign dictator, that is what you would be doing, afterwards!



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 09:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kandinsky


On ATS I've often seen the expression of NRA sentiments. In particular, I remember a very well-known member cheerfully dismissing statistical evidence against possession of weapons. Higher death rates? Ha! Higher gun crime? That's why need guns! I think it was you, Blup Blup having the debate with him. I realised then, that the US will always have guns.



I remember mate... and that's the problem with "Statistics".... It's as Disraeli said.
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics."
For every stat and fact I showed said member about guns... they came back with NRA stats and all kinds of other stuff.
People only believe their own stats and their own side and that goes for any argument on here, let alone one as touchy and complicated as guns.

On one side, people know the simple truth is that guns breed violence.... not solve it.

On the other the people believe they are safer with guns...

What can you do?



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 09:38 AM
link   
In Texas, most of us laugh about this absurd idea of banning firearms for personal protection, let alone sporting guns and rifles.
Throw them all in the ocean? Is this something that everyone will voluntarily do, or are we advocating search and seizure in all homes and businesses by the government? You want a bloody civil war? Because no one is going to voluntarily leave themselves vulnerable to the whims of government, relying on "police protection", an oxymoron if there ever was one.
Here, the sheriffs love the fact the people are armed, it makes their jobs easier, more coffee time.
The problem in America is so many Americans have been affluent enough to purchase illegal drugs that a huge industry built up around the distribution. If you removed the gun violence between rival gangs, and the police response, you would see a very different picture. In fact, the CIA has been implicated in drug running, and aren't they "government"?
Forgive me for laughing, but if you were in my shoes, you would probably have a gun and know how to use it.
Or, you would live in Austin smoking weed imagining everyone throwing their guns in the ocean!



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 09:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by yoesse
reply to post by blupblup
 


Guns really aren't the issue. Sanity is really the core of the issue. Unfortunately that issue is in the purview of the "psyche" professions who are also behind the programs being used to manipulate the masses to complacency conformity and addiction. The real problem is the mixture of the two.





Yeah but people whose sanity has diminished.... shouldn't be able to have guns.
people say that if these people didn't have a gun then it would be a knife or baseball bat or whatever.... that's crazy.

I've had a knife pulled on me before..and I dealt with it....and if I saw some guy start stabbing people and going on a stabbing rampage, I wouldn't think twice about trying to disarm him along with many others I'm sure.

However, If this was a gun... and he was blasting people, then who would want to confront the shooter or try and disarm him?

Believe me... It may well be the mental state of the people doing the shooting, that goes without saying, but having access to guns and guns themselves, are most definitely the issue.


[edit on 3/6/10 by blupblup]



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 09:41 AM
link   
Guns will always exist, make a law to ban guns and only the law abiders will not have protection. Criminals will have guns either way and there is nothing you, I nor the gov can do about it. This is why they are called criminals and if they where not then we would not be having this discussion.

I am against it as I beleave in the constitution. The constitution is not here for us to vote on "in america" and any politition that does not follow or vote for the constitution is in violation of treason. Unfortunently the entire gov is in violation of the constitution and should all be disbanded under treason. If they can not be honest with america then they should not be in office. The two party system is what ruined this concept and it is every americans DUTY to overthrow this abomination. Including myself, unfortunently no one bans together and any who stick there heads out are murdered and covered up. Thus we will all rot.



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 09:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by jeh2324
You know, maybe these people who do not believe in being armed or owning guns are doing the rest of us a favor. They obviously don't trust themselves with a gun. One bad day and their whole office would feel their instability.
So thank you to the domesticated hippies for not shotting me while I work. I know your unstable, I won't hold it against you. But don't come for my gun or you'll get it barrel first.



Yeeeeehaaaaaawwwwwww.... them damn hippies will be gettin' a shottin'



:shk:



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 09:46 AM
link   
I have no problem with guns per se.
I recognise the comparison with cars.
They are both deadly machines when in the wrong hands.
It is the human being that mis-uses either that is ultimately as fault.

I also believe that I have a right to defend my property.
I have a right to defend my family.
And I have the inalienable right to defend myself.

I dispute none of these and will do whatever is necessary to defend my family, property and myself, no matter what.

But, and this is a massive but!

I can not agree with the relaxation of UK gun laws.
The more that guns are available the more they will be used.
Pure and simple.

I could never have been described as 'an angel' especially when younger.
I have seen, and been involved in, some scary situations and I can assure you that if guns were readily available then instead of physical violence occurring then guns would have been used.
No if's or but's, definately.
And so more death.

Britain is a very violent country by nature.
Imagine if the traditional Sauturday night punch up occurred with people carrying guns?
There would be bloodshed the length and breadth of Britain.

The more guns that are available the more they would be used, simple and easy as that.

As for US gun laws.
That is for them.
Their country, their choice.
The USA is a completely different country and in manys society.
The Right To Bear Arms is engrained in them in a way that it isn't probably anywhere else, (apart from maybe Switzerland).

To compare the two is apples and pears.



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 10:00 AM
link   
Why in 1968, when going into a shop and walking out with a shotgun was perfectly legal, was gun crime considerably lower than it is now?


Why before 1997, when a complete ban on handguns was enacted, was crime involving handguns considerably lower than today?


Why, when looking at the facts, do people still insist that taking away guns from the law abiding will result in lower gun deaths?


The major gun laws in this country were enacted as responses to mass shootings. Guess what? Around a decade after each was passed, another one happened.



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 10:02 AM
link   
reply to post by Freeborn
 




Exactly, we are violent, we love a punch-up.... if we had guns, we'd have as many of these incidents as they do in the US, probably more.

It's mainly the gun and gang culture over there that has influenced our "Yoofs" to start carrying them anyway.... it's pathetic.

We have a good punch-up, that's it... maybe someone gets stabbed, maybe you disarm them... whatever.

Can you imagine the football riots we've had in the past.... only with guns??

Damn.



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 10:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by and14263
Guns don't kill people...

Lack of education, mental illness and our collapsing society does.


My sentiments exactly.

Okay. I’ll sound off! I believe there are certain instances where personal gun ownership is completely realistic. For example, I would say a farmer could have one to put a lame, injured animal out of its misery. I view this type of usage as a kindness. That’s about it.

My personal stance is that guns are mostly used to put big holes in other humans. I have no interest in doing that. I am on the side of the fence that leans toward that idea that if no one had them, no one would get shot. If I were located somewhere that I felt I “should” have access to a nearby gun, I would move. And I’m in a big city with ample crime. To me it boils down to indoctrination and fear, and I refuse to succumb to the notion I need a gun for protection. I don’t want one, I don’t feel I need one, and if I was to meet my end at the wrong end of someone else’s gun, I’d offer that my number was up in this mortal coil anyway.

As for hunting, well, there’s enough meat in my local supermarket to get me by. In the case of a so-called “shtf” stiuation, well, I‘d be a quick vegetarian. Now even though my next statement may appear to make me look like a hypocrite, bear with me… While I do periodically (read: PERIODICALLY) eat meat, (mostly this is when I’m a guest in another’s home) it has to be presented in a small cube resembling nothing of its former self or I’d lose it the same way it went down rather quickly. I don’t have the stomach to kill something, carve it up eat it. Debating the merits of gun ownership in a starvation scenario is another thread, so perhaps I’ll eat my words should that one ever come about...

Even though I do have the option to get one with ease through the proper channels (Welcome to Canada, we have a long history with guns), I choose not to. Label me a dreamer, but I wish more carried that sentiment. If the majority (remember: I did exclude farmers) didn’t have one, there wouldn’t be a debate of pros or cons. It would be a non-issue.

The first and last time I held and fired a weapon was when I got cajoled into shooting trap with friends. I enjoyed myself. It was an oddly powerful feeling, one that left me with the notion that no one should have access to that kind of potentially life-altering/ending power in one’s hands.

Thank you for reading my two cents.



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 10:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheDarkTurnip
Why in 1968, when going into a shop and walking out with a shotgun was perfectly legal, was gun crime considerably lower than it is now?



Why was crime in general lower then, than it is now?
Why was there a community spirit and why did people have more respect and so on.... these are social issues, not gun issues.





Why, when looking at the facts, do people still insist that taking away guns from the law abiding will result in lower gun deaths?



Well as I put above.... the facts are not really facts, they are statistics, and depending on which "Side" you are on... these facts differ drastically.

"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics."





The major gun laws in this country were enacted as responses to mass shootings. Guess what? Around a decade after each was passed, another one happened.



Wow.... so one every 10-15 years?
Or one a week/month as in the USA.... Hmmmm and with all those guns over there to keep everyone safe too.





[edit on 3/6/10 by blupblup]



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 10:15 AM
link   
reply to post by mamabeth
 


I own the NWO


But this thread was prompted by an event in the UK and I am referring to the UK - where never in our history have old grannies carried a pistol whilst walking to the village to post a letter, and where apart from those needing a gun for their job, or using it for sport, the only people who want guns are kids with very, very small penises and even smaller brains ....



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 10:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by Auntie Matter
The first and last time I held and fired a weapon was when I got cajoled into shooting trap with friends. I enjoyed myself. It was an oddly powerful feeling, one that left me with the notion that no one should have access to that kind of potentially life-altering/ending power in one’s hands.

Thank you for reading my two cents.


That's interesting. I've used skeet to turn gun-phobic acquaintances to the gun-loving side. Once they've spent a few hours at the range they always come back with "that's it?" or "what's all the hype been about?" meaning they lose their unhealthy notion that a gun is some power-mad destructive device hellbent on destroying the world.

If you thought it gave you some feeling of power perhaps you have greater issues to work out.



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 10:23 AM
link   
reply to post by blupblup
 


Hardly one per month.

US "mass shooting" timeline since 2005

Note the vast majority if not all occurred in "gun-free" zones or in the case of the Amish a no-gun zone out of belief.

Given the land area and number of people living here the numbers and frequencies are further watered-down compared to that island you're on.

Context and scope if you care about facts and stats. Not hyperbole and name-calling. Unless that's all you want in the thread of course.

[edit on 3-6-2010 by thisguyrighthere]



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 10:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheDarkTurnip

Why before 1997, when a complete ban on handguns was enacted, was crime involving handguns considerably lower than today?


In what way do you think that the ban on handguns after Dunblane has led to an increase in gun crime?

Bearing in mind that apart from members of gun clubs, virtually no-one in the UK in 1996 legally owned a handgun.

The law was daft - it was over reaction and punished the innocent without in any real way preventing a re-occurrence. But it has no bearing whatosever on the subsequent rise in (illegal) handguns amongst kids with very very small penises and even smaller brains in some urban parts of the country.

Worth noting that across many parts of the UK gun crime is non existent and in most places there are only 1 or 2 incidents a year at most. Mostly involving legally owned guns (domestic disputes, suicides). Not sure there has ever been an incident involving a gun in my town. Though someone was stabbed with a knife a few years ago.



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 10:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
I've used skeet to turn gun-phobic acquaintances to the gun-loving side. Once they've spent a few hours at the range they always come back with "that's it?" or "what's all the hype been about?" meaning they lose their unhealthy notion that a gun is some power-mad destructive device hellbent on destroying the world.


Only times I've ever fired a gun is on a shooting range. It's okay but not something I'm particularly bothered about doing these days. Hence I wouldn't want a gun.



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 10:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

Originally posted by Auntie Matter
The first and last time I held and fired a weapon was when I got cajoled into shooting trap with friends. I enjoyed myself. It was an oddly powerful feeling, one that left me with the notion that no one should have access to that kind of potentially life-altering/ending power in one’s hands.

Thank you for reading my two cents.


That's interesting. I've used skeet to turn gun-phobic acquaintances to the gun-loving side. Once they've spent a few hours at the range they always come back with "that's it?" or "what's all the hype been about?" meaning they lose their unhealthy notion that a gun is some power-mad destructive device hellbent on destroying the world.

If you thought it gave you some feeling of power perhaps you have greater issues to work out.


Nice try.

I was neither a gun-phobic before or after the experience, and had no fear to overcome as you might insinuate. The experience was powerful in that it made me realize that the contraption I was holding, while "designed" for sport, could be lethal in another circumstance. This wrong hand/ right-hand business didn't factor in. We had a very good debate over lunch after we left.

It was after this outing that I formed my opinion on gun ownership. Even though you're off the mark, I thank you for responding.



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 10:38 AM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


Have been game hunting, enjoyed it but was knackered at the end of it.

Done clay pigeon shooting, enjoyed that too, as I did target shooting once.

I have np problems with guns, in the right environment for the right occassion.

If I'd ever gone in the Army I would have insisted on learning to use one as it would be quite handy to be able to shoot back at the enemy!

If this country was ever threatened by a foreign invader or an evil overlord I would take up arms and defend my country to my dying breath, of that do not doubt!

If civilisation ever went tits up and I was lucky / unlucky enough to survive I would obtain a gun and learn to defend myself and to hunt.

These are genuine and legitimate uses of guns and I have no problem whatsoever with their use in these circumstances.

But, I don't want to walk to the shop on a Sunday morning carrying a Glock.
I don't want to get my special donna with chilli and garlic at 3am armed with a Smith And Wesson.
I don't want to go for a few pints knowing that everyone is tooled up like downtown Mogadishu.

I don't need a gun to feel like a man.
But that is really irrelevant.

If guns were more readily available in the UK then they would be used more often and more people would die.

Pretty, literally, bloody simple!

Edit to add.

UK society and mentality is completely different to US society and mentality.
As I said previously, it's like comparing apples and pears.

[edit on 3/6/10 by Freeborn]





new topics

top topics



 
19
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join