Why do Americans need guns? Rip UP the Second Amendment, problem solved.

reply to post by kevinunknown


Oh and I too go running at night in my city. The worst parts are down town close to where I live(I live in Reno, NV). The biggest problem here isn't guns. Crimes where guns are used are not nearly as common place here as they are in California-right next door, where the regulations are among the most strict in the nation. Even though Nevada has among the most lax gun laws and higher ownership rate, we're far less violent than Chicago(where guns are banned outright) California, and New York.

The problem we have here is meth-amphetamine. I'm not sure how much experience you have with this drug(in relation to experience with those who use it), but after working downtown where all the meth heads hang out, using your fists isn't an option. Down town Reno I have to carry my telescoping lead capped steel baton, and my handgun. Meth heads don't feel pain, and if they're armed with anything, they are extremely dangerous to those around them.

I've had to literally hold the guts in for someone who got stabbed a couple of years ago by one of these zombies. Not too long after that another one of my friends from the coffeehouse was stabbed in the arm during a robbery(meth head looking for meth) and they had to graft veins from his legs to his arms, and was on someone else's blood for 13 hours he had lost so much of his own.

That's why I carry and that's why I own one. I'm not going to be a victim. I'm very familiar with hand to hand combat, and I'm not afraid to use the knuckles. But if I find myself in the situation I described, I'm going to shoot the bastard dead rather than take the chance of being crippled or injured severely.

Bad things happen everywhere you go. I live in a nice neighborhood just far away enough from downtown to be comfortable. Average median income here is 65,000. I have nice neighbors, kids play in the street. I still have guns, because I like being prepared.

That's my right...RIGHTS are not subject to negotiation, they are not subject to regulation. They are RIGHTS. Not granted by government, but protected by it. At least in this country.

So, rather than tell us how much you hate liberty, go and try to destroy it in Scotland...It's not as if Scots have a tradition of taking up arms or anything. It's not like Scottish history isn't rife with notions of civilian ownership of arms... It's not like your ancestors fought for their own Liberty...Ever...

reply to post by kevinunknown


Rip up the Second Amendment? OK. Which one is next? The fourth? The fifth? How about we just do away with all of 'em... Yeah, that's the ticket...

The Second Amendment, more than any of the others, is the means by which the rest are protected. Think about this for a second, or two...

The mere threat of armed resistance from an armed and aroused populous will give a govt. bent upon oppression pause for thought.

I own, at last count, several firearms most of which are used for sport. Hunting. Target Shooting. One, however, I have for one purpose, and one purpose only... Yes, to kill should that horrific possibility come to pass. Given the rising crime rate in my little corner of the world? That possibility is greater now than it's ever been. I hope, and pray, that it's never necessary, but it's there should the need arise.

The reasons I feel it necessary? I don't trust authority to protect me, and mine. Who does that leave? Me.

reply to post by tjack


No she should not be in that situation in the first place and the rapist should be castrated and be forced to spend the rest of his days in a labour camp. But now we are onto my controversial views on criminal justice, I basically take the few that a very strong punishments should become the deterrent other than arming everyone like some kind of vigilante militia

reply to post by kevinunknown


My prayer is you will not be the first one on the train to the concentration camp in amerika.

You seem to be uneducated in weapons and there uses. Hunting, protection from foreign domestic threats, and entertainment. And object is only matter it has no thought process so it is not evil only the person that uses it is evil.

Chainsaws, knives, bricks, baseball bats, chairs, cars, ground, walls, corner of a desk, rope, piano wire, boots ect. ect. ect. are all evil by your standards we do not call for a ban on them.

You wish to be a sheep controlled by those with the weapons that is your issue, but say away from my God given freedom of Speech, freedom of assembly, press, and the right to bare arms with out any infringement.

Thank you and God Bless.

reply to post by projectvxn


You wrote that like I have never seen a stabbing or a been faced with a drugged up nut job, I have, I have also been a “victim” I still see no need to carry about a gun.

I really liked the bit at the end about Scotland, thing is I don’t view myself as Scottish, I am British. And that was hundreds of years ago, it was necessary, now the police and government protect us so we don’t all need to get our claymores out.

Originally posted by kevinunknown
reply to post by tjack

 

No she should not be in that situation in the first place and the rapist should be castrated and be forced to spend the rest of his days in a labour camp. But now we are onto my controversial views on criminal justice, I basically take the few that a very strong punishments should become the deterrent other than arming everyone like some kind of vigilante militia

Kevin.. rape sometimes has little to do with the penis or its function. Impotent "rapists" penetrate with knives or objects. Its the mind, not the equipment. Castration will not work. Im with you on a labor camp.. but Id prefer death for rapists. Especially those who rape children. I see no value in rehabilitation.. it doesnt work and its a waste of time/resources... work camps on the other hand is a viable solution to ineffectual incarceration/rehabilitation.

Originally posted by ACTS 2:38
reply to post by kevinunknown

 

Chainsaws, knives, bricks, baseball bats, chairs, cars, ground, walls, corner of a desk, rope, piano wire, boots ect. ect. ect. are all evil by your standards we do not call for a ban on them.

.

None of them were designed primarily to kill. That is what the origin of the gun is a weapon to kill.

reply to post by kevinunknown


They protect you huh?

So if you fight off a burglar in the UK you won't be arrested?

What if the burglar dies because he falls Yep...Looks like those cops show up just in time to arrest the victim..

Even with all of our problems, that kind of BS would never happen here.

Here's another example of the police protecting people If this SICK MAN had a gun, these burglars wouldn't be doing this to anyone else ever again. They stabbed that man near dead.. I guess gun laws and police aren't what they're cracked up to be hmm?

Originally posted by phishfriar47
reply to post by blaenau2000

 

Which is exactly why AMERICA is ALWAYS right....duh

Governments have abused power from the beginning of time, i think i would rather have a means to change the system if we were getting to be too oppressed. How did we ever come under the notion that a government was good for us to begin with, they have always been about assimilating power, and looking after their own well being. That goes back through history, its just since the American revolution that we have been able to facilitate change faster, largely due to guns, to quell some of the ambitions of a government not for the people, which is exactly what we have.

America is always right? O then I am very sorry, I was giving an opinion but I see now I must be wrong and America is always right.
And I understand now that is why youre government is so great and like you said guns facilitated youre great nation.

I bow in admiration for the great America and youre big guns.

reply to post by kevinunknown


Humans kill. It is immaterial what is used to get the job done.

Some of us would like to avoid killing altogether..But if we can't I'd like my chances of surviving the encounter to be maximized within proportion to the threat. If you come at me empty handed, you get the knuckles or the baton. If you come at me with a weapon of any kind in your hand, you get the 9mm.

I've learned to accept the nature of mankind overall, good and bad. I'm not going to make the same mistake as to subscribe to the notion that restricting that nature by letter of the law is anything but dictatorial and asinine, as many who have come before me have. Indeed, we should, as a society, punish anyone who refuses to control themselves and thus violates the rights of others. But we should not restrict the ability of the individual to respond to immediate threats to his/her life and liberty.

Originally posted by kevinunknown
reply to post by tjack

 

No she should not be in that situation in the first place and the rapist should be castrated and be forced to spend the rest of his days in a labour camp. But now we are onto my controversial views on criminal justice, I basically take the few that a very strong punishments should become the deterrent other than arming everyone like some kind of vigilante militia

So it's HER fault for being in that situation? Pathetic.

Your other controversial views? Sounds like you get your kicks being "controversial" and all, good luck with this and the rest of your controversy,and thanks for pointing it out, I've learned enough to ignore the heck out of you from now on.

The OP was written for no other purpose than to incite heated replys. No ignorance being denied here.

Whatever. I believe my original post was correct. I'll bite anyway.

Do you realize that the US has more restrictive weapons laws than a lot of other countries? Why aren't you questioning the laws of Switzerland which give their citizens assault rifles? How about Mexico that doesn't have the federal capacity to enforce any of their gun laws? My point being, there are a lot of countries that allow firearms but why are you only focusing on the US?

reply to post by kevinunknown


It is not my intention to sound snippy or unkind, but shame on you for not only not knowing anything of the history of the founding of this Country, but also virtually nothing of the history of the world if your post is truly your take on the ownership of firearms.

Read the Federalist papers: www.foundingfathers.info... ALL of the Federalist papers ~ it might help you.

Look into the history of EVERY Country that has deprived its citizens of the right to bear arms.

Do you really think criminals would turn in their firearms if the Second Amendment were to be 'ripped' up? Seriously? Do you think the criminal element turned in their firearms in the U.K. and Australia when those Countries banned ownership of them? Research their crime stats since then.

I do not know you, so i will not assassinate your character ... but that particular post of yours made me very sad for the state of our Country. How many are there who think like you in that regard?

The sad irony is that it is those like you who would be the first to suffer should we lose the right to bear arms. You would soon find yourself hiding behind those who refused to obey that law, begging them for their protection. You better hope it's not one of the armed criminals you are forced to beg for your protection.

reply to post by tjack


Yes I like to be controversial and i like to stir up debate.

Also I didn’t mean it was her fault, what i mean is that I think rape just shouldn’t happen as the result of a criminal justice system that is a strong deterrent

This is off topic anyway.

Originally posted by kevinunknown

The argument is always that it’s for self defence, that way if someone pulls a gun on a knife on you, you can protect yourself. It’s a hard one to argue against, but surly if it were the case that gun’s were outlawed or heavily regulated it would lead to a overall reduction in the number of firearms owned and therefore the odds of someone pulling a gun on you would be greatly reduced therefore you wouldn’t have to own a fire arm and the odds would fall further. In any case you can never be sure it’s going to help your odds, if two gun men mug you or break into your house you’re already on the losing side. Now baring in mind that there are almost enough firearms America for every citizen the robbers are going to know you have a gun in your house, they are going to be prepared and have the element of surprise on their side.

Ok let's tackle this statement first. The argument that regulation and the outlawing of guns reduces guns is only true for law abiding citizens, i.e. those individuals who are unlikely to use guns for any purpose other than self defense, hunting, or recreational shooting. I have yet to have someone explain to me what makes them believe that the criminal elements that are responsible for crime would give up their guns. As a matter of fact, I have seen several stories done where criminals were interviewed and asked about gun control. Guess what, they were in favor of it because it created a safer and more conducive environment for their less than legal activities. What gun control laws would accomplish would be to simply take guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens while leaving them in the hands of criminals, who are not going to suddenly become safety conscious citizens.

Now, as for the second amendment, you obviously have no understanding as to what the Constitution's role is. The second amendment, while providing for individual protection, is primarily a vehicle to ensure that the people are not put into a position where they cannot defend themselves from their own government should it become a danger the the liberties and freedoms cited in the Declaration of Independence. That in essence sums up the Constitution. It is not a document which grants rights. It is a document meant to limit the power and scope of government to within a very narrow framework. While, this has obviously been usurped in many ways, it does not change the fact that is its purpose.

I do not disagree with the basic premise that the world would be a much beautiful rainbow filled paradisaical utopia without guns. Oh wait before guns, we killed each other with swords. Ok, without guns and swords. But wait, then there were sharp pointy sticks... Ok, no guns, swords, or sharp pointy sticks. Crap, forgot about wooden clubs. Ok, not guns, swords, sharp pointy sticks, or blunt objects. Hmmm, wait a minute what about rocks, can definitely do serious damage with a rock. Ok, I have it now. We just outlaw all guns, knives, swords, sharp pointy sticks, blunts objects, and rocks. That will surely solve the problem...

Obviously, the problem is not the weapons used. Violence is not a new phenomenon which suddenly materialized with the advent of guns. It has been around as long as people have walked the Earth. What do we do to stop it? Well now that is a question for the ages and I am not so arrogant as to assume I have the answer. I do know that leaving myself and my family vulnerable to those in our society who do not share my sense of civic duty and compassion for my fellow man is not the answer. It simply makes me a poor protector of their right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

*** ATTENTION***

Please remain on topic -

Do not address the member, no name calling etc.

Thank You.

Is there really any point to this other than borderline trolling? Kevin you should know by now that this topic has been done dozens of times on ATS all with the same result, those who have access to the 2nd Amendment (normally Americans) cling to it while they still can and those who wish to see them disarmed for whatever reason (normally Europeans) claim that we (those pesky gun-owners) are barely breathing Neanderthals not fit to make decisions for ourselves. Your stance no matter the motivation behind it is that we should be less free, and no amount of text here will change that fact; you want to take freedoms away from people and limit the ones they currently have. Thats never going to go over well, so I hope the points you earn from this thread are worth the waste of resources this thread will undoubtedly be, good luck and have fun.

THIS is why folks should be allowed to carry a pistol to protect themselves. SCUM like these guys are just ONE reason out of many for which folks should be able to defend themselves. The link below contains a video of what you need to see OP.

These guys singled their victims out because they "looked like they wouldnt fight back". One of the victims was a pregnant woman; her fetus was cut out of her womb.

WARNING, THIS FOOTAGE IS BRUTAL!!!!! The second link below is the direct video download link because the ones embedded on the 1st link do not work. But just the same you can look under the embedded videos and click on the "murder-video.flv" link which is the same as my second link below.

[links to gore site removed]

How are the gun laws in Ukraine? I have not been able to find much info but what would be the outcome if this poor gentleman could have defended himself? Can you imagine the HORROR, PAIN, and FEAR that this guy experianced? How about his family and friends who watched this video of their loved one?

Is this ONE SINGLE REASON enough to help you see WHY law-abiding citizens should have the right to carry a pistol for self-defense?

*******EDIT, since a mod removed my link, just google: "Real Murder Video Ukraine Dnepropetrovsk Maniacs Victim" and you can find everything there on that page.********

MODS: I didnt realize that certain links were a no-no here. My apologies.