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

page: 6
33
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 12:39 PM
link   
reply to post by pplrnuts
 


I don’t really want to watch that if its as brutal as your claiming.

Your trying to use shock tactics to make me change my mind

Don’t bother trying because my mind is made up, citizens don’t need guns.




posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 12:42 PM
link   
reply to post by kevinunknown
 


In that vein, this thread is unlikely to change my mind...

Citizens should indeed have the right to keep and bear arms.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 12:44 PM
link   
reply to post by seagull
 


Fair enough, I won’t try to change your might but I might question your reasoning.

I am only all too aware that i will struggle to find a single American on ATS who will agree with me, I think i am right in saying there are enough guns in the America for you all to own your own gun a few times over. So I don’t expect you to change your mind.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 12:47 PM
link   
reply to post by kevinunknown
 


Unfortunately, I've seen my fair share of violence. It is shocking. It should be to any person of sound mind. But, any person of sound mind does not go around committing those kinds of atrocities. Citizens should be able to defend themselves from people like that, people who have no respect for life at all.

I know none of this will change your mind, but remember this, just because you don't want to reserve that right for yourself, doesn't mean you should be able to take the right away from others.

But you wouldn't understand, you've spent an entire thread advocating abrogating individual rights and liberties. I'm not sure what the motivation for it is...And you have yet to make a case why speech should be restricted as you said on page one.
edit on 14-12-2010 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 12:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1

 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 





[SNIP]

Back to the original topic,

We WILL NOT EVER CONCEEDE THE SECOND AMENDMENT OR THE CONSTITUTION. Guns are needed in cases of both civil and national defense as if you are attacked by an animal and have a gun you will kill the animal before it kills you.
edit on 14-12-2010 by TheImmaculateD1 because: (no reason given)
edit on Tue Dec 14 2010 by DontTreadOnMe because: MO EDIT: DO NOT REPOST INFORMATION FROM A PSOT THAT HAS BEEN REMOVED.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 12:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by kevinunknown
reply to post by pplrnuts
 


I don’t really want to watch that if its as brutal as your claiming.

Your trying to use shock tactics to make me change my mind

Don’t bother trying because my mind is made up, citizens don’t need guns.


Your mind is made up obviously, and I can care less to be honest as your opinion and supporting statements are poor at best.

I hope that you never find yourself in the same predicament as that poor guy had to go through in that video. Instead of sticking your fingers in your ears and shouting LA LA LA I'M NOT GONNA WATCH THAT VIDEO CAUSE I AM RIGHT, LALA, maybe you should give it a looksy...

Either way, I can care less what YOU think, its the "undecided" on this issue that I would like to have watching the video that I provided on my last thread.

But I guess for you it will be no video to learn from, only sticking your fingers in your ears and screaming LA LA LA.. eh?



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 12:48 PM
link   
reply to post by kevinunknown
 


Not just americans need guns, all who do not want to be the only ones without them need guns.

To explain:
Cops have guns.
Military have guns.
The gov has guns.
The Mafia has guns.
Criminals have guns.

Do you want to be the only one without a gun when either of the above pulls your number?

Just because the cops, Military or gov wants to put a hit on you does not mean your a criminal and deserve it. Because we live in a corrupt system where thinking for yourself makes you a terrorist, punishable as they seem fit. Does that make it right? Does that make them god!

The day they dont need guns will be the day I dont need a gun. But I will never give up my sword.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 12:49 PM
link   
**** KNOCK IT OFF ***

with the "troll" - "trolling" comments.

Staff will decide, leave it out of this thread or your post will be removed.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by kevinunknown
reply to post by seagull
 


Fair enough, I won’t try to change your might but I might question your reasoning.

I am only all too aware that i will struggle to find a single American on ATS who will agree with me, I think i am right in saying there are enough guns in the America for you all to own your own gun a few times over. So I don’t expect you to change your mind.


You may never find many on ATS.. mainly because the ones that live here... unless you do, you have no concept.. they are not "truth" minded so the material here would not appeal to them. They are out there... Americans that want guns banned. You may need to visit hard core "liberal" cites though.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 12:58 PM
link   
reply to post by projectvxn
 


I have another thread about freedom of speech

www.abovetopsecret.com...

it’s not really the point of this thread however I have already had that debate.

I can understand why you find it difficult to accept I would advocate restricting mans “natural rights”, man is inherently flawed and I would say that therefore those rights are flawed. And as such it is justifiable to restrict them and tweak them for the benefit of society. You are strongly in favour of protecting these absolute rights; I accept that, carry on by all means. All i am saying to you however is that i take a different view that these rights can and should be restricted.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 12:59 PM
link   
reply to post by kevinunknown
 


Indeed, you won't change my mind. As for questioning my decision to own several weapons? Feel free, that effects me not in the slightest.

It is my right as a free citizen of these United States to own, without recourse to any govt. agency, firearms of most sorts. I don't need a machine gun, so I've not bothered getting the appropriate license...though now that I think on it, it actually might be kind of cool to have one...must give this some thought.

You in the UK have allowed this right to be taken from you... Your choice, of course. Or was it? Did the govt. just willie nilly decide to remove that right? Were I you, that would worry me more than just a tad...



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 01:04 PM
link   
reply to post by kevinunknown
 


If man is inherently flawed does it still make sense to assume your notion of how the world should be restricted is the right one? How many have come before you that have attempted the same exact things? How have they fared against the harsh judgement of history?

If you'd like to keep making the same mistakes over and over again, be my guest. I, on the other hand, won't be viciously swallowed by history.
edit on 14-12-2010 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 01:04 PM
link   
reply to post by seagull
 


They started getting rid of the in 1928 if my memory serves me right and then got very strict in the 90’s after a gun man walked into a class room of children and shot them all. After that the government banned all hand guns, I know people personally affected by that and therefore even if I had a choice i would never own a gun.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 01:08 PM
link   
reply to post by kevinunknown
 


Just think of it like this, when america invaides your country you will have to depend on others to protect you as you cower in fear.

When China invades FL I will pick them off from 800 yards with my F-class and close up with my side arm. I will depend on no one but myself and that is the way it was meant to be.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 01:10 PM
link   
reply to post by projectvxn
 


That is true but just because the American system has not failed yet does not mean it one day will. It is true that people in the past have tried to restrict rights but i think its about moderation, if you go off like a dictator removing rights then it will fail.

But you restrict these rights society can still function with relative peace while prospering, for example restricting the right to protect yourself by banning guns, no guns no shootings. But the right to protect yourself in the event of a violent assault should remain such as kicking a guy in the balls if he’s chocking you. It’s about establishing a tolerance, I can’t tolerate guns.

Your opinion might be different, that’s fine.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 01:10 PM
link   
reply to post by kevinunknown
 


Yes, I remember that incident. As with all such incidents, it's a horrible thing.

You still, in my not so humble opinion, have more to fear from an armed burglar, than you do someone walking into a crowded schoolroom/theater/restaurant and opening fire with a handgun. But...it's your country.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 01:12 PM
link   
reply to post by kevinunknown
 


Such ignorant dribble
Guns are not the problem, people are. To have a gun requires discipline and training. Something that most people today sorely lack. Look at the who's and whys of gun crimes. Gangs for one, what are the common membership of gangs? So called minority kids living in the inner city is it not? Then we look at the media and entertainment industries marketing for said kids. Very good examples are set from those two sources. Nowadays people are more lazy and undisciplined then ever before. Try to blame the tool for the faults of the operator is a pathetic rationale. Your same arguments about guns could be made about cars. In society today it is never the person who did wrongs fault, it is some other excuse that removes all personal accountability. MAYBE if we started to hold individuals responsible for their actions and stopped excusing their behaviour by shifting blame to something else society might actually regain some equillibrium. Oh and by the way a US citizen has a right to own a gun, no where in our Bill of Rights does it say anything about the right to own and operate a motor vehicle or the right to secondary education. But people now expect those to be actual rights.
So your from Scottland, that makes some of my rant less applicable to you. But some of it does still. You may personally dislike guns but that doesn't change the necessity of their existence. I will stick with the problem being in the people and not the object. A gun needs a hand to manipulate it, they just don't shoot on their own.
edit on 14-12-2010 by hangedman13 because: different country perspective



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 01:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by kevinunknown
reply to post by pplrnuts
 


Don’t bother trying because my mind is made up, citizens don’t need guns.



This is definitely a polarizing topic and some would argue that because of this, it is pointless to have these discussions. However, I find value in being able to have civil discourse with differing opinions. It is this that helps us understand, if not agree with, one another. I believe that we can agree that we are unlikely to sway the other to change our beliefs, but that does not mean there is nothing to be gained from open discourse. In this vein, I would like to ask you a couple questions. Not out of derision, but because I am honestly curious.

1) How would gun control, in a realistic and practical way, take guns out of the hands of criminals who already subvert the current laws and rarely obtain said guns via the legal channels which have been established.

2) You say that citizens do not need guns. Do you believe that there is never a situation in which the citizens would or should find it necessary to defend themselves against their government or to rise up against tyranny? I must admit that the sentiment behind your statement is foreign to me. It seems to indicate a trust and belief that the government is going to be altruistic. Historically, however, this has definitely not been the case.

3) Why do guns illicit such ire when they are just the latest extension of the inherent violence that has been a part out our history as long as we have had a history? Do you feel that gun control laws will truly lower violent crime rates, or do you think that it will just change the type of violent crime?



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 01:13 PM
link   
In addition OP, I was born and raised in an anti-gun state in the US. The deal is that the BAD guys always find a way to illegally obtain a gun, while the GOOD guys abide by the laws and are UNARMED.

SO... that means BAD guys = 1, GOOD guys = 0. NOT FAIR to me, but thats fair to you, EH?? Are you one of the BAD guys OP??

The pro-gun state that I live now makes the BAD guys reconsider misbehaving. Us GOOD guys can be assured that if the BAD guys decide to ever misbehave and choose to harm us or our loved ones, that WE the GOOD guys can DEFEND against them.

The BAD guys do not like a fair battle. They will get one with me and other like-minded folks...

edit on 14-12-2010 by pplrnuts because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 01:16 PM
link   
reply to post by kevinunknown
 


They outright banned guns in Chicago 28 years ago or so...Since then the place has become worse than Baghdad at the height of the war. This is no exaggeration either. Washington DC had a handgun ban in place for a long time, when that was overturned by the Supreme Court ownership skyrocketed, crime? Not so much, in fact they are experiencing a decline in crime as far as call statistics are concerned.

Gun bans don't work unless you get rid of every single gun in the known universe...Good luck getting government to give up their guns.





top topics
 
33
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join