Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

This is why we should all have the right and the possesion of a firearms.

page: 12
11
<< 9  10  11    13 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 27 2011 @ 07:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Rocky Black
 


Could not agree more. The point of us owning guns isn't even to need them. It's to detour criminals in the first place. If every man and woman had a gun, a criminal aware of that will be left with turning to possible murder or not risking getting shot. A tough choice either way. You would find a slight increase in over-all severity of crimes, but a great decrease in volume and number of victims.

You can't rid the world of crime anymore then you can rid the world of the moon. It is a necessary part of life, like the reflection in water of the sun, one cannot exist without the other as it reflects the other.

Yin and Yang such a true metaphor of life. All the police state has done is taken the crime doing out of the criminals hands and put it into its own hands. The actual volume of crime is still pretty much the same, just less visible.

It's a concept of controlled crime. The only downside to this method of addressing the issue of good vs. evil is that when evil is controlled, it leads to oppression. Where good people don't lead good lives, and evil people don't suffer from bad lives.





Just my 2 Cents!
edit on 27-1-2011 by Ciphor because: (must be filled out)




posted on Jan, 27 2011 @ 07:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Binder
 
Very well said. I believe in peace,but as long as criminals and governments have guns.I want be giving up my 44mag.If more good people had guns criminals would be less likely to act.That may not be the way it should be,but I'm sorry thats the way it is.



posted on Jan, 27 2011 @ 08:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by TedHodgson
reply to post by Rocky Black
 

Guns are for people who arnt powerfull enough to use words to sort thier problems


Umm not too sure how to reply to this statement but here it goes....try telling that to the knife wielding thug that never finished the 7th grade as he demands your wallet/purse as he is in the process of carjacking you. Common type statements from people ignorant to firearms and their responsible use. Have you ever even shot a gun? Do you know what one even looks like? Geesh...I swear I think the most "passionate" anti-gun responses come from those that have NEVER even been introduced to guns (because if you have...and had done so properly you would realize that it isn't the gun that kills people, people kill people period end of sentence).

Have a nice day.

NT



posted on Jan, 27 2011 @ 08:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Newbomb Turk
 


They are simply to idealistic and not realistic enough. Ideally a utopia of peace would be awesome. It is not realistic however as it's just not possible with our current understanding of physics and the requirement of positive and negative and nothing.

It's also an age old issue of not addressing the source of the problem.

The source of robbery's, shootings, drug dealing illegal etc. is not guns. The source is despair created in others lives that they then put on other people. The gun is merely the object used to transfer that energy. This is natural. When a person is miserable they seek to remove that misery. However if you understand that no energy can be removed, only changed or moved, then it makes sense that in order for a criminal to remove their misery they must transfer that energy to another person. The victim.

It's pretty simple really and most people over look it and over-analyze the underlying issue here.

This is the beauty of tolerance, acceptance, forgiveness, and sacrifice.



posted on Jan, 27 2011 @ 08:48 PM
link   
reply to post by MrWendal
 


Love the video. Attack deflected by being armed. Would have turned out a much different way if the man wasn't armed.

Damn pansies fleeing 4 to 1.

Hope they have fun explaining bullet holes in their ride.



posted on Jan, 27 2011 @ 09:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ciphor
reply to post by Newbomb Turk
 


They are simply to idealistic and not realistic enough. Ideally a utopia of peace would be awesome. It is not realistic however as it's just not possible with our current understanding of physics and the requirement of positive and negative and nothing.

It's also an age old issue of not addressing the source of the problem.

The source of robbery's, shootings, drug dealing illegal etc. is not guns. The source is despair created in others lives that they then put on other people. The gun is merely the object used to transfer that energy. This is natural. When a person is miserable they seek to remove that misery. However if you understand that no energy can be removed, only changed or moved, then it makes sense that in order for a criminal to remove their misery they must transfer that energy to another person. The victim.

It's pretty simple really and most people over look it and over-analyze the underlying issue here.

This is the beauty of tolerance, acceptance, forgiveness, and sacrifice.


More eloquently put into words than I would be able. A very good post indeed. And I think that is kind of where I was "aiming" (no pun intended) for in that until we as a human species are able to exist on such a level where poverty/drug abuse and addiction/class warfare/elimination of a currency based monetary system/elite puppet masters pulling the strings of global governments/ the list goes on and on....but once those are dealt with, then YES by all means we could have a very good argument for the need of firearms weapons.

But until then....the ONLY thing that weapons bans/restrictions do is affect the LAW BIDING CITIZEN. Criminals could literally care less about which laws are enacted/in place (no need to expand on that one). Unfortunately it is too unfortunate that there are no statistics (as if there was a means of being able to document them in the first place) but no stats on the crimes/violent behaviors that have been STOPPED or PREVENTED due to an armed law biding bystander being present. All I can ever say is tell me when you last read/heard of your local liqueur store being robbed by someone with a concealed carry permit, or just a law biding citizen packing heat?

I cannot recall even one. But don't ask me as I might be a tad biased on the topic (I carry a Glock 19 and the wife carries a Springfield XD-9 Subcompact) and the LAST THING either one of us ever wants to have to do is find ourselves in a situation where we have to have someone staring down the business end of our barrels


NT



posted on Jan, 27 2011 @ 10:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Helmkat
Only because the criminal assumes there is no gun. When the criminal assumes there is a gun? they will shot first, take what they want, leave the victim bleeding.

The nature of the conflict will simply evolve.
and the history of several countries contradicts your assumption. Legally armed citizens in any society are much more civil and polite. And repeatedly, criminals re-think their targets, contemplate a more 'commercial' target or simply decide today isn't the day.
Any way you look at it, guns deter crime not escalate it.



posted on Jan, 27 2011 @ 10:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Masterjaden
reply to post by Honor93
 


you're also full of crap... there is no such thing as registering your hands as lethal weapons... The only place that it is ever even considered is AFTER a crime of serious injury has occurred, then professional boxers and or fighters can be considered to have used a deadly weapon in the altercation.

One of the reasons I've never fought professionally.

I'd like to be able to USE my hands to defend myself without fear of going to prison for life.

Jaden

ok so the phrase --> "registering hands as lethal weapons" is a myth but the concept doesn't change.
i can own a gun without registering it too, but if i use it to kill someone (just like my 'trained' hands) the punishment and/or charges are greater than if the unit was legal.

If i brutally attack someone and inadvertently kill them (with my hands), i am still charged with 'use of a deadly weapon' (my hands) ... so, vehicles are registered (deadly weapon), guns are supposed to be registered (deadly weapon) and i have to be registered as a citizen (deadly weapon) ... so, which part of that 'myth' is really not true?

And actually, you cannot USE your hands in defense and kill another without fear of going to prison for life ... think again.

edit: oh and btw, that registry mentioned above ... you know the individual one, occurs for every person, in every state unless you are present illegally. myth huh? i would disagree.
edit on 27-1-2011 by Honor93 because: add text



posted on Jan, 27 2011 @ 10:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Masterjaden
reply to post by Honor93
 


actually it's stupid to turn and run from someone who pulls a gun on you, tactically speaking. If you turn and try to run (depending on how close you are), they have to move only marginally to still shoot you as you run. if you get the right training, you can move toward them and to the outside of their shooting arm and gain control of the firearm. If you try to flee, you are putting your life in their hands, If you learn to protect yourself, you are taking responsibility for your own safety....

Jaden

not my suggestion dear ... try again.
i don't turn and run, i pull my own gun.
i did protect myself, i do protect myself and i will use my gun again, as needed.
ps: a relative trains MMA talent ... factor X is always in my bag of tricks.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 01:28 AM
link   
reply to post by CosmicCitizen
 


Thank you very much for the info. Will investigate. You seem to know your crossbows.




posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 03:37 AM
link   
reply to post by VI0811
 


Everyone in the UK has hidden guns?

Sorry chap but unless the people that you've been talking to are ex-special forces, farmers, eastern european gangsters and/or inner city 15 year olds you are more than likely having your leg pulled.

There are approximately 17 million guns in the UK however these are not real guns, they are mostly air/pellet guns, replica weapons or decomissioned/blank firing weapons (which you actually need a licence to possess).

There is no major gun crime in the UK outside of certain coucil estates around the country and most of the gun crimes reported involve these non lethal weapons, they are only reported as gun crime as they were used to threaten somebody.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 09:15 AM
link   
reply to post by Truth_Hz
 


Gun Crime in the UK


UK has worse crime rates than the rest of the EU:

Crime rating of the UK

Zindo
edit on 1/28/2011 by ZindoDoone because: spelling



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 09:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Ciphor
 

Yes. the point of citizen ownership of guns (besides hunting and target sports) is that you hope that you dont have to use them. A microcosm of military defense for a country as a whole. Be strong, "speak softly and carry a big stick" and either people will leave you alone or you will be prepared to deal with them if that doesnt serve as a deterrent,



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 09:41 AM
link   
reply to post by ZindoDoone
 


As much as I like to smack the English idea of a gun ban around, your statistics are off. In the most recent release from the home office the number of fireamrs offenses are actually lower now. The decrease comes from a drop in the use of immitation firearms to commit crime. So, the number of real guns being used is actually the same as 2008.

Gun crime is actually mainly contained to three police jurisdictions and isn't really a problem for most of the country. That is from the findings of the Home Office. They release Englands version of the Unified Crime Report.

However, you're right about other crimes. England's violent crime rate, outside of murder, is higher than America.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 10:32 AM
link   
reply to post by MikeNice81
 


Mike,
I used the first link to show actual stats and the second to show that when firearms are restricted , crime by other means grows. It looks like in the UK, crime as a whole got worse when the right of the 'Subjects of the Crown' had their rights to protect themselves and their property taken from them and given to the law enforcement and the politically correct.

Zindo



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 10:42 AM
link   
reply to post by ZindoDoone
 


You are correct that other violent crimes sky rocket. I am not arguing that point. You are much more likely to be violently assaulted in England or Scotland than America. I just wanted to correct the story because it was a bit old.

Plus he was right about gun crime not being a problem, in most areas. Firearms offenses do still happen more than 20 times a day in England. They just tend to be highly concentrated. That gives a lot of English people the view that guns are not a problem for them. It is a misconception, but one I can understand some having.



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 10:46 AM
link   
reply to post by MikeNice81
 


Yup, That's what the first link reported also. Clusters of firearm crimes where in certain areas! My question has always been-

"Just how many things that is of a dual purpose (can be used as a weapon) will the Elites in both the US and the UK outlaw or control before citizens say ENOUGH of the idiocy?"

Zindo
edit on 1/28/2011 by ZindoDoone because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2011 @ 10:58 AM
link   
reply to post by ZindoDoone
 


That is what scares me. I remember people in and from England talking about banning certain knives because of the increase of knife attacks. They even wanted to make it a crime to have a "kitchen" knife outside of the home. Nobody ever answered when I asked if that would apply to grilling in the yard.

It reminds me of the group that came out demanding the shape of hot dogs be changed. They cried about how kids choke to death on hot dogs every year and the shape is to blame. Then people here on ATS came along and agreed. One person agreed because it was annoying to spend time cutting up hotdogs for their kid. Never mind that literally billions of hot dogs are eaten with out incident every year. They killed 77 kids. That means the shape needs to be regulated to save children and add convenience.

That kind of idiocy actually scares me worse than criminals.



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 04:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Rocky Black
 


Prohibition of anything has never worked. This includes prohibition of drugs, gambling, & prostitution. Prohibition has historically only made these activities far worse by placing control of all three directly in to the hands of criminals. Prohibition of a specific type of firearm would only mean that particular firearm would now be controlled by criminals, and not be controlled by everyone else. That’s bad.

Does anyone remember the very first prohibition? There was one man, one woman, and one apple tree. Prohibition has never worked.



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 06:11 AM
link   
reply to post by Masterjaden
 


LOL I never said you were a redneck I was merely making the point that jumping onto here and making ridiculous ignorant generalisations in no way aids the reputation of what is supposed to be a forum encouraging free debate.

You are correct in your statement that



Most violent crime world wide is in metropolitan areas and the poorer areas within metropolitan areas...


And as such if you live outside these areas what is the need for these firearms is the question I was asking, or are you so paranoid that you need a small arsenal just in case your home gets invaded one day?

The probability of someone coming into my home with a Functioning Lethal Weapon is so minimal as to not be worthy of consideration in the UK and I believe this to be because of our strict gun laws. Agreed they may come into my home with a knife/bat/hammer or something such, but I'll tell you what, I'd much prefer my chances against any one of those as in my house I also have many knives, bats, hammers, and a multitude of other "weapons".






top topics



 
11
<< 9  10  11    13 >>

log in

join