China condemns U.S. gun ownership as human rights violation

Originally posted by roguetechie

If you don't like guns don't own one it's pretty simple.

This should end the debate, simple & consise.

reply to post by roguetechie

IF guns were not used people would just use knives or swords or cars or barbecue utensils.

Yeh, or even rocks or camels. Apparently riding camels can really clear a crowd out almost as fast as riot police with shields and rubber bullets.

reply to post by Citybig


are you this mad because when your queen dies your new one will be American?

eh as stated numerious times chinas opinions of American weapons(civilian or otherwise really has no impact on us sas a people so they can keep complaining about our rights and we will keep laughing at them for wanting to change our traditions

Originally posted by Revealation
Is ANYBODY REALLY GONNA TAKE ADVICE on HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS from THESE PEOPLE SERIOUSLY ????????????????????????

So is that the Chinese version of a minivan?



ETA: The baby in the bucket, as sad as it is, is just friggin hilarious looking!

Yeah China sure is doing great in that "Human Rights" issue.
Its also worth noting that only 47% of Chinese households own a car. It sure isnt because they like walking,
Its because they live is such poverty that they cant afford one, combined with the regulations on cars in
China.

reply to post by EyesWideShut


Yeah it's amazing how the rest of the world feels the need to impose their ways on us even though it's not working great for them.

While this country may not be in the best shape right now I find it telling that others can still summon the jealousy to hate the freedoms we do have.

Originally posted by QQXXw
reply to post by roguetechie

 

The second amendment was put in place in the 18th century when small arms were critical in defeating an enemy. It it now the 21st century and a population armed with small arms can only do harm to itself and not any organized military.

edit on 30-5-2012 by QQXXw because: (no reason given)

The second amendment was "put in place", in the words of Jefferson, "as a last resort to defend against tyranny in government."

It had nothing to do with defeating an enemy, unless the enemy you are referring to is a tyrannical government. The state militia and US Military are prescribed with securing the borders and providing for the national defense in our Constitution. I would think that with all your knowledge of our Constitution you would know this.

A Little Gun History Lesson


In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

------------------------------

In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

---------------------------

Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated

------------------------------

China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

----------------------------

Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

------------------------------

Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

------------------------------

Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million 'educated' people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

-----------------------------

Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million.

------------------------------

It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by their own government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars. The first year results are now in:

Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2 percent

Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 percent

Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)!

In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent. Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not, and criminals still possess their guns!

It will never happen here? I bet the Aussies said that too!

While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the past 12 months, since criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is unarmed.

There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the ELDERLY. Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort and expense was expended in successfully ridding Australian society of guns. The Australian experience and the other historical facts above prove it.

You won't see this data on the US evening news, or hear politicians disseminating this information.

Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws adversely affect only the law-abiding citizens.

Take note my fellow Americans, before it's too late!

The next time someone talks in favor of gun control, please remind him of this history lesson.

With Guns...........We Are 'Citizens'.
Without Them........We Are 'Subjects'.

During W.W.II the Japanese decided not to invade America because they knew most Americans were ARMED!

Note: Admiral Yamamoto who crafted the attack on Pearl Harbor had attended Harvard U 1919-1921 & was Naval Attaché to the U. S. 1925-28. Most of our Navy was destroyed at Pearl Harbor & our Army had been deprived of funding & was ill prepared to defend the country.

It was reported that when asked why Japan did not follow up the Pearl Harbor attack with an invasion of the U. S. Mainland, his reply was that he had lived in the U. S. & knew that almost all households had guns.

If you value your freedom, Please spread this anti-gun control message to all your friends!

reply to post by roguetechie
Hey, Rogue. I found a book you might like. Here:

thelink has this handy-dandy chart:
Gun Control Genocide chart:

Thank you cynical I have noticed this thread and even some of my own posts in it are long on opinions short on facts. That really spells it out in black and white for people who haven't wanted to see or acknowledge the PROVEN track record of "common sense" gun control measures leading to genocide and political repression. I even saw one post that went so far as to call a smaller version of this same list NRA propaganda.

Hopefully this list of PROVEN and very REAL incidents will help people to see that this is no joke and is truly deadly serious.

reply to post by Nucleardiver


The second amendment does not specify if the enemy is domestic or foreign and it was put in place during the 18th century. In both cases small arms would be used against the enemy which in the 18th century would also field mostly small arms. We are now in the 21st century and I hate to tell it to you but we don't have sailing ships or horse driven carts anymore and likewise small arms are not going to guarantee your "freedoms" (which by the way in the 18th century included slavery) against a professional army using all the inventions of the the last 200 years.

Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by Germanicus

 

Meanwhile, back in reality.

The BRIC countries you hail as so great have all gone the Capitalist way of doing business. Whether you and like minded people care to admit it.

Blah blah. Im sure you are the rudest guy here you know. You really should set a better example since you are a long time member. Why do you guys feel the need to insult people constantly? You really should not need to do that if you have a strong argument.

And we live in a Capitalist Empire genius. I am well aware that all nations are capitalist. When did I say they were not? I said China is State Capitalism and that is the way things will go.

State capitalism is a long way from American style capitalism whether you and like minded people care to admit it.

Originally posted by QQXXw
reply to post by Nucleardiver

 

The second amendment does not specify if the enemy is domestic or foreign and it was put in place during the 18th century. In both cases small arms would be used against the enemy which in the 18th century would also field mostly small arms. We are now in the 21st century and I hate to tell it to you but we don't have sailing ships or horse driven carts anymore and likewise small arms are not going to guarantee your "freedoms" (which by the way in the 18th century included slavery) against a professional army using all the inventions of the the last 200 years.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Here is the problem, It doesn't say the right of the Militia to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, it says the right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. as in "We the People"

Maybe I'm wrong... Let's ask the founding fathers.

No freeman shall ever be debarred the use of arms.
---Thomas Jefferson: Draft Virginia Constitution, 1776.


[The Constitution preserves] the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation...(where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.
---James Madison,The Federalist Papers, No. 46.


"A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government."
George Washington

Oh... Hmmm, look at that. I guess it's not open for interpretation, there it is in plain english.

reply to post by EyesWideShut


The "Win!" would be if you had quoted his complete post where he explains that he has the training necessary to use these kinds of weapons!

No offense, but the way you quoted it means just that weapons are for playing, which they never are!
I think your founding fathers did not just mean every fool should be armed and play with those guns but handle those weapons respectfully and use them only when necessary!
If your avatar means that you were/are in the USMC, you probably know exactly what I mean and know how to handle a weapon and not to see it as a toy.

reply to post by RationalTeddy


Thanks for the lesson in the safe use and employment of weapons systems RT, If you happen to have anymore classes on I dunno say 5 paragraph orders or how to effectively locate, close with, and destroy the enemy, by fire and maneuver, or repel the enemy assault by fire and close combat, I'd also like to take one of those.


Next time you drift out of your lane, atleast put your blinker on chief!

I'm just ballbusting man, I know what his skillset was and it was a comment between professionals. Sorry I got your Vickies in a bunch!

reply to post by EyesWideShut


See, that is what I meant with my last sentence in my last post. You know how to handle weapons.
It is just my firm stance that this stuff should not be viewed as toys. Again, no attack on you personally.
But if you, like me, are FOR a right to bear arms, show respect to your loud friend which can kill. There are enough people on ATS who will just take your post out of context and attack you personally and not see the bigger picture.
About more lessons... Let me put it this way: I was in electronic warfare in the Swiss Army. Not what you would call a combat unit exactly
But two things I took to my civilian life:
- gun handling, because I want to keep my rifle
- medical training, because it can actually help people

So from my point, we are cool

reply to post by RationalTeddy


No worries RT, you're good to go bro. I'm not too worried about people on here taking the things I say out of context, this place is a spinfest! Those that get it great, those that don't can drive on. You can't please everybody! =)

Does anyone realize that this is an Examiner article?

I'd take it with a giant bucket of salt.

If anything, it seems engineered to anger the ardent gun supporters on here.

reply to post by The Sword


It was in a report published on May 25, 2012 called "The Human Rights Record of the United States in 2011" by the State Council Information Office of the People's Republic of China. Searching Google shows many different sources ...

reply to post by Daedal


This is a case of China not wanting their citizens to own arms lest they revolt. So they have to demonize gun ownership.

reply to post by Daedal


I have never responded to a post here, but this one concerns me. They are no starting to make noise about gun ownership in America, why?? What concern is it of their's? Could this be that this is in conjunction with what Hilary and Obama are doing with the UN? I am really not a huge conspiracy theorist (though you would never be able to tell since I joined this site;-), but from what I am reading and hearing, this really scares me. America cannot be invaded because the loses for any invading army would be huge! However, an unarmed America, well that is a different story....