Watch what happens when Guns are banned in Australia

page: 9
68
<< 6  7  8    10  11 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 09:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by bellagirl

Originally posted by DocHolidaze

Originally posted by bellagirl
one of the main reasons many on here are stateing they wont give up their guns is so they can defend their country in a revolution. government control etc etc. doesnt this strike you as confusing ???.
you are a democracy. YOU vote in your government. YOU can vote your government out. isnt this why many of your soldiers have died on foreign battlegrounds and countries....to bring democracy to the world???

i cant imagine living in a country that is so frightened of their government. and how many complaining about the government actually voted in the last election ???


I personnely believe that the forefathers did gives us guns to protect against tyranny and oppression, but since everything is not one sided like u believe ill tell u this, i also like to hunt, target shoot, and hang with my friends at the range, i also believe my children's life are worth protecting at all costs in case a criminal decides to enter my home, and if someone is willing to enter a home and do criminal deeds, what else are they capable of doing to make sure they dont get in trouble, you might not be willing to protect your loved ones at all costs, but i am, and will do so till my last day, if there was no such thing as evil politicians and there was no such thing as criminals that have no remorse for there actions, i would totally agree with all the anti gunners, but we live in a real world with people that are evil, i suggest u open your eyes and look around







how dare you question me that i am not willing to protect my loved ones at all costs. i would fight till the death too protect my children.

i have also raised 3 children into their teens without a gun in the house and we are doing just fine thank you. we also sleep with the windows open in summer....can you do that ???.

we go out at night not afraid. we live in our home not afraid. we drive our car not afraid. can you say that ??? obviously not if your statement that you arm yourself for "just in case".

i think i will end with this. i think blind freddy can see this - we live in what must be close to paradise. yes we have problems, yes we have some crime, but we my friend have risen above it and choose to live our lives with love and freedom free from the feeling that we need to have a cold peice of killing steel called a gun strapped to us 24/7.

if the place that you live is not safe for your children to be raised with you feeling the need to have a gun..shouldnt you be putting more effort into finding a way to move from where you are to somewhere safer ???.

now how does it feel to have your parental responsibilities questioned......not nice is it buddy.

so you go ahead...keep your guns....i wont keep any....and i will just pray that you stay the hell away from my paradise.


there u go being one sided again i just gave more than one reason that i arm myself, yet u focus on one of them, you should work on your reading comprehension. due to gun laws here, i don't carry 247 and never stated that i do.(once again reading comprehension). they should outlaw knifes over 3 inches as well right, there a cold piece of killing steel, and u don't need a knife over three inches to cut your carrots right?

not everyone has the ability to just pick up and move, cause if it was up to me i would move, but child custody laws prevent me from moving out of the county, so now i live in the town that has the most job opportunitys and the second highest crime rate, this also happens to be a college town so guess what, vagrants flock here in hopes of picking up the scrapes of the rich college students(beer cans, old furniture and electronic equipment that can be sold and very profitable). Criminals also come here cause they know College kids like to get high, there was a home break in the other day here in my town were some drug dealers broke into the wrong house and were looking for drugs, luckily the man there and his children were not hurt in the process. Amphetamines are a huge problem in other towns in this county , so believe me i wish i could move, but unless i give up my kids i cant go anywhere(maybe that is something you could do in pursuit of paradise, but not me).

so i will keep my guns, cause are forefathers who founded this country believed it to be necessary, on a side note i grew up in a place u would call paradise, unlocked doors, kids out playing at all hours with no fear of losing them, and miles of forest to play in, and every buddy had a gun, and no one ever got shot, so because of a few bad apples all those good people back home have to give up there guns while all the criminals here were i live will continue to have guns and use them to instill fear in the good citizens of this town, it seems to me that you support criminal behavior, if you support anti gun legislation
edit on 9-8-2012 by DocHolidaze because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 09:11 AM
link   
Timely topic. My son who is in law school, recently forwarded me a paper on this topic. Please take the time to read this. Very revealing information which backs up the OP!

www.law.harvard.edu...



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 09:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by wrkn4livn
Timely topic. My son who is in law school, recently forwarded me a paper on this topic. Please take the time to read this. Very revealing information which backs up the OP!

www.law.harvard.edu...



That is an excellent and very informative read, please pass on our thanks to your son.

Oh and wish him luck, it's an increasingly tough career to get your foot in the better doors.



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 10:15 AM
link   
reply to post by WorkingClassMan
 


Thanks for the information. Balance is always appreciated.



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 11:12 AM
link   
reply to post by calebdaniels
 

"Though I do believe the citizens of Australia and the USA are very different, I do believe that people are, by nature, somewhat evil. Taking away the firearm of the law abider doesn't take away the gun of the criminal who uses illegal methods to get firearms, in the first place. For example, the previous AR shootings happened in an environment where people weren't allowed to carry firearms, yet, the criminal continued to carry a firearm. Criminals don't obey other laws, so why would they suddenly start obeying gun laws? "


AMEN! Disarming the innocent doesn't protect the innocent. The bad guys will always have guns, regardless of the law.
edit on 9-8-2012 by Gu1tarJohn because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 11:12 AM
link   
reply to post by wrkn4livn
 


That's a great article, thank you!

"....To bear that burden would at the very least require showing that a large number of nations with more guns have more death and that nations that have imposed stringent gun controls have achieved substantial reductions in criminal violence (or suicide). But those correlations are not observed when a large number of nations are compared across the world.



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 01:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by JoshBaker
In that video they said somebody ran into a persons house and robbed the house. Nobody died. The man was arguing that if he had a gun he could have shot the robber. Are they #ing crazy? Property isn't worth somebodies life , even if they are doing something awful. The robber needs civilized punishment and help.

As far as i know the only people who own guns in the UK are farmers and chav 'gangsters' who feel 'big' with a gun in their back pocket.
Reading through this thread has seriously questioned the sanity of this world. Having a gun doesnt make you safe , it makes you a coward.


That is some F**KED UP logic!!! Did you say "Civilized punishment and help"!?!? You are an enabler and part of the problem. You enter my house with ill intentions and you'll leave - on a stretcher - with 5 pounds of lead in you!

Next, "Chav gangsters" have guns in your country? But I thought they were illegal? Doesn't that magically mean that everyone in the country is safe from guns? By your own admission, I'd say it does not. Hence the reason LAW-ABIDING citizens should be allowed to have them. Because apparently CRIMINALS don't give a rat's ass about the law!


Having a gun doesn't make you a coward, it makes you smart! An armed society is a polite society!



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 03:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by mal1970
I'd think (and i wager we'd all agree) that if the USofA did what Australia did, the results would be far worse.


That's an undeniable fact.

Just look at the areas in the U.S. with the most restrictive gun laws: L.A., Chicago, Washington D.C, and New York City. All are havens for violent armed gangs, and have some of the highest crime rates in the country.

Apply the same restrictions to any other big city and you'll get exactly the same result. No one can argue that, and yet, the gun grabbers never stop trying, even though it's been proven over many decades.

I live in AZ, where a lot of people carry concealed. I wonder how many gun grabbers were NOT attacked because the potential perpetrator thought that they might be one of us.



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 04:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by yorkshirelad

You US folks are still living with the mindset of an 18th century homesteader.......i's time to grow up.

My d.ck is bigger than your gun, or is that too subtle.


First, I doubt it, even in the case of my daughter's .22 snub pistol. It's a whole 2.5" long...

Second, 'time to grow up', eh? Well, you can continue to play with your wanker. I'll continue to play with my guns.

Oh, & pray you never encounter a violent situation. And i do mean violent, like one you can't talk your way out of, as apparently you'll be comparing your d.ck to the criminal's gun while he's having his way with you & your family. On *this* side of the pond, we'll just shoot him.

Cheerio.



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 05:35 PM
link   
reply to post by DocHolidaze
 


You took the debate to a personal level TWICE now with your following comments:

1/. " you might not be willing to protect your loved ones at all costs,"

I have managed to protect my children without a gun, and shame on you for making such a vile comment.

2/. " but unless i give up my kids i cant go anywhere(maybe that is something you could do in pursuit of paradise, but not me). "

Just when i thought you couldnt stoop lower...you did.

so, i think we should agree to call this quits as its getting personal now and just agree to disagree with each others viewpoints on guns.

I wish you all the best with your children and stay safe.

bye for now.



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 07:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by yorkshirelad

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
reply to post by 13th Zodiac
 

I live in the state of Massachusetts in the United States in a small town where just about everyone owns several types of Guns. Rifles, Shotguns, Hand Guns and Rifles such as AR-15's and AK's.

We have very little crime and what crime we do have is trivial in it's level of violence....because EVERYONE IS ARMED!

Taking away GUNS from Citizens who own them legally as well as use them legally and for Hunting as well as Defense or Target Shooting Hobbies is just plain CRIMINAL as far as a Government forcing people to give up their weapons.

All this does is allow Criminals to be the ones with Firearms. Split Infinity


And over here in the UK we have little crime (it is actually concentrated in a few "hotspots" where crime is increasing slightly which allows for some cherry picked stats). But here's the really strange thing, hardly anybody has a gun....why is that?

Let me think, would I rather live in a country where I am 99.99% guaranteed to never even see a gun (except on TV at the olympics) let alone be a victom of a gun crime or live in a country where guns are the fear factor that keeps us under control by our gun toting neighbours. NO BRAINER.

You US folks are still living with the mindset of an 18th century homesteader.......i's time to grow up.

My d.ck is bigger than your gun, or is that too subtle.

The main reason that THE RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS...was written into the U.S. BILL OF RIGHTS...was for the purpose of the people to be able on their own to overthrow any Government of the U.S. that was not OF THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE AND FOR THE PEOPLE. It is written in the U.S. Constitution that it is the DUTY of an Citizen of the United States to make sure our Government abides by the rules of the U.S. Constitution and it is also the DUTY of each and every U.S. Citizen to forcibly remove such a Government in the example it provides.

It is difficult for a Citizen of the U.S. to explain this sacred DUTY to a person such as yourself who even though has a Parliamentary Government...you STILL HAVE ROYALTY and your Queen is a Multibillionaire. Also...our Police Force would never allow the Massive Sports and Anarchist Rioting as occurs in your country. The U.S. is a Country comprised of people from every Nation on Earth. Some may think this a WEAKNESS...it is not...it is a STRENGTH! I have been to the U.K. several times and find the people very nice and polite as well as my great admiration for the ability of the people of the U.K. to SOLDIER ON...as was the case during the BLITZ. But you folks have LOST SOMETHING OF YOURSELVES. I can see it and feel it in the eyes and in your peoples way they express themselves. We in the U.S. have our issues but one thing that we have not lost is the concept of ENDLESS POSSIBILITIES.

The most LOYAL as well as VOCAL ADVOCATE of love for the United States is an Immigrant who has just become a CITIZEN OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. They come from countries all over the World and they do not take their FREEDOMS for granted. I am sorry you cannot defend yourself. Split Infinity



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 09:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by SplitInfinity to be able on their own to overthrow any Government of the U.S. that was not OF THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE AND FOR THE PEOPLE. It is written in the U.S. Constitution that it is the DUTY of an Citizen of the United States to make sure our Government abides by the rules of the U.S. Constitution and it is also the DUTY of each and every U.S. Citizen to forcibly remove such a Government in the example it provides.... our Police Force would never allow the Massive Sports and Anarchist Rioting as occurs in your country.
.

Do you not see the problem with that argument? Once the american people RISE up, they'll be ANARCHISTS too. So what you're saying is that the US govt. would CRUSH such behaviour, yet at the same time, you think the 2A will allow you to BEHAVE in a WORSE manner; to physically oust the government. That doesn't make sense.

I think Evillerbob is spot on, and it's my opinion too, you guys wouldn't stand much of a chance if you tried to overthrow your own govt..

If it ever does happen, I'll be waiting with my popcorn.



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 11:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by mal1970
Being that there are at least 5 gun-grabbing pieces of legislation in the pipe with 2 mass shootings in as many weeks just in time to bolster support for them... Let's take a look at recent history.



Please, that video was nothing but propaganda. It was told from a biased perspective. The narrator was an American ffs...



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 11:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by just_julie
Australia and USA are very very different countries.


Inasmuch that Australia has less density, and less resistance to nwochange, than America, where guns are engrained. I cannot imagine handing over, in your own house, heirloom guns. To whom? And for how long? What a joke. The People should try to understand why this is being done. TF will set us all free. If it doesn't, well, so what. What are you going to do, stage a revolt?



posted on Aug, 10 2012 @ 12:12 AM
link   
reply to post by spoogemonkey
 

Again...you do not understand the ties between the People of the United States and the U.S. Military. Just about every family has someone in the Military Forces or has a Mom or Dad who is in the Reserve.

When a person is sworn in to become a Soldier or Sailor or Airman...they pledge to DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES. They do not pledge to defend the Government or the President...they defend the People and Constitution.

THAT is the difference between our Military and other Nations. That and the FACT...our Military is an ALL VOLUNTEER FORCE of professional Soldiers, Sailors and Airmen. There is no draft and getting in to the U.S. Military is difficult as in most cases a High School Diploma is not enough. They want an ASSOCIATES DEGREE OR BETTER. Split Infinity



posted on Aug, 10 2012 @ 12:47 AM
link   
reply to post by SplitInfinity
 


The US army is at the whim of the acting government, if they were to defect (or rise up), and fight with the people, that would amount to military coup. If that is the case, then it is not the 2A and average joes with guns that would be ousting the government... therefore the whole notion that bearing arms protects the people from tyranny is moot, as it infact relies on the military to join in, and without them there would be carnage.

There is a reason constitutions have clauses relating to their amendment: not all aspects are valid for eternity. Times change, interpretations change.. they are not written in stone. They are written and amended according to the opinion of the day, not past. Using an argument that was made in the making of the 2A does not necessarily imply its relevance.

I'm sure you are very proud of the US military, but even they aren't completely sure about their role in protecting the people and constitution, hence why anti-interventionalist Ron received more funding from service women and men than any other candidate.



posted on Aug, 10 2012 @ 02:21 AM
link   
reply to post by spoogemonkey
 

I come from a Military Family. We have lost members of this family in several wars. Almost all of the Men and Women of my family who are Military continue to serve in the Reserves. I have had this conversation with many of them on multiple occasions and I am not Military but I work with the Best of them as I am "CIVILIAN" in the way the quotes denote.

I asked...if you were ordered to fire on U.S. Citizens....what would you do? EVERY SINGLE ONE SAID...NO WAY!
A Soldier or Sailor or Airman has a choice to not follow an order that is considered as being against their OATH....that being to Defend the People and CONSTITUTION of the UNITED STATES.

The song 4 Dead in OHIO where National Guardsmen Fired by order upon Students who were occupying various buildings...is BURNED INTO THE CONSCIOUSNESS OF EVERY AMERICAN. These four students who died left a legacy that lives on as it will never again be repeated.

Because our Military is an all volunteer force as well as the many Families with Moms and Dads in the Reserve who some are at 40 years old or more...especially Air Force Reservists...are Highly connected to the communities where their bases are located.

The people of the U.S. LOVE OUR TROOPS...because they are our Family. When you have a Military as Large and as connected to all aspects of other people in either Companies that supply anything from Soda to Military Equipment to the Bases...and we have A LOT OF BASES...everyone knows everyone else.

This is why you will never see a Dictatorship in the U.S. The Military and the People would never allow it. Also...I have noticed that you seem to draw a line between a Countries People and their Military. In the U.S. there is no line...no wall...no separation. The Military ARE the PEOPLE! Split Infinity



posted on Aug, 10 2012 @ 05:23 AM
link   
reply to post by SplitInfinity
 


All very well and good, and I agree with you, except that does cast doubt on the need for the 2A, which is my point. If there will never be a dictatorship, then how is an argument defending the 2A on the basis of it's initial purpose a valid one? According to you, there won't be tyranny as the instrument (military) sides with the people anyway. Yet here we are, still hearing about 18th century reasoning (to stop the Govt. from tyranny).

It's all good that some americans like the right to carry guns, but surely you must see the contradiction?



posted on Aug, 10 2012 @ 05:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by SplitInfinityAlso...our Police Force would never allow the Massive Sports and Anarchist Rioting as occurs in your country.


Really?

Apart from the Seattle Riots in 1999. $20 million USD of riot damage. And the NY Blackout of 1977 - $300 million USD of riot damage. And the 2001 Cincinnati Riots (caused by the same thing as the London Riots last year), the 1967 Detroit riots that lasted nearly a week, the 1968 Chicago riots... and the... and the... and the...

I guess the LA riots were just a vicious rumour? More than a thousand buildings weren't destroyed, more than $1 billion USD worth od damage wasn't done?



posted on Aug, 10 2012 @ 06:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by hawkiye

Originally posted by Sablicious
Take The United States Of New South Fails numbers out of the Australian statistics and all of a sudden gun control starts looking a whole lot more effective!


Oh gun control is very effective... Allowing governments to murder their citizens by the millions:

"Anti Self-Defense (gun control) & The Mass Extermination Of Peoples

20 million exterminated for lack of self-defense. 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. '1, '2, '3.

1.5 million exterminated for lack of self-defense. In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. '4.

13 million exterminated for lack of self-defense. Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated. '5.

20 million exterminated for lack of self-defense. China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. '6

100 thousand exterminated for lack of self-defense. Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. '7.

300 thousand exterminated for lack of self-defense. Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. '8, '9.

1 million exterminated for lack of self-defense. Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million 'educated' people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated." '10.

56 million total, exterminated for lack of self-defense. Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million.

The next time someone talks in favor of Anti Self Defense (gun control), ask them "Who do YOU want to round up and EXTERMINATE?" Please pause and reflect on the MASSIVE AMOUNT of lives lost because the means of self defense were deprived these people. Now you may begin to understand why gun owners are prepared to defend the "Right to Keep and Bear Arms" with all thierr might as our Founding Fathers did! This is not idle talk, references are provided. The media is not giving facts, next time they quote statistics supposedly in favor of Anti Self Defense (gun control) Ask for references, you will be astonished at the lack there of, and half truths used to support their "Anti Self-Defense" agenda.

End notes
Lethal Laws. By Jay Simkin, Aaron Zelman, & Alan M. Rice. Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, P.O. Box 270143, Hartford, WI 53027 (262) 673-9745 et al. '1. Simkin et al., supra note 2, at 98. '2. Decree of the Council of People's Commissars, 10 December 1918, reprinted in 4 Decrees of Soviet Power 123 (Moscow 1968), reprinted in Simkin et al., supra note 2, at 123 '3. Id. at 100-04. '4. Id. at 83. '5. Raul Hilberg, The Destruction of the European Jews 318-20 (1985). '6. Id. at 190. '7. Id. at 229. '8. Id. at 276. '9. Id. at 278. '10. Simkin et al., supra note 2, at 315. For more in depth detail visit: www.jpfo.org..., www.jpfo.org..."

Source: this is a flier/mailer I put together years ago on gun control

edit on 8-8-2012 by hawkiye because: (no reason given)

This is an interesting pattern. I notice in most of the examples you have given, that these mass killings immediately follow the establishment of gun controls. Country leaders/governments strategically disarming their citizens so they can't defend themselves against the coming oppression. And should citizens suspect a coming oppression, they are unable to revolt.
From this perspective I am 100% behind the American citizen to hang on to your guns and ammo and keep them well primed. And I don't blame them for not trusting their corrupt government not trying something like this once/if they establish gun control, I wouldn't trust it either.

After reading your post, I am very suspicious of the American govt and their motives on this citizens owning guns issue. Does it fear or sense that a revolution is near? Is this why it wants your guns? Or does it have total oppression on the cards and the less resistance the better? It looks suspiciously like strategy.

I am not American nor live there, and I wasn't with you Americans on owning guns to begin with, but considering the above, I have 100% changed my mind.





new topics

top topics



 
68
<< 6  7  8    10  11 >>

log in

join