Obama supports UN global gun ban less than 24 hours after reelection

I will settle this debate right now with any of the anti-gun members in here.

How do you morally justify stripping a human being (against his/her will) from his/her last line of defense against tyranny?

reply to post by Starwise


ha ha, good joke. US would be one of the most tyrannical and the one with the most guns? It's obvious that a world without the means to easily kill one another is good. But it's all the killing that's already been done that's the problem. People are blind with rage and it will take generations to quell the fire that threatens to burn humanity out. All military should have the same rule applied. A nice dream to imagine a world where humans weren't acting out their primal instincts to kill and take revenge.

WOW do people know how to read? it says RENEWED DEBATE, look who the source of the article is, in short nothing has been done, they're only DEBATING the proposal right now, that's it.

reply to post by NoJoker13


Earlier thread that details this work in progress
www.abovetopsecret.com...

This is good stuff as well. Much still has yet to be written. This is an open door series of regulations when coupled with NDAA, Patriot etc can be very dangerous to the rights of Americans.

In the following, Series 05 is the only series that has been written out so far. This is plan as you go stuff.
www.smallarmsstandards.org...

Its already starting in the Caribbean of all places. Not exactly a hot bed for terror and militant dictators

To date, UNLIREC, in collaboration with nine Caribbean governments, has enhanced security in 99 stockpile facilities, destroyed 6,526 firearms and over 6.75 tonnes of ammunition and trained an important number of Caribbean officials in international standards for weapons and ammunition destruction."

www.unlirec.org...

Belize
www.smallarmsstandards.org...

All they need is an open door.

Remember this?

More than 160,000 handguns have been surrendered by their owners since new laws were introduced following the Dunblane massacre, the UK Government has revealed.

Legislation outlawing handguns followed the murder of 16 children and their teacher Gwen Mayor by gunman Thomas Hamilton at Dunblane Primary School in Scotland in March 1996. Hamilton then turned the gun on himself.

Originally posted by eLPresidente

How do you morally justify stripping a human being (against his/her will) from his/her last line of defense against tyranny?

Just who will you Point your Gun At...
Im curious, how will you know who the Tyrants are...
Police..
Military..
Crossing Guards..
Who.

reply to post by badgerprints


Wasn't Obama supporting this before the election anyways? I just don't see how or why this is such shocking news?

Originally posted by Hijinx
reply to post by badgerprints

 

Wasn't Obama supporting this before the election anyways? I just don't see how or why this is such shocking news?

There's about six posts in there where I explain that.

I guess the only real news is that it isn't being covered in the news.
Doesn't matter. No one reads anything after the first page or two and then responds.

If I was a real troll I'd be proud of this thread. It's got everybody in a tussle.

Wish I'd just ignored that little article and had another cup of coffee instead.

reply to post by Tw0Sides


Who ever trys to take it !

Originally posted by UltraMarine
reply to post by jjkenobi

 

The criminals will always have guns because they DON'T OBEY THE LAWS. That's why they are criminals. It just means the rest of us will be defenseless

We Civilians shouldn't possess guns . There are cops to protect us from Criminals . We cannot take law into our own hand .

Are... are you serious?

Who decides the cops and the government have better judgement than we do? They're only human, just as we are. Difference is, they are equipped with the law, and they can abuse power all they want to. It's not about taking the law into our own hands, it's about keeping ourselves safe when the law fails us.

And, yes... the law does, and will always, fail us.

Remember Katrina? Where was FEMA?

The government had plenty of time to shoot the desperate looters trying to survive from the disaster, but it was a little harder for FEMA to save those stragglers...

But no, I'm sure you're right. The government is much more trustworthy than we are.

Originally posted by UltraMarine

Isn't global gun ban a good idea ?

Kind of strange that someone with such a name would make such a claim...

It is not a good idea, if you look at the UK crimes, and any other place where firearms have been banned, or are heavily restricted have all an INCREASE in crimes with firearms... Do you know why that is?... Because CRIMINALS don't care for laws, so when a government does this it means the regular/good abidding people get their weapons taken away, which makes EVERYONE a victim...

When criminals know that people don't have firearms crimes increase, INCLUDING crimes with firearms...

Originally posted by UltraMarine

We Civilians shouldn't possess guns . There are cops to protect us from Criminals . We cannot take law into our own hand .

It takes cops about 30 minutes, or longer, to respond to a call. Not to mention that cops don't barge in trying to save your butt, they get in slowly, and most often AFTER the crime has been committed...

If you rely on cops to defend yourself and your family, you might as well just buy caskets for every member of your family right now...

reply to post by ldyserenity


There are already several states where firearms have been banned or are heavily restricted, and we still have the second amendment... Since when have individual rights EVER stopped a tyrannical government?...

Originally posted by UltraMarine
reply to post by jjkenobi

 

The criminals will always have guns because they DON'T OBEY THE LAWS. That's why they are criminals. It just means the rest of us will be defenseless

We Civilians shouldn't possess guns . There are cops to protect us from Criminals . We cannot take law into our own hand .

What rock do you live under??

Cops can not protect you from criminals. It is not their job to protect you from criminals. It is their job to investigate crime, in order to investigate a crime a crime must have already taken place.

There was a thread not too long ago where I posted the average response times from a 911 call. In the City of Atlanta the average response time to a 911 call came out to be somewhere around 11 minutes. If you have an armed criminal in your home, and you are defenseless, that is 10.5 minutes too long for the police to show up and "protect you".

How do you account for Cops who are criminal themselves? It was not long ago that a NJ police officer was arrested for his plans to kill, cook and eat women.

I say "No thank you", I do not need police to protect me, I will protect myself.

He only agreed to enter into talks about it.

Discussion and support are not the same thing.

Outlaw guns,and only outlaws will have guns.

Logic might prevail,or maybe not.

reply to post by ElectricUniverse

The way it is going now, the cops will take an hour to get there. Then when they do, they will shoot your dog, taze your baby, and pepperspray you for your troubles. That is if you are lucky and they don't send SWAT in to kill you all!

What's so great about the right to bear arms anyway?

You have the right to carry a dead fish in your pocket if you want to, I don't see many people exercising that particular right.

reply to post by Alekto


Well duh...... There are illegal gunlaws all over the place. A lot of places that "allow" you to carry a gun, make you conceal it......

reply to post by Alekto


When you face some big thug with a knife who wants your money and no witnesses in a place where people turn their heads you will want a gun . That's when you face reality . Its either him, them or you and they are young and you are not . Try calling a Cop then .
Then coming very soon to your little world is the Global Governments goals of privatizing Police Forces gives me even less confidence in the cops .
Get a gun , learn how to use it , learn the laws concerning it's use , get a concealed carry license , carry it and never use it for anything but the last ditch effort to save your life or the life of a loved one . Let it gather dust sitting there waiting for that instant that you have to have it . The fact that many people carry concealed now makes you a suspected carrier and makes attackers think twice . In New York thugs know you do not have a gun and they probably do .

reply to post by SimonPeter


You should not even need a concealed carry permit if you are deemed fit to carry any firearm.....

The government needs money and will make it hard for the average person to defend himself/herself.

Many of the gun laws make zero sense, especially the cooling off period. What retardation!

21 to drink and 21 to register hand guns. 17 to get a shooting permit. Driving a car involves risk as well especially if dwi. Of course double standards are popular with hypocrites.

reply to post by EarthCitizen07


Long ago when guns were carried on the hip you didn't have to have anything . But as far as the age thing most probably it was the young fast guns wanting to see who was the fastest and get cash quick /never gonna die kids that helped get guns frowned on . The young and impetuous make some really bad decisions a lot of times as we all know later in life . So some age restrictions are good . You will understand this some day . Been there done that !