Originally posted by Maxatoria

Originally posted by MadQuacker
They will never take guns from Americans. IF they tried it would be instant civil war imo, I would think they would have to bring in UN troops to enforce it and I don't see that ending well for those troops lol Americans are nuts,

Theres no way any UN country would turn up on the USA borders with weapons drawn.....theres too much weaponry in the hands of the populace and can you imagine how many troops would volunteer to be shot at the moment you left the airplane/boat with better kit than you have on you?

Show up on our borders? They're already here, inside. The biggest one I know of is the Russian Army in Colorado. Not to mention how many of other countries are stored in vacant FEMA camps. People are allowed over the southern border by the Feds. We are not allowed to protect our borders. Just ask the people of Arizona and Texas. And maybe New Mexico too. Though I haven't heard about anything in that state.

I'm definitely not losing any sleep over this. Let me know when something real happens. I'm not a big gun person anyway so I'm not bothered by at all. I do believe some weapons have no business in the hands of civilians. You know like RPGs and handguns with 200 clip drums. Doesn't make any sense to have that much firepower. We do have the right to bear arms...but it doesn't say with ones. And I doubt the Founding Fathers could imagine what a 50 Cal Sniper rifle can do to the human body...I'm just saying.

You know what? I am not even going to bother looking at any list because on one side we have the "lets ban most guns out there" crowd and on the other side we have "take the second amendment LITERALLY and NEVER, ever reconsider modifying it" crowd. It is like the israeli-palestinian issue taken over by fanatics of the worst kind.

The truth normally resides somewhere in the middle. Guns alone will never solve any problem because you need the brains behind them to make the bullets count. I am for mild to moderate gun control; there are some issues I agree and some I disagree with.

Everyone is making this out primarily to be a federal issue and mixing the UN and calling everything socialism, as though only a socialist dictatorship can exist. Rich people do not like socialism and never have. Yes we have a huge government that is wasteful but it is much more likely a croney capitalist global dictatorship with zionists at the top.

Nevermind keep pushing disinformation though with hyperbole and/or outright lies.

I know one thing- IF the Government ever plans on banning weapons again (as Reagan did) they will have to look no further than OP's link to find which list of weapons to try and ban.

--- numbskulls

Just posting the truth here:

Most people in our country want our gun laws to be more strict.

I personally don't know what I am for, but I don't see the need for an average American to have an auto assault rifle or a 100 round clip for their modified AK-47.

Originally posted by chadderson
So let me get this straight. Americans have the right to bear arms, EXCEPT for the list?

no - the list has nothing at all to do with Americans owning guns.

So when did the right to bear arms get diced up and quantified into specifically what is okay and not okay?

it didn't - the post's premis that it affects US gun ownership is BS. the treaty is about international arms trade.

All automatic weapons should be banned. All armor piercing rounds should be banned. 17 to get shooting permit and 21 to register guns in your name. Full background check for felonies and mental stability issues.

There should be no limit to how many rounds a magazine can hold. Short barreled rifles and short barreled shotguns should be allowed without tax stamps. Hollow points and full metal jacket are good. Silencers should require tax stamps. Automatic weapons made before the ban of 1983 should need transfer stamp, as they do currently. No concealed carry permits should be necessary if you qualify to buy a gun. No limit to how much ammunition you can buy. No registering ammunition sales or tracking down how much each customer bought.

In other words we have excessive gun laws as it stands, which serve more to increase revenue for the state and federal government than to protect society. And second the people who push state rights do not realise they are authorising the state and local authorities to further complicate matters. In states like illinois, new jersey, new york and massachussets the gun regulation has become insane which only helps organised gangs and frivilous crime.

That is why I say the gun control issue is complicated. Nevermind the UN which has its own agenda!

Originally posted by hanyak69

Originally posted by jimmyx

Originally posted by chadderson
So let me get this straight. Americans have the right to bear arms, EXCEPT for the list? So when did the right to bear arms get diced up and quantified into specifically what is okay and not okay?

the same reason an RPG or a bazooka is on the NOT OKAY list. c'mon....the ability to fire massive amounts of ammo, with the ability to kill multiple people all at once without reloading, is not infringing on your right to bear arms. if you think it is, then you must believe that the 2nd amendment gives you the right to kill alot of people at once. don't you think this brings into focus your motives as well as your state of mind?
do you want to be associated with the same people as:
1...columbine shooters
2...virgina tech shooter
3...gabby giffords shooter
4...colorado shooter(s)

edit on 21-11-2012 by jimmyx because: addition

Your statements have no merit. The 2nd Amend is to protect us from a tyrannical government. You need to know about rights given to us by the constitution . You are using cases of psychotic episodes to make a case to disarm all Americans. If a person wants to harm another person they will find a way to do it , by getting rid of gun does not get rid of crazy. I own guns and have nothing in common with these psycos. When all the guns are gone what will insure your freedoms?
I would not mind a bazooka or an rpg, they would be pretty fun to shoot!
In every instance in your list if there was an armed civilian there the shooter would have possibly killed less people. Did the police help? No cause they get there tooo late. A government cannot protect you true protection only comes from each individual.

Absolutely. We just need everyone to agree that we have a trannical "government". That includes any military, or others, who have sworn an oath to uphold and support the Constitution.
I only disagree on one minor point--- rights given to us by the constitution, We already have unalienable rights given to us by our Creator.( If you do not have a Creator, then insert another word instead of Creator.)
The Constitution is meant to restrain the "government". They need to be told, in writing, what SOME of our specific rights are. Just in case they forget. Government was never meant to be ABOVE man. It didn't start that way in the Republic that we were given. What happened?

---

---

More paranoid nonsense being propped up by the gun lobby.

If anyone thinks the liberals wanted a 45% jump in gun sales they don't know liberals, or America.


A gun ban will never happen, but people will profit from the threat as long as they can.

Originally posted by mudbeed
Just posting the truth here:

Most people in our country want our gun laws to be more strict.

I personally don't know what I am for, but I don't see the need for an average American to have an auto assault rifle or a 100 round clip for their modified AK-47.

The polls I've seen the last few years have generally shown that a solid majority favor the current laws.

Regardless, its not legal for the 'average' American to own an automatic weapon. You can get them, but its not an 'off-the-shelf' purchase and requires a few more steps legally, and the cost of the weapons themselves are prohibitive almost everyone. The much more common weapons are semi-automatic; they fire once each time the trigger is pulled. The vast majority of these weapons are used as little more than expensive toys for a Saturday afternoon at the gun range. They're not hurting anything.

I don't think its a question of 'need' anyway. A person can own a lot of things they don't necessarily need. That's an argument that I don't think anyone really wants to support, as it can be applied in a lot of ways that you might not find as favorable.

Originally posted by MrPlow
I know one thing- IF the Government ever plans on banning weapons again (as Reagan did) they will have to look no further than OP's link to find which list of weapons to try and ban.

--- numbskulls

edit on 21-11-2012 by alien because: (no reason given)

Actually, certain Democratic members of Congress introduce a new assault weapons ban almost every year. It never goes anywhere, but the vast majority of these have been listed in those proposed bans for years. I haven't compared the lists, but this one strikes me as being very similar to HR 1022 that was introduced by the usual suspects back in 2007.

I have a concealed carry class this Sunday, it is taught by a retired peace officer. If anyone knows what is happening down the line, he will. I will ask and post Sunday or Monday what the deal appears to be...for those of you interested.