America is not banning guns and that is that.

To out right ban guns would be an act of war on the American people. It could prove to be the straw that breaks the camels back.

Feinstein's proposed bill (to be introduced at the new session) might make it out of the Senate but it should fail in the House. That is when you have to watch for a possible Executive Order.

reply to post by rock427

Fwiw, our troops (most with multiple tours) have been training in Iraq and Afghanistan for almost a decade to go house to house and take the guns from the "insurgents" (they are probably pretty good at locating caches also).

Originally posted by CaptainBeno

Sick of discussions like this, I'll have the last laugh mate when your president makes you suffer.

To say I over people like you lot is an understatement.

GROW UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

One moment you claim that you don't care what the stupid Americans do to themselves; but in the next moment you remark about how much you'll enjoy when Americans are made to suffer.

Why do you care whether Americans want to run their own country in a savage or backward style? If South Ossetia and Kazakhstan can do it, why can't we?

Australians have constructed a society that you are convinced is morally superior---yay for you. But if Americans do the precisely the same for themselves by controlling their own nation in a style they like, it's suddenly awful.

Germany has some of the toughest gun laws in Europe, and they have a problem with school shootings, just like the US (google Winnenden, Erfurt, Emsdetten, + school shooting for the more recent ones.). Germany's stats are all the more alarming since overall their crime rate is lower than the US, but per capita their school shootings are on par with the USA



Since 1990, when "gun free zones" became legal in the US, practically every mass murder has been committed in a gun free zone. The only exceptions have been 2 in restaurants. And in one of those, the shooter drew fire from other diners, and fled.

Mass murderers strike when they hope there will be no resistance. It's why they often wear bullet proof vests, to reduce the chance of being stopped by another shooter. When they are confronted with the possibility of an concealed carrier on site, they choose another venue--a hospital, a temple, a playground, a shopping mall.

Funny how there are so few killing sprees at gun ranges. Why is that?

reply to post by tovenar


Wow, you stun me with you interlect and wit. I am in awe of your technical ability to make me see sense. Yes, I must have been wrong all along. Yep, you're right, I'm the silly one.

Please answer this question for me:

A spoon is for eating with
A spade is to dig with
A knife is to cut with
A toilet is to pee in
A glass is to drink out of
A pen is used for writing

A gun is to.............................................?

Now, I wait for the smart arses out there to give me Mcgyver multipul use stories, but I want the straight up everyday answer please?

I beleive it only has one answer.

There is no other use for this object than to kill.

Do you all really want to "potentially" kill someone that much, you all have no problems keeping one in the house?
Hey think for one moment, the only reason the "dude" who broke into your house in the first place to rob the joint was because he's gotta gun? I don't think he would be brave enough to enter with any of the other objects on my above list?

So go ahead, answer the question............

Funny how there are so few killing sprees at gun ranges. Why is that?
Good question....and since so many of these guys hate the police, why is it that no one walks into a police station and starts shooting up the place?

reply to post by CosmicCitizen


The answer to your question is at a school in connecticut

All of these shootings have used handguns and AR style rifles. No "street sweeper" type shotguns that the Clinton Administration was so afraid of that he had BATF classify them as "Destructive Devices" (requiring the same process and expense to "register" as machine guns and with no "sunset" like the AWB since it was done by executive branch fiat).

reply to post by rock427

There were signs of war leading up to Pearl Harbor....there are signs here as well; the "indefinite detention of american citizens" for one.

Originally posted by CaptainBeno


A gun is to.............................................?

Now, I wait for the smart arses out there to give me Mcgyver multipul use stories, but I want the straight up everyday answer please?

I beleive it only has one answer.

There is no other use for this object than to kill.

Do you all really want to "potentially" kill someone that much, you all have no problems keeping one in the house?

I don't want to kill anyone. I just want to stop them from messing with my family and my stuff. The other items on your list won't stop them.

The problem is not with me as a home owner; the problem is with the criminal who won't respect the laws, who won't respect my rights, who will take them unless he is too afraid to. Guns do that. A police officer in a car, five minutes away does not.

Maybe property crimes and home invasions aren't a problem in Australia; if that is the case I'd like to know more about that. Because generally in the USA, gun ownership in homes is believed to be a deterrent to home invaders and breaking & enterings. I'll have to have a look at the statistics.

Hey think for one moment, the only reason the "dude" who broke into your house in the first place to rob the joint was because he's gotta gun? I don't think he would be brave enough to enter with any of the other objects on my above list?

So go ahead, answer the question............

edit on 17-12-2012 by CaptainBeno because: (no reason given)

Actually, most break-in artists are unarmed in the US. Home invasions are much more rare. Both of them seemed to be deterred by homeowners with guns, though.

reply to post by CaptainBeno


Looking at This Page, It looks like the USA has about 4 times the homicide rate of Australia; whereas Australia has much more property crime, violent crime (particularly rape) than the USA.

Originally posted by MOMof3
I do not believe our government is tryrannical. I love my country and will stay here and fight bad policies like these. I am just telling you guys and warning you. You are testing the resolve of american mothers. The only way our government can become tyrannical is when its citizens get lazy and uninvolved. Now, how far do you want to go with these weapons, a nuclear bomb in every household?

You do not believe your government is tyrannical because you view the soil you stand on and the government that owns it as one in the same. They are not the same, America is ours, it was founded for the people by the people. The government does not define our country, they only govern it as long as we allow them too.

Americans have become complaisant but that is because the government has put your tax dollars to work to accomplish exactly that! Never associate the ground we walk on, the country we love with the corrupt regime we now have ruling America. They are corporatism goons at best and at worst.......... Well, thats for another thread.

America will be America not withstanding this government. The people know best and when it comes time in history to illustrate that fact to a sharp point, it helps to have guns.

reply to post by jude11

They are coming for the guns, it's been planned for years, it's being played out. They WILL come for the guns. That is That.

Now, the only question is, who will win?

If I had to venture a guess....

the side with tanks, jets, submarines, and space-based weapons.



We haven't had an 'equally armed militia' in a looooooooong time...

reply to post by CaptainBeno


....protect..

Originally posted by CaptainBeno

You know Captain, you'd do well to watch the personal attacks. Quite frankly, you sound ignorant by calling others idiots. You've been a member for a while. What happened to keeping discussions civil and on topic?

reply to post by truthseeker1984

 

You know what, You are right.

I appologise.

However, my stance on guns will never change.


I'm sorry for even giving a sh*.

Hey, we should all have guns......hey arm the f* world! Guns guns GUNS Wahooooooooo!
and you call me ignorant?
Today is a sad day.

Here in Australia, we don't need guns to protect ourselves buddy. Harden up for christ sake.

Sick of discussions like this, I'll have the last laugh mate when your president makes you suffer.

To say I over people like you lot is an understatement.

GROW UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

LOL Ya whatever 22 million Australians cannot be wrong......right? American's own one-third of all guns on this planet (90 guns per 100 people).

In America (statistically) you have a better chance at winning the powerball lottery then getting shot. All the gun control nut jobs would do better buying lottery tickets then trying to promote that line of BS.

You forget how big we are, hell America has aborted almost three times your population since Roe vs Wade mate; our guns are going nowhere. The majority of Americans polled say so.

reply to post by tovenar


nope

www.guardian.co.uk...

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy
reply to post by jude11

 

They are coming for the guns, it's been planned for years, it's being played out. They WILL come for the guns. That is That.

Now, the only question is, who will win?

If I had to venture a guess....

the side with tanks, jets, submarines, and space-based weapons.

We haven't had an 'equally armed militia' in a looooooooong time...

edit on 17-12-2012 by Lucid Lunacy because: (no reason given)

You do not need an equally armed militia when you outnumber them 20 to 1 and add to that the factor that a large portion of military would defect to the civilian side to protect there families. All you need do is keep the fighting and moral up long enough to effect change.

reply to post by tovenar


I

I don't want to kill anyone. I just want to stop them from messing with my family and my stuff. The other items on your list won't stop them.

So in the panic you're an ace shot then?

You can place them so they don't kill?

Originally posted by CaptainBeno
reply to post by tovenar

 

nope

www.guardian.co.uk...

I'm not sure what you're noping.

I quoted stats from a UN commission on crime about OTHER crimes, not just murder. Did you see that? Or just ignore it?

reply to post by Helious

You do not need an equally armed militia when you outnumber them 20 to 1

But all things aren't even. It's not as simple as 20 to 1, because it's not 20 armed with guns to 1 armed with a gun. You have to factor in those tanks and heavy artillery and everything else as their disposal. Of course this is extreme worst case dystopia scenario.

and add to that the factor that a large portion of military would defect to the civilian side to protect there families. All you need do is keep the fighting and moral up long enough to effect change.

Valid point. However, we can't underestimate the possibility of how far 'following orders' can go. History shows that.