It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Every possible reason for gun ownership addressed and countered

page: 13
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 02:05 PM
reply to post by IkNOwSTuff

It's a waste of time, man. It's like trying to convince a bone-idle teenage pothead to get a job, they will hit you with every possible excuse their minds can come up with, chuck insults at you -, there's no reasoning behind it - they just want to own guns...and these days, people are entitled to what they want, it's the modern mindset.

People are controlled by fear, I read that often on ATS...fear of each other. You wanna own a gun out of fear, if you live in an urban area, and own a's FEAR - and you are perpetuating that FEAR by buying into that way of thinking...FEEEEAR...and CONTROLLLL...guns are used to intimidate and control.

I don't fear the government half as much as I do the nutters walking our streets...face it, regardless of whether or not you are responsible, you speak for none other than yourself...grow up.

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 02:14 PM
reply to post by kozmo

Oh, but it was! You are committing ad hoc, ergo propter hoc without delivering appropriate evidence to support the claim. Did you not state that your country had also had massacres? Did you account, since you like statistics, for variations in population density? Of course not! In fact, all of your evidence is anecdotal based on your fear of guns. And none has been statistically normalized to account for the THOUSANDS of variables that ensure there is no correlation between Australia and The United States.

Once again... I dont fear guns, I dont like them but why would I fear them? there not in every 2nd house over here so nothing to fear. Its gun owners who are scared of guns it seems since most of you justify your having them by stating that you need them for protection from other people with guns

Since the gun ban we have had no massacres and gun deaths are a rarity over here, something like 50 a year and alot of those are suicide.
I dont see what population density has to do with anything but since you have admonished me onmy lack of statistical data maybe you could provide some to show me how wrong I am?
Ill take a stab here and say you either wont respond or youll come back with something like "I dont need staistics the burden of proof is on you" well you just stated something you claim to be relevant, I say its not so now the burden of proof is on you.
Im pretty sure you just said all that in an attempt to sound clever as when statistics are shown in most cases its per capita which IS statistical normalisation.... OOOPS

So yes, possession of firearms by the citizenry always gives pause to those who would so easily conquer a peoples and makes them take stock of their potential losses should they fail. Do you claim and unarmed populace would fair better than an armed populace? Hence the originating purpose of the 2nd Amendment!

In this day and age yes, an unarmed populace has a much better chance of overthrowing a tyrannical regime than an armed revolution.

You get 10% of America camped out in the cities and not moving till the gov leaves what they gonna do? shoot you all?

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 02:19 PM

Originally posted by nixie_nox

Originally posted by spock51
Also, I do not think offerring US .gov statistics will convince anyone. The US government has been known to fib.

This is a total copout. You can't deny stats just because you like the source. It gives a pansy way out by making a paltry excuse to deny the information.

Most people, including some relatives living in that area, say DC is a war zone out on the streets. I will take my sister's word over the .gov's word.

As someone who has relatives who work and live in DC, and who is in DC frequently myself, I will call bunk. ANd I will call your sister a drama queen.

Don't know a bloody thing about UK stats. However, most .gov stats are suspect every where in the world.
Call me paranoid, but I have been lied to by government entirely too many times to trust them unconditionally.

Have any truth about those lies, or are we supposed to take your word for it?

As stated previously, subjectivity must be guarded against, or at least recognized in a debate. You are highly intelligent and motivated, but you must realize that the American way and your way are vastly different. And the reasons for said difference IS an essential element in deciding such a volatile and divisive issue.

I am pretty sure that if the poster came out with a pro gun thread, you people would be jumping all over his support.

Just because you live in another country doesn't mean you can't understand the situation.

Anyone want to challenge RA on JFK? But he doesn't know anything since he isn't American, right?

Perhaps you failed to read my entire post. I am a Vietnam Veteran. Robert McNamara came out on national news outlets and confessed to fabricating the Gulf of Tonkin incident which led directly to the Vietnam Conflict costing 58,000 Americans, and God knows how many Vietnamese citizens, their lives. Hmmmm.... let me see........ I'm old ya know........but I am pretty sure the "Whiz Kid" was a Cabinet Member for LBJ, a Democrat. Yea thats right. I think most Americans affected by that particular debacle would have no problem labelling that as a lie foisted upon the public by the government they were supposed to be able to trust.
I am also Native American. Do I need to say anything more regarding the government's ability to lie? Genocide is not a pretty thing when you are not the ones with the guns. Never again will that be allowed to happen to us.
My sister is not in a position to run in the circles in which I suspect you do. She is, like me, working class and living the paycheck to paycheck American Dream. She keeps a firearm at home, as do a lot of working class people in that area. (And, yes, she can be a drama queen.)
Your reference to those who disagree with you as "you people" is a clear indicator that you view "us" as sub-human or, at least, inconsequential to your worldview. Your arrogance when stating that you can certainly understand our situation even though you are not American is downright laughable. I have absolutely no idea who the hell "RA" is and why JFK has any relevance to this topic nor to I care to delve into it.
The world is full of intelligent and insightful people who are not American, who are not white and who are not politically affiliated.
I am an Independent politically who finds the 2 party paradigm to be ill suited to represent the people of this country. Two heads from the same Hydra, .....but I digress.....
Your "rebuttal" was basically a combination of angst, arrogance and "talking points". While there are many brilliant and caring non-Americans out there who will help us through this mess, you, Nixie_Nox, are NOT one of them.

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 02:19 PM
reply to post by tamusan

Convince me that someone would not be able to obtain a firearm illegally, and you win.
It is far too easy to get your hands on any type of illegal countraband in this country.
What we need is a greater accountability for firearm owners. I would even submit to a yearly evaluation. If I am not responsible enough to manage my weapons, then I hope someone takes them away from me.

You cant stop crims from getting guns by taking them away from the public I acknowledged that in my OP, you can however stop school children from getting them.
You do understand that guns are so easily accessible on the black market because they are easily accessible legally dont you?
I agree with your idea for greater accountability, also making the fine for a lost or stolen gun ridiculously high might help prevent people selling them on

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 02:21 PM
reply to post by nixie_nox

that doesn't make sense. I am not being difficult either. I don't get what you mean.

If you have to ask for permission then you are granted the privilege of having said grace, or not. If you do not have to ask for permission then it is a right, since no one else but you is involved in the process of granting said right.

That is true for everyone and all things related to rights and privileges
edit on 18-12-2012 by zedVSzardoz because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 02:26 PM
I'm still waiting for you to come refute my facts...

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 02:26 PM

Originally posted by foodstamp
reply to post by IkNOwSTuff

Your gonna have to be more specific. Canada when? And australia when? Because I'm not aware of any change except for the British coming in a saying it was theirs. Heh

Australia had a referendum in 1901 and declared they were an independant country, Britain wasnt happy but not much could be done

And Canada decided it didnt need British rule in the 1930's, it had something to do with mineral rights.
To be fair with Canada it only became official in the 1980's.

And just to clarify with India and Egypt there was violence but it wasnt an armed uprising that toppled the governments, in fact it could be said the succeeded despite the armed uprising

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 02:29 PM
reply to post by foodstamp

What does evaluations and greater accountability do for gun control? Really... It doesn't stop guns from being stolen. It doesn't stop them by being bought legally through a proxy (90% of all illegl guns owned are bought legally) It doesn't stop anything. Just gives law abiding citizens more headaches and higher taxes to implement such a board to oversee a futile worthless form of control. Gun control will not stop a law abiding citizen turned madman from getting a gun and using it. Not ever... Your solution of more control does nothing to counter act the problem. Never has, never will. Our history of gun control is a testament to that..

And here youve just admitted that legal guns very easily get into the wrong hands, this is why guns need to be banned.
Having legal ones around just gives criminally minded people more and easier options for obtaining them

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 02:31 PM

Originally posted by IkNOwSTuff
In the 10 years after guns were banned in DC death by gun went down as compared to the 10 years before and despite what gun advocates seem to think it didnt rise by knife, bat or anything else.
The only statistical variance was that gun deaths were lower.
Isnt violent crime and gun crime getting lower in New York?

That is flat out false. Please link to your proof. Acceptable proof would be stats compiled by someone with phd in statistics in a peer reviewed journal or a report from the fbi. The handgun ban in D.C. was struck down in 2008 and murder has fallen ever year since. trict_of_columbia_by_city_2011.xls

2008 186 murders
2009 143 murders
2010 132 murders
2011 108 murders

I don't know how you're getting concecutive data all the way from 1975 to 1995 as fbi reports don't go that far back but homicides went up every year from 1986 to 1991. If you can't link to a legitimate data source i'm not inclined to believe your statement that crime went down in D.C. every year from 1975-1995

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 02:33 PM
As someone who has fired his share of guns. (AR-15, M-60 M-79 Grenade Launcher & a LAWS rocket; cool as hell, zero recoil) from basic training, sadly I think most ppl who post on this thread defending gun rights are full of it.

OP, I DON'T support your idea, merely b/c it gives us a lack of options, and that is my only reason, ppl like options.

All these arguments about facts, stats, crime rates, & all that is a smokescreen. (That's right, I said it) What it's really about is balls. One's own convictions & beliefs, which MOST ppl don't have /posses anymore.

Do I really need proof for this statement? Fine, but I won't post links b/c I shouldn't have to. First the local level. How many NH "Live free or die" ppl CONSTANTLY get stopped by the cops simply b/c they own a gun & are wearing it in public? And how many of these ppl KNOW that they're being illegally detained & yet submit to a "check" anyway, give their gun to a cop , have a "conversation" and then are free to leave? Just youtube that junk, it's everywhere.

If you're ONLY stopping me b/c I'm wearing a gun officer, fark you. It's illegal! End of story. Doesn't matter they do it anyway. comply. comply. comply.

On the state level, two words: Hurricane Katrina. Two more words: Gun confiscation. Two MORE words: IT WORKED. How many national guardsmen were killed by the gun owners in the act of "from my cold dead hands"?


I can't find any online. Doesn't mean it doesn't exist, and if it does someone please post a reply with a link to the story, I'd love to read it. But I doubt it.

We have how many youtube vids of cops arresting ppl ILLEGALLY. We also have laws on the books that, if you're being illegally detained, you have the RIGHT to resist using force upto and including death.

Now, what's the REALITY of that situation? We all know the answer. If you're being illegally detained and pull a gun on a cop,(and survive) you're either going to get a needle in your arm, or the electric chair, or life.

We are SUPPOSED to be a nation of laws, and when those that enforce the law don't abide by the law or, even worse, have a different variation of how those laws apply to THEM... well then we're not truly a nation of laws then are we? It's a double standard, and it's crap. Worse than that, it's a LIE.

My point is when I see these kind of things happening, enmasse,(ppl standing up for themselves against the system) then and ONLY then will I believe all this gun rights bs. Most ppl are all talk, and WHEN, not IF, but WHEN it happens (gun confiscation) most of the ppl here will fold like a house of cards.

I mean for crying out loud you got ppl getting arrested for PHOTOGRAPHY for pete sakes! And no one is resisting it! Taking pictures in public! PINAC has moved to or something like that if you insist on proof or don't believe that statement.

Let's face it, if you can't protect yourself against one flatfoot whose crapping all over your constitutional rights, how are you going to resist a SWAT team wearing kevler vests & Mp-5's or M-16's? You're not.

And for the love of God DON'T give me that lame "take it to the courts bs" argument. If you're not willing to die for your beliefs, you don't deserve to have them. That's why others fought & died, so you could have them. But if you're such a person that you believe NOTHING is worth dying for, then what is worth LIVING for?

To sum up OP, the answer to your questions is "we like the ILLUSION of freedom", not actual freedom b/c it's inconvenient.

For the record (because i know someone is going to suggest I am saying this even though I haven't even inferred it) I am NOT endorsing the killing of cops! I AM endorsing your rights to "live free" according to the laws that we ALREADY have on the books! The "law" won't match the reality of that situation though as i already said, (and i think most know that, which is why ppl goto the courts instead of the morgue) but the sad fact is our forefathers faced this very same situation themselves and they said FARK THAT, and they did it for much less then what we are putting up with NOW. That is irrefutable fact, like it or not.

Flame away, the proof is in the pudding.

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 02:40 PM

Originally posted by Grimpachi
reply to post by IkNOwSTuff

I can only guess that you do not have problems with wild dogs where you live. Even though most of America has been tamed there still are areas where carrying a firearm is the only way to insure your safety when I lived in Tennessee I worried about more than just dogs. When I was growing up we kept rifles on gun racks in our trucks and there was never a problem maybe that deterred shootings at schools I can only guess.

I have read where people from other countries have stated they have problems with gangs and knives yet they say they would rather face that. I have no fear of gangs because I am armed. I would much rather be able to defend myself with a pistol than a knife especially if I am defending myself against more than one person. I can’t remember the country but it wasn’t that long ago a psycho killed a bunch of kids on an island where guns were not readily available to citizens so there is an instance where anti-gun laws did more harm than good.

You can think what you want but America is still wild in many aspects depending on where you live if you have never lived here you probably wouldn’t understand yet these are not the only reasons for keeping our firearms but it is enough for me.

To kill wild dogs, feral cats, rabbits and other genuine pests is to me genuine grounds for gun ownership.

If someone holds you up with a gun and demands your wallet are you really going to go for your gun and risk your life over some cash, a few credit cards and a drivers license?

Im sorry but having guns everywhere does not solve problems.
An Island that has never had an issue with guns has 1 shooting spree (not being callous and even 1 ids to many) and your solution is to arm everyone

This unfortunately is typical of the gun owners mentality, guns solve all problems, as long as we have guns were fine.
This is blatantly not the case
edit on 18/12/2012 by IkNOwSTuff because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 02:40 PM
I can understand how people who have no concept of true freedom need this explained to them. It just gets really old having to do this everytime some nutjob kills a bunch of people.

I dont own guns because I am afraid
I dont own guns because I hunt animals
I dont own guns just to put holes in paper targets
I dont own guns cause I need to cuddle with one
I dont own guns because I have a sexual problem

I own guns and carry one on a daily basis because I am a free man.

I dont need your approval
I dont need your opinion
I dont care that you dont like guns
Your input on my decisions and what I "need" is irrelevant
I dont give a rats hind end what you think I need.

Liberty and rights are not about what you or anyone else thinks I "need".
MY liberty and MY rights are about what I think I need and what I want.
As long as I do not infringe on the life liberty or property of another I have not crossed any moral barrier.

My firearms are to protect my life liberty and property from those who would infringe on me and mine. That may be a single individual criminal or an entire army of them.
My firearms are insurance
They are a fire extinguisher
They are a spare tire in the back of the car
They are there just in case.

The government in all its guises cannot provide any measure of protection.
The government has no requirement to protect my life liberty or property
It is my duty as a citizen to protect my own life liberty and property.

I am not responsible for the actions of criminals who infringe on the life liberty and property of others.
I am endowed with the right to defend myself by my birth I do not need permission to do so.
The Constitution prohibits the government from restricting that right.
All laws that restrict access to the best means of defending my life liberty and property therefore violate an inalienable right.
I do not care if a criminal is unarmed. I have a right to defend myself and will use any means I deem fit to properly respond to the level of threat the criminal presents.

Again I understand that you do not agree with this I just dont care. You have no say in how I protect myself.

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 02:42 PM

Originally posted by tamusan
reply to post by CosmicCitizen

At any distance, a sane and rational person makes a conscious choice to pull the trigger.

Mentally ill people should not have access any type of weapon. They should also be watched closely, if they are a possible threat.

A firearm owner should be held responsible for not securing their firearms adequately. If their firearms are easily taken, especially by a mentally ill family member, then they should also be charged with the crime.

I cant believe this hasnt been starred until now

What is wrong with gun advocates?
They star a posts saying "hurry up and respond to me" but not this!!!!!

It really shows what sort of people were dealing with

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 02:44 PM
I just wanna throw in a comment I made in my own thread regarding this issue because it was cool and I'm proud of it - if we can solve problems with guns, imagine what we could achieve with bazookas.

People lived among wild animals for centuries looooong before guns existed...yet those area were still populated by humans, the wild animals didn't wipe 'em all out - we've been killing every animal we encounter since long before guns existed.

Guns just make it easier, people want guns cos they think they're cool, they look like a gangster...and so they can intimidate and control people, like the government we fear so much. Guns don't control people, people do...and they use guns to do it, sometimes.

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 02:46 PM
reply to post by Dragoon01're right! I'm a free man, too...but it's a missile I want, not a gun.

As a free man, it is my god-given right to own a missile! I also want the moon...I am free. As a free man, I want other people to die...freedom isn't really freedom when someone else loses out, is it? I mean YOUR freedom - f*** everyone elses...I get it.

Boy, is my face red.

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 02:49 PM
OK how about this then,I need the ability to fight multiple targets ,as I trained,because there are too many wrong hands that have them and are waiting to use them,as we converse.Multiple 30rd mags a pistol and knives as well.
I keep VERY careful control of who I allow in my house and warn those who don't know.
I have no idea who might be stupid enough to hit my area or why and I now don't care or fear them.
Piece of mind,that is why.

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 02:51 PM
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

Well, I just have a couple things in follow up to the reply. First, on the Constitution part.....Indeed, the original wording was old. However, that 2009 decision has the force of the Constitution itself. They quite literally, under our system, are directly interpreting and re-interpreting the document for all things forward of the day of a Supreme Court decision. So, when they said in 09 that is is an absolute individual right...that ended the debate on gun ownership. It doesn't end a thing on regulation of WHAT guns you can own...but it pulled the ban idea clear off the table by law.

Doesnt it just prove that it was ambiguous if the supreme court had to make a ruling on it?
Have there been similar rulings or debates on the 1st Amendment which is morwe cut and dry?
Not trolling genuinely curious

However, I'll say that I envy a place like England at times because guns were never a cultural staple to the nation. While England doesn't BAN guns....the degree they are found in society has no comparison whatsoever to ours, of course. In a different America? I wouldn't mind a bit......and I can hear people making me a Foe as I type this.

Once again

You accept it as part of an unfortunate reality, that I can handle.
Most of your compatriots just love guns, they will sugar coat it many ways but when it comes down to it they need it coz it makes them feel safe or strong. Funny how they say Im the one who fears guns when they usually say they need one to protect themselves from other peoples guns, they seriously cant see that is pretty much the definition of fear

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 02:53 PM

Originally posted by foodstamp
reply to post by tamusan

What do you mean by accountable?

And how does it reduce gun crime as a whole?

Please don't take it the wrong way. I am curious as to what you propose.

Practically all the guns that are "illegal" in the US started out as "legal" guns
Whoever got them legally should be responsible for what those guns do even when not in their hands.

Would stop alot of straw purchases and people would make more of an effort to secure them

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 02:53 PM

Originally posted by IkNOwSTuff
reply to post by tamusan

Convince me that someone would not be able to obtain a firearm illegally, and you win.
It is far too easy to get your hands on any type of illegal countraband in this country.
What we need is a greater accountability for firearm owners. I would even submit to a yearly evaluation. If I am not responsible enough to manage my weapons, then I hope someone takes them away from me.

You cant stop crims from getting guns by taking them away from the public I acknowledged that in my OP, you can however stop school children from getting them.
You do understand that guns are so easily accessible on the black market because they are easily accessible legally dont you?
I agree with your idea for greater accountability, also making the fine for a lost or stolen gun ridiculously high might help prevent people selling them on

ummm criminals aren't going to care how high you make a "fine" on owning a lost or stolen gun, also I think this point is just crap if people want something they'll get it, I don't understand your point about "stopping school children from getting them" wouldn't that be where parenting comes in??? therefore making this point invalid??

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 02:53 PM
What happened to my freedom to be able to live my life without fear of some idiot with a gun, taking charge and ordering me about? I guess that not owning a gun makes me a prisoner? This is completely pointless.

Bottom act not in the best interests of the future of humanity but in the best interests of your own future, you are all that is important to you...perhaps that's where we differ.

Whatever...I am out, this is a vicious circle - I lose, I'm off out to arm myself to the teeth with all manner of crazy weaponry, I'll get that missile come hell or high water...and I WANT to use that missile to rid the world of gun owenrs...becausme I'm FREE and I want what I want, and care not what you or anyone else wants or needs.

Au revoir.

new topics

top topics

<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in