Originally posted by kaylaluv

Originally posted by redtic

How that benefits us as a human race is beyond me - someday we'll look back on the 18-21 century and think "remember when everyone had guns and we used to kill each other all the time - god, we were stupid back then"...

I hope you're right about that. I think there are a few of us who are advanced beyond our violent species.

Unfortunately, I think it will be way beyond the 21st century before the human race as a whole evolves beyond the need for violence -- if ever. Maybe there's hope for the 31st century?

We live in the 21st century where violence happens. It's better to be prepared for it than not, imo. And though I own weapons, I'm not violent with them, but responsible. That can change in a heartbeat though if me, my family, or friend is threatened.

Originally posted by kaylaluv
Does it deter you that the military has this type of gun? If it doesn't deter you, it won't deter them.

There are many more of us than there are of them. Why wouldn't that be a deterrent?

Originally posted by Hydroman

Originally posted by kaylaluv
Does it deter you that the military has this type of gun? If it doesn't deter you, it won't deter them.

There are many more of us than there are of them. Why wouldn't that be a deterrent?

edit on 18-2-2013 by Hydroman because: (no reason given)

Ummm, because they can bomb a whole lot of us at once from above?

Originally posted by kaylaluv

Originally posted by billy82269

It has been that way since before recorded history and is a part of human nature. Anything that gives the weak an equal footing is an achievement for humanity. The gun has done that throughout it's history, In fact, there would be no such concept as human or civil rights were it not for the gun. Irregardless of what is written on a piece of paper, the only rights you have are those you have the ability to fight for.

Jesus (willing to be crucified for his principles), Gandhi (went on hunger strikes), and Martin Luther King, Jr.(peaceful marches) -- fought for human and civil rights with no guns. They were pretty successful too.

LOL, no they weren't. Jesus was crucified and thousands upon thousands of Christians were slaughtered. The British empire was already crumbling and they were afraid that clamping down on Gandhi as hard as they could have would martyr him and cause an armed rebellion. MLK had the luxury of combating a state that had to tread lightly for fear of armed rebellion also. The Black Panther Party and Malcolm X had a militant following that the government feared far more.

Originally posted by billy82269

Originally posted by kaylaluv

Originally posted by billy82269

It has been that way since before recorded history and is a part of human nature. Anything that gives the weak an equal footing is an achievement for humanity. The gun has done that throughout it's history, In fact, there would be no such concept as human or civil rights were it not for the gun. Irregardless of what is written on a piece of paper, the only rights you have are those you have the ability to fight for.

Jesus (willing to be crucified for his principles), Gandhi (went on hunger strikes), and Martin Luther King, Jr.(peaceful marches) -- fought for human and civil rights with no guns. They were pretty successful too.

LOL, no they weren't. Jesus was crucified and thousands upon thousands of Christians were slaughtered. The British empire was already crumbling and they were afraid that clamping down on Gandhi as hard as they could have would martyr him and cause an armed rebellion. MLK had the luxury of combating a state that had to tread lightly for fear of armed rebellion also. The Black Panther Party and Malcolm X had a militant following that the government feared far more.

I see - so Jesus was a failure, Gandhi was a failure, and Martin Luther King Jr. was a failure. Re-write history much?

The way i see it, there's three options.

1. You own guns, to protect yourself from criminals and an oppressive government. You're never robbed, and tyranny never comes. All is well. The guns are never used.

2. You own guns, to protect yourself from criminals and an oppressive government. Your house is either broken into, or all hell breaks loose and the government decides to go on a confiscation spree. The people use those weapons to protect themselves. Tyranny is avoided and we remain a free nation. (obviously with some rebuilding to do)

3. You do not own guns to protect yourself. You're either robbed, or you fall victim to a home invasion. The criminals have the upper hand, and you're taken hostage in your own home. Whether you make it out alive depends on a dozen factors. Are you good at talking? Better be, and that's if you're lucky. When your government decides to impose total control of the people, they will have no means of fighting back. The outcome? Read a history book.

Those of you that believe people don't need to own semi-automatic rifles or guns period are advocating for option #3. Do you want that to happen to your family? Do you want to live through that? I don't think so.

If you have it and never need it, great. If you need it and don't have it, well, you probably won't have to worry about needing one again.

Didn't the Virginia tech killer use hand guns (glock and p22) only? If this whole ban is about saving life's shouldn't they go after handgun who kill over 6,000 people? I don't even own a gun but I think this ban is a slippery slope.

/