Ban guns NOW!! But start from the top down...

page: 1
10
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 17 2013 @ 01:34 PM
link   
I think I have a decent enough idea on a rational gun control policy, and I am curious as to its reception.

IF the American citizens are to be disarmed, then it needs to begin with the politicos hell bent on banning them. Start by banning the private ownership of firearms by elected officials and politically appointed officials. Mrs. Feinstein, Mr. Reid, Mr. Holder turn ALL of your guns in first... and the firearms owned by every body guard and staffer... IF these "elite" people truly believe that guns are evil, then they need to turn in all of theirs in a gesture of good faith. Deny all of them Secret Service protection including the FLOTUS. The Secret Service should be for POTUS only. After banning firearm ownership by elected and appointed officials we then freeze ANY federal gun legislation for 10 years. Give them 10 years of looking over their shoulder every time they leave their home, without the benefits of a firearm for protection. If after 10 years they still want our guns... then MAYBE we will talk.

Of course, their first argument would be that "we are public officials and need to be protected"... Which implies, of course, that somehow these people's lives are worth more than yours or mine... and we should have a serious problem with that... it is "We the People" not "We the Politicians" and it is about damned time that we remind them of that.

Let's see Mayors Bloomberg and Emanuel stroll around their respective cities without any kind of protection detail...




posted on Mar, 17 2013 @ 01:38 PM
link   
No dice.



posted on Mar, 17 2013 @ 01:44 PM
link   

Deny all of them Secret Service protection including the FLOTUS. The Secret Service should be for POTUS only.


POTUS is doing a bad enough job without having to worry about FLOTUS being kidnapped.

Silly idea, but I think you knew that already



posted on Mar, 17 2013 @ 01:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Zarniwoop
 


FLOTUS Kidnapped?! Could you imagine holding Michelle Obama against her will? I wouldn't feel bad or worry for HER...I'd feel deep pity for the poor bastards that took her. She'd be back...they wouldn't be.

I think the OP was trying to make a point with some sarcasm here..at least I hope I read this right? It's a bit off though, at least to me because this very issue is so real and the "We get guns to shoot you....because you might shoot us" B.S. logic of the Government just isn't much I can find humor in these days.... Just me though.

A Flag for good effort.



posted on Mar, 17 2013 @ 01:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zarniwoop

Deny all of them Secret Service protection including the FLOTUS. The Secret Service should be for POTUS only.


POTUS is doing a bad enough job without having to worry about FLOTUS being kidnapped.

Silly idea, but I think you knew that already


Well of course that is a bit silly, but she claims to eat healthy and exercise... she could outrun the bad guys... maybe



posted on Mar, 17 2013 @ 01:54 PM
link   
Never going to happen our guns will be long gone before theirs ever will be.

As Mao said all political power comes from the barrel of a gun.



posted on Mar, 17 2013 @ 02:00 PM
link   
Maybe we can have them all declared mentally incompetent:


As Senate Democrats push ahead with a proposed ban on assault weapons and other gun-control legislation, Republicans are still trying to draw attention to what they see as the bigger issue -- keeping the mentally ill from owning firearms.


I think we can make a good case that none of them are sane enough to own a firearm... even a cut rate shrink could have Biden committed



posted on Mar, 17 2013 @ 02:03 PM
link   
I have to salute the OP for the concept; ban guns from the top down and perhaps... just maybe, we might again find a way to evolve as a species. It's been a while since we did that. In fact, we've been headed in the other direction now for several decades.

I think we have to work hard and surgically extract all the political influence and corruption to this subject before we can begin to get a clear view of the subject.

Person kills other people.
Person in question uses gun to kill other people.
Government ignores person and punishes inanimate object.

There was a time when person's of nobility could select someone to take their place when it came to punishments. There were called 'whipping boys' and it was a very definitive name because, lashes were not felt by the offending party but by someone of less social culture who was rewarded for taking the whip in their name.

During the US Civil War... mainly in the state of New York but elsewhere in the north, draftees could pay someone to take their spot so they didn't have to serve.

Here we have this inanimate object; the gun, that takes the brunt of public anger for the crimes commited by... wait just a minute: a Human Being!

Okay, so if these lunatics had NOT had firearms, them people would not have died, right?
Well, one only needs to refer back to Timothy McVeigh to see how that works. A little cow poop and a few chemicals mixed with a rental truck and... well, we all remember that.

The problem is one related to both the human condition and the culture we have ourselves created. Guns have been around for hundreds of years... but as for the extreme violence in movies, TV and video games?

NOOOOOO! We can't include that!

Camel cigarettes were made to change there ads because children are impressionable. They will smake because they like the cute camel. Apply the same logic to the violence in the movies and other forms of entertainment and we all run into the street screaming... NOOOOO video games don't affect the kids!

That may well be a direct result of the old reference, 'The dumbing down of America' but I think it is more political than simple education.

Many think there is an effort to tear down this nation to make way for a new age world government. Such could not exist with a US Constitution in force or 190 million Americans armed and ready to defend their rights and freedoms!

From the top down works okay... but, don't hold your breath if you want to see how it all plays out, lol.

...



posted on Mar, 17 2013 @ 02:06 PM
link   
Actually, take the gun issue out of this and you have a good thread.


that somehow these people's lives are worth more than yours or mine... and we should have a serious problem with that... it is "We the People" not "We the Politicians" and it is about damned time that we remind them of that.


Politicians, at least at the Congressional level and up, get way too many perks and bennies for simply waddling around DC for a few years spouting partisan nonsense and pretending to be important... Of that they definitely need to be reminded.



posted on Mar, 17 2013 @ 02:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Zarniwoop
 


I'm 100% behind you on that. We can start with their Health Care. They get the care of kings and lesser Gods ...while we get rationed for meds and told we have to justify the smallest thing ..while the Doctor has a book worth of paperwork to prove HE justified OUR justification.

Indeed... The issue of their lives meaning FAR more than our pathetic little existences IS the core one I suppose. After all... There are over 300 million of us. There are only a couple thousand of them. I guess that means they must be rare and precious. ...or so that seems to be their thinking. (Endangered would be another way to put it.
)



posted on Mar, 17 2013 @ 02:24 PM
link   
reply to post by madmac5150
 


If we're gonna start banning inalienable rights why can't we go in numerical order?

Let's start with the first amendment.



posted on Mar, 17 2013 @ 02:26 PM
link   
OP you argument is based upon a flawed premise that invalidates it in it's entirety. The American people do not "need to be disarmed". Quite the contrary.



posted on Mar, 17 2013 @ 02:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by madmac5150

Originally posted by Zarniwoop

Deny all of them Secret Service protection including the FLOTUS. The Secret Service should be for POTUS only.


POTUS is doing a bad enough job without having to worry about FLOTUS being kidnapped.

Silly idea, but I think you knew that already


Well of course that is a bit silly, but she claims to eat healthy and exercise... she could outrun the bad guys... maybe


Also people who work out regularly tend to drink a lot of water. So it would be easy for her to urinate on her attackers if it really got to the point of her being assaulted.



posted on Mar, 17 2013 @ 02:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by DarthMuerte
OP you argument is based upon a flawed premise that invalidates it in it's entirety. The American people do not "need to be disarmed". Quite the contrary.

I know that and you know that... it is Washington and TPTB that haven't figured that out yet...



posted on Mar, 17 2013 @ 02:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by DarthMuerte
OP you argument is based upon a flawed premise that invalidates it in it's entirety. The American people do not "need to be disarmed". Quite the contrary.


It would actually be a begging the question fallacy. The OP didn't prove that the American public needs to be disarmed.



posted on Mar, 17 2013 @ 02:31 PM
link   
reply to post by madmac5150
 

Agreed. Good point. If I am to be defenseless then why not the government too? Surely they want to set a good example for what they believe in. They are after all representing my interests?



posted on Mar, 17 2013 @ 02:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by madmac5150

Originally posted by Zarniwoop

Deny all of them Secret Service protection including the FLOTUS. The Secret Service should be for POTUS only.


POTUS is doing a bad enough job without having to worry about FLOTUS being kidnapped.

Silly idea, but I think you knew that already


Well of course that is a bit silly, but she claims to eat healthy and exercise... she could outrun the bad guys... maybe


Dude... if anyone gets even close to michelle, specially when shes eating, all she has to do is growl...



see?



posted on Mar, 17 2013 @ 02:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrptr
reply to post by madmac5150
 

Agreed. Good point. If I am to be defenseless then why not the government too? Surely they want to set a good example for what they believe in. They are after all representing my interests?


And lets not forget that the hallmark attribute of a great leader is to lead by example.


And they're obviously great leaders considering they know better than we do on virtually every area of our miserable lives.



posted on Mar, 17 2013 @ 02:37 PM
link   
reply to post by FraternitasSaturni
 


Yikes! Okay, amend my earlier post.

Step 1, growl.
Step 2, (if necessary), urinate on attackers.
Step 3, (if necessary), fire two shots from double-shot shoutgun.
Step 4 (certainly necessary after step 3), reload shotgun.
Step 5, (if necessary), fire two shots through White House front door at scary people on front porch.




edit on 17-3-2013 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2013 @ 02:40 PM
link   
reply to post by madmac5150
 


That'll be the day.




new topics
top topics
 
10
<<   2 >>

log in

join