Obama cites Australia’s gun confiscation program as example for US

originally posted by: Kryties

Never, because I have something called "common sense" - you may wish to look into it.

So, it comes down to you not liking firearms, don't want them, and because you don't like nor want them, no one else should.

Very elitist sounding.

originally posted by: Kryties
Go back to salivating over your guns mate, hopefully in the next decade or two all you Americans will have shot each other dead anyways so the point will be mute.

Sure sure. Because the numbers show that happening.

Maybe you should in turn take your own advise and actually get your facts straight.

originally posted by: Kryties


Go back to salivating over your guns mate, hopefully in the next decade or two all you Americans will have shot each other dead anyways so the point will be mute.

And it isn't "mute". it is "moot".


If your going to insult, at least do it correctly.

originally posted by: macman


So, it comes down to you not liking firearms, don't want them, and because you don't like nor want them, no one else should.

Wrong again! But keep trying to put words into my mouth mate, it's quite amusing to see the depths some people will go to to prove a point.

I don't hate guns, in fact I've recently been considering applying for a license because I've moved to a farm. I just don't worship them like many others seem to.

Maybe you should in turn take your own advise and actually get your facts straight.

That could be quite difficult seeing as though they already are 'straight'.

Awaiting the next attempt to put words into my mouth and deliberately misconstrue what I say...........................................kgo...............................

originally posted by: macman

And it isn't "mute". it is "moot".


If your going to insult, at least do it correctly.

Wow, you've sunk even lower! Now you're picking on spelling errors.......

....the sign of a great troll!

P.S. Google "autocorrect" before you make even more of a fool out of yourself.

originally posted by: Kryties

Wrong again! But keep trying to put words into my mouth mate, it's quite amusing to see the depths some people will go to to prove a point.

I don't hate guns, in fact I've recently been considering applying for a license because I've moved to a farm. I just don't worship them like many others seem to.

Ohhhh, I get it. YOU can have them. Just not those that you think shouldn't.
And since you don't like words put into your mouth, it is nice to see that you basically do the same, by stating we worship guns.

You sure do offer a lot of advise, but don't seem to keep any for yourself.

originally posted by: Kryties

That could be quite difficult seeing as though they already are 'straight'.

Awaiting the next attempt to put words into my mouth and deliberately misconstrue what I say...........................................kgo...............................

And what stats and facts have you presented that are in fact correct?

a reply to: Kryties

Yeah, because I point that out, and you can't really defend against it, you will fall back to the statement of "troll".
Okay then, sure sure.

And blaming auto-correct?? I guess you don't actually review what you are posting.

originally posted by: ArchAngel_X
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus
I don't understand what you're trying to say? I was posting about weapons which are restricted or prohibited in my country.

As a Canadian, I have no use for a full-auto rifle or sawed-off shotgun with armor-piercing rounds. I don't fear my government, my neighbours, or police. And on the marginal chance someone breaks into my house while I'm inside, I have a few tools (crowbar, axe, machete) literally a few feet away from me in my tool room I could conceivably use for self-defense if I feel so justified.

Well it's a good thing that we don't need "full-auto rifles" and "sawed-off shotguns" which use "armor-piercing rounds" since all of those things are already very illegal...

Those scary black things you see on TV are actually semi-automatic. Sure they can hold a lot of ammo but the need for them is not just about "Home Defense" and "Enemies Foreign and Domestic" even though that is part of it.

We have an actual use for these rifles.

In the southern half of the United States we have a massive wild pig problem. I'm sure some of our southern members can tell you how bad it is. They are breeding like crazy and spreading like wild fire. They move and destroy every crop in their wake. I am not exaggerating either (even though I wish I was)

What do we use to hunt these four legged hairless locusts? AR-15's generally. AR-15s are generally lightweight, easy to maneuver, the ammunition for them was fairly inexpensive and they have a decent capacity. Wild pigs are very fast runners and travel in large groups. Believe it or not it may take you all 30 rounds just to get a couple of them per outing.

Same further north with the Coyote or Wolf population. They are decimating livestock (the crop of choice in the north western part of the nation if you will) and are again spreading like wildfire. The weapon of choice for these animals? Yup the AR-15.. why? Same reason.. to protect our food supply.

If home defense and "Enemies Foreign and Domestic" isn't a good enough reason.. that should be.



----------------------------------

[ A side note: I don't understand how the idea of the Govt turning on us is a "Wild Crazy idea"... It's happened throughout history in so many places and in so many different ways... Why should we consider ourselves immune to tyranny? You know Hitler was considered to be the 2nd coming before WW2... He didn't just open with "Gimme your guns and kill the Jews!"... took a lot of programming to make that happen... remember that. ]

originally posted by: Kryties

originally posted by: macman


So, it comes down to you not liking firearms, don't want them, and because you don't like nor want them, no one else should.

Wrong again! But keep trying to put words into my mouth mate, it's quite amusing to see the depths some people will go to to prove a point.

I don't hate guns, in fact I've recently been considering applying for a license because I've moved to a farm. I just don't worship them like many others seem to.

Maybe you should in turn take your own advise and actually get your facts straight.

That could be quite difficult seeing as though they already are 'straight'.

Awaiting the next attempt to put words into my mouth and deliberately misconstrue what I say...........................................kgo...............................

You feel that other people "worship" guns, making you guilty of putting words into other's mouths.

There's a vast difference between worshiping guns and demanding your right to their ownership. That you consider them the same only illustrates your misunderstanding of the entire issue.

DP

?

Listen I'm just gonna end this whole debate here and now (even though I won't).

The right to bear arms is the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution.

The only LEGAL way to pass any federal law or regulation is an Amend the Constitution.

For those that don't know to amend the Constitution:

Article V The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.

Source: The United States Constitution

Ok anti-gun people, If you want gun control.. the instructions are posted above.

As to President Obama who apparently wants us to be more like Australia... Go ahead and give her a go. Until then, anything you pass in this regard is unconstitutional.

originally posted by: BasementWarriorKryptonite

originally posted by: Kryties

originally posted by: macman


So, it comes down to you not liking firearms, don't want them, and because you don't like nor want them, no one else should.

Wrong again! But keep trying to put words into my mouth mate, it's quite amusing to see the depths some people will go to to prove a point.

I don't hate guns, in fact I've recently been considering applying for a license because I've moved to a farm. I just don't worship them like many others seem to.

Maybe you should in turn take your own advise and actually get your facts straight.

That could be quite difficult seeing as though they already are 'straight'.

Awaiting the next attempt to put words into my mouth and deliberately misconstrue what I say...........................................kgo...............................

You feel that other people "worship" guns, making you guilty of putting words into other's mouths.

There's a vast difference between worshiping guns and demanding your right to their ownership. That you consider them the same only illustrates your misunderstanding of the entire issue.

Hear, hear!

a reply to: BasementWarriorKryptonite

It's probably worth noting that if the Australian authorities behaved in a manner similar to their American counterparts, Australians would likely want access to own as many guns as their US cousins.

Police in in several aussie states already do act that way you just haven't been unlucky enough to cross them ever heard of zero tolerance policing it does exist in Australia as well as does the increasing militarisation of the various police forces, note "Force" NOT police "Service" as use to be in days when civil liberties in most of Australia still meant something.Infact in Australia we are in worse potential situation than the US since we dont even have a "Bill of Rights" i would much rather have my civil rights written in stone than left to legal positivist relativity.
I also think police should be limited to one weapon only either tazer or gloch not both their choice of weaponry is excessive!

originally posted by: ArchAngel_X
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus
I don't understand what you're trying to say? I was posting about weapons which are restricted or prohibited in my country.

As a Canadian, I have no use for a full-auto rifle or sawed-off shotgun with armor-piercing rounds. I don't fear my government, my neighbours, or police. And on the marginal chance someone breaks into my house while I'm inside, I have a few tools (crowbar, axe, machete) literally a few feet away from me in my tool room I could conceivably use for self-defense if I feel so justified.

you are apparently not so smart of a Canadian, (good choice of using bob and doug as an avatar i guess). since you forget about more asinine Canadian laws. if you were stupid enough to go use your tools as you describe on someone who breaks in you would likely find yourself in jail, and likely broke into the bargain. you have forgotten that it is illegal to use greater force. you may use lessor force of course. that means in simple terms that if someone attacks you with a four inch knife and you defend yourself with a six inch knife you have broken the law and may be prosecuted for it and things like manslaughter, wrongful death or injury etc. not to mention you are also libel to be sued for any injury anyway. since even if someone breaks into your home and injures themselves on something (you don't even have to be there), you can be held libel for it and can even face criminal charges depending on what they hurt themselves on. like say your axe, crowbar, or machete falls and hurts them. so unless your attacker had a crowbar at least the size of yours, or an axe of the same size, or a machete or sword the same size or larger than yours or a gun you are screwed. and even if they are at least equal armed you could be screwed for hurting a poor criminal, you could even be charged for brandishing a weapon even if you didn't hurt them. welcome to Canadian justice EH.

a reply to: rhynouk

...and law-abiding citizens need to defend themselves

a reply to: generik

And this is the primary reason we have such asinine pointless gun laws and restrictions here in Canada; highly ignorant inner city types who have absolutely ZERO knowledge of *current* Canadian gun laws. The solution to *their* inner city problem of gun crime is a blanket of gun control for the *entire* nation even though 95% of gun crimes in Canada are committed using smuggled or stolen firearms in large cities like Toronto. When it's broken down even further such crimes are committed by the *exact* same type of people that commit them in the U.S.

Canadian inner city types are a very strange bunch, they repeatedly have their heads stomped in, get arrested, tazered, tear gassed, and thrown in temporary confinement after their rights are temporarily suspended by government (Toronto G20 Martial law incident). Yet these same ignorant types favor strict gun controls which only allow those same types, the militarized police, to own large capacity high caliber rifles like AR-15's. They are brain dead and if the SHTF they deserve everything they get.

The worst are the types who have never even been out of a city like Toronto and have been brainwashed by ultra left wing elitist academia to the point they honestly believe you can walk into a sporting goods store and walk out with a shotgun and/or rifle 5 minutes later the same day; these are the ignorant fools voting during a federal election.

a reply to: Jocko Flocko

This is similar to the US. Most gun violence happens in city/urban areas. Residents in city and urban areas also much more likely to blindly support gun control.

Those who live in rural areas often have an actual need for firearms and also tend to oppose gun control.

A problem I foresee in the not so distant future is the gap between the rural population and city/urban population. Cities are growing and rural areas are becoming developed. The city/urban beehive mentality is becoming more common all over the US, this also seems to result in more people being pro gun control.

The US is enough of a democracy that the will of the majority can take away the rights of the minority. I fear that the next generations are being conditioned to reject the 2nd Amendment in favor of gun control and within 50 years there might be a widespread effort to disarm the American citizen.

It happened in New Orleans.

a reply to: DaMod

This is why demographic make up is key. The populace will reflect the make up of Congress, the Executive branch, and most importantly the Judicial Branch. Our Constitution and Bill of Rights gave us the freedoms and way of life we enjoy today. We are at risk of diluting it and fundamentally changing it when we elect officials that care squat about the Constitution or our fundamental rights.