Self defense not a valid reason to own a firearm

Make no mistake. We are not being represented by elected officials.


We are being ruled.

Sou th Africa takes another gold medal at the Stupid Olympics


In a country where we boast with some of the most impressive murder, rape and hijacking stats in the world, self defense could soon no longer be a valid reason to own a firearm.


If you're rich however, you can hire private security like myself to protect your family. 🤦🏻‍♂️


Politicians will not be leading by example either of that you can be certain.


Sooner or later all of us are going to find ourselves up the creek without a paddle.


Valid question : are people protesting about this Bones? What are YOU doing about it?



1. Touche.

2. I will not incriminate myself online.

a reply to: 19Bones79

Surely, by extension, nuclear weapons are even more protective.

Why would anyone want to limit the access of the general public to nuclear weapons?

These 'nuke grabbers' must be fascists who want to take away everyone's right to freedom and self defense.

a reply to: chr0naut

Surely not.

I see conservatives so enamored by police that I don't think they need guns as their so precious police can protect them just fine.
Mind boggling that limited government types would worship the very enforcers of tyranny that would oppress them.
They kind of remind me of baby birds being fed - "We need police to protect us"
Yet the police can't even protect Chicago.
So yeah, if you keep begging and whining for police to be your protectors then why need guns?

a reply to: chr0naut

I agree, weapons are wrong. This should extend to knives which need to be banned. I think the human body is also a weapon, and any and all fighting back is use of this weapon and should result in serious jail time. It will surely end nearly all crime.

a reply to: MrNeo

So you want no guns and no police. Makes sense. How how's the 'defund' movement worked out? Crime going down yet?

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: chr0naut

I agree, weapons are wrong. This should extend to knives which need to be banned. I think the human body is also a weapon, and any and all fighting back is use of this weapon and should result in serious jail time. It will surely end nearly all crime.

In civilized countries, any inflicting of grievous bodily harm upon another person, is already illegal.

But surely there are people who know how to create weapons of mass destruction. So defense against such weapons, by proliferation of those weapons, seems almost rational... Almost.

a reply to: 19Bones79

I don't know man...



Most of the countries in this overview are yellow (Allowed with permit – good reason (like sport shooting license or proving danger to life) required)

On the right side is possession of handguns by country. You'll notice only the loopy parts of this world are in green and blue. (blue= no permit / green= permit without reason).

I take it that the "proving danger to life" makes sense for self defense against wildlife not other people...

Peace

a reply to: chr0naut

Damn bro...you won the dumbest thing I've read on the internet today! Congrats!

a reply to: chr0naut

I don't even know how to make sense of what you just said.

Did you try to obviously be a troll with failure in mind?

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: 19Bones79

Surely, by extension, nuclear weapons are even more protective.

Why would anyone want to limit the access of the general public to nuclear weapons?

These 'nuke grabbers' must be fascists who want to take away everyone's right to freedom and self defense.

What are you on about? Nobody in real adult life needs a weapon ofmass distraction. You love comparing apples to sports equipment don't you?

This thread is about people who live in one of the most dangerous counries in the world. Rape mad, home intruder mad etc. Maybe you should read up about S.Africa.

The criminals have all the gear, willingness to kill and are brazen as feck about it.
Do you think they will listen and hand in their weapons or stop being rapists or killers when all decent folk have handed in the only deterrent or means to defend themselves?

I do not dare to let you think of the answer by youself because in yor world everything is rainbows and unicorns.

The answer is: will they heck. Now they can enter any home, knowing the people are basically sitting ducks.

Lovely idea mate. For the rapists and killers at least.

a reply to: promisedland

You'll notice only the loopy parts of this world are in green and blue. (blue= no permit / green= permit without reason).

As opposed to those utopian "red" countries?

a reply to: Flatcoat

As opposed to those red countries, yes.

No idea why you would classify them as utopian but I guess you have your reasons.

Peace

originally posted by: promisedland
a reply to: 19Bones79

I don't know man...

Most of the countries in this overview are yellow (Allowed with permit – good reason (like sport shooting license or proving danger to life) required)

On the right side is possession of handguns by country. You'll notice only the loopy parts of this world are in green and blue. (blue= no permit / green= permit without reason).

I take it that the "proving danger to life" makes sense for self defense against wildlife not other people...

Peace

Don't believe everything you see or copy from the internet.

Case in point. You can own (with a permit) a handgun in Australia.

However, you must transport it only from your home to the shooting range and back. You may not be armed with this weapon at all. It must be locked in a safe with the ammunition kept in a separate safe. It is not worth having.

Bit different now isn't it.

In Australia we are not permitted to own a weapon for self defense, full stop, end of story.

P

a reply to: 19Bones79

I wholeheartedly wish for several years now that a European country or the U.S. would allow all SA citizens to take refuge with full citizenship granted in our country. And on top of that we should be funding the travel expenses for your liberation.

Salt the fields and run. RUN!

I feel sorrow for those that don't have the means to run to another country. Those that do have the means and decide not to run should swallow their pride and RUN!

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: 19Bones79

Surely, by extension, nuclear weapons are even more protective.

Why would anyone want to limit the access of the general public to nuclear weapons?

These 'nuke grabbers' must be fascists who want to take away everyone's right to freedom and self defense.

First of all, there was that high school kid who built a homemade nuke. I don't believe nukes should ever be used, government or not.

Second, I believe in gun ownership. I've had multiple home invasions. We can't all live in the 'burbs. We have multiple plans for escaping, hunkering, barricading, and firearm use.

When seconds count, police are just minutes away.

And no I've never shot at a person. I couldn't live with myself. Unless of course it was direly necessary.

originally posted by: RickyD
a reply to: chr0naut

Damn bro...you won the dumbest thing I've read on the internet today! Congrats!

You'd think so.

Yet there are countries in the world where such 'self defense' arguments are used in regard to weapons that have no other ancillary functions other than to be a weapon.

a reply to: pheonix358

No it isn't different. We have the same rules where I come from. It's absolutely useless to own a gun.

You even have to pass a test annually to see if you can keep your license.

But that is something anybody would agree to if they own it purely for the sport.

Since they grouped sport shooting license and proving danger to life in the same category (yellow) I could believe there are places in this world where you could be allowed to have a gun ready in case of wildlife. Where I come from we don't have any life threatening wildlife so here you can only get a permit for sport.

Only the weird places in this world allow their citizens to own a gun without a permit or license.

Peace

a reply to: Alien Abduct


A few years ago I felt the same but nowadays there is nowhere to run.


The whole world is changing for the worse.

a reply to: 19Bones79

Countries that prevent you from owning a gun for self defense also have some of the lowest firearm related murder rates. Japan and the UK for example forbid the ownership of any kind of firearm for self defense, and consequently it's exceedingly difficult for anybody to get their hands on one to use in a murder ether.

A lot of the "gun crime" committed in these countries is done with reproduction weapons that simply look real or with agricultural firearms like shotguns that have very low ammunition capacity and a low fire rate. Making it difficult for people to kill more than one person before they are stopped.

Japan, for example, hasn't had a single school shooting in the last 100 years, while Britain hasn't had a school shooting since they outlawed handgun ownership.