class warfare?

[MHKflyer52]

I have been following this thread for a while now and it seems to push some folks buttons for and against having a weapon (Pistols, Rifles, Shotguns, etc.) and seems to be causing a lot of debate which is good as it makes people think which is really good. I also feel it is a person's choice to own a weapon and not something that the government should be trying to control more than what they already do control. The laws are already in place that do limit certain types of weapons from most people like machine guns and fully auto hand guns and missiles and bombs and seem to be working well when people live by the law. It's the people that do not live by the existing laws that are in place that are the problem and not the weapon as the weapon is not the controlling factor but the person who is in possession or the owner of the weapon that is the controlling factor.

Yes I do think a mandatory back ground check should be required to purchase a weapon of any kind (pistol, rifle, shotgun, crossbow, cannon, tank or whatever) along with a required training course on the use and care and the proper storage of a weapon before a purchase can be made of any weapon but that is just my belief.

Yes I know the criminal or mentally deranged person will always find a way around the law to obtain a weapon if they want one. A wise person once told me that "If someone wants something bad enough and is willing to give up everything to obtain that thing or goal then they are impossible to stop in 99.9% of the time" and I do believe that to be a very true statement and something we all have to except as law abiding persons and from what history has shown us.

As for my belief on owning a weapon I do not try to push my beliefs on owning a weapon on anyone beyond suggesting that if I am asked about acquiring a weapon by anyone I always tell the person to get some training first, not only for themselves but their immediate family members, like their wife and even their children so that they know and understand the dangers that a weapon can create and also so they will not hurt themselves or someone else by accident with that weapon, like a wife or child or themselves. I also tell them that they are opening themselves up to a whole different world of responsibility and legality once they acquire a weapon and that it should not be taken lightly as it is a great responsibility. I also think this is the whole key to the problem that we are facing here in the United States. The fact that people today feel they do not have to take responsibility for their actions in most cases even when it comes to ownership or possession of a weapon but again this is my belief.

The whole point to my post is that without people being held responsible there is no law or action that will stop the en-saneness that is taking place with the ownership of any weapon, so why do we not focus on training and enforcement of the existing laws that are in place instead of creating more laws that are and will be very hard to enforce by our law enforcement organizations. Yes I do own a number of weapons and I believe I have the right to own them along with the responsibility that comes with owning weapons without the government telling me that I can or can't own a weapon or certain type or the ammunition for a certain type of weapon. But again this is my belief and I respect what others believe and try to not infringe on others or their beliefs but why are we as a country not addressing responsibility and enforcing the existing laws that are in place.

[WestTexasS2K]

Rikker If you dont want a gun in your house then dont get one. Its that simple.

Edited April 12, 2013 by WestTexasS2K

[rikker]

Rikker If you dont want a gun in your house then get one. Its that simple.

 

I wish it were.

[rikker]

As has been well said here education is up to the parent and child, a very good education can be had without the schools at a reasonable cost. As for the Gun subject; I have guns, have had from a very early age, also have knifes, clubs, and various other tools for damage. It is your choice to own or not to own but do not infringe my rights to freedom. What should be the main focus is to find the right one who is guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt and make them answerable for the crime no matter what method was used. let us punish the guilty, but let's not kill or jail the innocent. Myself I would never choose a gun to commit mayhem, there are other ways simpler and far more effective. We have far too many laws now, and that in its self makes them ineffective. Let's lay off the guns and do what should be done. The most effective self defense uses what is at hand, your hands, they are always with you.

 

Sadly it is real.... now I will not sleep a wink. Evidently John Rambo is alive and active in this forum, he drives a 7 with the "hands" of Bruce Lee..

 

I am particularly worried not just by your brags of a huge Armageddon stash you claim to have but your " other various tools of mayhem".

 

I asked before how many gun advocates are happy with just one gun? no one answered.

Is anyone else getting sick and tired of hearing about the 2nd Amendment and its " right to bear arms", when was that changed to "arms that will never be equal to what the government has"?, because that is what it is now.So if the arms that we are allowed to have kill more than they save then why have them?

Edited April 12, 2013 by rikker

[slngsht]

Sadly it is real.... now I will not sleep a wink. Evidently John Rambo is alive and active in this forum, he drives a 7 with the "hands" of Bruce Lee..

 

I am particularly worried not just by your brags of a huge Armageddon stash you claim to have but your " other various tools of mayhem".

 

Why do you feel the need to insult people who are posting here?

 

I asked before how many gun advocates are happy with just one gun? no one answered.

 

I'm happy with being able to buy however many guns I feel like, or none at all.

 

I'm happy to be left alone when I'm not committing crimes with my guns.

 

Liberal who have no clue what they're talking about are trying to pass laws that don't make sense, and I'll vote against that and fund people who work against that. Once it's law, I'll obey it and still support changing it.

 

Answered.

 

 

 

Is anyone else getting sick and tired of hearing about the 2nd Amendment and its " right to bear arms", when was that changed to "arms that will never be equal to what the government has"?, because that is what it is now.So if the arms that we are allowed to have kill more than they save then why have them?

 

I'm not. Start pushing my buttons on freedom of religion, due process, over-reach and waste by the feds, and the welfare state, and you'll get a similarly passionate response.

 

REMEMBER not to mock.

[slngsht]

I have been following this thread for a while now and it seems to push some folks buttons for and against having a weapon (Pistols, Rifles, Shotguns, etc.) and seems to be causing a lot of debate which is good as it makes people think which is really good. I also feel it is a person's choice to own a weapon and not something that the government should be trying to control more than what they already do control. The laws are already in place that do limit certain types of weapons from most people like machine guns and fully auto hand guns and missiles and bombs and seem to be working well when people live by the law. It's the people that do not live by the existing laws that are in place that are the problem and not the weapon as the weapon is not the controlling factor but the person who is in possession or the owner of the weapon that is the controlling factor.

Yes I do think a mandatory back ground check should be required to purchase a weapon of any kind (pistol, rifle, shotgun, crossbow, cannon, tank or whatever) along with a required training course on the use and care and the proper storage of a weapon before a purchase can be made of any weapon but that is just my belief.

Yes I know the criminal or mentally deranged person will always find a way around the law to obtain a weapon if they want one. A wise person once told me that "If someone wants something bad enough and is willing to give up everything to obtain that thing or goal then they are impossible to stop in 99.9% of the time" and I do believe that to be a very true statement and something we all have to except as law abiding persons and from what history has shown us.

As for my belief on owning a weapon I do not try to push my beliefs on owning a weapon on anyone beyond suggesting that if I am asked about acquiring a weapon by anyone I always tell the person to get some training first, not only for themselves but their immediate family members, like their wife and even their children so that they know and understand the dangers that a weapon can create and also so they will not hurt themselves or someone else by accident with that weapon, like a wife or child or themselves. I also tell them that they are opening themselves up to a whole different world of responsibility and legality once they acquire a weapon and that it should not be taken lightly as it is a great responsibility. I also think this is the whole key to the problem that we are facing here in the United States. The fact that people today feel they do not have to take responsibility for their actions in most cases even when it comes to ownership or possession of a weapon but again this is my belief.

The whole point to my post is that without people being held responsible there is no law or action that will stop the en-saneness that is taking place with the ownership of any weapon, so why do we not focus on training and enforcement of the existing laws that are in place instead of creating more laws that are and will be very hard to enforce by our law enforcement organizations. Yes I do own a number of weapons and I believe I have the right to own them along with the responsibility that comes with owning weapons without the government telling me that I can or can't own a weapon or certain type or the ammunition for a certain type of weapon. But again this is my belief and I respect what others believe and try to not infringe on others or their beliefs but why are we as a country not addressing responsibility and enforcing the existing laws that are in place.

 

Agreed 100% - as long as background checks don't turn into registration

[rikker]

Why do you feel the need to insult people who are posting here?

WOW, Have you read the "hands of death" quote earlier by him, no insult at all, just amazed at the claims.

 

 

I'm happy with being able to buy however many guns I feel like, or none at all.

 

I'm happy to be left alone when I'm not committing crimes with my guns.

 

Liberal who have no clue what they're talking about are trying to pass laws that don't make sense, and I'll vote against that and fund people who work against that. Once it's law, I'll obey it and still support changing it.

 

Answered.

 

I guess you are attempting to call me a liberal..

what does politics have to do with this argument?

You really believe that this is a "liberal" problem?

 

How many guns do you have Mr SHT.

 

No mocking inferred.

 

 

 

I'm not. Start pushing my buttons on freedom of religion, due process, over-reach and waste by the feds, and the welfare state, and you'll get a similarly passionate response.

 

REMEMBER not to mock.

 

and the same by myself, and the majority of this great country that chose to be Democrat with a President of the same.

[rikker]

Agreed 100% - as long as background checks don't turn into registration

 

You have to do it with a means of transport so why not with a weapon of death?

and by the way, read the whole story before you judge, you are no longer a controller.

Edited April 12, 2013 by rikker

[rikker]

You are being plan ignorant of weapons to think that a magazine size of 10 rounds is going to reduce gun violence. Anyone with about 10 min of practice can change a mag and be shooting again in less than 2 seconds. Chicago has some the strictest gun policy in the US and has the highest murder rate. Recent studies shoe 90 percent of the murders committed there are by gang members. You think that the gang bangers are going to go to the gun store and submit to a background check. If so you are being a bit naive.

 

Mexico puts you in jail for having a bullet casing in your vehicle and yet has thousands murdered every year with a gun. It doesnt appear that gun control is working there either. What has happened is civilians are dragged from their homes and murdered because they have no way to defend themselves against the cartels.

 

Gun ban supporters always point to the UK as an example of what gun bans can do. Yes gun deaths went down. Thats like saying banning driving reduces traffic accidents of course it does. But violent crime overall in the UK is 776 per 100k compared to 403 per 100k in the USA. (As close as can be calculated because the two countries calculate violent crime completely different)

 

If guns are the issue why is the murder rate in Switzerland not close to ours per capita? They have the second highest gun ownership next to USA, but some reason they have the lowest murder rate and violent crime rate in the world. Maybe they have one of the lowest instances of violent crime because they have a compulsory military service and 2/3 of the males are trained in the military and women volunteers are as well. They are trained and then sent home after their service with their gun in hand and it is kept their entire life. The government sponsors shooting days for training and supply all the ammunition you want to shoot. Maybe the reason violent crime is so low in Switzerland is because a large majority of the population is armed and trained to use their weapons. Maybe the reason the violent crimes in Switzerland are lower because they have less gangs? Maybe they have lower stress living? Maybe we should study what they do right and what we do wrong and change that not just go by emotional gut reaction to tragedies like Newtown.

 

Are there ways to improve the system sure. I don't hear very many complaining in my part of the country where gun ownership is high about background checks. I would say most people are ok with doing background checks, closing the "gun show loop hole". I think person to person sales is still a tender spot. That whole personal property thing that some hold dear. There are already laws in place for straw man purchases so no need to add other laws to do the same thing.

 

Assault rifle is a load a crap also spewed by those who know nothing about guns. It shoots the same as thousands of other guns you have to pull the trigger to shoot each bullet. Its not a full auto rifle like the military has or like what Hollywood puts out there. My pistol, shotgun and AR15 all shoot at the same speed.

If want to ban semi auto weapons that will remove 98 percent of the guns in existence. So you are back to a revolver. There are guys that can shoot 6 shoots out of a revolver accurately in under 2 second faster than a AR15. So maybe those men should be banned from owning guns at all since they are good with them.

 

Guns were not invented until the 9th century. It seems men have been killing each other long before the gun.

IMO banning gun may save a few lives. Banning Tylenol, cigarets, aspertaine, fluorinated water, GMO foods, drunk driving, and thousands of other ways people die would save lives too. Where do you draw the line?

 

 

If people aren't careful the government is going to slowly take every bit freedom and independence away from you. 911 happened we ended up with the Homeland security. We now we have check points on US highway hundreds of miles from the border to where you are asked for proof of citizenship before you are allowed on your way. You grandmothers and small kids are molested by goons at the airport every time you

fly. NDAA which is loaded with liberty robbing sections. Affordable Health Care Act which will eventually break most companies and make insurance unaffordable for everyone. You will no longer be able to choose who you want to use for health care.

 

In a report today an email from top Army officials in pentagon sent out a 14 page email advising the troops to be on the watch out for violent extremist groups like AFA American Family Association, American Family Radio which are both Christian broadcasting stations and Catholisim, Among other well known terroist groups.

 

http://nation.foxnews.com/religion/2013/04/05/us-army-labeled-evangelicals-catholics-examples-religious-extremism

 

 

So Christians are to be considered terrorist now? Where do you draw the line? Is there a line or do you just do what your told no matter what?

 

words fail me.

[slngsht]

"I guess you are attempting to call me a liberal.."

 

you what I said: "Liberals who have no clue what they're talking about are trying to pass laws that don't make sense". Are you in congress?

 

"and the same by myself, and the majority of this great country that chose to be Democrat with a President of the same."

 

"How many guns do you have Mr SHT."

 

Guns? what guns?

[powderbrake]

Is anyone else getting sick and tired of hearing about the 2nd Amendment and its " right to bear arms", when was that changed to "arms that will never be equal to what the government has"?,

 

Another basic misconception by those who do not understand guns. The 2nd Amendment was written understanding that the arms referred to WERE the state of the art in that time. In fact many of the arms, even up to and including the civil war were supplied by the soldiers themselves. This included muskets, rifles, cannon and mortars.

The purpose of the feedom outlined in the 2nd amendment was to enable the citizens to defend themselves against an overeaching government.

 

Also. Cars are registerd as a method of collecting taxes. Registration of guns is a method to collect the guns.

[MHKflyer52]

Agreed 100% - as long as background checks don't turn into registration

 

I agree 100% on that.

[ayseven]

Guns are one reason (and certainly not the only one) I chose not to live in California. It is your choice to deal with this issue in the way that suits your country. But the rest of the world looks upon this subject as a bit weird. Just saying...

[rikker]

Another basic misconception by those who do not understand guns. The 2nd Amendment was written understanding that the arms referred to WERE the state of the art in that time. In fact many of the arms, even up to and including the civil war were supplied by the soldiers themselves. This included muskets, rifles, cannon and mortars.

The purpose of the feedom outlined in the 2nd amendment was to enable the citizens to defend themselves against an overeaching government.

 

Also. Cars are registerd as a method of collecting taxes. Registration of guns is a method to collect the guns.

 

What is there to "understand", not much of a learning curve is there really?

Regarding your take on history, I wonder how many citizens had their own cannon.

The rifle or musket was a tool used by many for hunting, so I am sure it was not that thrilling to be told they could own what they already had anyway.

I guess they were also used to keep pesky indians and slaves under control.

The real power pieces of the day were the big artillery pieces and ships of war, the only chance a regular joe had to get one of those was to become a pirate.

So today,we cannot go out a buy a missile, or a warplane or an aircraft carrier; and owning anything that blows people up would make you a terrorist.

So you you really think that owning a firearm today would stop an "overeaching government" and who wants to live in constant fear of a government.

Do you really believe that registration of a gun or owner is a precursor to collection and total ban?

[slngsht]

Do you really believe that registration of a gun or owner is a precursor to collection and total ban?

 

you should read up on history of gun control in the UK and how registration led to confiscation.

 

and as for guns being responsible for violent crimes... how come there is no "national debate" about violent movies and video games?

 

This is the violent crime stats for UK - although their deaths by firearms are significantly lower. They just replaced firearms with knives, ropes, etc...:

 

http://www.justfacts.com/images/guncontrol/england-full.png

[rikker]

The gun laws that were introduced in 1997 were as a direct result to the massacre of schoolchildren by a lone crazed gunman, (sound familiar).

Homicides by firearms are virtually non-existent there now and the overall violent death rate far lower that the USA.

A very similar set of circumstances happened in Australia too.

It looks like there are going to be changes here and I welcome them.

What are you afraid of?

 

You know, of course, people can be killed many weapons such as those you mentioned BUT do you really think that the recent tragedies in CO and CT would have

had anywhere near the death tally without the use of semi-assault rifles and their high velocity bullets spewing into innocent people?

Edited April 13, 2013 by rikker

[slngsht]

The gun laws that were introduced in 1997 were as a direct result to the massacre of schoolchildren by a lone crazed gunman, (sound familiar).

Homicides by firearms are virtually non-existent there now and the overall vilent death rate far lower that the USA.

A very similar set of circumstances happened in Australia too.

It looks like there are going to be changes here and I welcome them.

What are you afraid of?

 

Very clever use of facts there! Simple question for you. Have they conclusively dropped their murder rate since 1997? If you look around, you'll find murder rates have stayed the same. The same goes for Australia.

 

Just to play your "they have gun control therefore their murder rate is lower than here" - how's the murder rate in Mexico? lol. They have gun control. You can argue this any way you want, numbers don't lie. Violence is a function of societal problems, not guns.

[rikker]

I think we can all agree that Mexico is out of control.

With regard to UK, Eire, Canada and Australia, yes the rates for death by firearm are miniscule now, but they never really were that high anyway, particularly when compared to the US. The non gun homicide rates actually climbed for a few years peaking in 2005 then dropping drastically.

As you said before , and I totally agree, other weapons can and will be used but if we can reduce these terrible mass killings then we should at least try, and yes gun control is just one part of the answer, but it is a very important part.

I agree with you that society plays a huge part in crime and violence but surely when you look at the number of guns in this country and the ease with which they can be purchased then this has to be a huge factor.Is the only way to reduce gun violence to put more guns out there?

[slngsht]

alright, glad we agree on some things. putting more guns out there is definitely not a solution - i'm not advocating that. gun safety and general education about responsible ownership and use are needed. I'm just not a fan of government mandating it. especially federal government. These decisions can be made at the local level, where people have greater control and say over their laws.

 

I think we've beat this thing to death by now.

[WestTexasS2K]

Representive that is working on our new gun laws. I'm feeling safer already.

 

http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=wwh1eMlSDrs&feature=youtu.be&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3Dwwh1eMlSDrs%26feature%3Dyoutu.be