Poll: Lets pretend the government passes a law stating that you can't have a gun anymore...

Recommended Videos

BoredAussieGamer

New member
Aug 7, 2011
289
0
0
I'd give it to them alongside my massive collection of Manga and immense library of classic literature and 8 tracks along with my Rolls-Royce and everything else I don't have.

I live in Australia, where only farmers and private security have guns so I can't honestly say I give a shit. My Nerf guns on the other hand...
 

Johnny Novgorod

Bebop Man
Legacy
Feb 9, 2012
19,347
4,013
118
Don't own one, never did, never will. Wish Americans would get over the issue, they're a bit grown up to be playing cowboy anymore.
 

SerithVC

New member
Dec 23, 2011
117
0
0
If the government were to do such a thing it would be a sign that they are plotting to take more power from the people to round them up and enslave them. If your gonna deny my reasoning, look at the way the world is running right now. Most people are forced to work multiple jobs or to not take any vacations just to make ends meet. This also forces people into the military because thats the ensures them that they will have a steady income that will pay the bills and slowly warps them into being killing machines. PTSD is proof of this because when people come back, they still have that feeling of being in a battle zone. Also the military tends to 'post' people to different locations so that they don't form strong bonds with non military personal. So if the government bans the ownership of guns, it means they are moving closer to the enslaving of the people. And befor anyone gets any stupid ideas, no i am not an anarchist. I don't have faith in the way the government is being run and believe there should be a drastic change in leadership.
 

Mordekaien

New member
Sep 3, 2010
820
0
0
Daystar Clarion said:
I killed that guy with my mind.

Like this?

OT, I don't own one, and my country (Slovakia) has some pretty strict rules for those who want to go around the streets armed so I guess it doesn't matter that much to me.
 

AnarchistFish

New member
Jul 25, 2011
1,500
0
0
Do I ignore this thread, considering it's pretty obviously only aimed at people from countries where gun ownership is legal, especially the USA.

Or do I make a smartarse comment because it wasn't specified

i'll get back to you on this
 

Headdrivehardscrew

New member
Aug 22, 2011
1,660
0
0
I ticked the 'kill' one, to express my disgust at such a notion.

In reality, I would just pack up my stuff and leave. It just wouldn't be my country anymore. It wouldn't be what I signed up for when I was born into this.

You want what is mine, without paying for it? In my books, that's stealing. And I don't like thieves. I am not an overly religious person, but I find my religion to always give me more than I put effort into it. It's quite an amazing energetic perpetuum mobile. It'll end once I'm down and out, which will inevitably happen, but my religion is absolutely OK. It gives me the freedom to believe in God, even though I perfectly know there is no God. It allows me to make shit up and occasionally even use foul language to express my feelings. It allows me to want to be friends with everybody, even the angry beardyman that wants to cut off my head. I think my religion is awesome.

I can look back to the early days when we were but a cult, despised and shunned and hated by our Jewish brothers and sisters. I can look back at over a thousand years of conflict with that other, younger cult that tends to crave for what isn't theirs. I can look back at Medieval times, when the surplus of sons led the church to breed Darth Vader clones and lots of bored people. I can look back at Nazi Germany, knowing that part of my people died in camps just because they remained true to their faith. OK, some ate non-kosher food. At least I think rats and worms and beetles ain't kosher. Never looked it up, as it's really not a problem of mine.

I can look back at how we were driven out, raped, beheaded, murdered and ridiculed by the Horde for centuries, without ever being allowed to regroup or catch a break. I can look at how things are turning to shit right now in, say, too many nations in Africa, the area affectively known as the 'Middle East' or even Eastern Asia, wherever someone else claims to have gotten the latest update from some imaginary deity or a less godly bearded guy like, say, Marx. I can see people claiming to fight for their people in South America, but they do it with guns, and mostly by exploiting their very own people, to produce drugs they then sell to other countries to fund their struggle, and fuck shit up from within. If you're into the cuddly fuzzy world of National Geographic, check out their 'Zombie Island' documentary. It's hilarious.

I can look at all that and still want to believe in a better tomorrow. I can look at all that and still control my disgust, my sadness and my rage. Because I know that it is in our nature to be but murderous, raging beasts.

Homo Homini Lupus. Destroying is not an art form.

And yet, those lonely folks that choose to go on a rampage are but glitches in the system. We, as a people, as a nation, are better than that. I don't condone James Yeager's words uttered and thoughts behind them, but I can allow myself to understand how threatened he must have felt that moment he considered it to be a good idea to have that moment put up on teh interwebz for all eternity. I don't know him personally and I don't think he's a very smart man. But there are plenty other folks around us, wherever we are, that think and act and look like James Yeager, they just don't all subscribe to they same cause. Tick off the majority of them, and it's not just Al-Qaeda sleeper cells or lonely assburgers on a rampage. It really would mean civil war. And I wouldn't like that very much, now, would I.

So, why should I pay taxes to a bureaucracy that, well, does not respect me and treads on me?

Why not just turn my back on them and ridicule them from afar?

Let them build their socialist Utopia and - inevitably - fail, like everyone before them. I really want no part in this.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d8/Gadsden_flag.svg
 

Vegosiux

New member
May 18, 2011
4,381
0
0
SerithVC said:
If your gonna deny my reasoning, look at the way the world is running right now.
Last time I checked, we're not enslaved or forced into military on this side of the pond. Shit's fucked up, yeah, but that's a greater issue than just "The man" doing it "for t3h evulz, lol"...


I don't have faith in the way the government is being run and believe there should be a drastic change in leadership.
When you say "the government", do you mean "the US government", or do you mean "any given government in the world"? And if you mean "any given government in the world", I'd love to hear it from you how all of them work, really.

I do know ours is just about to fall - and we needed no guns for that. That's right. We're ousting our government because we feel it's betrayed our trust (well, not me, since I never did trust them in the first place, and voted for someone else) and we're not doing it with guns.
 

The Funslinger

Corporate Splooge
Sep 12, 2010
6,150
0
0
Thyunda said:
Binnsyboy said:
Thyunda said:
it's because inner-city Americans do not need a handgun for any reason.
If you'd said rifles, I'd understand where you're coming from, but I'd say people in the city have more reason for a handgun than someone in a rural area. Carry weapons and such, which do protect people.
Which is why every Londoner carries a handgun, right?
Not that I'm really looking to get into a gun debate, but handguns are illegal in Britain. Meaning anyone with a handgun has acquired it via black market means. And if they've acquired it via black market means, they probably intend to commit some crime, or have at least shown themselves to already have disregard for the law.

Speaking in terms of America, where such things can be acquired legally, yes. Licensed handguns are a good thing. I'd probably have situation training required on a national level before being able to have a carry permit/purchase a handgun, though.
 

fix-the-spade

New member
Feb 25, 2008
8,639
0
0
TopazFusion said:
Were this to happen, I'm guessing it would cause another civil war, as pathetic as that sounds..
Bet it wouldn't.
One side would gear up for it, then realise that the other side has JDAMs and all those guns they'd been hoarding to 'defend against tyranny' were a moot point.

Then they'd start suing people...
 

AnarchistFish

New member
Jul 25, 2011
1,500
0
0
phreakdb said:
America is the only country in the western world that hasn't had truly violent protests about entitlements and money since the global depression began.
What the fuck? How big is your idea of the "western world"?
This is moot anyway, in an argument trying to argue about incidence of violence in the US

phreakdb said:
the main one being so that the common people don't get trod upon by a tyrannical government or the us as a whole doesn't get overtaken by a hostile foreign nation.
That's looking likely.

Either way, it probably would just make things worse, arming a shitload of untrained, disorganised civilians. Even if they won out it probably wouldn't have been worth it for the losses.

But this is all theoretical
 

sageoftruth

New member
Jan 29, 2010
3,417
0
0
Conspiracy theorists would definitely take it the hardest. The passing of such a law would be all the evidence they needed that the government was disarming the populace for a military takeover.
 

CrystalShadow

don't upset the insane catgirl
Apr 11, 2009
3,829
0
0
Single Shot said:
Yeah, right, a breach of this part of the constitution?
"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the Right of the people to Keep and Bear Arms shall not be infringed"
Do Americans know what a militia is? I read this and thought of the Swiss system of gun laws built around every 20 - 30 year old (Male?) being part of a trained militia with the option to keep semi-automatic versions of their issued rifle afterwards because they had proper training and respect for the firearm BEFORE being allowed to own it.
What I found interesting in looking into the Swiss system is that even though everyone that has been trained as part of the militia (which is basically everyone. Or at least, all the men) has a military issue rifle.

HOWEVER, the swiss laws with regard to ammunition are incredibly strict; In the past you were given a sealed box with 50 rounds for the rifle, (intended to be in case something happened and you needed to use the gun prior to getting to a military facility). But the box was sealed, and there were regular inspections to ensure you hadn't been tampering with it.
Meanwhile, after some kind of incident, even that is no longer the case. So, just about everyone has a gun, yes. But few people have munitions.
(and there are many other restrictions about carrying a gun around even then.)

A gun without ammo isn't much of a weapon really.
 

Thyunda

New member
May 4, 2009
2,955
0
0
Binnsyboy said:
Thyunda said:
Binnsyboy said:
Thyunda said:
it's because inner-city Americans do not need a handgun for any reason.
If you'd said rifles, I'd understand where you're coming from, but I'd say people in the city have more reason for a handgun than someone in a rural area. Carry weapons and such, which do protect people.
Which is why every Londoner carries a handgun, right?
Not that I'm really looking to get into a gun debate, but handguns are illegal in Britain. Meaning anyone with a handgun has acquired it via black market means. And if they've acquired it via black market means, they probably intend to commit some crime, or have at least shown themselves to already have disregard for the law.

Speaking in terms of America, where such things can be acquired legally, yes. Licensed handguns are a good thing. I'd probably have situation training required on a national level before being able to have a carry permit/purchase a handgun, though.
I was being totally sarcastic.
 

Commissar Sae

New member
Nov 13, 2009
983
0
0
Alright, so they are coming for my old Lee Enfield rifle. I'd probably just bring it to be decommissioned since I have never fired it anyway and mostly just hold on to it because my dad gave it to me when I got my long guns license (which was mostly just a fun way to spend a day with some friends.) So not really that big a drama for me even as a gun owner.

Then again I'm Canadian and live in the city so I don't even keep the rifle at home, I left it with my dad who keeps it in a locked safe with his guns (which again almost never see use, since my dad hasn't gone target shooting since before I was born.)
 

Edible Avatar

New member
Oct 26, 2011
267
0
0
Trezu said:
I have a question

Why do people wanna keep there guns? because its eaiser to ward intruders away? Makes you feel safer? People may perceive your genitals to be bigger?

do you wanna know who doesn't use a gun? Batman.

just sayin
Hunting, target shooting, sport shooting, home defense, military living history, reenacting, exercising constitutional right, responsible fun.

^My reasons brah.

EDIT: Sorry, OT: I bet that there would be a shitstorm and possibly a regime change. While it is true that the US has the best military on earth, i doubt they could protect EVERY federal building/agent/and property from bombings/shootings/arson/and subterfuge.

I bet several politicians would be assassinated and the government would be paralyzed, leading Obama to declare martial law. The National Guard probably couldn't/wouldn't be called up due to fear of desertion and their unwillingness to fire upon citizens,so it would be up to the Marines and the Army to restore order, which i'm not certain if they could.

The states would recall their reserves from the military, which is within their rights, but the martial law would turn those troops over to a federal command, so civil war could break out over the power struggle.

But then again, that's only an educated guess.
 

spartan231490

New member
Jan 14, 2010
5,186
0
0
I'm keeping appraised of the situation to ensure this is never a decision I'd have to make. Suffice it to say, I own several firearms, and I will not give them up to anyone. If it came to this, I would try to intimidate my way out(I have several places I could go where no one would ever find me) but if I had to yes I would kill to keep my firearms. Without firearms I am simply a victim waiting for an attacker, a slave waiting for a master, and I refuse to put myself in that situation. I also have a number of plans for if there are too many of them for me to get out and I am forced to turn over my guns. I don't intend to share the details, but suffice it to say that making weapons far more dangerous than firearms is remarkably easy.
 

natster43

New member
Jul 10, 2009
2,459
0
0
Well do NERF guns count for this also? If so Imma hide the shit outa my guns. But if just actual guns, I would give my guns up, since I don't own any.
 

sageoftruth

New member
Jan 29, 2010
3,417
0
0
Like many of you, I'd be completely unaffected by such a law. I don't own any guns, and I live in Massachusetts, where hardly anyone else owns any guns. I'd be really curious to see what happens in states with less strict gun laws. I've spoken to people on both sides, and it seems like there's a downside either way.