why are weapons still legal in america?
- Thread starter vampirekid.13
- Start date
Recommended Videos
im going to have to go and say that the whole point is that civilians stop killing each other.firedfns13 said:
how about we look at how many homocides are committed using knives/bats/beatings as opposed to guns.
ull notice guns are the leading cause of homocides, because guns desensetize you. it takes a lot of guts and hate to stab someone. it doesnt take anything to pull a trigger.
seeing how they were in a fascist/socialist/communist government im not too worried about that.JZmada said:
Very, very naive.
For a start the UK doesn't allow fire-arms for civilians and so people knife each other instead. It is not uncommon.
On a side-note: If you don't want to be labelled (your avatar) it's best not to choose a cliché name like 'vampirekid' for an online alias.
For a start the UK doesn't allow fire-arms for civilians and so people knife each other instead. It is not uncommon.
That doesn't make any sense at all. Every human being is a potential criminal. Owning a gun doesn't make the slightest difference on whether they might try and hurt somebody.vampirekid.13 said:
You clearly know nothing about 3rd World countries then. Africa has a lot of militia in it's countries and they are armed very well.vampirekid.13 said:
You are in the military and chose the name "vampirekid"???vampirekid.13 said:
Or that the Government has become Totalitarian and the normal people need to defend themselves against the corrupt, this is what I meant by naive.vampirekid.13 said:
On a side-note: If you don't want to be labelled (your avatar) it's best not to choose a cliché name like 'vampirekid' for an online alias.
Twilightkid.13, why don't you take up a crusade against disease or poverty? Those are definitely more pressing issues for humanity. A petulant tirade against firearms is pointless and inefficient.
I don't think there would be a point to it. People who want them would still be able to get their hands on them. Then the people who need them (for self defense) would be fucked. Also, criminals who can't get them still have knives, blunt objects, and their fists to harm people. And I think the people that have a rather large and expensive collection would not part with them willingly.
I love how people seem to think there's some kind of civil war going on in the U.S. between criminals and civilians and if civilians don't own guns, it'll mean the end of country as we know it.
Yeah, let's just completely forget the fact that Europe still has gun control and hasn't turned into a post-apolacptic wasteland yet.
Yeah, let's just completely forget the fact that Europe still has gun control and hasn't turned into a post-apolacptic wasteland yet.
I'm not against people owning side arms and the like to protect themselves from home invasions, but seriously, what would happen to these people, when weapons that can be easily obtained on the black market lands in the hands of people who would actually use them in when attempting to rob your house?
2 Rogue vigilante assumed that a mexican immigrant family had drug money somewhere in their basement, they went in, killed the father and 8 year old daughter, and if it weren't for the side arm of the husband, the widow would have never been able to make it out alive. Yeah, some people are badass enough to give their would be aggressors a complete facial makeover, but a having a weapon to protect oneself and one's family, is better than taking chances.
I think JWAN, the local gun nuts might give a much better insight on this matter. Although, I am completely against civilians possessing assault rifles and military grade weaponry.
2 Rogue vigilante assumed that a mexican immigrant family had drug money somewhere in their basement, they went in, killed the father and 8 year old daughter, and if it weren't for the side arm of the husband, the widow would have never been able to make it out alive. Yeah, some people are badass enough to give their would be aggressors a complete facial makeover, but a having a weapon to protect oneself and one's family, is better than taking chances.
I think JWAN, the local gun nuts might give a much better insight on this matter. Although, I am completely against civilians possessing assault rifles and military grade weaponry.
After the bombing of Pearl Harbor in 1941 the United States was open to invasion. In recent decades, when asked why the Axis forces never invaded such questions were met with straight-faced incredulity and comments along the lines of "are you kidding?! you psychos have all got guns in every home!" So the 2nd Amendment does still carry a large amount of usefulness today. It's like Sweden. NOBODY dares invade them because of the same damn reason, the right to bear arms.
Personally I prefer handheld/thrown weapons such as crude shrapnel grenades, molotov bombs, and axes.
Personally I prefer handheld/thrown weapons such as crude shrapnel grenades, molotov bombs, and axes.
To quote Ice Cube from the classic album AmeriKKKa's Most Wanted,
"So whatcha do, go and ban the AK?
My s**t wasn't registered any f****n way"
And by the way, isn't a hunting rifle a gun?
Why not include this in your ban?
Are humans impervious to bullets shot from a hunting rifle?
"So whatcha do, go and ban the AK?
My s**t wasn't registered any f****n way"
And by the way, isn't a hunting rifle a gun?
Why not include this in your ban?
Are humans impervious to bullets shot from a hunting rifle?
The American Economy.
Its based around a War Machine, a war economy is described as one that uses more than 20% of its economy on the buildings of weaponry.
So there is your answer MONEY
Australia took guns away and even if you expand our population out to America's we stil have 9000 less gun murders than you per year so yeh gun control works.
America's Argument:but the bad guys have the guns
So what, thats why you have police to take them away from those people.
Its based around a War Machine, a war economy is described as one that uses more than 20% of its economy on the buildings of weaponry.
So there is your answer MONEY
Australia took guns away and even if you expand our population out to America's we stil have 9000 less gun murders than you per year so yeh gun control works.
America's Argument:but the bad guys have the guns
So what, thats why you have police to take them away from those people.
Why the exception for hunting rifles do they not kill people to?vampirekid.13 said:
The supreme court ruled the 2a is an individual right the founding fathers meant it as one.
This is obviously meant to be for the sake of comedy. You don't understand how little in stopping homicides taking away guns will do. If somebody wants somebody dead, badly enough, (unless that person can defend himself) he will be dead by other means than a gun. Your too close minded to rightfully defend this argument.vampirekid.13 said:
Hate to break it to you mate, but it's not so much an excuse as an accurate appraisal of the situation.The infamous SCAMola said:
Consider this: the majority of people who own a gun do so for entirely legal reasons: self-defence, hunting, sports shooting and in some cases the misconception that the motive behind the second amendment is applicable to a modern first-world democracy. That's all very well and good, and the bulk of those people would, albeit grudgingly, hand in their guns if and when the call came. Indeed, the law-abiding ones would have little choice in the matter, because refusal to hand in their weapons would be met by the cops - who have access to a database of every registered and licensed gun owner in the USA.
In the event of the second amendment being abolished and all the firearms recalled, the only ones that would wind up being turned in would be the legally registered, legally used ones. Illegally owned ones would slip through the net.
Which means that all the guns left in the country would be left in the hands of people with an existing and proven proclivity for ignoring the gun laws that are already in place.
now, as a Brit I'm constantly bemused by the American love for weaponry, but speaking as an outside observer, it simply doesn't look to me like banning the gun is feasible for the USA. They're too deeply ingrained in the culture and too ubiquitous. Banning them would be like bailing out the rowing boat without plugging the hole first.
"You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass."
-Isoroku Yamamoto
"I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve. "
-Isoroku Yamamoto
During WW2, this guy, he knew what the U.S. was all about.
Also,, guns don't kill people, people kill people. I enjoy shooting all sorts of guns. One of my friends who is quite wealthy has a large vault full of guns. For us it's an entertainment thing. None of the people I have shot with would ever use a weapon to be an aggressor, only for self defense.
In my book, guns are alright, the more the merrier I say.