Government WILL Ban Guns Soon....

[D. B. Doober]

I gotta disagree with ya Krunch. Perhaps another assault weapons ban, but never a full ban. And I really doubt we'd even see an assault weapons ban. The NRA will see to that. Then there is that whole 2nd amendment thing. I really don't see us amending the constitution to remove the 2nd amendment, and you can't outlaw guns if they are expressly permitted by the 2nd amendment. Certain types can be limited, like full automatic, but even they can be owned, provided you pony up the necessary $$ and have the proper permits.

There are probably more guns in this country than people. I own more than a dozen. There is a better chance of Cannabis being made legal than there is of a total ban on firearms.

I dont know man.
Supreme court justices view the constitution in one of two ways, that its something bound in stone that can not ever be altered and must be preserved, or that it changes and has evolving standards.

if it were brought up before the court and the majority of the court was of the evolving standards type, they may say a well armed militia is basically the national guard, so lets outlaw militias because we already have a militia, and yeah it does say the right to bear arms but to what extent? Isnt the national guard basically/legally THE people, but well armed? Well there we go, no need for guns.

 

[Infinitesimal]

I dont know man.
Supreme court justices view the constitution in one of two ways, that its something bound in stone that can not ever be altered and must be preserved, or that it changes and has evolving standards.

if it were brought up before the court and the majority of the court was of the evolving standards type, they may say a well armed militia is basically the national guard, so lets outlaw militias because we already have a militia, and yeah it does say the right to bear arms but to what extent? Isnt the national guard basically/legally THE people, but well armed? Well there we go, no need for guns.

have you ever read the constitution? it reads that in order for a STATE to ratify it must maintain its own militia, each state; not a federally controlled entity, which none have now... and modern militia groups are being labeled "tourist" groups.

 

[Hank Hemp]

Congress will not ban guns period. They want to keep their jobs, right?

 

[OrganicBuds]

This thread is funny. So many uniformed people/sheeple in this thread.

 

[VerdantGreen]

surely you would all agree that a society where no-one owned a gun would be safer than a society where everyone owned a gun?

the 'right to bear arms' is really giving everyone the right to 'play god' -to end someone else's life effortlessly and with little risk to themselves. sure they may have to face the consequences at a later time but that's little consolation to the dead person.
People react in anger all the time without really thinking, if they have a gun n their pocket then the consequences of that anger can be so much more deadly.

and reading threads like this it also seems that some gun owners are just itching for society to break down or for some other sh1t to hit the fan so they can start shooting...

perhaps its just a cultural thing that i dont understand,

VG

 

[paladin420]

surely you would all agree that a society where no-one owned a gun would be safer than a society where everyone owned a gun?

the 'right to bear arms' is really giving everyone the right to 'play god' -to end someone else's life effortlessly and with little risk to themselves. sure they may have to face the consequences at a later time but that's little consolation to the dead person.
People react in anger all the time without really thinking, if they have a gun n their pocket then the consequences of that anger can be so much more deadly.

and reading threads like this it also seems that some gun owners are just itching for society to break down or for some other sh1t to hit the fan so they can start shooting...

perhaps its just a cultural thing that i dont understand,

VG

Just one question sir. Did we as people just start killing each other with the advent of firearms?

and one answer. Yes it is a cultural thing. To me a firearm is just another tool. Yes a dangerous tool. I don't let children play with a gun or a chainsaw.

 

[toughmudderdave]

Here's the gig...All of this shit isn't going to happen overnight. Our freedoms/liberties/rights are slowly and insidiously being taken away from us and it will take decades. In the meantime, all the gov't has to do is to "indoctrinate" the next generation through "education" and everything falls into place. The gov't isn't going to simply ban the possession of firearms, they'll just, over the years, make it more regulated and more difficult to obtain firearms and ammo. As long as the government has records of who owns what, in the event of insurrection, all they have to then do is "pay you a visit".

 

[THE PABLOS]

You can have all the guns you want. The government has much better ones...along with...artillery, navy, air craft (manned or unmanned), bombs to all degrees....and a bunch of trained people...who know and are already indoctrinated well..in their uses.

The idea...that common citizens will come out of the hills with their shotguns (or even AK 47s) and defend themselves against tyranny...and be successful at it....is ludicrous. You would need a faction of the military to break off and participate in such a defense. Without that...it would be a complete slaughter.

I can't believe that people think living in America is all that bad. I mean...how? Owning guns is a moot point when it comes to the big scheme of things. The 2nd amendment...is not only open for interpretation...but was also conceived in a far different time. You have a right to not trust government...no one in their right mind should...but the truth is....Americans have been spoiled in their evolution...and need to stay on the trough. The meals are plentiful....and you can still go on vacation.

My point is...if by holding on to your guns in case you need revolt or defend yourselves against governments is the excuse for owning them...check yourself. If you own guns because you are a sportsman...and enjoy hunting and whatnot....I'm with you. Home protection...I'm with you....but dogs are better. Guns and government are tools....it's a power trip to some.

 

[greenmatter]

You can have all the guns you want. The government has much better ones...along with...artillery, navy, air craft (manned or unmanned), bombs to all degrees....and a bunch of trained people...who know and are already indoctrinated well..in their uses.

The idea...that common citizens will come out of the hills with their shotguns (or even AK 47s) and defend themselves against tyranny...and be successful at it....is ludicrous. You would need a faction of the military to break off and participate in such a defense. Without that...it would be a complete slaughter.

I can't believe that people think living in America is all that bad. I mean...how? Owning guns is a moot point when it comes to the big scheme of things. The 2nd amendment...is not only open for interpretation...but was also conceived in a far different time. You have a right to not trust government...no one in their right mind should...but the truth is....Americans have been spoiled in their evolution...and need to stay on the trough. The meals are plentiful....and you can still go on vacation.

as a vet the only thing i can hope is that lots of the guys in uniform today would have a problem with kicking down doors and lighting up civilians.

the fact that there won't be a yes or no answer is probably one of the reasons that they are not going to be trying that shit any time soon

has anyone who thinks that they are going to come and take all the guns away from the citizens actually considered what it would take to get that done? and who would do it?

i can't think of any way it would work

 

[Hydrosun]

I dont know man.
Supreme court justices view the constitution in one of two ways, that its something bound in stone that can not ever be altered and must be preserved, or that it changes and has evolving standards.

if it were brought up before the court and the majority of the court was of the evolving standards type, they may say a well armed militia is basically the national guard, so lets outlaw militias because we already have a militia, and yeah it does say the right to bear arms but to what extent? Isnt the national guard basically/legally THE people, but well armed? Well there we go, no need for guns.

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.

But to what extent? To an UNLIMITED extent that SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. Any restriction on ANY individual's RIGHT to ANY gun is unconstitutional. All peoples may posses ANY guy they so desire.

Doesn't matter who doesn't like it or how powerful their laws are. All gun possession is fully legal.

 

[VerdantGreen]

Just one question sir. Did we as people just start killing each other with the advent of firearms?

no, but firearms mean you can kill someone a damn site easier, and like i said you can do so with little risk to yourself.

and if someone wants to go out with a bang and take a load of people with them... then an easily acquired firearm means that the death toll is likely to be in the dozens.

VG

 

[gaiusmarius]

what people some times forget to consider is that in the end, if guns are made illegal, it wil only be the law abiding who give them up. your average criminal is not gonna give up his weapons. so all you achieve is a society of victims who are at the mercy of any criminal with a weapon. this is the big glaring loop hole in banning guns, you end up with only the bad guys having them and where would we be then?

 

[Hydrosun]

no, but firearms mean you can kill someone a damn site easier, and like i said you can do so with little risk to yourself.

and if someone wants to go out with a bang and take a load of people with them... then an easily acquired firearm means that the death toll is likely to be in the dozens.

VG

Guess we need to outlaw machetes and radios also. Seems like genocide can happen easily.

Again who cares if someone is psycho or insanely murderous? How does that lead to ME losing ANY rights at the point of your government guns?

You will save me from a mad man with a gun by putting a government gun in my face and telling me what I may and may not own!

God bless AmeriKa.

 

[Bush Dr]

One of the few US industries still going and making money are the gun companies, the suppliers, etc all add up to a vital voter block, no politician is going to get his ass kicked out of Congress because he closed Colt down

Apart from the NRA voting power there's all the gun manufacturers, ammo manufacturers, etc, the pro gun lobby is very strong and clearly demonstrates the will of the people

The closest analogy is tobacco, it could be illegal tomorrow and the smoking 'problem' is gone, but who is going to stand up and say "Vote for me and be unemployed"

The passion of both pro and anti gun lobby will maybe result in the Brady bill Mk2 but little else

 

[THE PABLOS]

When did guns start symbolizing Freedom? As I smoke this joint...I find that ironic.

 

[Bush Dr]

only the bad guys having them and where would we be then?

I can think of 9 folks in New York would prefer that after the police shot them

 

[greenmatter]

no, but firearms mean you can kill someone a damn site easier, and like i said you can do so with little risk to yourself.

and if someone wants to go out with a bang and take a load of people with them... then an easily acquired firearm means that the death toll is likely to be in the dozens.

VG

true ......... kinda


the thing people seem to miss every time some yo yo goes off the deep end is how few casualties there actually are. the nut cases in colorado at both columbine and that movie theatre did very little damage considering what could have been done (and before i get flamed. YES I KNOW how fucked up that sounds ...... but it's true) i think even crazy fucks realize how crazy what they are doing is and stop. remorse has saved more than one person IMHO.

yo yo's are going to find a way to make things interesting no matter what happens. oklahoma city is a perfect domestic example of that. no guns involved in that one.

the trouble here is that there are so many nut bags with guns that normal citizens feel the need to protect themselves ....... which does not sound all that crazy to me since the cops and the government does not seem to be able to

the whole gun issue is an out and out clusterfuck. it won't be solved any time soon, but hey it's a good thing to harp on during an election year, which is when the debate ALWAYS gets hot and heavy. anyone else notice that pattern?

 

[VerdantGreen]

Guess we need to outlaw machetes and radios also. Seems like genocide can happen easily.

Again who cares if someone is psycho or insanely murderous? How does that lead to ME losing ANY rights at the point of your government guns?

You will save me from a mad man with a gun by putting a government gun in my face and telling me what I may and may not own!

God bless AmeriKa.

i guess you think that increasingly regular mass killings and gun crime is a fair price to pay for the 'right to bear arms' ?

 

[VerdantGreen]

.......

the trouble here is that there are so many nut bags with guns that normal citizens feel the need to protect themselves ....... which does not sound all that crazy to me since the cops and the government does not seem to be able to

......

i do understand this, i may feel differently if everyone around me was armed to the teeth.
but then it leads to more and more escalation. the criminals get automatic weapons so the citizens have them as well... and imo the society is a whole lot more dangerous

Its possible to get guns in the UK, and hardened criminals often use them - but we get hardly any 'mass killings at the hands of a nutter' because you cant just go to a store and buy a gun on your credit card.

VG

 

[rives]

surely you would all agree that a society where no-one owned a gun would be safer than a society where everyone owned a gun?

the 'right to bear arms' is really giving everyone the right to 'play god' -to end someone else's life effortlessly and with little risk to themselves. sure they may have to face the consequences at a later time but that's little consolation to the dead person.

VG

I think that the biggest problem associated with guns today is that we are halfway between the traditional US model and your Euro-utopia. A very large number of people (primarily city-dwellers) eschew their gun ownership rights and thus have little exposure to them other than misconceptions planted by the entertainment industry. Very few people are brought up with safe gun-handling fundamentals being drilled into them from the first time that they express an interest in firearms. The unfortunate result of this is that, to a large extent, the wrong people are armed.

Regarding playing God, I suggest that you Google "Priscilla Ford". There are many things available to the common man that can cause multiple deaths of innocents.

Here's the gig...All of this shit isn't going to happen overnight. Our freedoms/liberties/rights are slowly and insidiously being taken away from us and it will take decades. In the meantime, all the gov't has to do is to "indoctrinate" the next generation through "education" and everything falls into place. The gov't isn't going to simply ban the possession of firearms, they'll just, over the years, make it more regulated and more difficult to obtain firearms and ammo. As long as the government has records of who owns what, in the event of insurrection, all they have to then do is "pay you a visit".

You nailed it here, Dave. A perfect example of this is the west-coast lumber industry. Over the last 30 years or so, environmental groups targeted this industry and pushed their agenda through the public school system. The result is that an industry that once supported most of the rural towns on the west coast has been decimated, the forests are at a peak point regarding fire danger, and there is no longer even the infrastructure to do anything useful with the material that is contributing to this fuel loading. Meanwhile, we still use just as much or more lumber in building our houses, but it is brought in by truck or rail from more distant locations. NIMBY heaven.