There's no need for gun control and most of these mass shootings are just CIA backed false flag operations and just like the war on drugs(which was basically war on the 4th amendement) these false flag opertions are attacks on the second amendment
If you give up the second amendment then you should also be ready to give up the first...
Topic: What's your opinion of gun control? - page 13. (Read 450417 times)
IMO, people should be given the choice whether whey want to own a fire-arm or not. In places like Texas, where home invasions are very common, the possession of a fire-arm can save many lives. However, the government should make it impossible for people with a criminal record, and those with mental issues from obtaining fire-arms.
I can agree there is certain places where a fire arm in the home is something that can justified, however I will never ever understand why the general public need easy access to army grade auto weapons etc. Absolute bloody madness!!
I am Scottish and it took just one evil rat to carry out a massacre (Dunblane) for people to flick that switch in their brains and see gun control was a joke at the time. What happened to that children in Dunblane was pure evil.
This happens time and time again the USA but still the cavemen refuse to accept they have a serious problem!
That's because cavemen had to wind up in caves, outside their beautiful homes, before they realized that they need guns to protect their families and homes.
IMO, people should be given the choice whether whey want to own a fire-arm or not. In places like Texas, where home invasions are very common, the possession of a fire-arm can save many lives. However, the government should make it impossible for people with a criminal record, and those with mental issues from obtaining fire-arms.
I can agree there is certain places where a fire arm in the home is something that can justified, however I will never ever understand why the general public need easy access to army grade auto weapons etc. Absolute bloody madness!!
If you had voted (or have been reported to have voted) for independence from London and London said 'We know better what should happen in Scotland and we have the military grade weapons, so fuck off.' then you might have a better understanding of this. Such things do happen you know.
I am Scottish and it took just one evil rat to carry out a massacre (Dunblane) for people to flick that switch in their brains and see gun control was a joke at the time. What happened to that children in Dunblane was pure evil.
Pure stagecraft most likely if it is anything like the other 'mass shootings' that the commonwealth 'suffers' from.
There really is a residual difference between Americans who broke away a couple hundred years ago and the populations which remained subjects of the crown. Thankfully. To bad that America fell under new management. Hopefully when Americans figure it out there will be enough vestigial spirit to take the appropriate action. That's the main reason for dis-armament effort, and the main reason for our 2nd amendment in the first place...'absolute bloody madness' that it may be.
This happens time and time again the USA but still the cavemen refuse to accept they have a serious problem!
More and more of us see the problem quite clearly and accept it. I mean the whole 'problem, reaction, solution' picture.
IMO, people should be given the choice whether whey want to own a fire-arm or not. In places like Texas, where home invasions are very common, the possession of a fire-arm can save many lives. However, the government should make it impossible for people with a criminal record, and those with mental issues from obtaining fire-arms.
I can agree there is certain places where a fire arm in the home is something that can justified, however I will never ever understand why the general public need easy access to army grade auto weapons etc. Absolute bloody madness!!
I am Scottish and it took just one evil rat to carry out a massacre (Dunblane) for people to flick that switch in their brains and see gun control was a joke at the time. What happened to that children in Dunblane was pure evil.
This happens time and time again the USA but still the cavemen refuse to accept they have a serious problem!
Gun control. first, we need to knows why people make the gun.we go our history that people make some tools for killing animals for the food. but now why people make weapons killing for people.thts not good. anybody can see the most of country have a civil war. some country weapon using under 18 kids.should need all countries to make one rules for what age limit people can use a weapon.
Sounds like a civil war. Go ahead and get rid of your guns, because that is what you believe. I'll keep mine because that's what I believe. Next, go ahead and start a civil war with me.
Gun control. first, we need to knows why people make the gun.we go our history that people make some tools for killing animals for the food. but now why people make weapons killing for people.thts not good. anybody can see the most of country have a civil war. some country weapon using under 18 kids.should need all countries to make one rules for what age limit people can use a weapon.
The 1% who are the driving force behind both the gun control and the gun freedom movements are keenly aware of the 'civil war' aspect and the influence that arms will have in the outcome. Both sides wish to be on top when civil war comes to town. The 99% are followers who naively believe whatever line is fed to them by their respective leadership categories.
Note that the 'gun grabbers' are not at all against guns per-se. They generally want more and bigger guns for the para-militaries. This is because their leadership classes believe that they will maintain control over these para-militaries when the shit hits the fan. The idiot 99% of their side faithfully tow the line and march for MORE guns as much as they march for less. They mostly want the 'elite' to have the upper hand because that is who funds their efforts, though few of them can think clearly enough to even see what they are marching for.
Actually, I'll adjust my estimate. On the gun-grabber side it's probably 1%-99% who see the picture clearly and understand who/what they are fighting for. On the 'bitter clingers' side it's probably closer to 10%-90%,
Gun control. first, we need to knows why people make the gun.we go our history that people make some tools for killing animals for the food. but now why people make weapons killing for people.thts not good. anybody can see the most of country have a civil war. some country weapon using under 18 kids.should need all countries to make one rules for what age limit people can use a weapon.
Guns should really be prohibited. I'm so angry when young teenagers shoots video on youtube where they are holding a real gun. People should have a taser gun or a gun that shoots only tranquilizers so there are no more shooting incidents that will ever happen in schools again.
I think it's good to control the use of weapons, because weapons can be misused if those who hold are children, and there has been a lot of news about weapons abuse that has happened lately, in my country only certain people can have weapons
Actually, I see little news about somebody not controlling his guns. There are few people who leave them lying around for the kids to attempt to control. Most gun folks control their kids as well as they control their guns.
Some of the biggest and best gun controllers are the shooters going into the schools, etc., and killing people with their guns. If they didn't have good control of their guns, they would have missed. So, you are in favor of gun control so that more people get killed?
I think it's good to control the use of weapons, because weapons can be misused if those who hold are children, and there has been a lot of news about weapons abuse that has happened lately, in my country only certain people can have weapons
How much of this 'news' is utter bullshit? As per the link above, when one of the very few real reports left looked into things she found that out of some 230-ish reported 'school shootings', only 11 were found an actual basis in reality. Now why would that be do you suppose?
Again: https://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2018/08/27/640323347/the-school-shootings-that-werent
I think it's good to control the use of weapons, because weapons can be misused if those who hold are children, and there has been a lot of news about weapons abuse that has happened lately, in my country only certain people can have weapons
A Brief History Of Repressive Regimes And Their Gun Laws
Read more at https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-09-13/brief-history-repressive-regimes-and-their-gun-laws.
Quote from: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-09-13/brief-history-repressive-regimes-and-their-gun-laws
Although gun control laws are not created equally in terms of overall impact, gun confiscation holds a special place in the halls of political repression. A trip down memory lane will give us a refresher of how gun confiscation has helped consolidate government power.
The Soviet Union and Its Satellite States
The Soviet Union left its mark as one of the deadliest political regimes in the history of mankind. However, it could not get away with such atrocities without having a complete monopoly on the use of force.
Ironically, the famous Soviet leader Vladimir Lenin called for a proletarian militia in his essay Letters From Afar. Lenin charted out his vision in the following passage:
What kind of militia do we need, the proletariat, all the toiling people? A genuine people's militia, i.e., one that, first, consists of the entire population, of all adult citizens of both sexes; and, second, one that combines the functions of a people's army with police functions, with the functions of the chief and fundamental organ of public order and public administration.
The Soviet Union and Its Satellite States
The Soviet Union left its mark as one of the deadliest political regimes in the history of mankind. However, it could not get away with such atrocities without having a complete monopoly on the use of force.
Ironically, the famous Soviet leader Vladimir Lenin called for a proletarian militia in his essay Letters From Afar. Lenin charted out his vision in the following passage:
What kind of militia do we need, the proletariat, all the toiling people? A genuine people's militia, i.e., one that, first, consists of the entire population, of all adult citizens of both sexes; and, second, one that combines the functions of a people's army with police functions, with the functions of the chief and fundamental organ of public order and public administration.
Read more at https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-09-13/brief-history-repressive-regimes-and-their-gun-laws.
Guns were created to protect and not to harm. It's okay to own one but it should be acquired legally and for the right purposes. The government has every right to order gun control since they're the ones who runs and takes care of the society. Right now, there are plenty of reports for smuggled guns and ammunitions being sold in the black market away from the governments radar, and it could possess a grave threat to the society if those persons who owns the said guns will use it to their own evil cause and intentions.
Ummm...given that it is trivial for a law abiding citizen to buy guns and ammo legally, the only people who are doing so on the black market are criminals. WTF do you think they are going to use the guns for?
It should go without saying that outlawing firearm ownership will drive the black market profits to near infinity in a place where people are as attached to their guns and the idea of self-defence as we are here in the U.S.. Maybe you are a wanna-be black market gun dealer?
Except for crime ridden inner cities the U.S. basically has little real problem with gun crimes, and what we do have has been dropping for several decades as a result of the common-sense policy of 'throwing the book at' people who are caught using firearms in the commission of a crime.
A lot of the problems that people perceive are a result of falsified data used in a massive anti-gun propaganda drive. As per the link I posted above.
Also, a person should not be licensed to carry a gun if he/she has a criminal record or has some mental issues.
They are not only not allowed to carry them, they are not allowed to own them. You are fighting a non-problem and advocating a solution which has existed for a long time. Ask yourself why?
No serious person on either side of the debate advocates changing this basic policy with respect to convicted criminals. I personally am leery about the 'mental health' aspect. It's as plain as day that a lot of the gun-grabber types would be willing and happy to define wishing to own a gun as a 'mental issue' in and of itself. Or basically any thought pattern which conflicts with what the current political leadership wants.
Well "I'll be dipped in shit and rolled in rock-salt!" NPR is about the last place I expected to see some of the bullshit that the gun-grabbers are generating be actually called out:
https://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2018/08/27/640323347/the-school-shootings-that-werent
I wonder how much longer this 'Anya Kamenetz' chick will have her job?
Why are you trying to compare drugs with guns? This is completely and utterly different. Drug use as craving for intoxication is consequences of human mind, the lack of coping mechanisms in most people . This is why war on drugs will never work until the war on drugs would mean completely something else not trying to kill the drug traffic and selling.
Actually guns and drugs have some remarkable psychological similarities. A lot of people are 'gun nuts' who derive a good deal of pleasure out of owning, collecting, and shooting their guns. It seems to give them an adrenalin rush. More power to them as far as I'm concerned. Almost zero lawful gun owners are a threat to me, and the fact that 75% of the households in my area own firearms for home defense is a giant benefit to me.
Vastly more people feel vulnerable and feel a lot more security knowing that they can defend themselves against the threats that are out there. Older people and females who are by nature more weak than most of their attackers are especially prone to feel this sense of security, and with good reason. It takes a special kind of dirtbag to want to deprive a person of this sense of security and leave them to the tender mercy of the local rapists and/or meth-heads.
Guns on the other hand is something completely different. I was using ' assault riffles" as the most extreme example of guns which are ' normally" owned by US citizens. It does not matter which gun, riffle ,small big or shotgun, i dont know how they all are called and I dont care and it does not matter.
So you are saying that 'assault rifles' are simply the first step for the gun-grabbers? I mean, who knew???
US has sick definition of freedom if the freedom involves free market of any kind of guns. And dont give me this shit that a lot more people die in other type of deaths.
I feel aligned with the founding fathers and their concepts of 'freedom.' And they did make it the 2nd amendment after all. If that makes us 'sick', then so be it. A lot of people in a lot of countries have derived inspiration from our brand of 'freedom' over the last several centuries...and a lot of political leaderships have worked hard to undo some of 'damage.'
If you _really_ want the low hanging fruit in so far as protecting the kiddies, outlaw bicycles. They are quite unnecessary and result in vastly more injury and death than do guns. For an extra kick, throw in snowboards and similar demonstrably dangerous sports. Maybe you should ask yourself why the gun-grabber propaganda doesn't ever mention this and why nobody has their panties in a bunch about it. Hint: it isn't about saftey for the plebs and the kiddies. It's about something else entirely.
I agree that there would be bigger black market if the guns would be banned in US, but guns are much harder to smuggle than drugs. And the problem is also in the society which thinks that it is normal to have such lethal weapons in their possessions. Why the rest of the civilized world does not have a problem with mass shootings? For example Europe? Because people in Europe does not think that they need fucking gun or 10 guns, if they need to protect themselves they buy tear gas.
A metric ton of contraband is a metric ton of contraband. One is not much more difficult to smuggle than then next. People have a simplistic understanding of how 'smuggling' is typically accomplished and who the big players in the industry are.
I've no interest whatsoever in the U.S. becoming anything like Europe in any way. It is the last 1/4 of a turd disappearing down the toilet as far as I'm concerned. In engineering a 'backup option' for my own ass, the thought of setting up shop in any part of the EU never even crossed my mind.
OMG.
YEs, the gun control wont stop people being violent but it WILL STOP THEM KILLING PEOPLE WITH ASSAULT RIFFLES!
There is no place for discussion. The lives of others outweighs your perverse presumption of your gun rights every fuckin day.
Doubt it. The 'war on drugs' had pretty much only the effect of making profit margins for drug trafficers very high. It actually didn't seem to have much impact on the availability of drugs. I don't see any practical way to keep so-called 'assault rifles' out of the hands of those who want to have them, and especially since the U.S. and others are flooding certain regions with them in order to try to provoke 'regime change.' There is also a strong push for 'open borders' which cannot help but induce extra channels for illegal goods of all sorts.
I read somewhere (this board?) that more people are killed in the U.S. with hammers than with 'assault rifles'. I would not doubt it. Most fatalities are probably accomplished with handguns. Rifles and shotguns not so much. So why the big push against 'assault rifles'? Could it be that the paramilitaries see what is on the horizon and do not wish to be packing the extra body armor? Are they anticipating a desire to throw a certain class of people in prison (or a 'gulag') and want an excuse to round up this certain class of people? Basically from the perspective of 'protecting the peeps from harm' there are a lot of much more practical things to do that would save a lot more suffering than trying to confiscate all 'assault rifles'. Clearly something else is going on. What exactly it is isn't clear. Yet.
Why are you trying to compare drugs with guns? This is completely and utterly different. Drug use as craving for intoxication is consequences of human mind, the lack of coping mechanisms in most people . This is why war on drugs will never work until the war on drugs would mean completely something else not trying to kill the drug traffic and selling.
Guns on the other hand is something completely different. I was using ' assault riffles" as the most extreme example of guns which are ' normally" owned by US citizens. It does not matter which gun, riffle ,small big or shotgun, i dont know how they all are called and I dont care and it does not matter.
US has sick definition of freedom if the freedom involves free market of any kind of guns. And dont give me this shit that a lot more people die in other type of deaths.
I agree that there would be bigger black market if the guns would be banned in US, but guns are much harder to smuggle than drugs. And the problem is also in the society which thinks that it is normal to have such lethal weapons in their possessions. Why the rest of the civilized world does not have a problem with mass shootings? For example Europe? Because people in Europe does not think that they need fucking gun or 10 guns, if they need to protect themselves they buy tear gas.
OMG.
YEs, the gun control wont stop people being violent but it WILL STOP THEM KILLING PEOPLE WITH ASSAULT RIFFLES!
There is no place for discussion. The lives of others outweighs your perverse presumption of your gun rights every fuckin day.
Doubt it. The 'war on drugs' had pretty much only the effect of making profit margins for drug trafficers very high. It actually didn't seem to have much impact on the availability of drugs. I don't see any practical way to keep so-called 'assault rifles' out of the hands of those who want to have them, and especially since the U.S. and others are flooding certain regions with them in order to try to provoke 'regime change.' There is also a strong push for 'open borders' which cannot help but induce extra channels for illegal goods of all sorts.
I read somewhere (this board?) that more people are killed in the U.S. with hammers than with 'assault rifles'. I would not doubt it. Most fatalities are probably accomplished with handguns. Rifles and shotguns not so much. So why the big push against 'assault rifles'? Could it be that the paramilitaries see what is on the horizon and do not wish to be packing the extra body armor? Are they anticipating a desire to throw a certain class of people in prison (or a 'gulag') and want an excuse to round up this certain class of people? Basically from the perspective of 'protecting the peeps from harm' there are a lot of much more practical things to do that would save a lot more suffering than trying to confiscate all 'assault rifles'. Clearly something else is going on. What exactly it is isn't clear. Yet.
Guns are made for one purpose, and that purpose is to kill.
I believe that guns are not weapons, they are tools. How they are used is up to the person holding it.
Guns are especially dangerous in the hands of people who don't know how to use them (i.e., kids and teenagers) as well as those who are mentally ill and/or have a temper problem.
Gun control will not stop violence because a violent person doesn’t need a gun to be violent.
After the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, support for gun control increased dramatically.
Generally in America, the support for gun control has outweighed the support for gun rights.
Are gun control laws constitutional?
What would be your ideal set of laws regarding firearms?
OMG.
YEs, the gun control wont stop people being violent but it WILL STOP THEM KILLING PEOPLE WITH ASSAULT RIFFLES!
There is no place for discussion. The lives of others outweighs your perverse presumption of your gun rights every fuckin day.
Cody Wilson on Liberty, the State, and Open Source Gun Designs
Read more at https://www.lewrockwell.com/2018/08/thomas-woods/cody-wilson-on-liberty-the-state-and-open-source-gun-designs/.
The media went berserk recently over Cody Wilson and his Stoic defense of the publication of open-source gun designs suitable for 3D printing. We go beneath the surface and talk social media deplatforming, free speech, and Cody's ideological influences.
MP3 > https://tomwoods.com/ep-1224-cody-wilson-on-liberty-the-state-and-open-source-gun-designs/
MP3 > https://tomwoods.com/ep-1224-cody-wilson-on-liberty-the-state-and-open-source-gun-designs/
Read more at https://www.lewrockwell.com/2018/08/thomas-woods/cody-wilson-on-liberty-the-state-and-open-source-gun-designs/.
Guns are the best thing that ever happened to society. Why? Before guns, any 90 pound granny had to fear for her life every time a 250 pound muscleman bully was near her. The bully was king. He could kill or maim at will. But when Granny got a gun, she had a chance.
A 250 pound muscleman bully can easily kill or maim a 90 pound granny. But if Granny has a gun, she has a chance.
When you consider that the bully term might be applied to a bunch of people in government, the safety of all people is to have guns in the hands of all people, so that all people can protect themselves from bully government.
A 250 pound muscleman bully can easily kill or maim a 90 pound granny. But if Granny has a gun, she has a chance.
When you consider that the bully term might be applied to a bunch of people in government, the safety of all people is to have guns in the hands of all people, so that all people can protect themselves from bully government.
Jump to: