Topic: What's your opinion of gun control? - page 176. (Read 450551 times)

Exactly.  Gun control is hitting what you aim at.

All these peasants, speaking from the perspective of their multi-generational status as chattel property of a Sovereign, have been effectively bred for domesticated subservience.  Accordingly, they have as much use for the tools of self-defense (and tyranny resistance) as a typical factory-farmed chicken, pig, or sheep.

When they use code words like "gun control" it's really their dog whistle announcing 'let's all talk about there is no RKBA, regardless of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.'

Love that avatar. Great for depicting the confidence we need for putting down criminals in government.

Forget gun control, we need bullet control.

Right on. But the method for protecting, and who we are going to protect against, is the real question.

It seems that some of law enforcement, and some of the military, if you look at the record, are the ones that we need protecting from. Who is going to offer such protection? The government isn't, because it is the one that is direction law enforcement and the military to harm us. Until we find the one who will protect us, we need to protect ourselves. And the only way to do this effectively is to fight fire with fire, fight guns with guns.

killing is not a choice.. But protecting is a must.. For our own safety, its good for us.. But, for other thing, especially bad thing, its must be slow down..

No guns.   lol we would just find other way to kill people and people would complain about it.

And no military should be the only one to have gun.  Our constitution allows us to have gun for protection.   Not from each other but to defend ourselves against our own government.

Gun control is being able to hit what you shoot at.    lol

In an utopia, there should exist the widest range, variety and distribution of guns. Why? Because nobody would ever harm anyone else with the guns, and guns are great sport. Besides, target practice improves hand/eye coordination, so that people have better use of their faculties for every other purpose. In addition, scientific understanding of the processes that occur with gun usage can be found almost nowhere else; I mean, you wouldn't want to get rid of the game of pool/billiards, would you?

In a utopia no one would have guns, because no one would want to kill and the military shouldn't exist.

Well, I'm an Utopian.

I believe that the best control for gun control is no gun at all. Only militaries should be allowed to use firearms... and if we didn't had the need to make war it would be even better.

A world without guns is a better world.

Gun control is fun control. You control your guns when you are out shooting, and you can have lots of fun.

 

This is totally true.  And most gun owners I know wont give emm up even if they were suppose to.

I loved how all the idiots in NY City stood in lines to turn in there guns.  Like I said Idiots.

IMHO Gun bans only take guns out of the hands of those law-abiding citizens who decide to comply with them.

One gun in each hand.       It is difficult to control more than one gun in each hand.

LOL.....

very true.

Gun control is kind of messed.  People push for better gun control laws.  Instead they make it harder for the average law abiding citizen to buy or own one.  While all a criminal has to do is head to a local seller (not a gun shop) and purchase whatever they like.  Its more common then you think.
There are also the ones who decide to make their own firearm.  Pretty easy as well.  Iv done it. and It doesn't take much.  Just the balls to fire it.

In Pennsylvania and I am sure its like this in other parts of the country.  A firearm isnt considered a firearm without a receiver.  Anyone can purchase gun parts without even an ID in most cases.  You can order a 80% complete receiver for say an AR-15.  You can finish it at home on a mill, or even with a hand drill in most cases.  funny thing is it legal.  The only thing is you can never sell it.  As there is no serials or anything associated with the firearm.  But fully legal to own and fire.  Just illegal to sell.  I have done this twice.  All parts are shipped directly to the house.  No signature required. Build away and your have yourself a fully functional AR-15.

Interesting huh.  But to take away from the ones who need or want one for protection.  Shouldn't be.  Find a way to get them off the street and they would be heading in the right direction.  Which they wont be able to do anyways.  Like the war on drugs.  They are losing and will always continue to.  Risk vs reward sometimes is high.  People will never stop.

Your argument is that guns CAUSE mental illness? Removing guns is in no way going to improve anyone's mental health. Perhaps you should start trying to form a complete sentence before you attempt to form a complete thought and tell others how righteous you think it is.

the control of weapons would be important to improve the health of society, society is quite sick. Examples are as Columbine, uneducated teens or control, kill without mercy. American gun culture has failed as their neoliberal politics based on fear. In my view, a resounding no to arms.

The disregard for law enforcement and laws in general by liberals has caused irresponsible behavior. Abortion has fostered a disregard for human life. Get rid of liberals not guns.

1) It has come to my attention that we, in the United States are corporations. If you notice your corporation name is your name in all caps and that is what is on your license and legal papers, etc. Watch this video for more info: The Differences Between Common Law & Maritime Law & What They Are

2) As you can see people are calling for guns to not be allowed for those who are mentally unstable, or "insane".

3) Could they then claim all US citizens are "insane"? Just curious, how hard it would be to call a corporation insane versus a person.

1 U.S.C.  §1. Words denoting number, gender, and so forth

"the words “insane” and “insane person” shall include every idiot, insane person, and person non compos mentis;

the words “person” and “whoever” include corporations, companies, associations, firms, partnerships, societies, and joint stock companies, as well as individuals;"

There are about 470 million gallons of water per person found in the oceans. The question isn't about water. The question is about desalinization and transportation of it. Gore is an enemy of the people.

We are already using our 3d printers to print showerheads that subvert the Al Gore Law that limits water flow per showerhead to Save the Planet.