Jump to content

The Complex Issue of Gun Laws in the US

Aussieinuk

By Aussieinuk,
in Off Topic Lounge

Recommended Posts

CDTA

CDTA

Posted
Posted
THIS.

 

But, this is a major blue state, so what do you expect? These libtards don't get it, gun control doesn't work, and sadly I don't think they'll ever get it. Crime raises when gun control gets stricter (this is a true statistic everywhere), but that means nothing at all to them, it's all about banning the innocent citizens' guns he/she has to defend themselves.

<blockquote class='ipsBlockquote'data-author="jgood6195" data-cid="633235" data-time="1358356824"><p>

My god, what rock have you been hiding under all these years. The FBI themselves admitted that in areas wih guns, crime has dropped a whopping <strong class='bbc'>49%</strong>!</p></blockquote>

Like I said, those statistics mean nothing to libtards. It's all about disarming innocent Americans.

 

mhm, mhm, because all liberals are retards, right

 

And the ironic part of the whole Sandy Hook thing was the guns were brought legally, but in a sense stolen. Pretty callous to use that tragedy as a reason for all the gun bans. I can understand the automatics, but taking away the semi-autos? Do people get to have 4 hand guns in place of that semi? 
If such politicians feel that we don't need such guns, then I'd like to see their body guards under the very same restrictions. Only one bodyguard and one gun. But no, they won't be so willing to do that... more do as I say, not as I do shit.

 

You do not need four handguns as a replacement to one semi-automatic weapon, if you are using it for self-defense. You would only need that many to replace it if you intended on mass-murdering people.

 

Sandy Hook has about as much to do with guns as drunk driving has with cars.  They're involved; they're not the cause.

 

Incidentally enough, machineguns are legal to own in CT.

 

So? Are you saying that this can't happen in NY? You said yourself, it can happen anywhere, and then you turn around and say it couldn't have happened here.

 

God, what is it with you and the damn conspiracy nuts? So good for you if you follow stuff like that, most of us don't and don't want to hear anymore of it.

 

Joe: With the domino by czar Cuomo, I won't be surprised that will eventually become illegal very soon.

 

Freedom of speech. I for one find it interesting, and is this not a public forum?

 

daddy bush did an executive order on guns in 1989 and i bet everyone applauded that  now obama might do something similar and republicans (specifically tea party) are screaming tyranny are you all just a bunch of hyprocrites?! read and educate your selves for once, it might be good for you and turn off alex jones for once.

http://www.cafemom.com/group/115890/forums/read/17912041/Presidents_Bush_and_Clinton_Also_Used_Executive_Orders_to_Reform_Gun_Laws

 

Nono, it's ok when it's not Obama.

 

Guns are hardly the only tools available to do harm to others.  Chemicals, edged weapons, explosives, not to mention physical trauma via other means.  Liberals love guns though...as long as nobody else has them.

 

Try killing 50 people in a minute with a knife.

 

To the guy that said Nazis loosened Germani's gun laws, you are incorrect. People were forced to give up their guns. They were banned. Made worse that they had to register them prior to that. Making it easier to confiscate. A classic example of, "Disarm so they can't protect themselves".

 

Britain banned guns. Now they want to ban sharp knives. I heard from someone that lives there that they may also ban blunt objects. Funny how THAT is what makes him think they are going to far. I told him, "They wen't too far when they banned the guns. There gonna have to ban rocks and bricks too. Maybe even fists, that's blunt too right?".

 

 

"Anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit atrocities." -- Voltaire

 

Yet again, yes anything can hurt people, but that's like saying we should allow tanks. As I said before, it's a hell of a lot easier to kill 50 people in a minute with a semi-automatic weapon than it is with a knife.

 

And that is exactly what is going to happen here unless our local governments act. This mayor, governor, and president* are all insane! These actions are a form of treason.

 

No, it's not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 219
  • Created
  • Last Reply
jgood6195

jgood6195

Posted
Posted
mhm, mhm, because all liberals are retards, right

 

 

You do not need four handguns as a replacement to one semi-automatic weapon, if you are using it for self-defense. You would only need that many to replace it if you intended on mass-murdering people.

 

 

So? Are you saying that this can't happen in NY? You said yourself, it can happen anywhere, and then you turn around and say it couldn't have happened here.

 

 

Freedom of speech. I for one find it interesting, and is this not a public forum?

 

 

Nono, it's ok when it's not Obama.

 

 

Try killing 50 people in a minute with a knife.

 

 

Yet again, yes anything can hurt people, but that's like saying we should allow tanks. As I said before, it's a hell of a lot easier to kill 50 people in a minute with a semi-automatic weapon than it is with a knife.

 

 

No, it's not.

Yes, of course it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CDTA

CDTA

Posted
Posted
Yes, of course it is.

Actually, I do not think this is a point that should not* be argued, because this is something that cannot be debated with you.(No offense, it's just with the conspiracy jazz)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Minato ku

Minato ku

Posted
Posted

The problem of the USA is its murder rate, it is the highest in the western world.

When most Western European countries have a murder rate under 1 per 100,000 inhabitants, in USA it is above 4.5.

It is worse when you see that some cities like Chicago had a murder rate of over 18.5 per 100,000 inhabitants in 2012.

 

 

There is clearly sometimes wrong.
While the maybe too easy access to gun is a part of the problem, in my opinion it is only one part of the issue.
 
 
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Urbanfortitude

Urbanfortitude

Posted
Posted
The point is to protect one's self from a dangerous government, like say, the NY government.

 

Well so far nobody from the government has tried to A: take me hostage.  B: break into my home.  C: snatch my bag from me on the subway. D: fire shots at me.  Somehow I'm not so sure the government is who I should be worried about

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Shortline Bus

Shortline Bus

Posted
Posted
Well so far nobody from the government has tried to A: take me hostage.  B: break into my home.  C: snatch my bag from me on the subway. D: fire shots at me.  Somehow I'm not so sure the government is who I should be worried about

Yup. Some in NRA still think this is 1776. The Redcoats aka British still in charge. And most of then new United States still wilderness.

Well it's 235 years later. Again this is not about taking away guns. I do agree with the NRA for schools especially high schools (where most of the problems occur)to have either a cop or trained security guard (armed if needed). I also agree with Obama for ban on almost all military style weapons.

 

FYI. President G HW Bush after the Stockon, Ca. school massacre in late 1989 was the first modern President (and a Republican) that used an executive order to reform & restrict military weapons. So again where the common sense here? A combo of some form of gun control, including background checks should be tried. We all know gun control laws alone wont prevent the next shooting but at least make it less likely  for someone to get a gun especially the mentally ill imo.

 

Plus the issue of mental health is so underreported by most of the media as a way to combat these shootings. In many of these mass shootings i.e Columbine, Santee, Va Tech, and recently at Sandy Hook, the gunmen all had severe mental health issues. Oh that right it's not sexy enough to report!.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jgood6195

jgood6195

Posted
Posted
Yup. Some in NRA still think this is 1776. The Redcoats aka British still in charge. And most of then new United States still wilderness.

Well it's 235 years later. Again this is not about taking away guns. I do agree with the NRA for schools especially high schools (where most of the problems occur)to have either a cop or trained security guard (armed if needed). I also agree with Obama for ban on almost all military style weapons.

 

FYI. President G HW Bush after the Stockon, Ca. school massacre in late 1989 was the first modern President (and a Republican) that used an executive order to reform & restrict military weapons. So again where the common sense here? A combo of some form of gun control, including background checks should be tried. We all know gun control laws alone wont prevent the next shooting but at least make it less likely  for someone to get a gun especially the mentally ill imo.

 

Plus the issue of mental health is so underreported by most of the media as a way to combat these shootings. In many of these mass shootings i.e Columbine, Santee, Va Tech, and recently at Sandy Hook, the gunmen all had severe mental health issues. Oh that right it's not sexy enough to report!.

So you do agree with me?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LTA1992

LTA1992

Posted
Posted

I said it once and I'll say it again. When the US loses it's guns, that will be it's end. 

 

DHS now considers those that won't give up their guns terrorists. They ran a drill just yesterday in Portsmouth, Ohio regarding that. 

 

The drill revolved around the scenario of the two pro-second amendment advocates killing a teacher before setting up a chemical lab to develop weapons of mass destruction. Portsmouth Fire Chief Bill Raison said the exercise was necessary due to the threat of domestic terrorism.

 

No one thinks it wrong that the government that is supposed to serve us call those that want too keep the right to protect ourselves terrorists? No one thinks that at all? Is it wrong that if you want arrange a political protest, your name will be run through a Fusion Center and will most likely be put on a list? Isn't it wrong that they are allowed to fly predator and surveillance drones in our skies? For what? The possibility that there are Al-Qaeda agents in America?

 

 

"Americans think their danger is terrorists. They don't understand the terrorists cannot take away habeas corpus, the Bill of Rights, the Constitution.... The terrorists are not anything like the threat we face from our own government in the name of fighting terrorism.... The American constitutional system is near to being overthrown" -- Paul Craig Roberts

 

 

"The truth is, there is no Islamic army or terrorist group called Al Qaida. And any informed intelligence officer knows this. But there is a propaganda campaign to make the public believe in the presence of an identified entity representing the 'devil' only in order to drive the TV watcher to accept a unified international leadership for a war against terrorism. The country behind this propaganda is the US . . ." -- Former British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jgood6195

jgood6195

Posted
Posted

I said it once and I'll say it again. When the US loses it's guns, that will be it's end. 

 

DHS now considers those that won't give up their guns terrorists. They ran a drill just yesterday in Portsmouth, Ohio regarding that. 

 

The drill revolved around the scenario of the two pro-second amendment advocates killing a teacher before setting up a chemical lab to develop weapons of mass destruction. Portsmouth Fire Chief Bill Raison said the exercise was necessary due to the threat of domestic terrorism.

 

No one thinks it wrong that the government that is supposed to serve us call those that want too keep the right to protect ourselves terrorists? No one thinks that at all? Is it wrong that if you want arrange a political protest, your name will be run through a Fusion Center and will most likely be put on a list? Isn't it wrong that they are allowed to fly predator and surveillance drones in our skies? For what? The possibility that there are Al-Qaeda agents in America?

 

 

"Americans think their danger is terrorists. They don't understand the terrorists cannot take away habeas corpus, the Bill of Rights, the Constitution.... The terrorists are not anything like the threat we face from our own government in the name of fighting terrorism.... The American constitutional system is near to being overthrown" -- Paul Craig Roberts

 

 

"The truth is, there is no Islamic army or terrorist group called Al Qaida. And any informed intelligence officer knows this. But there is a propaganda campaign to make the public believe in the presence of an identified entity representing the 'devil' only in order to drive the TV watcher to accept a unified international leadership for a war against terrorism. The country behind this propaganda is the US . . ." -- Former British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook

Notice how they rarely mention AL-CIA-DUH anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jgood6195

jgood6195

Posted
Posted
Glad to see you give this forum the respect it deserves!

No seriously, this computer plays games with me sometimes and I just can't bother with it.

 

We can't go paranoid with this like the Port Authority not allowing photography people can have guns just don't let them get in the wrong hands.

You speak the truth N4.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
User

User

Posted
Posted
No seriously, this computer plays games with me sometimes and I just can't bother with it.

Oh, lol, living in old technology eh?

 

We can't go paranoid with this like the Port Authority not allowing photography people can have guns just don't let them get in the wrong hands.

They're not going to change their policy, pain in the asses they are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.

  I accept