Constitutional Rights

[StarsMine]

I am 13

---------- Post added at 07:10 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:07 PM ----------

If we have to fight or own government we WILL lose the battle, don't kid yourself.

We have done it before and won. Many countries of have done such. Is it pretty? No, never is, but if such a thing comes to that and people feel passionately enough to fight for something they believe in that is being threatened. Anything can happen.

[SCRIBBLE]

Slippery slope trying to restrict some weapons and not others when regardless of restriction or not they will exist. All these bans and restrictions will do is create more criminals. Stars, those DIYers and mechanical engineers are just going to mod the magazines regardless of any law in place just in the same sense that underage kids still buy alcohol illegally from legal establishments.

So as Rape said, you are going to have to pry them from my cold, dead fingers.

Why not put some form of breathalyzer in all vehicles so we can get rid of the drunk drivers that kill so many innocents every single year?

Focus on something else, not what the fucking media tells you to be worried about.

[thecat]

Yes less developed countries did it.
But the USA is far from undeveloped.

---------- Post added at 07:26 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:24 PM ----------

I know that, did I ever say otherwise?

---------- Post added at 07:29 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:26 PM ----------

The assault weapons ban worked under Bill Clinton.

[Assassin]

I hate to be the bearer of bad news but thecat is right. If you honestly think that the government turns on us and we would be able to fight them off with shotguns and rifles you are sadly mistaken. We will kill some if not most of the armed forces coming after us over all..but over all we would also simply lose. Which is why the army and other fighting forces have little to no jurisdiction (sp?) here in the States.

[SCRIBBLE]

I hate to be the bearer of bad news but thecat is right. If you honestly think that the government turns on us and we would be able to fight them off with shotguns and rifles you are sadly mistaken. We will kill some if not most of the armed forces coming after us over all..but over all we would also simply lose. Which is why the army and other fighting forces have little to no jurisdiction (sp?) here in the States.

Assuming no other nation in the world would come to our aid and that the military would mindlessly kill the citizens they defend -- which includes their daughters, mothers, brothers, etc.

Edit: I bought assault weapons during the Clinton administration.

[Chikun]

Commie bastards in this thread haven't seen the movie Tank.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0088224/

So get your Jew lawyers out of this thread before they get arrested.

[Spasm]

The assault weapons ban worked under Bill Clinton.

How did it work exactly?

Does it Prevent or Reduce Crime?

Criminals rarely use assault weapons in violent crimes. They are large and so not easily concealed. They are heavy and therefore not conducive to carrying around all day. And, they aren't as nimble as a handgun for close quarters "work" like that required at a liquor store or other "stop and rob" convenience store. The choice of weapon for the criminal is the hand gun. It is easy to conceal, easy to carry, and plenty powerful and intimidating, regardless of its caliber. "Assault weapons" have been used for crimes like bank robberies, drive-by shootings and school shootings, but these are rare. The hand gun is by far the preferred weapon for criminals.

Does it Prevent or Reduce Accidents?

Limiting the features by instituting an assault weapon ban does nothing to prevent or reduce accidents. Firearms accidents are not the result of pistol grips, flash suppressors or folding stocks. They are the result of careless handling and use of firearms. Expecting a reduction in accidents based on prohibiting certain features on a weapon would only be possible if those features promoted unsafe handling or use of the weapon. Such is not the case with an assault weapon ban.

[StarsMine]

Yes and what many attribute the drop in crime in the mid to late 90s was a societal change, Gang violence went down severely due to the death of BIG and Tupac.
Its multiple factors that effect crime not just laws. But laws do effect crime rates, not in the way of making things illegal and thus a crime but deterring people who would have done something. More people would drink and drive if it was not illegal due to fear of the law.

[Rage]

Guns in the hands of sane, sensible, good standing members of society is not a bad thing, whether they are deemed "war like" or not.

The problem here is not the guns mentally unstable people can get ahold of... but rather the mentally unstable people who can get ahold of the guns.

I firmly believe that when a better education system, better health care system, mentally unstable individuals can be diagnosed and treated, to prevent such things from happening. Why take a negative approach to the guns and hurt law abiding citizens constitutional rights, when you can take a proactive approach and watch for, help and treat people who pose such a threat to society This country would be far better off to take any money put forth to deal with these ludacris gun bans, and put that money towards unstanding the people behind such unbelievable acts, and working to prevent people from ever reaching such a state. You'll help millions!

Just because one fat kid pisses in the pool doesn't mean you ban all fat kids from the pool.


Oddly Rape hasn't said he wants to kill me today....

[Spasm]

I am 13

---------- Post added at 07:10 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:07 PM ----------

If we have to fight or own government we WILL lose the battle, don't kid yourself.

---------- Post added at 07:12 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:10 PM ----------

Those guns look nice, don't go shooting sprees O.K.

Hence 13 and obviously know very little history, 2nd amendment is not here for hunters. It's here to protect us from our own government.