Constitutional Rights

[Rage]

Well theres a lot of discussion in America about proposed gun bans and new restrictions, because of several atrocities.

As a Northerner of Maine, and as some would say, Canadian due to my geographical situation, I own several firearms.
I am also a avid member of the NRA, and several hunting and shooting clubs... local and international.


I'm interested in your take on this whole anti-firearm agenda, how it may affect you. For those of you unlucky Non-Americans (note: extreme amounts of sarcasm), if such proposed legislation gets passed, how do you think it will affect you, your country, if any affect at all.


Also, Pictures of your weapons are welcome :) I'll be posting mine shortly.

[ZERO]

I think the media gov and education system in the US have made it clear, the constitutional is an old piece of paper and nothing else.

Or in the words of Obama: "A charter of negative liberties"

Clearly we need a better one that entitles us to stuff just like what the ussr had. Also look at how the US is hand over fist trying to give up all liberties for security so why not just give up everything.

[Rage]

The US government among other things clearly does need an entire overhaul. That is plan as day. But my concerns are under no right does the government have to take away my firearms that I have LEGALLY purchased and LEGALLY have the right to possess.

Because of the idiotic media blowing shit way out of proportion, and idiotic laws some dumbass elected officials are proposing, weapons sales, especially semi-automatic weapons sales, have sky rocketed. You'll be hard pressed to find any sort of AR-15 or similar guns, and corresponding ammo. The push to reduce the amount of "war like" weapons in our society has had a reverse affect and probably close to doubled the amount!

[Assassin]

I think the media gov and education system in the US have made it clear, the constitutional is an old piece of paper and nothing else.

Or in the words of Obama: "A charter of negative liberties"

Clearly we need a better one that entitles us to stuff just like what the ussr had. Also look at how the US is hand over fist trying to give up all liberties for security so why not just give up everything.

I agree with this. I do believe extra security is paramount but I don't wanna see gun laws take a hit for it. It isn't the gun it's the owners intent that makes it what it is. Maybe better training for individuals and more conceal carries would fix most of this. I know here in Wisconsin since our conceal carry law is now in effect our crime has gone down a bit. Btw I am mostly liberal so this isn't a I'm Republican and vote conservative. Quite the opposite usually.

[Rapedollar$]

feel free to wade through the corpses of others who have tried to attempt to pry away my guns.

if you want em, pry them from my cold dead fingers.

Im still angry that they are using guns as a scapegoat to avert people from the actual issues. also i enjoy there ever broadening definition of "Assault Weapons".

Edit: Damnit fatman! help protect my guns.

[thecat]

You don't need a bushmaster for hunting.
You don't need a 100 round magazine for hunting.
No one is trying to ban ALL guns.
I like hunting but I would not need 100 32 cal rounds to kill a dear.
You can't overthrow the US government with the weapons open to the public so don't pull the I need the guns to fight an abusive government crap.

[brett friggin favre]

No one is trying to ban ALL guns.

you're 12 and you have no idea what you're talking about.

[thecat]

No you have no idea what you are talking about.
I have not seen anyone in power except mayor bloomberg say "I want to ban all guns".
If you are so smart than send me a link that supports your position.
Now stop watching fox news.

[anex]

You don't need a bushmaster for hunting.
You don't need a 100 round magazine for hunting.
No one is trying to ban ALL guns.
I like hunting but I would not need 100 32 cal rounds to kill a dear.

^---- This. That is exactly what is being discussed. The only guns that anyone would be coming after is assault rifles. Why? Because assault rifles allow people who go on mass murder sprees to rack up their kills easier but people have been pushing that for a while. If you think you need an AR-15 to "hunt" or "protect yourself", then you shouldn't be owning guns in the first place.

[Assassin]

Edit: Damnit fatman! help protect my guns.

I am...I was just saying that as a liberal my vote should be considered.

No you have no idea what you are talking about.
I have not seen anyone in power except mayor bloomberg say "I want to ban all guns".

I believe the argument is the slippery slope one.

[thecat]

anex for the win!
:wtg:

[-=Toy=-=Québec=-FR]

You don't need a bushmaster for hunting.
You don't need a 100 round magazine for hunting.
No one is trying to ban ALL guns.
I like hunting but I would not need 100 32 cal rounds to kill a dear.
You can't overthrow the US government with the weapons open to the public so don't pull the I need the guns to fight an abusive government crap.

Related ?

6697

[Assassin]

Related ?

6697

Lol dude he's obviously over 13..

[-=Toy=-=Québec=-FR]

Lol dude he's obviously over 13..

oh sorry *fail*

[ZERO]

Given the point of the right to be armed is to defend against a tyrannical government I think the real issue is that we do not have enough tank and artillery ownership.

[StarsMine]

... What in the hell of fuck.
Hell just froze over, Cat said something intelligent.

When the time comes to over throw the government just mod your guns and gun cartages to 100 round clips. We are a nation of DIYers and many mechanical engineers so that would be a non-problem. Until then for home use you should not need more then 6 bullets, when hunting you don't need anything more then bolt action.

Personally an assult rifile that is in semi automatic and has a normal/gimped clip is fine. I dont see much of a reason to ban those, a sawed off shotgun or an SMG is much better for close quarter massacre, and thats how its usually done when they happen.

[Rapedollar$]

Given the point of the right to be armed is to defend against a tyrannical government I think the real issue is that we do not have enough tank and artillery ownership.

true but in the event that we had to defend ourselves against a tyrannical government a portion of the current standing military would surely side with the constitutionalists.

i am however surprised how few people actually know the 2nd amendment isn't about keeping a hunting rifle.

[brett friggin favre]

there are plenty of people trying to get rid of guns altogether. people in power, maybe not...but people nonetheless. they have groups. and vans. and lots and lots of pot.

[acolyte_to_jippity]

Lol dude he's obviously over 13..

technically correct, he's in the 8th grade, so 14.


true but in the event that we had to defend ourselves against a tyrannical government a portion of the current standing military would surely side with the constitutionalists.

i am however surprised how few people actually know the 2nd amendment isn't about keeping a hunting rifle.

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.

what alot of people don't seem to understand is that there are two seperate clauses in that amendment. The fact that a militia is necessary to the security of a FREE state (protecting against the government), and then the part about owning and bearing guns shall not be infringed. too many people claim that only militia or army/police should have guns because the amendment only talks about militia people, but they're idiots.

[Meltdown]

People still think they live in the time that there where cowboys and there where baddies around every corner that want to shoot u death and steal your money. people don't need to have semi auto guns in there home. America needs to look in the mirror for once and accept that they need to change, must be a word everyone is so afraid of. the american dream is over or rather it never existed. why cannot they accept it that the more guns is just asking for more death people. I'm just shocked that there actually children death now because those peeps are ignorant.

[StarsMine]

People still think they live in the time that there where cowboys and there where baddies around every corner that want to shoot u death and steal your money. people don't need to have semi auto guns in there home. America needs to look in the mirror for once and accept that they need to change, must be a word everyone is so afraid of. the american dream is over or rather it never existed. why cannot they accept it that the more guns is just asking for more death people. I'm just shocked that there actually children death now because those peeps are ignorant.

Ill give you we have the most Gun violence out of any first world country, I will not give you we have the most violent crime of the first world. That would be scotland.


A UNITED Nations report has labelled Scotland the most violent country in the developed world, with people three times more likely to be assaulted than in America.

England and Wales recorded the second highest number of violent assaults while Northern Ireland recorded the fewest.

The study, based on telephone interviews with victims of crime in 21 countries, found that more than 2,000 Scots were attacked every week, almost ten times the official police figures. They include non-sexual crimes of violence and serious assaults.

Violent crime has doubled in Scotland over the past 20 years and levels, per head of population, are now comparable with cities such as Rio de Janeiro, Johannesburg and Tbilisi.

The attacks have been fuelled by a “booze and blades” culture in the west of Scotland which has claimed more than 160 lives over the past five years. Since January there have been 13 murders, 145 attempted murders and 1,100 serious assaults involving knives in the west of Scotland. The problem is made worse by sectarian violence, with hospitals reporting higher admissions following Old Firm matches.

David Ritchie, an accident and emergency consultant at Glasgow’s Victoria Infirmary, said that the figures were a national disgrace. “I am embarrassed as a Scot that we are seeing this level of violence. Politicians must do something about this problem. This is a serious public health issue. Violence is a cancer in this part of the world,” he said.

Detective Chief Superintendent John Carnochan, head of the Strathclyde Police’s violence reduction unit, said the problem was chronic and restricting access to drink and limiting the sale of knives would at least reduce the problem.

The study, by the UN’s crime research institute, found that 3 per cent of Scots had been victims of assault compared with 1.2 per cent in America and just 0.1 per cent in Japan, 0.2 per cent in Italy and 0.8 per cent in Austria. In England and Wales the figure was 2.8 per cent.

Scotland was eighth for total crime, 13th for property crime, 12th for robbery and 14th for sexual assault. New Zealand had the most property crimes and sexual assaults, while Poland had the most robberies.

Chief Constable Peter Wilson, president of the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland, questioned the figures. “It must be near impossible to compare assault figures from one country to the next based on phone calls,” he said.

“We have been doing extensive research into violent crime in Scotland for some years now and this has shown that in the vast majority of cases, victims of violent crime are known to each other. We do accept, however, that, despite your chances of being a victim of assault being low in Scotland, a problem does exist.”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article568214.ece

I do think we can lower our gun violence but dont kid yourself into thinking we are all that violent compared to others.

[Rage]

A few of my guns. Sold my ar to my father and my handgun to my friend. Gonna buy more thought.

Top to bottom:
MP 15 22lr semi auto. 25rd clip. 2.5 x fixed zoom scope. Laser sight. Home defense light and front grip. Gonna buy a holographic sight this spring.
Bolt action iron sight 22lr
4 10 shot gun
20 ga. Shot gun
270 savage bolt action.

[thecat]

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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[thecat]

Yes less developed countries did it.
But the USA is far from undeveloped.
Do I have to say things 100 times.

[StarsMine]

Yes less developed countries did it.
But the USA is far from undeveloped.
Do I have to say things 100 times.
I would hardly call Britain undeveloped

[thecat]

There were no jets,tanks,other stuff back than.

[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....

[thecat]

Great points, now tell me how 30 round magazines can do besides kill people.
There is no point in risking it.

[Chikun]

Great points, now tell me how 30 round magazines can do besides kill people.
There is no point in risking it.


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.

6699

srsly

[Rage]

Great points, now tell me how 30 round magazines can do besides kill people.
There is no point in risking it.

Sport Shooting... Home defense....


A 30rd magazine has nothing to do with it... Thats like saying ok... well than an 8 inch knife has no other point than to kill people when you stab them. you can only use 3 inch knives from now on.... or why does your car hold more than 9 gallons of gas, that just means you can drive farther to run your cheating gold digger wife over.


A weapon is a tool, it has no say in how it is used, or who/what it harms. Don't blame the tool, it only did what it was performed to do... shoot. The one to blame is the fool who points it at children or unworthy individuals

[Carmichal]

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....

PLUS +++++++++++++1000000000000000000000000000000000000 000000

lol spam. Yes I agree with you 100%. Fix the real issue.

[ricochet]

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.

You forget that the government isn't some magical entity, it's an organization of Americans many of whom believe in the 2nd amendment.

Do you think that the military will turn on the American public?

[Meltdown]

Ill give you we have the most Gun violence out of any first world country, I will not give you we have the most violent crime of the first world. That would be scotland.


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article568214.ece

I do think we can lower our gun violence but dont kid yourself into thinking we are all that violent compared to others.

Yes and no

the usa might not be the most violent but usa is the example of the world for allot of country. I also believe that they should change there law. Because sending people to years of prison so they can come out and kill more people isn't going to work. where we live we a system that give people they help they need. and voila here every things goes allot better. just putting people away because it will ease your pain does not mean it is the best solution, if those people come out of jail with more hatred then they have been put into because they never got any help i do say they should change the system.

There allot of weird people out there who can easily get a gun and kill people, is that how we want to live, seeing every week another news bulletin of people being shot by weirdo.

[-=Toy=-=Québec=-FR]

Oh god America.

I clearly have too many American friends on Facebook. lol

6701

[StarsMine]

Oh god America.

I clearly have too many American friends on Facebook. lol

6701
Airsoft fight :D
I want to get some airsoft guns.

[maynard]

Airsoft fight :D
I want to get some airsoft guns.

paintball > airsoft

[Rapedollar$]

Rage. we are ok now. well stated. at least so far.

[Assassin]

You forget that the government isn't some magical entity, it's an organization of Americans many of whom believe in the 2nd amendment.

Do you think that the military will turn on the American public?

While true this has already been proven in many countries before. The army can and will turn on it's people if the government asks it to. It's what they are paid to do and drilled into thinking. You follow orders for the better cause. Now, while this works in the field while we are abroad, it would work the same here. Just saying. Some free thinking people would be like ...wait a min...but the grunts by and large would just follow the orders. Better you than me scenario.

[Rage]

Rage. we are ok now. well stated. at least so far.


I dont even understand why were weren't but hey ill take it. And if they start trying to take our guns, you are all welcome to northern maine. Remote, Plenty of food and water. Over a million acres of forest land. We can build a community there. I get to choose who comes in tho, sorry Owns... tits or gtfo

[Rapedollar$]

I dont even understand why were weren't but hey ill take it. And if they start trying to take our guns, you are all welcome to northern maine. Remote, Plenty of food and water. Over a million acres of forest land. We can build a community there. I get to choose who comes in tho, sorry Owns... tits or gtfo

I approve of this message

[Penis シ]

This should be required watching.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yATeti5GmI8

The point of this video is to give you a direct definition of an Assault Rifle and a Semi-Automatic Rifle. It's also stated once or twice in this video that of ALL of the murders EVER committed with assault rifles, only two were done with legally owned assault rifles.

The next point I would like to make is that there are two options below semi-automatic rifles. One is a pump shotgun, the other is a bolt action rifle. I would not like to use a bolt action rifle to protect myself, and I SURE as hell would not like to see a pump shotgun used in the next gun tragedy. As far as the clips go, YES, I can see the point that it may be unnecessary for hunting, but that's not what extended clips were created for. It isn't war either. It's target practice convenience. On a "day" at the range, it's easy to go through 1000+ rounds. On a standard clip, of 12, that is 83 reloads. If you have 30 bullet clips, you give yourself 33 reloads. Cuts a LOT of time, so you can get to your hobby. This is bigger for semi-automatic rifles.

The next media lie that I would like to dissect is that these guns "fire as fast as you can pull the trigger" or that they can even fire "as many as 45 rounds per minute". This may be true for trained professionals, but many enthusiasts, and especially the people committing these travesties cannot live up to these standards. You'll be lucky to get a whole clip out of them in 60 seconds, if the gun is properly cleaned and maintained, and if they are strong enough to maintain accuracy. But I've seen bolt action shooters go through 30 bullets in a minute. The average police response time for something of this variety is 6 minutes. That's far more than 26 deaths for a trained individual. Again, they are not the ones committing these travesties.

What's the solution? It starts with culture. Not video games or movies. Problem solving, compassion, and empathy. Then it's about healthcare. It's about instilling consequence, and passion into every child. It's about teaching fellow man how to overcome obstacles instead of merely avoiding them. It's about learning that there is no one correct answer for any question and a good intention is the best.

You want to prevent the next tragedy? Go after the media. They'll spend weeks building a shrine of shit around this person glorifying and immortalizing them. You want to fix the problem. Don't give them the time of day. Don't let the next person see what the satisfaction is like. I guarantee most of you know more about the killer than any single victim. I guarantee that most of you know the names of more of these psychopaths than the names of their victims.

Guns aren't the enemy, people aren't the enemy. There is NO enemy but the media. Take down those two avenues and you'll have a rich riverbed of soil to cultivate the next generation for good.

[XX0wnsXY]

I dont even understand why were weren't but hey ill take it. And if they start trying to take our guns, you are all welcome to northern maine. Remote, Plenty of food and water. Over a million acres of forest land. We can build a community there. I get to choose who comes in tho, sorry Owns... tits or gtfo

No rage, fuck you.

[acolyte_to_jippity]

This should be required watching.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yATeti5GmI8

The point of this video is to give you a direct definition of an Assault Rifle and a Semi-Automatic Rifle. It's also stated once or twice in this video that of ALL of the murders EVER committed with assault rifles, only two were done with legally owned assault rifles.

The next point I would like to make is that there are two options below semi-automatic rifles. One is a pump shotgun, the other is a bolt action rifle. I would not like to use a bolt action rifle to protect myself, and I SURE as hell would not like to see a pump shotgun used in the next gun tragedy. As far as the clips go, YES, I can see the point that it may be unnecessary for hunting, but that's not what extended clips were created for. It isn't war either. It's target practice convenience. On a "day" at the range, it's easy to go through 1000+ rounds. On a standard clip, of 12, that is 83 reloads. If you have 30 bullet clips, you give yourself 33 reloads. Cuts a LOT of time, so you can get to your hobby. This is bigger for semi-automatic rifles.

The next media lie that I would like to dissect is that these guns "fire as fast as you can pull the trigger" or that they can even fire "as many as 45 rounds per minute". This may be true for trained professionals, but many enthusiasts, and especially the people committing these travesties cannot live up to these standards. You'll be lucky to get a whole clip out of them in 60 seconds, if the gun is properly cleaned and maintained, and if they are strong enough to maintain accuracy. But I've seen bolt action shooters go through 30 bullets in a minute. The average police response time for something of this variety is 6 minutes. That's far more than 26 deaths for a trained individual. Again, they are not the ones committing these travesties.

What's the solution? It starts with culture. Not video games or movies. Problem solving, compassion, and empathy. Then it's about healthcare. It's about instilling consequence, and passion into every child. It's about teaching fellow man how to overcome obstacles instead of merely avoiding them. It's about learning that there is no one correct answer for any question and a good intention is the best.

You want to prevent the next tragedy? Go after the media. They'll spend weeks building a shrine of shit around this person glorifying and immortalizing them. You want to fix the problem. Don't give them the time of day. Don't let the next person see what the satisfaction is like. I guarantee most of you know more about the killer than any single victim. I guarantee that most of you know the names of more of these psychopaths than the names of their victims.

Guns aren't the enemy, people aren't the enemy. There is NO enemy but the media. Take down those two avenues and you'll have a rich riverbed of soil to cultivate the next generation for good.

total biscuit approves.

[Rapedollar$]

Penis for VP.

Spasm/ Penis for president 2016!

[Spasm]

This should be required watching.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yATeti5GmI8

The point of this video is to give you a direct definition of an Assault Rifle and a Semi-Automatic Rifle. It's also stated once or twice in this video that of ALL of the murders EVER committed with assault rifles, only two were done with legally owned assault rifles.

The next point I would like to make is that there are two options below semi-automatic rifles. One is a pump shotgun, the other is a bolt action rifle. I would not like to use a bolt action rifle to protect myself, and I SURE as hell would not like to see a pump shotgun used in the next gun tragedy. As far as the clips go, YES, I can see the point that it may be unnecessary for hunting, but that's not what extended clips were created for. It isn't war either. It's target practice convenience. On a "day" at the range, it's easy to go through 1000+ rounds. On a standard clip, of 12, that is 83 reloads. If you have 30 bullet clips, you give yourself 33 reloads. Cuts a LOT of time, so you can get to your hobby. This is bigger for semi-automatic rifles.

The next media lie that I would like to dissect is that these guns "fire as fast as you can pull the trigger" or that they can even fire "as many as 45 rounds per minute". This may be true for trained professionals, but many enthusiasts, and especially the people committing these travesties cannot live up to these standards. You'll be lucky to get a whole clip out of them in 60 seconds, if the gun is properly cleaned and maintained, and if they are strong enough to maintain accuracy. But I've seen bolt action shooters go through 30 bullets in a minute. The average police response time for something of this variety is 6 minutes. That's far more than 26 deaths for a trained individual. Again, they are not the ones committing these travesties.

What's the solution? It starts with culture. Not video games or movies. Problem solving, compassion, and empathy. Then it's about healthcare. It's about instilling consequence, and passion into every child. It's about teaching fellow man how to overcome obstacles instead of merely avoiding them. It's about learning that there is no one correct answer for any question and a good intention is the best.

You want to prevent the next tragedy? Go after the media. They'll spend weeks building a shrine of shit around this person glorifying and immortalizing them. You want to fix the problem. Don't give them the time of day. Don't let the next person see what the satisfaction is like. I guarantee most of you know more about the killer than any single victim. I guarantee that most of you know the names of more of these psychopaths than the names of their victims.

Guns aren't the enemy, people aren't the enemy. There is NO enemy but the media. Take down those two avenues and you'll have a rich riverbed of soil to cultivate the next generation for good.

Great post and I would like to add that gun safety and overall morality towards human life and how you treat others should start at HOME. Too many parents these days are depending on the school system and society itself to teach these values to their child and look where it has gotten them. Furthermore I would like to point out the hate that the media creates, have you guys even seen the picture of Treyvon Martin that CNN shows everyone, they make the guy look like hes fucking 11 years old when he was for the most part a full grown adult. The media feeds off situations like the school shootings and does everything in its power to fuel racism, which is fucking ridiculous.

[Assassin]

Great post and I would like to add that gun safety and overall morality towards human life and how you treat others should start at HOME. Too many parents these days are depending on the school system and society itself to teach these values to their child and look where it has gotten them. Furthermore I would like to point out the hate that the media creates, have you guys even seen the picture of Treyvon Martin that CNN shows everyone, they make the guy look like hes fucking 11 years old when he was for the most part a full grown adult. The media feeds off situations like the school shootings and does everything in its power to fuel racism, which is fucking ridiculous.

Agreed 100% Why I only watch my Daily Show which at least is semi-less of those things.

[HotFuzz]

^---- This. That is exactly what is being discussed. The only guns that anyone would be coming after is assault rifles. Why? Because assault rifles allow people who go on mass murder sprees to rack up their kills easier but people have been pushing that for a while. If you think you need an AR-15 to "hunt" or "protect yourself", then you shouldn't be owning guns in the first place.

Think about this.... I just shot you with my .22 rifle.. guess what, thats an assault rifle too then huh? i just assaulted you with it. a weapon is a weapon and all firearms are deadly. the scope could be broadened to include just about anything.
marijuana, cocaine, meth, crack, pcp, ect ect are illegal too, hows that turning out?

and just because yes it seems like theres a lot of gun violence going on cause the media publicizes it so much doesnt mean shit. think about how many firearms are out there. its not like theres 10,000 firearms out there and 5,000 ppl are committing crimes with them.

[anex]

Oh lordy HotFuzz, you have made me seen the light. Guns for all! Keep that M249 just in case you need to defend yourself against that nigger Obama.

[brett friggin favre]

all things must now be made of rubber, because it's much more difficult to beat someone to death with a hollow rubber baseball bat than it is with a wooden one. all guns must be converted to fire nerf darts. speed limits on freeways are now 9.23 MPH.

favre 4 prez.

[StarsMine]

Agreed 100% Why I only watch my Daily Show which at least is semi-less of those things.
I watch every episode of the Daily show, but only watching that is one of the stupidest things to do. There is so many important things he skips because there is only 10 min of news on that shows, 10 min of comedy sketches and 5 min of interview unless you watch online.

[Tickle Me Emo]

Oh lordy HotFuzz, you have made me seen the light. Guns for all! Keep that M249 just in case you need to defend yourself against that nigger Obama.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

[thecat]

+1 for you.
This point can be applied both ways.

[Rage]

I just ordered 3 ar 15 lower receivers. FUCK YA

[anex]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

Ya, because I was super serious and trying really really hard to counter his argument. Ask me if I care.

[Assassin]

Ya, because I was super serious and trying really really hard to counter his argument. Ask me if I care.

I'm going to go with...absolutely.

[-=Toy=-=Québec=-FR]

People like Alex Jones absolutely terrify me.

They're what's wrong with U.S.A. Fucking loons.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=fEbBM4DG9V0#!

[Penis シ]

He had a great argument until he lost his cool. I give all the credit in the world to Piers' producer. What you saw in that interview was Jones come out with facts, numbers, and logic. At one point, Piers asks him what kind of gun was used in the separate shootings and Alex almost has it but then he goes into an ad hoc attack about people fleeing England, his charges at the Daily Mail, and then told him that if there was a boxing ring, he'd fight him.

What his producer did that was brilliant was drawing a line between him (the right) and the left by bringing in a Harvard professor that agreed with Piers right after and call what he had a "perverted version of history". Thus rectifying the gap between right and left. Crazy and educated. Extreme and logical. It's bullshit. It's theater. But.... brilliant.

[acolyte_to_jippity]

He had a great argument until he lost his cool. I give all the credit in the world to Piers' producer. What you saw in that interview was Jones come out with facts, numbers, and logic. At one point, Piers asks him what kind of gun was used in the separate shootings and Alex almost has it but then he goes into an ad hoc attack about people fleeing England, his charges at the Daily Mail, and then told him that if there was a boxing ring, he'd fight him.

What his producer did that was brilliant was drawing a line between him (the right) and the left by bringing in a Harvard professor that agreed with Piers right after and call what he had a "perverted version of history". Thus rectifying the gap between right and left. Crazy and educated. Extreme and logical. It's bullshit. It's theater. But.... brilliant.

do you need a tissue?

[Penis シ]

Nah, I use napkins.

I'm just saying that I'm fairly liberal and have a huge opposition to Piers on this topic. Instead of using his platform to attempt a balanced medium, he did a balancing act that Fox News could be envious of. That happened immediately after the incident when he was calling someone who supports gun rights an idiot and other names simply for having a differing opinion. What he did last night was obnoxious. I was really rooting for Alex Jones on that one, but when Piers started pushing buttons, I saw what he was doing. I'm just in admiration of how his producer put this ideological canyon between Alex Jones and Liberals. I think you can support abortion rights, marriage equality, AND gun rights. Piers seems to think anyone who supports the third is an idiot.

[Jeimuzu]

They can have my guns when they pry them from my cold dead arms. 20,000 died against 300. I'd like to see what the government would do against 80,000,000 Americans.

[Curdy]

Way i see it gun right is about protection from governments gone tyrannical, but over the years media and government seem to have turned a large number of you lot into passive citizens. Sure a semi rifle may seem like overkill, but are they banning the wrong guns after all handguns have killed more than these rifles, and mass shootings are very rare and only ever happen in gun free zones, im not saying everyone should be packing heat but people should be free to choose. Take for instance in the UK we have no guns only if you can pay a fortune and get through all the red tape you can, and we still had a mass shooting then, these shooting are much more rare than in America. But in UK we have a lot more violent crime than in America.

Guns are a deterrent much like nuclear bombs deter nation states from invading another nuclear armed nation.


Speaking as a none citizen.

[Jeimuzu]

Ban sex to stop rapists!

[Curdy]

Ban sex to stop rapists!

thats my quote hoe!

[thecat]

They can have my guns when they pry them from my cold dead arms. 20,000 died against 300. I'd like to see what the government would do against 80,000,000 Americans.
I love cats.

[Meltdown]

I love cats.

I would love to see you drop dead, and fast.

[anex]

thats my quote hoe!

I thought it was "Win her over... with chloroform".

[Curdy]

I thought it was "Win her over... with chloroform".

haha cant believe you remember that

http://cdn.iwastesomuchtime.com/August-25-2011-20-08-24-10171.jpeg

[acolyte_to_jippity]

I thought it was "Win her over... with chloroform".

is it bad that i read that in curdy's voice?

[Jeimuzu]

I love cats.

Lmao..

Meet Luna (Short for Lunatic), Mr. Fat-A-Puss, and Blitz.

Blitz loves bacon.
679067916792

[Assassin]

Lmao..

Meet Luna (Short for Lunatic), Mr. Fat-A-Puss, and Blitz.

Blitz loves bacon.
679067916792

Lol did this thread derail that much?

[Jeimuzu]

Lol did this thread derail that much?

If America was a democracy I'd still be talking about gun ownership. We're all slaves D=

[Assassin]

If America was a democracy I'd still be talking about gun ownership. We're all slaves D=

That is entirely....true.

[thecat]

We have no democracy because of money in politics, not because Obama wants to take or guns.
Have fun voting for frauds, my cat is running too.
Winter (my cat) for 2016 ha ha ha.
Catnip for all.

[StarsMine]

is there to much money in washington? yes.
That does not change the fact that we are a democracy. We do vote, we do have a voice.

[Rapedollar$]

we really should go back to a republic. this democracy crap is just going to end up turning into a dictatorship once they take away enough of our liberties.

[thecat]

D
is there to much money in washington? yes.
That does not change the fact that we are a democracy. We do vote, we do have a voice.
The CEO's are incharge, they call the shots not us.

[Jeimuzu]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fkl0gSOu3QM

Also,


is there to much money in washington? yes.
That does not change the fact that we are a democracy. We do vote, we do have a voice.

Those votes can be overridden, and normally are. The only voice that is heard is the one that disobeys.

[Nemesis]

...you guys know you've never been a democracy, right?

[Curdy]

Lol why does it take a Brit to remind you your meant to be a Republic

[Meltdown]

The more guns the more deaths because of it. We had pretty good discussion yesterday on nl tv and we basically all agree. America still lives with the tough they need to defend themselves against terror attacks and think everyone needs to own a weapon. Especially most mid south states. The time great Britannia ruling is over, 200 years over but still people are clinging on that law made back then. It is the mindset of the people of america that need to change, like someone else said very nicely, like what happens with marten luther king, accidents where needed to change the mindset of the american people, and these accident recently might do it again. although i highly doubt it. Here in europe we almost have no weapons compared to the usa. and here the conflict with it is like 200% lesser that is a fact.

So i think america should look into the mirror and deep into it, why can we do it here without and why can the Americans not do it. It is the state of the mind.

[Curdy]

The more guns the more deaths because of it. We had pretty good discussion yesterday on nl tv and we basically all agree. America still lives with the tough they need to defend themselves against terror attacks and think everyone needs to own a weapon. Especially most mid south states. The time great Britannia ruling is over, 200 years over but still people are clinging on that law made back then. It is the mindset of the people of america that need to change, like someone else said very nicely, like what happens with marten luther king, accidents where needed to change the mindset of the american people, and these accident recently might do it again. although i highly doubt it. Here in europe we almost have no weapons compared to the usa. and here the conflict with it is like 200% lesser that is a fact.

So i think america should look into the mirror and deep into it, why can we do it here without and why can the Americans not do it. It is the state of the mind.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jQbdpWQFAgg

^ The only decent journalist who uses facts rather than emotions to get a message across

[Meltdown]

And why do u think Honduras has more death by fire arms, because of the usa and there silly drugs law. Kind a bad excuse to compare usa to those countries LOL. But u know i don't care if they ban firearms or not in the usa, my family is not at risk. not my friendss who risk to get shot by idiot. I'm totally fine if those people want to keep the guys, but then also keep in mind you al have choose the risk of your children friends or family being murdered by idiot. because the more guns will never apply to safer america. never that is a foolish way to think.

Edit: also the reason why those parties who talk for the use fire arms are so big is because there biggest followers are those who never had decent education, how simpler the people the easier it is to brainwash them, and let's be honest most of those people are doing what there told and think it is the truth. no wonder the republicans are falling apart. there too many people now these days with education and there all vote ting for the democrats. which is very wise decision.

[Curdy]

And why do u think Honduras has more death by fire arms, because of the usa and there silly drugs law. Kind a bad excuse to compare usa to those countries LOL. But u know i don't care if they ban firearms or not in the usa, my family is not at risk. not my friendss who risk to get shot by idiot. I'm totally fine if those people want to keep the guys, but then also keep in mind you al have choose the risk of your children friends or family being murdered by idiot. because the more guns will never apply to safer america. never that is a foolish way to think.

Edit: also the reason why those parties who talk for the use fire arms are so big is because there biggest followers are those who never had decent education, how simpler the people the easier it is to brainwash them, and let's be honest most of those people are doing what there told and think it is the truth. no wonder the republicans are falling apart. there too many people now these days with education and there all vote ting for the democrats. which is very wise decision.

Just seems you ignore the statistics and figures and went for the emotion again.

[Meltdown]

Just seems you ignore the statistics and figures and went for the emotion again.

I don't believe those statistics that's different, Do u guys believe everything they say? The thing is they want you to believe that. The real statistics are way different but they will never tell you that.

[Curdy]

I don't believe those statistics that's different, Do u guys believe everything they say? The thing is they want you to believe that. The real statistics are way different but they will never tell you that.

Well whats wrong with them in the first place? and where are these real statistics you speak of?

[StarsMine]

We are a representative democracy.
Republic means the government is controlled by the people.

Meltdown I have already said that although we have the greatest gun violence per capita then any first world country, we are about 14th for overall violent crime, counting murders, rape, armed robberies. (first world only being counted)
Do I think there is something we can do to lower gun violence, Yes. Some better background checks to make it MORE difficult to get a gun. Wouldnt stop the criminals but it would limit accidental shootings, though not by much. The best thing we can do are societal changes, like what happens in the mid-late 90s with the gang violence dropping. DC metro area seems to be doing something right, used to have a murder a day, now 84 in a year. Huge drop.

[Nemesis]

We are a representative democracy.
Republic means the government is controlled by the people.

Meltdown I have already said that although we have the greatest gun violence per capita then any first world country, we are about 14th for overall violent crime, counting murders, rape, armed robberies. (first world only being counted)
Do I think there is something we can do to lower gun violence, Yes. Some better background checks to make it MORE difficult to get a gun. Wouldnt stop the criminals but it would limit accidental shootings, though not by much. The best thing we can do are societal changes, like what happens in the mid-late 90s with the gang violence dropping. DC metro area seems to be doing something right, used to have a murder a day, now 84 in a year. Huge drop.

There was a segment on the daily show last night that showed how handcuffed the ATF is because of gun nuts and the NRA. Someone who cares should post it.

[DJ_MikeyRevile]

The more guns the more deaths because of it. We had pretty good discussion yesterday on nl tv and we basically all agree. America still lives with the tough they need to defend themselves against terror attacks and think everyone needs to own a weapon. Especially most mid south states. The time great Britannia ruling is over, 200 years over but still people are clinging on that law made back then. It is the mindset of the people of america that need to change, like someone else said very nicely, like what happens with marten luther king, accidents where needed to change the mindset of the american people, and these accident recently might do it again. although i highly doubt it. Here in europe we almost have no weapons compared to the usa. and here the conflict with it is like 200% lesser that is a fact.

So i think america should look into the mirror and deep into it, why can we do it here without and why can the Americans not do it. It is the state of the mind.

It is a constitutional right for Americans to own firearms, not to protect themselves from terrorists.. but to allow the citizens to defend themselves from a tyrannical government. The reasoning behind these proposed bans is due to politicians blaming the item used to kill rather then holding the individual accountable. A criminal is a criminal, criminals break laws. Creating new laws will not prevent them from breaking them. If a deranged mentally ill person wants to kill people, he will do so. That will not change by outlawing firearms. You not only have your punch line facts wrong, you do not understand how a ban like this would effect this country. Police men and women to soldiers who swore an oath to protect our constitutional rights will not stand idly by while the government takes them away.

I leave you with this to think about...

If you hand wrote a nasty letter to your boss that resulted in you getting fired from your job, was it your fault or the pens?

[brett friggin favre]

It is a constitutional right for Americans to own firearms, not to protect themselves from terrorists.. but to allow the citizens to defend themselves from a tyrannical government. The reasoning behind these proposed bans is due to politicians blaming the item used to kill rather then holding the individual accountable. A criminal is a criminal, criminals break laws. Creating new laws will not prevent them from breaking them. If a deranged mentally ill person wants to kill people, he will do so. That will not change by outlawing firearms. You not only have your punch line facts wrong, you do not understand how a ban like this would effect this country. Police men and women to soldiers who swore an oath to protect our constitutional rights will not stand idly by while the government takes them away.

I leave you with this to think about...

If you hand wrote a nasty letter to your boss that resulted in you getting fired from your job, was it your fault or the pens?

http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/well_done_sir.gif

[acolyte_to_jippity]

It is a constitutional right for Americans to own firearms, not to protect themselves from terrorists.. but to allow the citizens to defend themselves from a tyrannical government. The reasoning behind these proposed bans is due to politicians blaming the item used to kill rather then holding the individual accountable. A criminal is a criminal, criminals break laws. Creating new laws will not prevent them from breaking them. If a deranged mentally ill person wants to kill people, he will do so. That will not change by outlawing firearms. You not only have your punch line facts wrong, you do not understand how a ban like this would effect this country. Police men and women to soldiers who swore an oath to protect our constitutional rights will not stand idly by while the government takes them away.

I leave you with this to think about...

If you hand wrote a nasty letter to your boss that resulted in you getting fired from your job, was it your fault or the pens?

http://i871.photobucket.com/albums/ab273/xx44/Other/citizen-kane-clapping-gif.gif

[Rage]

It is a constitutional right for Americans to own firearms, not to protect themselves from terrorists.. but to allow the citizens to defend themselves from a tyrannical government. The reasoning behind these proposed bans is due to politicians blaming the item used to kill rather then holding the individual accountable. A criminal is a criminal, criminals break laws. Creating new laws will not prevent them from breaking them. If a deranged mentally ill person wants to kill people, he will do so. That will not change by outlawing firearms. You not only have your punch line facts wrong, you do not understand how a ban like this would effect this country. Police men and women to soldiers who swore an oath to protect our constitutional rights will not stand idly by while the government takes them away.

I leave you with this to think about...

If you hand wrote a nasty letter to your boss that resulted in you getting fired from your job, was it your fault or the pens?

http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/20120607035837_auto.gif

[Jeimuzu]

The more guns the more deaths because of it. We had pretty good discussion yesterday on nl tv and we basically all agree. America still lives with the tough they need to defend themselves against terror attacks and think everyone needs to own a weapon. Especially most mid south states. The time great Britannia ruling is over, 200 years over but still people are clinging on that law made back then. It is the mindset of the people of america that need to change, like someone else said very nicely, like what happens with marten luther king, accidents where needed to change the mindset of the american people, and these accident recently might do it again. although i highly doubt it. Here in europe we almost have no weapons compared to the usa. and here the conflict with it is like 200% lesser that is a fact.

So i think america should look into the mirror and deep into it, why can we do it here without and why can the Americans not do it. It is the state of the mind.

Where you get your facts?.. Mass shootings have decreased, the media just blows the ones that do happen out of the window. Go watch Canadian news for a day, you'll see why they have less violence and crime. The only crimes coming with guns involved are the ones from criminals though, and the mass shootings are normally stopped by citizens who are armed. On average, only 2-4 people die when a citizen steps in, but it's more around the area of 20 people waiting for police to get there. Criminals don't exactly follow the laws. But there's one thing I'll agree with Obama about: The way wars are fought is changing. Biological and chemical weapons are more threatening than an invasion of people with guns.

But what they're doing is trying to punish lawful Americans by taking away freedom we've had and functioned with for years.

[StarsMine]

There was a segment on the daily show last night that showed how handcuffed the ATF is because of gun nuts and the NRA. Someone who cares should post it.
That was a well done segment.
http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes/wed-january-16-2013-jessica-chastain

[Jeimuzu]

That was amazing Star.

[StarsMine]

I like how one of the executive orders obama signed was to give the ATF an actual director.
And people fliped out that he was signing executive orders taking their freedom away...

[Meltdown]

It is a constitutional right for Americans to own firearms, not to protect themselves from terrorists.. but to allow the citizens to defend themselves from a tyrannical government. The reasoning behind these proposed bans is due to politicians blaming the item used to kill rather then holding the individual accountable. A criminal is a criminal, criminals break laws. Creating new laws will not prevent them from breaking them. If a deranged mentally ill person wants to kill people, he will do so. That will not change by outlawing firearms. You not only have your punch line facts wrong, you do not understand how a ban like this would effect this country. Police men and women to soldiers who swore an oath to protect our constitutional rights will not stand idly by while the government takes them away.

I leave you with this to think about...

If you hand wrote a nasty letter to your boss that resulted in you getting fired from your job, was it your fault or the pens?

This is where your wrong. but i guess you will never understand why.

U guys are being filled with information that ain't right, you just believe what u want to believe. I don't need to proof anything, hell i care if you guys shoot your own people. All i can tell we got it much and much better here in Europe.

[StarsMine]

.... again there are many places in europe more violent then the US. Violent crime... is not common in the US, just that the violent crime in the US commonly has guns.

[SCRIBBLE]

Violent crime... is not common in the US.

Are you sure you want to stand by that statement?

[Penis シ]

The 2011 arrest rate for violent crimes was 172.3 per 100,000 inhabitants; for property crime, the rate was 531.3 per 100,000 inhabitants.
By violent crime offense, the arrest rate for murder and non-negligent manslaughter was 3.5; forcible rape, 6.3; robbery, 34.5; and aggravated assault was 128.0 arrests per 100,000 inhabitants.

But it IS important that this does NOT include Assault 1, which is violent crimes not committed with a weapon that result in serious bodily injury. These crimes are much more numerous.

[StarsMine]

Are you sure you want to stand by that statement?
compaired to other first world countries, yes. we were something like 14th for violent crime. first in gun violent crime, but violent crime as a hole is comperitivly not that common here as they are elsewhere.

[DJ_MikeyRevile]

This is where your wrong. but i guess you will never understand why.

U guys are being filled with information that ain't right, you just believe what u want to believe. I don't need to proof anything, hell i care if you guys shoot your own people. All i can tell we got it much and much better here in Europe.

you are not even an american, nor do you line in america. So before you start spouting nonsense with your extremely hard to read shit poor english. Read our constitution. I understand that you feel all fire arms should be taken away but just because your to much of a sissy nanny to hold a fire arm, should not ruin it for the rest of my country. Stay involved with your own socialist affairs and leave the grown up world powers alone.

---------- Post added at 10:39 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:32 PM ----------


you are not even an american, nor do you line in america. So before you start spouting nonsense with your extremely hard to read shit poor english. Read our constitution. I understand that you feel all fire arms should be taken away but just because your to much of a sissy nanny to hold a fire arm, should not ruin it for the rest of my country. Stay involved with your own socialist affairs and leave the grown up world powers alone.

P.S. you do realize Europe as a whole has a higher gun crime rate then america, right?


---------- Post added at 10:40 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:39 PM ----------


you are not even an american, nor do you liv
e in america. So before you start spouting nonsense with your extremely hard to read shit poor english. Read our constitution. I understand that you feel all fire arms should be taken away but just because your to much of a sissy nanny to hold a fire arm, should not ruin it for the rest of my country. Stay involved with your own socialist affairs and leave the grown up world powers alone.

P.S. you do realize Europe as a whole has a higher gun crime rate then america, right?

p.p.s. I apologize for the triplet post, the internet out here in Afghanistan where i am fighting to protect those rights you wish my country had never had for 200+ years, is shit poor slow.

[StarsMine]

no... US is number one for gun violence per capita in the first world.

[Nemesis]

But it IS important that this does NOT include Assault 1, which is violent crimes not committed with a weapon that result in serious bodily injury. These crimes are much more numerous.

How do you guys classify your assaults? I know it's different from us. And what's the difference between assault and battery?

We have:
Assault
Assault Causing bodily harm
Assault with a weapon
Aggravated Assault

I think what qualifies as each is different here too. I know that a consensual fight doesn't count as assault but I think it's different for you guys.

[Penis シ]

Well Nem, my point was to say that by the numbers, it appears that we have less violent crime. But that's due to blatant statistic manipulation. I felt it was important to note that for that statistic; the one most often stacked against others in argument, the numbers don't mean what most would say they mean.

This allows for both Stars and Scribble to be right in their own ways. As far as gun violence goes, We have the most guns per capita and yet, we only have the 28th highest rate of gun related crime.

To address Mikey; Europe, as a whole continent certainly does have a higher gun crime rate than the U.S. But per 100,000, the U.S. stands higher. If we were to include our continent, I think we rank WAY higher in both ways.

My argument is not about statistics, though. It's about civil liberties. I believe that people should be able to buy all the rope they want. What they choose to do with it is of their own consequence.

[Nemesis]

Well Nem, my point was to say that by the numbers, it appears that we have less violent crime. But that's due to blatant statistic manipulation. I felt it was important to note that for that statistic; the one most often stacked against others in argument, the numbers don't mean what most would say they mean.

Oh my question had nothing to do with this thread, I'm just curious. Talking common sense gun control with Americans is like talking rocket surgery with retards; they're fucking retarded so don't waste your time.

[Penis シ]

Oh, in that case; Canadian statistics include the latter 3 of the categories you posted. They also include robbery, murder, rape, and just about anything else violent beyond a fist fight. The United States measures a statistic that is titled the same but while it has rape, murder, robbery, it doesn't include violent assault committed without a weapon. That's argued to be a tipping point in the statistic that makes America LOOK less violent without actually addressing any problems.

[Nemesis]

Oh, in that case; Canadian statistics include the latter 3 of the categories you posted. They also include robbery, murder, rape, and just about anything else violent beyond a fist fight. The United States measures a statistic that is titled the same but while it has rape, murder, robbery, it doesn't include violent assault committed without a weapon. That's argued to be a tipping point in the statistic that makes America LOOK less violent without actually addressing any problems.

Nvm. But on a different note how the hell do you not include common assault in violence statistics? Stupid Americans.

[StarsMine]

probably cause its a misdemeanor. Getting in a fist fight with someone isnt much of a crime in my eyes. Though what does getting the shit beat out of you in an alley count as, cause thats a bit more of a crime.

[Nemesis]

probably cause its a misdemeanor. Getting in a fist fight with someone isnt much of a crime in my eyes. Though what does getting the shit beat out of you in an alley count as, cause thats a bit more of a crime.

Getting in a fist fight isn't a crime at all, here in Canada anyways. A consensual fight nullifies the last element of assault so it's not a crime. If you beat the guy to death or extremely badly, however, it can be.

[StarsMine]

In not very well versed in the specifics of the law, but I am fairly sure that is a felony and counts in violent crime

[Nemesis]

In not very well versed in the specifics of the law, but I am fairly sure that is a felony and counts in violent crime

Not always. In Canada it's summary and indictable offenses instead of misdemeanor and felony. Most of our offenses are Duel, which means they can be one or the other, given the circumstances. I'm not as fluent in American law as I am in this, which is why the questions.

[brett friggin favre]

let's just...not rage so hard that we shoot people. k? k.

[Nemesis]

let's just...not rage so hard that we shoot people. k? k.

Or just go back to the way things used to be, where men drank and beat their wives, and everyone was happy.

[anex]

p.p.s. I apologize for the triplet post, the internet out here in Afghanistan where i am fighting to protect those rights you wish my country had never had for 200+ years, is shit poor slow.

From a Ron Paul, I'm appaulled! Get sniper hill! You pay $90 (for 50 kb/s) instead of $100 (20 kb/s)

[Penis シ]

No no no, it's not that fighting is included for one and not another. It's that assault, without a weapon, resulting in serious bodily injury or in Canada, Assault 1, is included in the Canadian statistic. It is NOT included in the American statistic. So if I went out and kicked a guy in the nose until he was in a coma for 2 months, it wouldn't affect the American stat, but if Cyber did it, it would include in the Canadian statistic, plus he'd go to jail for being a Mexican that committed a hate crime.

[SCRIBBLE]

What you all are also forgetting is that in large urban and rural areas in America the police will not be called for many violent crimes. Crime that is not reported is not included in the statistics. The school of thought with these areas is that police will only exacerbate problems if not cause unnecessary problems for the reporting individual. Anyways, comparing which countries are more violent than one another is silly as everyone here can agree that crime is reported differently country to country.

Another issue, which is why I questioned Star's stance, is that violence as defined by the W.H.O. is not congruent with what is reported as violent crime. Sexual assault can be a misdemeanor and by Star's stance that is not violent however as defined by the W.H.O. it is in fact violence.

[DJ_MikeyRevile]

From a Ron Paul, I'm appaulled! Get sniper hill! You pay $90 (for 50 kb/s) instead of $100 (20 kb/s)

it is sniper hill... its still shitty with how many people ue this one router

[Nemesis]

No no no, it's not that fighting is included for one and not another. It's that assault, without a weapon, resulting in serious bodily injury or in Canada, Assault 1, is included in the Canadian statistic. It is NOT included in the American statistic. So if I went out and kicked a guy in the nose until he was in a coma for 2 months, it wouldn't affect the American stat, but if Cyber did it, it would include in the Canadian statistic, plus he'd go to jail for being a Mexican that committed a hate crime.

Putting someone in a coma would never be common assault, that's aggravated assault which doesn't need the element of consent to be issued.



Sexual assault can be a misdemeanor and by Star's stance that is not violent however as defined by the W.H.O. it is in fact violence.

I'm pretty sure you're wrong on that one, as sexual assault is always an indictable offense. Don't mistake a hybrid offense as a lower conviction, it's done that way so there are more opportunities to arrest someone for committing it.

[Penis シ]

Right, Nem. But that isn't included in the "violent crimes" statistic in the U.S.

[ZERO]

I don't believe those statistics that's different, Do u guys believe everything they say? The thing is they want you to believe that. The real statistics are way different but they will never tell you that.

No just what you say lol

6814

[ZERO]

6816


It is a constitutional right for Americans to own firearms, not to protect themselves from terrorists.. but to allow the citizens to defend themselves from a tyrannical government. The reasoning behind these proposed bans is due to politicians blaming the item used to kill rather then holding the individual accountable. A criminal is a criminal, criminals break laws. Creating new laws will not prevent them from breaking them. If a deranged mentally ill person wants to kill people, he will do so. That will not change by outlawing firearms. You not only have your punch line facts wrong, you do not understand how a ban like this would effect this country. Police men and women to soldiers who swore an oath to protect our constitutional rights will not stand idly by while the government takes them away.

I leave you with this to think about...

If you hand wrote a nasty letter to your boss that resulted in you getting fired from your job, was it your fault or the pens?

6815

Hopefully now:

6817

And not:

6818

0

[Spasm]

I'll add to Zeros posts of great pictures!

6819

[Penis シ]

Ehh, I agree with the guy on the left in the first one. In the second one; no hardcore pornography? That seems a bit pervasive. I understand no child or animal, but what I own of what two consenting adults shouldn't be called into question. He also has an issue with profanity? I understand limiting the rights of free speech as far as preventing dangerous situations, but again, a law to make people feel more comfortable is bullshit. I'll say what I want where I want and wont give a shit. As far as the flag burning thing goes; I get it. But at the same time, I wouldn't burn an American flag, I wouldn't associate with someone that has; but I wouldn't say "HEY LET'S SEND THIS GUY TO JAIL FOR EXPRESSING HIMSELF". It's just benign.

And I go back. That motherfucker said to ban "assault weapons". Fuck that made up term. "This gun looks scary, I bet we can ban it if we cause confusion about it". I take it back Spasm. That guy is simply a Contrarian and a dumb one at that.

[StarsMine]

Trying to figure out if Biden agrees that Assault weapons is a bad term or not... Cant tell....

I'm much less concerned, quite frankly, about what you call an assault weapon than I am about magazines and the number of rounds that can be held in a magazine

I have to say spasm that that is a poor comparison in my mind.

Source:http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2013/01/25/170195037/sponsors-of-assault-weapons-ban-hope-newtown-shooting-changes-minds

[brett friggin favre]

i agree, porno magazines with too many round, rotund women are true american tragedy.

wait what are we talking about again

[Spasm]

It's a joke pic that mocks liberals and its pretty funny, because its true!

And let's remember the 1st Amendment was written when all we had was quill pens and manual printing press. - Epic fucking line lmfao

[acolyte_to_jippity]

Ehh, I agree with the guy on the left in the first one. In the second one; no hardcore pornography? That seems a bit pervasive. I understand no child or animal, but what I own of what two consenting adults shouldn't be called into question. He also has an issue with profanity? I understand limiting the rights of free speech as far as preventing dangerous situations, but again, a law to make people feel more comfortable is bullshit. I'll say what I want where I want and wont give a shit. As far as the flag burning thing goes; I get it. But at the same time, I wouldn't burn an American flag, I wouldn't associate with someone that has; but I wouldn't say "HEY LET'S SEND THIS GUY TO JAIL FOR EXPRESSING HIMSELF". It's just benign.

And I go back. That motherfucker said to ban "assault weapons". Fuck that made up term. "This gun looks scary, I bet we can ban it if we cause confusion about it". I take it back Spasm. That guy is simply a Contrarian and a dumb one at that.

for a weapon to be considered an "assault weapon" doesn't it have to be chambered in a certain caliber (or range of calibers) and have automatic fire capability exceeding a certain RPM?

[DJ_MikeyRevile]

for a weapon to be considered an "assault weapon" doesn't it have to be chambered in a certain caliber (or range of calibers) and have automatic fire capability exceeding a certain RPM? no.

an assault weapon is any object used to assault another. therefor making an assault weapons ban, ban things like rocks, pens, bats, milk cartons, plush teddy bears and pillows.

[brett friggin favre]

from wikipedia:

Assault weapon refers to different types of firearms, and is a term that has differing meanings and usages.

it's ambiguous, so no law can be made about it as an ambiguous law is pointless.

[Penis シ]

What's better is how the word was created. It was created to SOUND like Assault Rifle during a time when assault rifles were already banned. This got people all flustered and now the media uses the two terms ALMOST interchangeably. Pisses me off when Piers Morgan talks about how fast these guns can shoot, etc. Any time I hear someone talk about "assault weapons" I automatically assume they're an idiot.

[ZERO]

Given that the gun is to protect me from the gov I do not think they shoot fast enough...

I want the old days where I could own a ship loaded up with some cannons...

Think for a moment that back when the founders wrote this yes all they had were muskets but individuals that had the money owned armed ships capable of destroying an entire city! If anything I feel like individually we have given up a lot of heavy firepower that we previously did have in the past. I do not think anyone today is allowed a weapon that can take out a city but back then such things could be found on privately owned ships.

Obviously today we do not want people running around with the ability to blow up a city and I do not think anyone is trying to allow for that but it is something to think about as to what sort of firepower the founders were allowing and were already present in their day.

[SCRIBBLE]

Given that the gun is to protect me from the gov I do not think they shoot fast enough...

I want the old days where I could own a ship loaded up with some cannons...


Maritime law still allows for some crazy shit in the States. That is why the "Freemen" and stateside Moors will claim they do not recognize the jurisdiction of most courts and LEOs because of the gold-trimmed flags flown in many courts.

Anyways, on the topic of owning ships outfitted with cannons, how comfortable is everyone with rearming local militias?

[acolyte_to_jippity]

Maritime law still allows for some crazy shit in the States. That is why the "Freemen" and stateside Moors will claim they do not recognize the jurisdiction of most courts and LEOs because of the gold-trimmed flags flown in many courts.

Anyways, on the topic of owning ships outfitted with cannons, how comfortable is everyone with rearming local militias?

you saw how well that went with the Antoine Martin case.