Quote:
|
You think because you have that little pistol tucked under your pillow that it gives you supreme power over your government??
|
No. I think the 50 cal Barrett high-powered, anti-material, light anti-armor sniper rifle tucked in my gun rack gives me supreme power over the government. Especially if 300 million other people are similarly armed.
THAT is the reason for the second amendment. 300 million people armed against the possibility of the 1.4 million members of the US military being used in a coup. You tell me the odds in that situation. It's not the lone gunman with the Barreta 9 mm. Its the 300 million with hunting rifles, shotguns, semi-automatics, automatics, pistols, army surplus equipment, etc. that protect our liberties.
If even 2% of the nation is armed, that means 6 million people able to stand against our standing military force of 1.4 million. You don't see that as an equalizer? Sure the military has better equipment. But as is often said in military circles, quantity creates a quality of its own. 2:1 odds? I'll take it. And I'll take 300:1 odds even more.
Quote:
The rest of the world seems to do just fine without every man and women carrying a weapon.
|
Yeah... they're living really well in Iran, Cuba, China, North Korea, Syria, and all the other dictatorships where guns aren't allowed.
Oh... you mean WESTERN countries. Like Sweden... oh, crap, that's not right. Everyone owns a gun in Sweden. They actually have to own one by law since anyone can be called up for amy service at any time. Or maybe you mean Australia... nope that doesn't work either, since guns are prevalent there as well. Israel? Nope. They all own guns too. The UK? Yeah, guns are illegal. And people don't own guns unless they happen to be rich, Irish, a criminal, etc.
So, exactly which countries are you talking about? Which "rest of the world" do you mean?
Quote:
Its personal responsibility. Blame the kid and parents. Not the weapon. It didnt play a part!!!
|
Are you saying that it isn't about personal responsibility? If the parents in your hypothetical case had taken responsibility to lock up their gun properly, their 8-year-old would never have gotten his hands on it.
Your discounting of personal responsibility is the cause of so many of the problems we see in society today. People don't take responsibility for ANYTHING today. Not for sex, not for drugs, not for guns, not for smoking, not for how they eat, not for making a living. Nobody is responsible. The GOVERNMENT should take responsibility for all these things and impose rules (which people break regularly) of conduct.
Tell me, Skell, which country with gun control laws has actually been able to keep guns out of the hands of people? If they can't stop drugs from coming into their countries, what makes you think that they can ever stop guns from coming into their countries? And even if you manage to take guns out of the hands of citizens, what makes you think they won't just go to the black market and get another one? The whole idea that "taking away people's guns gets them off the streets" is pure sh!theadedness.
I find it intersting that the States with the strictest gun control laws have the most gun crimes. I find it interesting that countries in Europe with the strictest gun control laws have the highest levels of gun crimes. And I find it interesting that Israel and Sweden, the two countries with the most liberal gun laws have both the lowest level of gun crime and the lowest levels of gun-related accidents. Gee, I wonder why that is.
No I don't. I already know the answer.
Skell, the fact is that you don't know what you are talking about. There is no historical or statistical data to back up your assertion that stricter gun laws result in lower levels of gun violence and gun-related accidents. There is ample evidence to prove the exact opposite. There is also evidence to prove that more liberal gun laws result in significant decreases in crime rates across the board.
"Getting guns off the street" doesn't make people safer or any other stupidity like that. It makes CRIMINALS safer to commit violent crimes. And it creates a black market in illegal guns that are then owned by people who just want to protect themselves from ciminals.
If the "war on drugs" is stupid because it creates the very market in illegal drugs that it is supposed to be stopping, then eliminating gun rights is just as stupid. Moreso, since the right to bear arms is Constitutionally guaranteed, where the right to recreational drugs is not.
Elliot
Linear Mode
