Assault weapon bans

[bernard75]

Ignorance breeds accidents.  

You gotta love em NRA crackers.

[TheButterZone]

I guess in the USA, instead of cars, everyone should be driving an M1A since the US Army has such  MBTs?  Also everyone need a Minuteman?

If you can climb up on a tank and shoot the occupant(s), tanks aren't invincible. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shawn_Nelson

Same for missile commands.

[mdude77]

Please answer, why do you suppose Japan regulates firearms so tightly?

There's only one reason why a government would want to regulate firearms: to control the populace.

A government that sincerely wanted to help the citizens would protect their rights, educate them, lead by example, and stay the hell out of the way of everything else (like money creation).

This is conjecture on your part until you back it up with something more. Please do so. Even if you were right, how do you reconcile your beliefs with the annual gun deaths in Japan? And finally, please compare and contrast competing theories, such as a nation's (its people's) interest in safety.

I said it earlier, and I'll say it again.

The most dangerous entities in this planet are governments.  They have killed more people than any other cause, likely the sum of every other cause.  What Japan does is irrelevant, and I'm not going to go for your red herring.  You may trust them, or your government, but I don't.

America is still the most free nation in the world, because of one thing and one thing only: the populace is armed, and many of them distrust governments at all levels (rightfully so).

You may like the idea of being subject to the whim of a government official who pretends he cares about your welfare.  Most care about their citizens/subjects as much as farmers care about their cows and sheep.  You serve a purpose, and when you don't anymore, they'll do whatever they can to profit from your demise.

I hope you see the error in your thoughts before it's too late.  Until then, stop trying to force your beliefs on free people like myself by advocating centralized government control of guns.

My words are still true: the cause of all the world's problems are a lack of Godliness.  Without God, there are no morals, no right and wrong, and all hell breaks loose.  Yes, it is that black and white.  Everything else is irrelevant.

M

[Spendulus]

Ignorance breeds accidents.  

You gotta love em NRA crackers.

No, the picture showing incorrect and dangerous handling of weapons was made by an American anti gun lobby group.

If it's the NRA crackers that have to point out what safe and unsafe handling is, then, yeah, you gotta love them.

[DeathAndTaxes]

Ignorance breeds accidents. 

You gotta love em NRA crackers.

No, the picture showing incorrect and dangerous handling of weapons was made by an American anti gun lobby group.

If it's the NRA crackers that have to point out what safe and unsafe handling is, then, yeah, you gotta love them.

This.

NRA rules for gun safety.

ALWAYS keep the gun pointed in a safe direction.
ALWAYS keep your finger off the trigger until ready to shoot.
ALWAYS keep the gun unloaded until ready to use.

although personally I find Cooper's rules a better teaching aid

All guns are always loaded.
Never let the muzzle cover anything you are not willing to destroy.
Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on the target.
Be sure of your target and what is beyond it.

Anyways if you see guns potrayed in an unsafe manner it is usually by some gun grabber group.

[MikeH]

EDIT: Oh, forgive me! You are a different Mike, but with the same agenda. And thus, consistent, you are not, within your own clique of gun lovers.

I'm in Australia, I've never even held a gun - I was all for gun control a few years ago but I've learnt a lot since then.

People need to forget what they have been fed by the mainstream media and even history books, you would be amazed how much is bullshit if you just do some research yourself.

[FirstAscent]

Please answer, why do you suppose Japan regulates firearms so tightly?

There's only one reason why a government would want to regulate firearms: to control the populace.

A government that sincerely wanted to help the citizens would protect their rights, educate them, lead by example, and stay the hell out of the way of everything else (like money creation).

This is conjecture on your part until you back it up with something more. Please do so. Even if you were right, how do you reconcile your beliefs with the annual gun deaths in Japan? And finally, please compare and contrast competing theories, such as a nation's (its people's) interest in safety.

I said it earlier, and I'll say it again.

The most dangerous entities in this planet are governments.  They have killed more people than any other cause, likely the sum of every other cause.  What Japan does is irrelevant, and I'm not going to go for your red herring.  You may trust them, or your government, but I don't.

Japan is irrelevant because it doesn't fit your world view?

America is still the most free nation in the world, because of one thing and one thing only: the populace is armed, and many of them distrust governments at all levels (rightfully so).

You mean freedom to have guns, freedom that allows your criminal neighbors to have guns, and freedom from social nets that might prevent people falling into a life of criminal activities? That kind of freedom?

My words are still true: the cause of all the world's problems are a lack of Godliness.  Without God, there are no morals, no right and wrong, and all hell breaks loose.  Yes, it is that black and white.  Everything else is irrelevant.

Is that so? Then explain this: http://underthemountainbunker.com/2011/01/14/two-maps-states-with-the-most-gun-deaths-vs-states-with-high-church-attendance/

[freedomno1]

snip

This is why politics always confused me when I was younger.  Why do they call themselves liberals, and then aim to use government force to take liberties away?  That's not very liberal, unless you consider taking liberties liberally as liberal, which seems to be the only thing they're liberal about.  Why don't we just call dogs "cats", pop open a cold beer and call it a day?

The reality is they are actually statists but that term isn't a nice sounding.  


Left or right is linear thinking and too simplistic.  At a minimum there are at least two axis social feedom and economic freedom.  "Liberals" tend to be liberal on the social freedom axis but horribly regressive on the economic freedom axis.  "Conservatives" tend to be more liberal on the economic freedom axis and but regressive on the social freedom aspect.  Honestly they are both merely "flavors" of the same statist agenda.

Socially liberal statist vs Socially conservative statist.


Every politician in the US is in the upper right quadrant so any labels are merely how they relate to each other.


An interesting quiz for two dimensional political views (takes about 10 minutes):
http://politicalcompass.org/test

Hmm
Economic Left/Right: -5.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.72

Forums libertarian guess I'm safely in the right region

[mdude77]

Japan is irrelevant because it doesn't fit your world view?

Gun control worked great for Hitler, China, and the USSR as well.  If you look at it from the statist's point of view.

You mean freedom to have guns, freedom that allows your criminal neighbors to have guns, and freedom from social nets that might prevent people falling into a life of criminal activities? That kind of freedom?

With freedom comes responsibility.  True freedom means being free to do what you wish as long as it doesn't harm anyone else.

Is that so? Then explain this: http://underthemountainbunker.com/2011/01/14/two-maps-states-with-the-most-gun-deaths-vs-states-with-high-church-attendance/

I may have implied churches, but that's not what I meant.  Most mainstream religion is as messed up mainstream governments, mainstream media, mainstream food, and so forth.

M

[zeroday]

Insane people won't disappear with the ban of assault rifles. They will just switch to propane tanks blowing in class rooms, which would be much more destructive than using AR-15.

[Equilux]

Please answer, why do you suppose Japan regulates firearms so tightly?

There's only one reason why a government would want to regulate firearms: to control the populace.

A government that sincerely wanted to help the citizens would protect their rights, educate them, lead by example, and stay the hell out of the way of everything else (like money creation).

This is conjecture on your part until you back it up with something more. Please do so. Even if you were right, how do you reconcile your beliefs with the annual gun deaths in Japan? And finally, please compare and contrast competing theories, such as a nation's (its people's) interest in safety.

America is still the most free nation in the world, because of one thing and one thing only: the populace is armed, and many of them distrust governments at all levels (rightfully so).

M

By saying something like that you've just proven that you have ABSOLUTELY no idea what the word "free" or "freedom" actually means. Please learn your basics.

[mdude77]

Please answer, why do you suppose Japan regulates firearms so tightly?

There's only one reason why a government would want to regulate firearms: to control the populace.

A government that sincerely wanted to help the citizens would protect their rights, educate them, lead by example, and stay the hell out of the way of everything else (like money creation).

This is conjecture on your part until you back it up with something more. Please do so. Even if you were right, how do you reconcile your beliefs with the annual gun deaths in Japan? And finally, please compare and contrast competing theories, such as a nation's (its people's) interest in safety.

America is still the most free nation in the world, because of one thing and one thing only: the populace is armed, and many of them distrust governments at all levels (rightfully so).

M

By saying something like that you've just proven that you have ABSOLUTELY no idea what the word "free" or "freedom" actually means. Please learn your basics.

I stated earlier what my definition of freedom is.  Yours may vary.

M

[Equilux]

Please answer, why do you suppose Japan regulates firearms so tightly?

There's only one reason why a government would want to regulate firearms: to control the populace.

A government that sincerely wanted to help the citizens would protect their rights, educate them, lead by example, and stay the hell out of the way of everything else (like money creation).

This is conjecture on your part until you back it up with something more. Please do so. Even if you were right, how do you reconcile your beliefs with the annual gun deaths in Japan? And finally, please compare and contrast competing theories, such as a nation's (its people's) interest in safety.

America is still the most free nation in the world, because of one thing and one thing only: the populace is armed, and many of them distrust governments at all levels (rightfully so).

M

By saying something like that you've just proven that you have ABSOLUTELY no idea what the word "free" or "freedom" actually means. Please learn your basics.

I stated earlier what my definition of freedom is.  Yours may vary.

M

You definition is raping the word freedom, go find your own more suitable word with which you want to express what you mean. This is just misleading and giving you a free ride on the positive connotations the word freedom has, while you mean nothing of the sort.

[bernard75]

America is still the most free nation in the world

 
Nope nothing else to add and the gun part makes it only funnier.

[mdude77]

Please answer, why do you suppose Japan regulates firearms so tightly?

There's only one reason why a government would want to regulate firearms: to control the populace.

A government that sincerely wanted to help the citizens would protect their rights, educate them, lead by example, and stay the hell out of the way of everything else (like money creation).

This is conjecture on your part until you back it up with something more. Please do so. Even if you were right, how do you reconcile your beliefs with the annual gun deaths in Japan? And finally, please compare and contrast competing theories, such as a nation's (its people's) interest in safety.

America is still the most free nation in the world, because of one thing and one thing only: the populace is armed, and many of them distrust governments at all levels (rightfully so).

M

By saying something like that you've just proven that you have ABSOLUTELY no idea what the word "free" or "freedom" actually means. Please learn your basics.

I stated earlier what my definition of freedom is.  Yours may vary.

M

You definition is raping the word freedom, go find your own more suitable word with which you want to express what you mean. This is just misleading and giving you a free ride on the positive connotations the word freedom has, while you mean nothing of the sort.

Perhaps you misunderstood.  The 2nd amendment is protects all other amendments.  Without the government is free to walk over the people like every other government of the world.  (China anyone?)

Do tell, what's your definition?

M

[Equilux]

Please answer, why do you suppose Japan regulates firearms so tightly?

There's only one reason why a government would want to regulate firearms: to control the populace.

A government that sincerely wanted to help the citizens would protect their rights, educate them, lead by example, and stay the hell out of the way of everything else (like money creation).

This is conjecture on your part until you back it up with something more. Please do so. Even if you were right, how do you reconcile your beliefs with the annual gun deaths in Japan? And finally, please compare and contrast competing theories, such as a nation's (its people's) interest in safety.

America is still the most free nation in the world, because of one thing and one thing only: the populace is armed, and many of them distrust governments at all levels (rightfully so).

M

By saying something like that you've just proven that you have ABSOLUTELY no idea what the word "free" or "freedom" actually means. Please learn your basics.

I stated earlier what my definition of freedom is.  Yours may vary.

M

You definition is raping the word freedom, go find your own more suitable word with which you want to express what you mean. This is just misleading and giving you a free ride on the positive connotations the word freedom has, while you mean nothing of the sort.

Perhaps you misunderstood.  The 2nd amendment is protects all other amendments.  Without the government is free to walk over the people like every other government of the world.  (China anyone?)

Do tell, what's your definition?

M

No no no, lets stick with you "definition" for a while. So far that 2nd amendment has done NOTHING to protect any of the other amendments, so I doubt that's actually the case, and I think it's in fact part of a pretty elaborate fantasy shared by many gun-owning Americans.

By your "definition" Somalia is probably the most free country in the world; guns are prolific and government is virtually non existed.

[randomcloud]

Banning is never an answer, violence is something that is rotten in culture and that needs to be eradicated by the society as a whole, but for sure the gun-loving fucktards that defend that more guns = less deaths are not helping at all.

Hint: This is what the debate is actually about. Gun control advocates see guns as a psychological symbol of violence, and think that by getting rid of guns they will get rid of violence.

But none will ever show any actual evidence that getting rid of guns will lower overall violent deaths and crime rates, they'll obfuscate the issue by using the loaded term "gun deaths" that doesn't take into consideration whether those supposed prevented deaths just switched to violent deaths with other weapons, so...

[mdude77]

No no no, lets stick with you "definition" for a while. So far that 2nd amendment has done NOTHING to protect any of the other amendments, so I doubt that's actually the case, and I think it's in fact part of a pretty elaborate fantasy shared by many gun-owning Americans.

By your "definition" Somalia is probably the most free country in the world; guns are prolific and government is virtually non existed.

Two wrong's don't make it right.  America is still free.  If big brother keeps pushing, he will have a rebellion on his hands.  He doesn't want to go there because the people can defend themselves.  What, people can't defend against a military?  Look at the US's invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan.  The only way to completely control a population is to strip them of their right to defend themselves.  It worked perfectly in China, the USSR, and for Hitler.  It would work here too if the people allow it.

M

[mdude77]

By your "definition" Somalia is probably the most free country in the world; guns are prolific and government is virtually non existed.

As for Somalia.. you're mixing up godless individuals with freedom.  Yes, they are free.  And they are abusing it.  See my earlier statements about the only solution is Godly individuals.  Every possible combination works with God.  None work without.

M

[bernard75]

Oh fuck, now sects are brought into the equation, too.