MERGED--> all Gun Control discussion - Page 6 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 04-09-2009, 06:08 AM   #76
Refugee
 
dazzlingamy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: The city of blinding lights and amazing coffee - Melbourne.
Posts: 2,467
Local Time: 04:57 PM
Perhaps the government can do a buy back scheme? In this economic climate, they can pass a law that no one can sell guns or ammunition anymore, then anyone who owns a gun has until Dec 09 to sell it back to the government, and then they just have to turn them in with no money. Then after this is done anyone caught with a gun is in possession of an illegal firearm and sent to jail for a mandatory 6 month sentence.

They can melt all the guns down ad use the steel to build houses for the needy and the money given to the people for their guns can stimulate the economy!

I know our country is tiny compared to the US and i know for a lot of people im talking loony toony, but you can be a first world country and live a safe happy and productive life without fear for your life without having a gun tucked into your pants and under your pillow.

The fact is, most of the people who were shot dead in that article i posted would still be alive if the people who killed there were unable to purchase a gun. These people are drug dealers, or shady people, they are your "regular" citizen who are going postal and killing innocent people. One shot in one millionth of a second can kill a person. Trying to stab them or hit them with a bat or something takes a whole lot more effort, contact and time.

I just think its an absolute travesty and something CAN be done about it.
__________________

__________________
dazzlingamy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2009, 06:19 AM   #77
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 06:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dazzlingamy View Post
In this economic climate, they can pass a law that no one can sell guns or ammunition anymore, then anyone who owns a gun has until Dec 09 to sell it back to the government, and then they just have to turn them in with no money. Then after this is done anyone caught with a gun is in possession of an illegal firearm and sent to jail for a mandatory 6 month sentence.
Erm, no, they couldn't, because that would violate the Constitution. And amending the Constitution requires, first, approval by a two-thirds majority of both houses of Congress, followed by ratification by three-fourths of the individual state legislatures. Not gonna happen.
__________________

__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2009, 07:56 AM   #78
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Tiger Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: The Everglades
Posts: 4,740
Local Time: 01:57 AM
All of you who think that the 2nd amendment is ever going to be abolished need a serious reality check. It's not happening and I personally don't want it to happen. I can't condemn guns, even though I hate the notion of hunting because some people enjoy it and some people live off it. As long as they aren't shooting down endangered condors for sport, then I don't see anything wrong with it. I do see something wrong with selling any semi or fully automatic weapon. There is no reason to own an uzi or an AK-47 copy that has been brought up in this thread.
Are you fully expecting a scene similar to Normandy in Pennsylvania? We have an army filled with trained people to handle such guns and the fact that they are out in the public is the scary part. A madman with a shotgun or regular .357 can do far more damage if he has a uzi that holds 30 rounds and takes a simple clip to reload.

Keep your regular guns and stop freaking out.
__________________
Tiger Edge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2009, 08:31 AM   #79
Refugee
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,593
Local Time: 01:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BonoVoxSupastar View Post
I thought you said you weren't an ultra right gun nut? All of these scenarios are those used by militia types.

What these scenarios do not ever address is that the government and the law abiding citizens no long carry the same exact technology, as they did in colonial times. So if you really wanted to follow this argument push for tank, grenade, and f-16 ownership.

Weak weak weak argument. What are you going to do up against their technology? Shoot a tank with your .38?
im not, i guess you didnt see the "JUST FOR THE SAKE OF ARGUMENT" i posted like 5 times.

you missed the point of my post. i wasnt saying we should have rocket launchers and shit to defend enemy tanks. i was only bringing forth the idea that guns historically represent our freedom. try to read between the lines!

and who's to say those scenarios couldnt happen. you dont know what the future could bring 10-15 years from now. i bet in 2000 you'd never imagine people would use commerical aircraft to bring down 2 of the biggest skyscrapers in the world. or for you conspiracy people, that our government would set such a thing up.
__________________
bigjohn2441 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2009, 08:48 AM   #80
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 38,358
Local Time: 11:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigjohn2441 View Post
im not, i guess you didnt see the "JUST FOR THE SAKE OF ARGUMENT" i posted like 5 times.

you missed the point of my post. i wasnt saying we should have rocket launchers and shit to defend enemy tanks. i was only bringing forth the idea that guns historically represent our freedom. try to read between the lines!

and who's to say those scenarios couldnt happen. you dont know what the future could bring 10-15 years from now. i bet in 2000 you'd never imagine people would use commerical aircraft to bring down 2 of the biggest skyscrapers in the world. or for you conspiracy people, that our government would set such a thing up.

And you ignored my point. These scenarios are pointless unless you have at least similar access to arms and there's no way that is possible...

How come no one ever addresses this issue?
__________________
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2009, 08:52 AM   #81
Refugee
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,593
Local Time: 01:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dazzlingamy View Post
Perhaps the government can do a buy back scheme? In this economic climate, they can pass a law that no one can sell guns or ammunition anymore, then anyone who owns a gun has until Dec 09 to sell it back to the government, and then they just have to turn them in with no money. Then after this is done anyone caught with a gun is in possession of an illegal firearm and sent to jail for a mandatory 6 month sentence.

They can melt all the guns down ad use the steel to build houses for the needy and the money given to the people for their guns can stimulate the economy!

I know our country is tiny compared to the US and i know for a lot of people im talking loony toony, but you can be a first world country and live a safe happy and productive life without fear for your life without having a gun tucked into your pants and under your pillow.



The fact is, most of the people who were shot dead in that article i posted would still be alive if the people who killed there were unable to purchase a gun. These people are drug dealers, or shady people, they are your "regular" citizen who are going postal and killing innocent people. One shot in one millionth of a second can kill a person. Trying to stab them or hit them with a bat or something takes a whole lot more effort, contact and time.

I just think its an absolute travesty and something CAN be done about it.

lemme repost a part of what i said on the previous page and see what you think of this

Quote:
back in colonial times up until i guess the middle of the 20th century we didnt seem to have violent gun crimes we do today, even though guns were always readily availible, maybe even moreso than today. today we have the war on drugs, the war on terror, a bad economy, substantial poverty rates, poor education system. all these recent things that have contributed to gun violence. maybe we need to look at these social problems as a cause of gun violence, rather than just guns themselves.
you think that if everyone was financially sound and well educated and healthy, even WITHOUT gun control we'd still feel the need to shoot eachother?
__________________
bigjohn2441 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2009, 08:58 AM   #82
Refugee
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,593
Local Time: 01:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BonoVoxSupastar View Post
And you ignored my point. These scenarios are pointless unless you have at least similar access to arms and there's no way that is possible...

How come no one ever addresses this issue?

ok ill try.

how come we seem to have had such a hard time with the "insurgents" in iraq and afganistan? do they even have anything close to our technology?
__________________
bigjohn2441 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2009, 09:15 AM   #83
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 38,358
Local Time: 11:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigjohn2441 View Post
ok ill try.

how come we seem to have had such a hard time with the "insurgents" in iraq and afganistan? do they even have anything close to our technology?
Well for the most part the insurgents are forcing our forces to fight within cities and towns, and in Afghanistan(mostly) unknown terrain where much of their more advanced weapons will not or can not be used. If anything else is used it's pretty much considered targeting civilians. So it's gun against gun.

None of the scenarios you speak of would work this way. Either you'll be trying to take over the government which would force your hand, or we're being occupied by another country that isn't exactly there for nation building. I cannot think of a scenario where you force them to fight on your playing field.
__________________
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2009, 09:46 AM   #84
Refugee
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,593
Local Time: 01:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BonoVoxSupastar View Post
Well for the most part the insurgents are forcing our forces to fight within cities and towns, and in Afghanistan(mostly) unknown terrain where much of their more advanced weapons will not or can not be used. If anything else is used it's pretty much considered targeting civilians. So it's gun against gun.

None of the scenarios you speak of would work this way. Either you'll be trying to take over the government which would force your hand, or we're being occupied by another country that isn't exactly there for nation building. I cannot think of a scenario where you force them to fight on your playing field.
you dont think a few million organized, pissed-off citizens with rifles, shotguns, pistols, etc would pose a problem for the government or invading armies?

im not saying those scenairos will happen EXACTLY that way. maybe something totally different could happen. Maybe some disease like in 28 days later will happen. wouldnt you wish you had a gun then?

but seriously, if the shit does hit the fan in the future, whatever it may be, and it forces us into action, would you rather just surrender to tyranny, invading armies, or whatever, or do you take up arms and fight for your freedom. thats the whole purpose behind the 2nd amendment ,to ensure we have the means to defend ourselves and our freedom from whatever may threaten it.
__________________
bigjohn2441 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2009, 10:28 AM   #85
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 38,358
Local Time: 11:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigjohn2441 View Post
you dont think a few million organized, pissed-off citizens with rifles, shotguns, pistols, etc would pose a problem for the government or invading armies?

im not saying those scenairos will happen EXACTLY that way. maybe something totally different could happen. Maybe some disease like in 28 days later will happen. wouldnt you wish you had a gun then?

but seriously, if the shit does hit the fan in the future, whatever it may be, and it forces us into action, would you rather just surrender to tyranny, invading armies, or whatever, or do you take up arms and fight for your freedom. thats the whole purpose behind the 2nd amendment ,to ensure we have the means to defend ourselves and our freedom from whatever may threaten it.
I get the theory. But I just think we have reached the point where it is only that, a theory.

I have never will never advocate the removal of hunting rifles. My concern is handguns and assault rifles(and yes the true definition).
__________________
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2009, 05:52 PM   #86
War Child
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Carlisle PA
Posts: 818
Local Time: 12:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BonoVoxSupastar View Post
Maybe I'm the more educated one about guns here since you can't answer the question.


I don't fucking think so.

You keep ignoring the fact that rifles, assault rifles included, are not often used in murders or crimes. There is nothing wrong with wanting to go shoot a fully tricked out AR15 for shits and giggles. If all you're going to do is hunt, then a hunting rifle is fine but if you like to go shoot, they're a tad bland. 10,000 gun homicides in 2007 and only 450 involved a rifle. Charles Whitman slaughtered 14 people with an innocuous "hunting" rifle.
__________________
HyperU2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2009, 06:13 PM   #87
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 38,358
Local Time: 11:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by HyperU2 View Post
I don't fucking think so.
I can tell you are such a mature and even tempered adult in real life.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HyperU2 View Post
You keep ignoring the fact that rifles, assault rifles included, are not often used in murders or crimes.
Read my previous post, I have never and will never support the ban of hunting rifles. But I see no need for assault rifles.

I realize the use of hunting rifles, plus they are difficult to conceal or take out multiple victims with, so they make a lousy weapon of choice for crime. Assault rifles on the other hand have no common use and are ideal for taking out multiple victims from far distances.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HyperU2 View Post
There is nothing wrong with wanting to go shoot a fully tricked out AR15 for shits and giggles. If all you're going to do is hunt, then a hunting rifle is fine but if you like to go shoot, they're a tad bland. 10,000 gun homicides in 2007 and only 450 involved a rifle. Charles Whitman slaughtered 14 people with an innocuous "hunting" rifle.
Nothing about a gun should be for shits and giggles. I think this is the biggest problem with certain NRA types, and one of the reasons my father finally left. Is so many have got caught up in the gun culture that they have no respect for the gun itself and it has now become a toy.

But if shooting targets is your thing, I think guns like this shoot be stored at ranges and not residences.
__________________
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2009, 06:19 PM   #88
War Child
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Carlisle PA
Posts: 818
Local Time: 12:57 AM
So deaths by guns to you are only a tragedy if it's multiple victims? I'd wager spree shootings are less than one percent of homicides be firearm per year. But they sure do sell newspapers.
__________________
HyperU2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2009, 06:25 PM   #89
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 38,358
Local Time: 11:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by HyperU2 View Post
So deaths by guns to you are only a tragedy if it's multiple victims? I'd wager spree shootings are less than one percent of homicides be firearm per year. But they sure do sell newspapers.
Your comprehension is poor.

Let me spell it out.

Knife, bat, hunting rifle, rolling pin, stapler; all have purposes but can also be used to murder someone.

Hand gun, assault rifle; one purpose: kill and ideal for crime.
__________________
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2009, 06:32 PM   #90
War Child
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Carlisle PA
Posts: 818
Local Time: 12:57 AM
Any gun can be used to kill, so why single out assault rifles? They look scary, despite statistics showing they're rarely used to kill? Your logic if poor. Any and all firearms should be covered by the 2nd Amendment.
__________________

__________________
HyperU2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:57 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com