Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
jayzee

Why we can't ban guns in the US...

Recommended Posts

I say ban all auto and semi auto weapons only police and the forces need acess to such weapons.

 

Any type of firearm that can be used by a police or military force to supress a population should also be allowed to be possessed by the population to repel tyranny should the need arrise.

 

is history really that irrelevant to most people, I mean they act as if corruption, tyranny, greed, etc is a thing of the passed and that the government is capable of responsibly controlling and protecting the population lol.

 

I'm convinced most people are just too stupid to think past what they hear on the latest news report.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So if I burned a pile of my cash and told the fed I did' date=' they would prosecute me?[/quote']

 

Lol, yes. The government is the only institution that can burn money. Our notes are a fiat currency that they pay interest on. It's their property. They loan it to you for purchasing goods and services. There is a finite amount of currency in circulation that has been loaned to them. Apparently you've never paid attention to how the government reacts when you mess with their "bank account."

 

----------------------------------Title 18 United States Code, Section 331

 

Whoever fraudulently alters, defaces, mutilates, impairs, diminishes, falsifies, scales, or lightens any of the coins coined at the mints of the United States, or any foreign coins which are by law made current or are in actual use or circulation as money within the United States; or

 

Whoever fraudulently possesses, passes, utters, publishes, or sells, or attempts to pass, utter, publish, or sell, or brings into the United States, any such coin, knowing the same to be altered, defaced, mutilated, impaired, diminished, falsified, scaled, or lightened -

 

Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both ----------------------------------

 

Title 18 United States Code, Section 333

 

Mutilation of national bank obligations

 

Whoever mutilates, cuts, defaces, disfigures, or perforates, or unites or cements together, or does any other thing to any bank bill, draft, note, or other evidence of debt issued by any national banking association, or Federal Reserve bank, or the Federal Reserve System, with intent to render such bank bill, draft, note, or other evidence of debt unfit to be reissued, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than six months, or both.

 

----------------------------------

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Any type of firearm that can be used by a police or military force to supress a population should also be allowed to be possessed by the population to repel tyranny should the need arrise.

 

is history really that irrelevant to most people' date=' I mean they act as if corruption, tyranny, greed, etc is a thing of the passed and that the government is capable of responsibly controlling and protecting the population lol.

 

I'm convinced most people are just too stupid to think past what they hear on the latest news report.[/quote']

 

So you need these kind of weapons incase obama trys to take over the country? How is that tin foil hat working out for you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Australia is very similar to the USA' date=' very similar people and culture for the most part. But look what happened when they banned all guns in their country....

 

https://www.youtube.com/embed/p8RDWltHxRc

 

Crime increased and gun crimes increased and the politicians act dumb at what is going on..[/quote']

 

The Politian?s didn?t act dumb they Australians they are dumb!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lol' date=' yes. The government is the only institution that can burn money. Our notes are a fiat currency that they pay interest on. It's their property. They loan it to you for purchasing goods and services. There is a finite amount of currency in circulation that has been loaned to them. Apparently you've never paid attention to how the government reacts when you mess with their "bank account."

 

----------------------------------Title 18 United States Code, Section 331

 

Whoever fraudulently alters, defaces, mutilates, impairs, diminishes, falsifies, scales, or lightens any of the coins coined at the mints of the United States, or any foreign coins which are by law made current or are in actual use or circulation as money within the United States; or

 

Whoever fraudulently possesses, passes, utters, publishes, or sells, or attempts to pass, utter, publish, or sell, or brings into the United States, any such coin, knowing the same to be altered, defaced, mutilated, impaired, diminished, falsified, scaled, or lightened -

 

Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both ----------------------------------

 

Title 18 United States Code, Section 333

 

Mutilation of national bank obligations

 

Whoever mutilates, cuts, defaces, disfigures, or perforates, or unites or cements together, or does any other thing to any bank bill, draft, note, or other evidence of debt issued by any national banking association, or Federal Reserve bank, or the Federal Reserve System, with intent to render such bank bill, draft, note, or other evidence of debt unfit to be reissued, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than six months, or both.

 

----------------------------------[/quote']

 

I understand its fiat currency. I just never realized we could not destroy our own money.

 

Ok so lets make this perfectly clear then. You do not believe that taxation is legal theft because the money belongs to the government in the first place?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So you need these kind of weapons incase obama trys to take over the country? How is that tin foil hat working out for you?

 

It has nothing to do with Obummer dumb ***.

 

It has everything to do with a population having the ability to repel ALL threats both foreign and Domestic lol. Are you saying tyrannical governments couldn't happen in the US?

 

How's that nieve ignorance working out for ya?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I say ban all auto and semi auto weapons only police and the forces need acess to such weapons.

 

Most auto weapons are already banned and you will never get rid of the semi auto weapons. There are way too many and most are unregistered. I would never give mine up anyways as they are used lawfully for hunting and none are registered. This has been talked about before and you have lost because common sense, facts, and history are on our side so quit bringing it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We banned guns in the UK does that mean we don?t have gun crime? No but it?s harder to get a gun so you don?t end up with retards walking into places and killing everyone! We changed at a time where it was possible its way too late for America.

Is America going to change the way it is in the next few years NO! It would take decades of work and it?s not something the Yanks are interested in, this is today?s news tomorrow the US will have something else to worry about and it will move on.

 

Shame the parents of those poor kids won?t be able to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It has nothing to do with Obummer dumb ***.

 

It has everything to do with a population having the ability to repel ALL threats both foreign and Domestic lol. Are you saying tyrannical governments couldn't happen in the US?

 

How's that nieve ignorance working out for ya?

 

Working out really well here in the uk thanks, I have felt the need for a gun to protect me from an uprising.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I understand its fiat currency. I just never realized we could not destroy our own money.

 

Ok so lets make this perfectly clear then. You do not believe that taxation is legal theft because the money belongs to the government in the first place?

 

This is a fine line topic of discussion. I'm honestly surprised you didn't go the "intellectual property rights" route but I'm glad you didn't, as I would've equally destroyed that point too. I'm assuming that you are of the stance that taxation is theft because it is taken forcibly and immoral. This is a subjective view point. If you do not use any government funded services or goods, to include the roads you travel on, then yes. It could be considered theft. However, that is almost an impossibility in todays society, so its more like a "membership fee" to use the services and therefore a voluntarily submitted fee. No one is forcing you to work, or live in the country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Working out really well here in the uk thanks' date=' I have felt the need for a gun to protect me from an uprising.[/quote']

 

The UK never had the proliferation of weapons as the US had. You could ban every type of gun today and you still wont get rid of them all. What do you expect, that responsible gun owners & criminals alike will willingly turn in their guns?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So you need these kind of weapons incase obama trys to take over the country? How is that tin foil hat working out for you?
You have to be 110% naive to think the government could never go tyrant on us. They are ALREADY doing it. Look at NYC!

YES, we need to possess a certain level of firepower to counter the threat of government firepower that will be used against us.

 

It's not a tin foil hat, Tyranny and opression has destroyed EVRY SINGLE EMPIRE EVER. Ours will be no different.

People in power always want more power. They are getting it, because we hand over our freedoms out of fear.

Then one day, we wake up and realise we live in a cage in a police state, but it's too late, we gave up our speech, our guns, and our privacy long ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You have to be 110% naive to think the government could never go tyrant on us. They are ALREADY doing it. Look at NYC!

YES' date=' we need to possess a certain level of firepower to counter the threat of government firepower that will be used against us.

 

It's not a tin foil hat, Tyranny and opression has destroyed EVRY SINGLE EMPIRE EVER. Ours will be no different.

People in power always want more power. They are getting it, because we hand over our freedoms out of fear.

Then one day, we wake up and realise we live in a cage in a police state, but it's too late, we gave up our speech, our guns, and our privacy long ago.[/quote']

 

Honestly I think the argument for the reason to have guns is kinda moot, as I dont feel either side will ever see the light, so to speak. The only logical consideration is that regardless of whether you agree or disagree with gun ownership, the fact is, they will never go away and any attempt to confiscate them would be laughable at best, or result in dire bloodshed at worst - not to mention it wouldnt work by any effective measure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Working out really well here in the uk thanks' date=' I have felt the need for a gun to protect me from an uprising.[/quote']

 

This is the US, not the UK.

 

And your gun control laws have done NOTHING to quell violent crimes in the UK when you compare historical and worldwide statistics. The UK just got lucky and did theirs right about the same time the world as a whole experienced a similar drop in violent crime rates around the same time. But they still accredit that to the gun control legislation despite legitimate proof that it didn't improve violence in the UK anymore than the numbers inproved anywhere else in the world.

 

Statistical data historically proves that violent crime rates world wide ebb and flow around the same time showing similar percentages of rising or falling. That data completely debunks the effectiveness of ANY countries violent crime statistics in relation to gun control measures.

 

Not a single country around the world can show a rise or fall in violent crime after gun control measures that can't be reflected in the numbers in almost any other pro-gun country around the world at the same time. There are more than a few countries who have experience VAST rises in violent crime after criminalizing firearms for the population.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We banned guns in the UK does that mean we don?t have gun crime? No but it?s harder to get a gun so you don?t end up with retards walking into places and killing everyone! We changed at a time where it was possible its way too late for America.

Is America going to change the way it is in the next few years NO! It would take decades of work and it?s not something the Yanks are interested in' date=' this is today?s news tomorrow the US will have something else to worry about and it will move on.

 

Shame the parents of those poor kids won?t be able to.[/quote']

 

Right but it's a fact that the violent crime rate never went down and is probably higher than before. Criminals just found different weapons. Besides the fact that it just wouldn't work here, it would be terrible for our already fragile economy. You will be taking billions of dollars in income from American companies as well as having millions of people losing jobs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Right but it's a fact that the violent crime rate never went down and is probably higher than before. Criminals just found different weapons. Besides the fact that it just wouldn't work here' date=' it would be terrible for our already fragile economy. You will be taking billions of dollars in income from American companies as well as having millions of people losing jobs.[/quote']

 

Crime rates go up as populations grow! Plus I don?t know how old you are but when I was at school you had a fight and that was that no one got all pissy about losing and shot or stabbed you! Seems like the world is a far more angry and aggressive place

 

yours sincerely Grandpa firth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is the US' date=' not the UK.

 

And your gun control laws have done NOTHING to quell violent crimes in the UK when you compare historical and worldwide statistics. The UK just got lucky and did theirs right about the same time the world as a whole experienced a similar drop in violent crime rates around the same time. But they still accredit that to the gun control legislation despite legitimate proof that it didn't improve violence in the UK anymore than the numbers inproved anywhere else in the world.

 

Statistical data historically proves that violent crime rates world wide ebb and flow around the same time showing similar percentages of rising or falling. That data completely debunks the effectiveness of ANY countries violent crime statistics in relation to gun control measures.

 

Not a single country around the world can show a rise or fall in violent crime after gun control measures that can't be reflected in the numbers in almost any other pro-gun country around the world at the same time. There are more than a few countries who have experience VAST rises in violent crime after criminalizing firearms for the population.[/quote']

 

Let's also not forget to mention that the UK has one of the most intrusive Nanny State governments in the civilized world and are in the clear lead for being the most surveyed citizenry as well. Cameras galore!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Working out really well here in the uk thanks' date=' I have felt the need for a gun to protect me from an uprising.[/quote']

 

Why do we give a **** about what works in a country a fifth the size of the US with a different culture and different bordering countries? It has absolutely no bearing on what will work in the US. Plus it may not even be working there, violent crimes are higher than ever. Keep looking the other way and acting like it is a great solution though just so you can troll and argue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is a fine line topic of discussion. I'm honestly surprised you didn't go the "intellectual property rights" route but I'm glad you didn't' date=' as I would've equally destroyed that point too. I'm assuming that you are of the stance that taxation is theft because it is taken forcibly and immoral. This is a subjective view point. If you do not use any government funded services or goods, to include the roads you travel on, then yes. It could be considered theft. However, that is almost an impossibility in todays society, so its more like a "membership fee" to use the services and therefore a voluntarily submitted fee. No one is forcing you to work, or live in the country.[/quote']

 

Thanks for answering the question... :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can't decide if to watch The Amazing Spiderman or The Dark Knight rises tonight. not seen either.

 

Dark Knight rises, that new spiderman actor sucked imo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Let's also not forget to mention that the UK has one of the most intrusive Nanny State governments in the civilized world and are in the clear lead for being the most surveyed citizenry as well. Cameras galore!

 

hmm but how many of our kids and movie goers get blasted with automatic weapons? the odd policeman here and there yes!

 

if it keeps me safe and i have nothing to hide who cares!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Crime rates go up as populations grow! Plus I don?t know how old you are but when I was at school you had a fight and that was that no one got all pissy about losing and shot or stabbed you! Seems like the world is a far more angry and aggressive place

 

yours sincerely Grandpa firth

 

So this is an applicable variable when talking about the UK, but not when talking about the US. The fact that anyone tries to compare crime rates of a country of 64,641,000 to one with 350,000,000 is absurd from the get go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Crime rates go up as populations grow! Plus I don’t know how old you are but when I was at school you had a fight and that was that no one got all pissy about losing and shot or stabbed you! Seems like the world is a far more angry and aggressive place

 

yours sincerely Grandpa firth

 

Agreed and it may have helped gun violence and murders there but it just won't work here as you have said yourself. I am 30 and it was the same when I was in school here. You have a problem and you fight, all of it is settled. Then when the school officials ask what happened you tell them that you hurt yourself playing football and they would let it go even though they knew you were lying. A month or two later you would probably be at the same party with the guy you fought and you could have a drink and BS like nothing happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for answering the question... :rolleyes:

 

I did. Apparently you need to brush up on your comprehension. If you don't use government goods and services to include infrastructure, yes, it can be considered theft. If you do use them, no, your paying for what you use.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Agreed and it may have helped there but it just won't work here as you have said yourself. I am 30 and it was the same when I was in school here. You have a problem and you fight' date=' all of it is settled. Then when the school officials ask what happened you tell them that you hurt yourself playing football and they would let it go even though they knew you were lying. A month or two later you would probably be at the same party with the guy you fought and everything would be ok because and you could have a drink and BS like nothing happened.[/quote']

 

spot on! miss those days and worry about my kids.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They also seem to forget what happened to empires in the past that had a strong military presence and a disarmed citizenry. Here is a list of people who agree with disarming their population.

 

Hitler

Stalin

Qaddafi

Castro

Pol Pot

Idi Amin

Mao Tse-Tung

Kim Jong-Il

 

They were all "experts" in gun control' date=' and they agree that it works. Citizen on citizen violence decreases but it seems to be directly proportional to the increase of Government on Citizen violence...[/quote']

 

The Mayans must have been right, cause I seem to agree with Kevbo completely....

 

That's not correct either... The latest approximation was around 9' date='840ish deaths by firearms(murder, suicide, and uniformed response combined). Conversely, people die of Heart disease: 599,413 Cancer: 567,628 Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 137,353 Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 128,842 Accidents (unintentional injuries): 118,021 Alzheimer's disease: 79,003 Diabetes: 68,705 Influenza and Pneumonia: 53,692 Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 48,935, annually. So let's ban everything that causes all of those, AMIRITE?[/quote']

 

And if the argument didn't stop with the previous post I quoted, it had to stop after this one^^^

 

Look, you can't get any more gun control than you have now!

 

If you take all the registered guns from legal gun owners, you LOSE control of guns... what do you control then??? You don't control the guns on the streets. CRIMINALS control them.

 

The ONLY thing the government (ANY government, this is not only about Obama) will control is THE POPULATION.

 

This is not gun control, this is population control and it's the start of the slippery slope that will enable

 

They also seem to forget what happened to empires in the past that had a strong military presence and a disarmed citizenry. Here is a list of people who agree with disarming their population.

 

Hitler

Stalin

Qaddafi

Castro

Pol Pot

Idi Amin

Mao Tse-Tung

Kim Jong-Il

 

They were all "experts" in gun control' date=' and they agree that it works. Citizen on citizen violence decreases but it seems to be directly proportional to the increase of Government on Citizen violence...[/quote']

 

Why don't you read anything in the papers about any of the cancerous **** on shelves everywhere? Why are people not screaming to ban GMO? Or any number of other things that KILL people and KIDS?

 

Because it serves no agenda. Well, not an agenda that anyone in power is interested to promote at least.

 

So you need these kind of weapons incase obama trys to take over the country? How is that tin foil hat working out for you?

 

Hitler was elected in a democratic elections and presented a pretty convincing economic policy for the country that was in a big economic slump. I am NOT comparing Obama to Hitler, but Obama is not the last American president. There will be others and you can NEVER say never.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So this is an applicable variable when talking about the UK' date=' but not when talking about the US. The fact that anyone tries to compare crime rates of a country of 64,641,000 to one with 350,000,000 is absurd from the get go.[/quote']

 

dont get me wrong buddy you guys have no fecking hope of sorting your gun problems out without strict gun laws and about 100 years of having them in place!

 

plus your crime rates will go up and up just like everyone elses

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hmm but how many of our kids and movie goers get blasted with automatic weapons? the odd policeman here and there yes!

 

if it keeps me safe and i have nothing to hide who cares!

 

But your crime rate has remained the same. Different methods. Same results. A person bludgeoned with and object, shot with an arrow, or killed with a knife rather than a gun is still a dead person. Forgive us Americans for not sharing your submissive and passive nature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But your crime rate has remained the same. Different methods. Same results. A person bludgeoned with and object' date=' shot with an arrow, or killed with a knife rather than a gun is still a dead person. Forgive us Americans for not sharing your submissive and passive nature.[/quote']

 

Yeah but you can't kill 20 people in a matter of seconds with a knife or a baseball bat. And you are more likely to get the **** kicked out of you for trying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah but you can't kill 20 people in a matter of seconds with a knife or a baseball bat. And you are more likely to get the **** kicked out of you for trying.

 

You assume a person with a knife would go around crowded public places and start swinging wildly like some with a gun would do. You guys are from the UK. Jack the ripper? Does it ring any bells? Ffs man...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah but you can't kill 20 people in a matter of seconds with a knife or a baseball bat. And you are more likely to get the **** kicked out of you for trying.

 

So youd be much happier of only a few people die? I dunno about you, but I'd rather not be content with anyone getting killed and thus I'd rather focus on how we can best prevent these people from doing any harm at all in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You assume a person with a knife would go around crowded public places and start swinging wildly like some with a gun would do. You guts are from the UK. Jack the ripper? Does it ring any bells? Ffs man...

 

Yeah, who stalked single targets over a long period. Not quite the same as someone on a kill frenzy in a shop. Plus he had reason to kill those women.

 

Then again, the Washington sniper systematically picked of single targets too, so not all gun mass killings are spur of the moment frenzy either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But your crime rate has remained the same. Different methods. Same results. A person bludgeoned with and object' date=' shot with an arrow, or killed with a knife rather than a gun is still a dead person. Forgive us Americans for not sharing your submissive and passive nature.[/quote']

 

hey as long as you are still just killing each other its fine!

 

yeah I will kiss my kids goodnight in my passive way and go to see a movie passively knowing some retard won?t come in guns blazing or send my kids off to their passive school knowing they won?t get shot by some fecking idiot with mommy or daddy issues, hey maybe at the weekend we can go to the mall without the danger of getting blasted by some nut.

Yeah life sucks here in the passive nanny state.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So youd be much happier of only a few people die? I dunno about you' date=' but I'd rather not be content with anyone getting killed and thus I'd rather focus on how we can best prevent these people from doing any harm at all in the first place.[/quote']

 

Would I be happier with 3 people getting killed than 30? Of course. That means 27 people live. I think any sane person would think the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point.

 

Circle_With_Dot.JPG

 

We're missing it...

 

It's not about the kids unfortunately. It's not about the people who died at the mall in Oregon or at the Colorado cinema.

 

Like people have cleverly pointed out, there are MANY bigger causes of unnatural death. They are not being discussed with such emotions. I wonder why kids who die as a result of a drunk driver don't stir so much political debate...

 

It's not about guns at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can't respond to this in the other thread because it is blocked for Adult Material for some reason. The CT shooter tried to buy guns days before the shooting but was denied so he just found a way to get guns anyway. And did you read the San Antonio story because it was not a mass shooting. A guy injured one person and then was injured himself.

 

Prohibition didn't work in the US' date=' it just made criminals millions of dollars and people could get booze whenever they wanted. Drugs are illegal in the US and I could get any drug that I want at anytime and criminals are making billions of dollars. If you make guns illegal or harder to obtain criminals will still get them and use them whenever they want and more bad people will make billions of dollars. The only people that you are hurting are law abiding citizens. Plus there are already hundreds of millions of unregistered weapons in the US. There is no way to safely get rid of all of these weapons. So instead of trying to take away guns we need a way to try to help these people or find out why mass shootings are becoming more popular.[/quote']

 

 

prohibition only ended because of the hundreds of billions of dollars of money the government was losing annually from having it outlawed. then the criminals took 100% of the revenues. if there was no way to regulate it and make a tonne of money, they would still have it illegal. people would just go to canada or their speakeasy's.

 

if you legallized drugs, less tax money would be wasted keeping johnny potsmoker behind bars after getting caught selling that joint in oklahoma to his buddy. nobody would be getting shot and murdered over it every single day, and the hardened criminals and gangsters would have to find some other ways to make their money and exploit the system. easy access to guns just makes it much simpler for them to operate their business

 

its not the guns to blame. its the regulation laws and the people that are to blame. if you give them a harder time to obtain these guns, it wont be as common. especially if they have to jump through hoops. crack down on all these unlicensed guns that are distributed everywhere as well as the shops that will sell to anybody without even checking for licenses, or registering it in the federal database.

 

doing nothing about it other than shrug it off while making it look like a tradgedy in the news is not going to do anything to slow it down. i mean if you need to be tested to obtain a drivers license, you should at least be adequately tested in order to own a gun. this includes mental testing too, and periodically. not just one time and okay...youre good for another 5-10 years. especially when you get older

 

keep that **** regulated and enforced more stricter, sure the wrong people would still be able to get what they want but at least make them have to work for it. it would at least slow it down. obviously its a problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's still refusing to accept the fact that violent crime statistics are actually up rather than down in ALL countries whom have implemented gun control measures outside of the typical up and down percentages being experience world wide..

 

Ironically enough mass murder (the exact catalyst of these debates) statistics remain relatively unchanged. Saying gun control quelled mass murders in Europe is a hilarious over statement for a group of people that should know their history well enough to understand that it never was really that big of an issue in the first place lol, outside of gang type conflict and a war of some sort Europe has never really had that much of a problem with mass killings other than serial killings, and that's a whole other monster.

 

You would also think they would head their history well enough to understand just exactly how dangerous disarming the population could easily lead to a tyrannical government run amok that can create a HUGE mess (read Nazi Germany).

 

Ahh, how easily we forget the mistakes of our past.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Would I be happier with 3 people getting killed than 30? Of course. That means 27 people live. I think any sane person would think the same.

 

No, a sane person would rather address the real problem and avoid anyone getting killed or hurt at all. But sadly, thats not your concern, you have an agenda, and it has nothing to do with gun crimes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He's still refusing to accept the fact that violent crime statistics are actually up rather than down in ALL countries whom have implemented gun control measures outside of the typical up and down percentages being experience world wide..

 

Ironically enough mass murder (the exact catalyst of these debates) statistics remain relatively unchanged. Saying gun control quelled mass murders in Europe is a hilarious over statement for a group of people that should know their history well enough to understand that it never was really that big of an issue in the first place lol' date=' outside of gang type conflict and a war of some sort Europe has never really had that much of a problem with mass killings other than serial killings, and that's a whole other monster.

 

You would also think they would head their history well enough to understand just exactly how dangerous disarming the population could easily lead to a tyrannical government run amok that can create a HUGE mess (read Nazi Germany).

 

Ahh, how easily we forget the mistakes of our past.[/quote']

 

This seems like a relevant time to remind people of the Norway mass shooting, despite Norway having strict gun laws and a historically low crime rate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This seems like a relevant time to remind people of the Norway mass shooting' date=' despite Norway having strict gin laws and a historically low crime rate.[/quote']

 

One incident in many years compared to how may separate incidents in the US THIS year?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One incident in many years compared to how may separate incidents in the US THIS year?

 

Once again, let's not ignore historical data and trends. (historical is a KEY word in his post and most of my posts)

 

Norway has NEVER been a place where that kind of thing is common. Gun controls did NOT stop it from happening.

 

The US historically has ALWAYS had a high level of violence in comparison with many European countries. Just because their gun laws have kept their crime numbers low in comparison to the US means nothing lol. Especially when the US has experienced pretty much the same rises and falls of crime rates as the countries who claim their crap is working lol.

 

Nieve people are nieve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One incident in many years compared to how may separate incidents in the US THIS year?

 

US population of over 300 million compared to Norway's population of 5 million people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This seems like a relevant time to remind people of the Norway mass shooting' date=' despite Norway having strict gun laws and a historically low crime rate.[/quote']

 

It is very relevant. Saw this on another site.

 

Quote:

Breivik spent six days in Prague in late August and early September 2010. He chose the Czech Republic because the country has some of the most relaxed laws regarding guns and drugs in Europe. Following his Internet inquiry, Breivik noted that "Prague is known for maybe being the most important transit site point for illicit drugs and weapons in Europe". Despite the fact that Prague has one of the lowest crime rates[31] among European capitals, Breivik observed that he was not looking forward to his trip to the Central European capital, because he has "heard that there are very brutal and cynical criminals".[32]

 

He hollowed out the rear seats of his Hyundai Atos in order to have enough space for the firearms he hoped to buy. After two days, he got a prospectus for a mineral extraction business printed, which was supposed to give him an alibi in case someone suspected him of preparing a terrorist attack.[32] He wanted to buy an AK-47-type rifle (this firearm is however not very common in the country, unlike the Vz. 58[33]), a Glock pistol, hand-grenades and a rocket-propelled grenade, stating that getting the latter two would be a "bonus".[30][32]

 

Breivik had several fake police badges printed to wear with a police uniform, which he had acquired illegally on the Internet, and which he later wore during the attack.[15][16] Contrary to his expectations, he was completely unable to get any firearms in the Czech Republic, commenting that it was the "first major setback in [his] operation". In the end, he concluded that Prague was "far from an ideal city to buy guns", nothing like "what the BBC reported", and that he had felt "safer in Prague than in Oslo".

 

Cliffs notes: He didn't get guns overseas.

 

 

Quote:

Upon returning to Norway, Breivik obtained a legal permit for a .223-caliber Ruger Mini-14 semi-automatic carbine, ostensibly for the purpose of hunting deer. He bought it in late 2010 for ?1,400 ($2000). He wanted to purchase a 7.62x39mm Ruger Mini-30 semi-automatic carbine, but gun laws in Norway may have prevented Breivik from obtaining it.

 

Getting a permit for the pistol proved more difficult, as he had to demonstrate regular attendance at a sport shooting club.[32] He also bought 10 30-round magazines for the rifle from a United States supplier, and 6 magazines for the pistol (including 4 30-round magazines) in Norway. From November 2010 to January 2011 he went through 15 training sessions at the Oslo Pistol Club, and by mid-January his application to purchase a Glock pistol was approved.[35][36]

 

 

Cliffs notes: He got them legally in Norway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So because it happens a lot in America it is ok and people should just accept it and not bother trying to solve the problem?

 

If there were no gun control in Norway chances are it would happen a hell of a lot more frequently, so that proves gun control works. But please keep making up more ******** to back up the fact you feel you need a gun, it is entertaining.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No' date=' a sane person would rather address the real problem and avoid anyone getting killed or hurt at all. But sadly, thats not your concern, you have an agenda, and it has nothing to do with gun crimes.[/QUOte']

 

So you are honesty saying 3 people dying is just as bad as 20 people dying? And you call me insane? How old are you son 12?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So because it happens a lot in America it is ok and people should just accept it and not bother trying to solve the problem?

 

If there were no gun control in Norway chances are it would happen a hell of a lot more frequently' date=' so that proves gun control works. But please keep making up more ******** to back up the fact you feel you need a gun, it is entertaining.[/quote']

 

You've missed the point completely as you often do. Crime will exist no matter what. It existed before guns, it will exist after they become obsolete. You're so submissive in nature that you would give up all freedoms you have in order to try and win a war that's been waged since the dawn of man. This method has not, and will never work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...