Diuretic
New member
Yes, the purpose of the weapon has nothing to do with the learned behavioural aversion of others.
If the govt had banned these weapons, this man would be alive today
- Thread starter Little-Acorn
- Start date
Yes, the purpose of the weapon has nothing to do with the learned behavioural aversion of others.
gonzojournals
Better than You
Yes, because criminals so often use legal guns.
gonzojournals
Better than You
Rightcheck into the history and reason for development of firearms.
Armies just always show each other their guns and go home ?
No, they show up if the other's guns are not intimidating enough-- see Cold War for example of the guns just looking too big.
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
In fact, most criminals DO use legal guns. Surprising fact.
The mass slaughter listed above was made by a person using a legally bought gun, who wasn't a member of this criminal underground syndicate you seem to attribute all crime in America to.
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
No, Gonzo is a fascist.
Why don't we invade Singapore? We could do it easily. Their guns aren't that big.
gonzojournals
Better than You
Proof please.
This statement is as ridiculous as the starter of this thread wants to make gun control look. Thanks for the laugh....both of you.
T
TRGLDTE
Guest
The Rwandan massacres of a few years back - 1.5 million people killed. The weapon of choice? Machete, not guns.
WC Grouch
New member
Holocaust Survivor Theodore Haas:
"Before Adolph Hitler came to power, there was a black market in firearms, but the German people had been so conditioned to be law abiding, that they would never consider buying an unregistered gun. The German people really believed that only hoodlums own such guns. What fools we were.
It truly frightens me to see how the government, media, and some police groups in America are pushing for the same mindset. In my opinion, the people of America had better start asking and demanding answers to some hard questions about firearms ownership, especially if the government does not trust me to own firearms, why or how can the people be expected to trust the government?
There is no doubt in my mind that millions of lives could have been saved if the people were not "brainwashed" about gun ownership and had been well armed. Hitler’s thugs and goons were not very brave when confronted by a gun. Gun haters always want to forget the Warsaw Ghetto uprising, which is a perfect example of how a ragtag, half-starved group of Jews took up 10 handguns and made asses out of the Nazis."
Something to think about...
"Before Adolph Hitler came to power, there was a black market in firearms, but the German people had been so conditioned to be law abiding, that they would never consider buying an unregistered gun. The German people really believed that only hoodlums own such guns. What fools we were.
It truly frightens me to see how the government, media, and some police groups in America are pushing for the same mindset. In my opinion, the people of America had better start asking and demanding answers to some hard questions about firearms ownership, especially if the government does not trust me to own firearms, why or how can the people be expected to trust the government?
There is no doubt in my mind that millions of lives could have been saved if the people were not "brainwashed" about gun ownership and had been well armed. Hitler’s thugs and goons were not very brave when confronted by a gun. Gun haters always want to forget the Warsaw Ghetto uprising, which is a perfect example of how a ragtag, half-starved group of Jews took up 10 handguns and made asses out of the Nazis."
Something to think about...
WC Grouch
New member
Gun control is always the prelude to tyranny. Hitler campaigned on Law and Order. Hitler's first act was to confiscate all registered firearms.
gonzojournals
Better than You
Uscitizen just went up a notch in my book. That puts him at notch one.
Yeah only one of mine is registered.
And it is the handgun associated with my concealed carry permit.
all were obtained legally at the time they were purchased.
I have quite a few registered guns and several that are unregistered. In Oklahoma we don't have to register the handgun that we carry concealed in any specific way, which is a good thing since one of the guns I regularly carry is an old semi-auto pistol that my dad gave me. No way of tracing it back to a registeration that I can tell. When I carry concealed across the state lines I carry a registered gun to avoid any potential problems though.
That list. The first thing they'll do is raid the NRA for a member list. They'll also assume weapons for those on that list.
Little-Acorn
New member
Changing the subject like that is usually a sign you can't refute the argument - a condition that clearly applies here.
We weren't talking about what the army uses guns for, but what civilians use them for, which of course is vastly different. Or would have used them for, if government didn't keep illegally interfering with their right to do so.
As I pointed out, guns are used far more frequently to deter crimes than to kill people. Mention that you have a gun to the guy trying to break down your door, and he often takes off, end of story. Pull out a gun when someone is trying to mug you, and the mugging stops real quick, with the guy either turning tail or freezing so you can call the cops and hand him over to them... and you didn't even have to point the gun at him, much less fire it. Point a gun at a guy who's coming at you with a knife (or even another gun), and the confrontation stops then and there, again without a shot being fired... because the guy never intended to face a murder rap, he only wanted to take your car or money or whatever. Fire a warning shot when some guy is trying to rape your wife or daughter, and he will immediately stop paying attention to her and start giving his undivided attention to you... and he'll already know you have no qualms about firing your gun.
Guns are used far more frequently in those ways, resulting in no physical harm or injuries to anyone, than to kill or injure. This has been documented endlessly, in studies and reports by everyone up to and including the U.S. Dept. of Jusitce (http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/165476.pdf). All the whirling-dervish spinning you're doing, won't change that fact. One wonders why you continue to engagein it, rather than admit you were wrong and try being right for a change.
But then, I guess you aren't interested in being right. You seem only to want to "get" the other guy, as though coming up with any reply at all somehow equates to making a valid point. Seems to be a version of "I got you last" that most people give up after about the third grade... but apparently not everyone.
Clearly you don't check the drivel you write here, before posting-- the facts I've been citing are freely and abundantly available to anyone who even tries to look them up.
Last edited:
Yea, well, I am guilty. I am an NRA member. I think they are my only voice in Washington as it pertains to the issue of gun control. I pay my dues each year and ignore their pleas for more money throughout the rest of the year.
For those that think they are just a republican organization, take note that last few elections they reccommended that I vote for 5 democrats and 3 republicans. On another note I never vote based solely on what they say. They are after all a one issue organization. I am not a one issue voter. I at least look at two or three issues.
For those that think they are just a republican organization, take note that last few elections they reccommended that I vote for 5 democrats and 3 republicans. On another note I never vote based solely on what they say. They are after all a one issue organization. I am not a one issue voter. I at least look at two or three issues.