Guns, Guns Guns

smr wrote: I will not surrender my God given rights (endowed by the creator!) to freedom and the ability to protect what is mine from Evil!

Riiight...

Kyoto accords....that was a economic relocation of wealth and jobs to China and India from America. They do not take part in the Kyoto accords.

Really...

1. USA never ratified the Kyoto treaty.
2. China and India are both part of the treaty. They were just not required to do all that much YET, and of course, because USA didn´t ratify, they didn´t feel they should make sacrifices when the vastly richer USA refused to.
3. The economic relocation had zero and nothing to do with the treaty and everything to do with bloody stupid shortsighted US domestic politics and to some extent with free trade agreements.


Do you bother to learn anything about whatever your latest rant is about? Ever?

HB of CJ wrote:What our sheeple disarmed friends from foreign countries

50 to 1 that i can outshoot you. And the reason i do not own a gun is because i do not feel any NEED for it, and the fact that i am more interested in hand to hand weapons, as those go along with my martial arts training.

I COULD have aquired up to 10 pistols, 20 rifles or a combination of the two before i would need a special permit.

HB of CJ wrote:The Second Amendment is not about hunting. It is all about the necessity of the armed population to kill off all the bad government if and when that government becomes ... tyrannical to the people.

No, the 2nd amendment is about how USA isn´t supposed to have an army, but rely on a well regulated militia. Because the founding fathers didn´t want USA to become another UK replica. As it later did.

Only morons can manage to read it the way the gun-nuts do, as that requires specifically NOT reading the text anywhere near normally, as you have to ignore context completely and the fact that half the text becomes meaningless.

HB of CJ wrote:Our Revolutionary War was very nasty, vindictive and bloody.

Compared to the thirty years war or the hundred years war, it´s barely a footnote in history.

By conservative accounts, the 30 years war caused 10 times more deaths than the US CIVIL WAR.
And the 100 years war is most likely far beyond that, but because it ALSO allowed the plague to spread, it´s impossible to know.

And the US revolutionary war had the total number of deaths counted in thousands, not hundreds of thousands the civil war or MILLIONS like the 30 and 100 years war´s.

Calling the US revolutionary war "nasty and bloody" is utterly laughable.
Sweden alone had similar number of deaths in the Napoleonic wars even! And we were just a minor part of that!

The US revolutionary war may have been real important for USA, but the reason you won it is because just like in total, it wasn´t really a "big thing" or all that important compared to other wars.

The war when Sweden broke from the Kalmar Union had almost half as many deaths as the US revolutionary war. 1520s population.

The so called Great Northern War 1700 to 1721 killed off about as much as the US civil war, with almost 2 centuries less population while causing much devastation.

The Russian coastal raiding against Sweden late in that war alone caused far more devastation than the whole American Revolutionary war. Possibly more than the US civil war... Against a small fraction of the population and territory of USA.
A halfdozen cities were completely burned to the ground, not a single building left standing. And many more were partially destroyed.

And i haven´t even gone beyond just my own country, which is on the smaller side, even if it spent a few centuries as a "major power".

No matter how big in USA, most of your wars are nothing but background noise compared to the conflicts of the rest of the world.

Ranting about how you big badasses have so much more experience with guns and war is just pathetic.

HB of CJ wrote:This at the time included ordnance including big cannons and mortars. This today SHOULD include anything the military has up to and including big crew served stuff including aircraft.

Oh but of course. For that well regulated militia it refers to.

HB of CJ wrote:Absolutely non believable by sheeple people living in disarmed nanny state nations where most sheeple have not even SEEN a real gun much less legally own and shoot automatic rifles and such.

I´ll make sure to tell everyone next time Finnish massconscripts make a mockery of US "professional troops".

The Danes and Norwegians do it all the time so that´s just par for the course.


And of course, you speak like that while sitting in a nation that has no enemy armies on it´s borders. Classic chickenhawk style.

HB of CJ wrote:I do not know what action you disarmed nanny folks may employ, but in SW OR USA we would just pull our legal handguns and stop the threat. But then again a .45 hasn't the range of denial.

No, you idiots pull out your guns and then promptly get shot in the head by your own police or military.

Or possibly get caught, then executed or imprisoned for treason. It doesn´t matter how much conviction you have in your own delusions, reality doesn´t care.

Tenshinai wrote:
No, you idiots pull out your guns and then promptly get shot in the head by your own police or military.

Or possibly get caught, then executed or imprisoned for treason. It doesn´t matter how much conviction you have in your own delusions, reality doesn´t care.

Nah, that only happens if you have the bad fortune of being born black, hispanic or muslim, really.

smr wrote:Excuse me but having a concealed handgun could have reduced the carnage! Just look to Israel, how many terrorists have been killed by concealed handgun owners....a bunch!

dscott8 wrote:A couple of points, seeing as I live 23 miles from Orlando and have a concealed weapons permit:

1. You can't compare Florida permit holders to Israelis. In Florida, a "shall issue" state, you get a permit with minimal training unless the State finds positive evidence to deny it. I could have just presented my DD214 military service record and got the permit, but chose to take the Sheriff's Dept course for the training on legal issues. There is NO training on tactical issues, like they do in Israel with their mandatory service. I suspect that in a mass shooting situation, some permit holders would wind up shooting each other even after the bad guy had gone down.

Handgun ownership in Israel is a lot more limited than you seem to imagine. It's actually restricted in ways most US gun control advocates would find excessive. It's not military training which counts so much (not all handgun owners were combat troops, and even most of those won't have any prior experience with handguns); rather, a condition of a gun license (which generally allows you to own a single handgun and requires the police and a psychologist to sign off on it) is undergoing mandatory training. As a result handguns are rather uncommon here; SMR's reference to "many terrorists killed by concealed handgun owners" is rather exaggerated. Had this atrocity happened in ISrael it's unlikely anyone but (possibly) the security guards would have been armed.

HB of CJ wrote:This at the time included ordnance including big cannons and mortars. This today SHOULD include anything the military has up to and including big crew served stuff including aircraft.

I'me curious - does that include nukes?

Absolutely non believable by sheeple people living in disarmed nanny state nations where most sheeple have not even SEEN a real gun much less legally own and shoot automatic rifles and such.

I for one find it humorous that such disarmed unmanned individuals can even spout off on such gun subjects about which they know nothing and never will. Very funny on the face of it.

I've handled and trained on a variety of weapons up and including MAGs and LAWs. Does that qualify me to comment?

What will YOU folks do if YOUR government busts down YOUR front door and invades your home? What CAN you do? Call the police? Ha ha ha. Employee a cricket bat? A kitchen knife?

Call a lawyer?

I do not know what action you disarmed nanny folks may employ, but in SW OR USA we would just pull our legal handguns and stop the threat. But then again a .45 hasn't the range of denial.

And subsequently be mentioned in the papers alongside the phrase "died in a hail of gunfire".

Unless order has completely broken down (in which case your rights - inluding the 2nd Amendment - aren't worth much - the proper recourse for this would be the courts (unless you're facing a situation which is bothinstantly lethal and the government agent in question is in the wrong, e.g. a policeman trying to murder you). A government - almost by definition - can always bring more force to bear and eventually you will go down if you escalate to lethal force (or at best, spend the rest of your life in prison).

HB of CJ wrote:Our Revolutionary War was very nasty, vindictive and bloody. To keep this from happening again, our founding Fathers wrote specific laws providing for the people to keep and bear arms.

This at the time included ordnance including big cannons and mortars. This today SHOULD include anything the military has up to and including big crew served stuff including aircraft. .

The (il)logical extension of this is that any citizen of the US should be allowed to own a nuclear weapon, I'm assuming (hoping) you draw a line before that on what weapons a private citizen should be allowed.
The other extreme is that all guns should be banned because they can be used to hurt or kill other people. The (il)logical extension of that is everything that can be used to hurt or kill other people should be banned including cars, knives, rocks, clubs and the ability to vote (if Trump wins you could argue that would harm illegal immigrants, and on the other end you could argue that voting for pro choice people harms baby's. Better just stop people from voting)
Gun control comes down to where you draw the line between the rights and needs of individuals for firearms and the protection of other individuals and society from those who abuse or misuse those rights. There is no one size fits all solution as those needs vary from place to place even within a country. A sensible policy for Tokyo of no private firearms for example makes no sense for someone in rural Alaska who might open his front door to find a Grizzly sitting there.
Culture plays a large role too, as an outsider looking in, Personal freedoms, rights, liberties and responsibilities are a large part of American culture, distrust of the government also seems to be part of American culture. When you combine that with the Second amendment it makes sense that many Americans draw the line and say "No! The government does NOT have the right to regulate my gun ownership". When you combine that with the fact that basically every government in history, when given an inch, will try to take a mile, the reason many Americans refuse to consider any gun control quite honestly makes sense because sure today the government just wants to ban automatic weapons, but tomorrow they can say, well that was effective, let's ban semi auto, and the next day, let's ban all but single shot, followed by let's ban all guns.

By the way HB of CJ, insulting everyone that disagrees with you, and for that matter saying that everyone that doesn't live in America is a Sheeple takes away a lot of strength and validity from your argument. That being said though, I rather enjoy reading a lot of your posts as they tend to provide some food for thought whether I agree or not.
Tenshinai, do you really need to throw so many insults into your posts? It very much detracts from the forums when you insult the person you disagree with rather than their arguments. It makes it feel like you join the discussion simply to Troll and not to add anything to the topic
Part of what I like about these forums is the fact that people with wildly differing viewpoints actually discuss topics here with intelligence instead of insults, insulting other posters does more to convince me that your arguments lack the merit to stand on their own than it does to discredit the insultees argument

PeterZ, you and I have also recently found common ground on several topics, but unfortunately this is not one of them.
Does your comment about individual weapons include backpack nukes? Does a crew serviced individual weapon include a F22?

I intend to discuss your latest comment with friends who are bemused by the US gun situation. I expect that they will agree with me that it is even further from rational reality than any exterior observer could have expected. Incidentally these are not HB's sheeple, but capable and tough people.
I assume that the central point is that you believe it would be right and proper to use lethal force to overthrow a democratically elected government if it did stuff that you and your buddies disagreed with?

Tenshinai: I think you need to go back on your meds? It is pretty obvious you have gone over the top and perhaps a little bit inside out.

Have you received my private E Mail from me to you? You are still salvageable as a good friend. I have a gift for you from SW OR USA.

Fifty to one? Really. No way I am going to take that bet. We all know a M16 does not have the range of a good Calvary Saber or even a Rapier.

I actually do apologise to the religious people for upsetting them. The only defence I have is that I was provoked.
Now in a moderate and respectful way, can I politely ask where this God given rights principle comes from? If your deity has actually granted you these rights, what was the process. Is it just you, or you and like minded people, or every one?
Does it include, as HB and PeterZ have said, virtually every weapon known to man?

Re The places where only the security guards would have guns. This guy was a security guard!!!

A conservative look at Gun control:



Poker