the_cpl
Where'd That 6th Toe Come From?
That's why you shouldn't own a knive or a car neither.
Boy, 8, fatally shoots self with Uzi at gun show
- Thread starter Buxbaum666
- Start date
Where'd That 6th Toe Come From?
That's why you shouldn't own a knive or a car neither.
Except that knives aren't registered weapons. And it's hard to get hit with a murder charge for running over a stranger. However, with a gun, it is automatically assumed that you shot it, no matter who, because it's considered more violent. All I'm saying is that I agree with Bux.
LogisticEarth
First time out of the vault
Sicblades said:
This is why registration doesn't work. I also don't know why it's "automatically assumed that you shot it". You're not going to get charged with murder just because it was your gun that was stolen. If your gun is stolen, you should report it anyway.
If your car is stolen and used in a bank robbery, or involved in a hit-and-run accident, and you didn't report the theft, they sure as hell are going to come looknig for you.
Ozymandias
First time out of the vault
'why registration doesn't work'? You mean to suggest that firearms shouldn't be registered at all?
This whole discussion is crazy.
This whole discussion is crazy.
LogisticEarth
First time out of the vault
Ozymandias said:
They're not registered in most of the US States as it stands, and those areas that DO have registration are generally high-crime areas like large cities and such. I live in Pennyslvania, and you can walk into any store and buy a long arm or handgun with just a a state-issued drivers liscence and instant background check. There's no police record or registration process on a state level. Of course things like Class III firearms (automatic weapons and destructive devices) and such have federal registration though.
No, it has never been legal to own firearms in my country. Except for hunting, but hunters are in relatively few numbers.
There is no profit from selling guns, since no one is using them.
Street gangs in my country fight with swords. The fatalities are low because it takes a lot of guts to get into a sword fight, and if one of the fighters is a quick runner he can escape injury. Thing is that some of the mafia have guns, but they never use them against ordinary people. On rare occasions the use it for assasinations. But that happened once in the last few years.
Bal-Sagoth
Water Chip? Been There, Done That
Sicblades said:
This is another thing that is hard to speculate on. Would it be the Government vs citizens? Or the Government and citizens vs an invasion? In which case the armed citizens would be fighting alongside the military.
Regardless while a well trained military unit would obviously out do even the most well trained civilian militia (if only due to equipment) I would not write off them as being completely ineffective.
This country has the idea of armed resistance against a more powerful foe embedded in its conscious. That also goes back into the founding of our country and the mentality many here possess.
Anyways it is not as if in recent times a smaller and not as well equipped force has held out and caused grievance amounts of trouble for super power nations that have incredibly large military's.
Hmm now where have I heard of that happening?
LogisticEarth
First time out of the vault
Bal-Sagoth said:
Even in a rebellion against the Government, you would probably still see military units fighting alongside the citizenry. Many soliders I've talked to have said that if they are ever given an order to disarm the population, they will willfully ignore it, and that this sentiment is shared among many commissoned officers on up the command chain.
If we ever did have a widescale rebellion, if the reasons were right, I'd bet you'd see National Guard units, and many regular military units defecting to the rebels. After all, when you enter the military, you swear an oath to the Consitution, not the President, Congress, or government.
availability of guns to lawful citizens and gun crime, is not directly linked.Blakut said:
only extreme situations tend to create big problems. too little control or too much. both create excellent conditions for violent crime.
but take the UK, firearms are now very much restricted and guncrime has never been so high... not to mention that break-in's where the residents are at home has skirocketed as well, since robbers are now nearly sure the people can't fight back anyway.
on the other hand, you have the US, where guns can be found everywhere. doesn't take a genius to see that that leads to problems.
still, the US cannot safely restrict firearm ownership now, even if they wanted to. millions upon millions of firearms would disappear into the illegal circuit, this fueling even more crime.
still, most countries take a position somewhere in between & do just fine. some rules, usually quite a bit of red tape, but relatively low gun crime.
extremes are never good, as far as i can tell. which country are you from, because i sincerely doubt it's as simple as you portray it.
It's not that I think civilians shouldn't have guns.
It's just that I don't want AMERICANS to have guns.
Or, heck, just idiots in general.
And, yes, I know that's an anti-democratic thing to say. But do you REALLY believe you're on equal terms with that angst-ridden drooling console kid that shot up his high school the other week because he couldn't get any and mommy won't buy him the new XBOX 360?
The problem isn't guns. The problems is idiots with guns. And sadly there's no constitutional way to prevent idiots.
It's just that I don't want AMERICANS to have guns.
Or, heck, just idiots in general.
And, yes, I know that's an anti-democratic thing to say. But do you REALLY believe you're on equal terms with that angst-ridden drooling console kid that shot up his high school the other week because he couldn't get any and mommy won't buy him the new XBOX 360?
The problem isn't guns. The problems is idiots with guns. And sadly there's no constitutional way to prevent idiots.
well, lets see. first lets look at afganistan. that place is one of the few spots on this earth that loves guns as much as americans do, they love them so much that they have some of the worlds most highly skilled gunsmiths there that build guns from scrap metal with hand tools and produce pieces that other then a faulty serial number or something like that are pretty downright hard to tell that they werent manufactured in a factory.
in afganistan's history no nation save for alexander the great's empire has truely controlled them. recently russia failed and the us is starting to realize the true limits of what we can actually call control in afganistan. we havent been able to put a solid true government over all of afganistan, and we havent been able to control all the fighting in there because its so fucking heavily armed and the populous is not the type ot be pushed around.
further, look at the battle for berlin in ww2. when the russians closed in on that city the army itself disintigrated and was no match. however russia started experiencing grevious casualties and pain from civilians who armed with just about anything they could find fought back. the disorganized men women and children forming berlin's militia had honestly given russia its hardest fight for a long time. really they failed because russia used human wave strategies and instead of the pressure fading as casualites mounted russia sent easily 4 men every time they got a report of one dead.
the sheer amount of arms available made the american revolution possible, and it allowed a respectable war in the early years of the american civil war, the private arms allowed militia to fight natives and outlaws in the freshly started territories of the united states as we spread, and it even saved us in numerous other wars ranging from the war of 1812 to the war we had with mexico, so dont say that private ownership of arms hasn't done anything for any nation. while private citizens arming themselves cannot replace an army, it will provide a great boost to the fighting force of that nation, especially within its own borders. if the citizens are not able to fight the enemy directly the heavily armed insurgency will be able to drastically reduce the enemy's ability to resupply and manouver through the field. essentially they can grip onto the enemy's ankle and allow our own army to prevail even against a "stronger" oponent.
simple fact, armed insurgency is the real reason why nobody has conquered the world. if the people dont like you, your cause or what your doing often your army will soon find itself highly unable to operate in the region.
ya we are all fat idiots who murder each other over nothing. oh wait, look at that crazy cook in korea who ran around hacking people with knives? nobody talks about that.... hell there are numerous cases of incidents like that in japan, korea and china. there is even a case of some japanese psyco releasing poison gas on a train. i know its a lot more badass then the columbine kids with pipe bombs and tech9's but yknow....
and btw, even though being fat is an "epidemic" in the us, you have to realise that the bullet shot by a heavy man kills all the same as with a skinny fit man. some russian elite guard units learned that in ww1....
