Yes, indeed.master_of_flamaster said:Riiiiight
EDIT: Saying 'Riiiight' is no argument of any form, come back when you learn the difference between disimissing someone else's argument with a dumb statement, and with an actual argument.
Perks of my job
- Thread starter WarMonger
- Start date
EDIT: Saying 'Riiiight' is no argument of any form, come back when you learn the difference between disimissing someone else's argument with a dumb statement, and with an actual argument.
Don't even fucking start Rebellion.
The right to own firearms is not simply a privilege. It's a real right, with uses. The Second Amendment was written to protect the First Amendment and the others. This is not a privilege of the wealthy or influential but a right of every citizen. It is not that we fear the government but that the government knows that there are armed citizens who don't agree with them and would oppose them.
It is clear from reading contextual documents that many of the founding fathers of the United States of America intended the Second Amendment as a right to allow individuals to own and maintain firearms for the common defense of the populace against any enemy, whether foreign or domestic. As some have said, it is indeed a sad thing and not a good sign that a population can not trust its own police forces to protect it. However, I think it is a far more grim and sad notion that many people can not trust their fellow man, even their neighbors, with the ownership and responsibility of a firearm.
There have been studies undertaken and completed which show a tendency in people who are against firearms ownership to be lacking in self-confidence. They do not feel they are capable of handling a weapon and fear it, fear those who can. They become jealous of those people and have a need to find reasons other than their own inadequacies to explain why firearms must be abolished. No, I don't mean this as a personal insult toward any of you. I am pointing this fact out because not everyone who is against firearms, or for, has the reasoning skills necessary to actually discern real reasons.
Many of you are currently unhappy with Bush and you don't even live in this country. How do you think some of us feel who live here and have to deal with things like the Patriot Act being put in place? Even if I weren't speaking for myself, there are other people, other citizens, whose rights and lives it is my duty to protect as well as my own. Firearms give every citizen the ability to protect themselves from harm and oppression no matter how old or feeble; no strong sword arm is needed but the pull of a trigger.
I would think that the nations of Europe, who were once under Soviet rule, would appreciate the value of an armed populace as the basis for a stable government free from a large threat of corruption and oppression. Both the fascists and communists invoked crime control as a reason for their real intent, gun control. They realized that an armed populace would not tolerate to be starved to death because their government felt they needed to sell the grain to pay for their new war machine. Fascism and communism as ideals only go so far when you and your family are starving. As an old Jewish man once said, if I recall correctly, "If every Jew had a rifle and a few rounds of ammunition there would be far fewer Germans now and many more Jews."
Do I fear a hostile take over of the United States government in the foreseeable future? Do I think I should take up arms because our current elected official decides to do what I consider idiotic things? No, I don't. I am a perfectly sane and reasonable person. To take up arms so lightly is a foolish action and an abuse of a right.
I must ask you all this: Is it that you do not trust me with firearms though I have shown a repeated and ample knowledge of their use , responsibilities, and safety? Or is it that you believe there is absolutely no need for firearms in our modern and advanced world? That America will never fall and nothing will ever change, things will only get better from now on?
I must say that my main interest in firearms is from a purely technical and mechanical
viewpoint. This is why I design them, this is why I haven't been to a firearms range in nearly two years. Through my interest though, I also acknowledge the responsibility and problems that come with owning them. If one of you could say a few magical, fantasy, words right this instant that would cause all weapons to disappear and for no man to ever raise his hand against another again... I would gladly go with you in that endeavor.
Thank you for reading this, I assure you I am reading what you are taking the time to write. - Col
It is clear from reading contextual documents that many of the founding fathers of the United States of America intended the Second Amendment as a right to allow individuals to own and maintain firearms for the common defense of the populace against any enemy, whether foreign or domestic. As some have said, it is indeed a sad thing and not a good sign that a population can not trust its own police forces to protect it. However, I think it is a far more grim and sad notion that many people can not trust their fellow man, even their neighbors, with the ownership and responsibility of a firearm.
There have been studies undertaken and completed which show a tendency in people who are against firearms ownership to be lacking in self-confidence. They do not feel they are capable of handling a weapon and fear it, fear those who can. They become jealous of those people and have a need to find reasons other than their own inadequacies to explain why firearms must be abolished. No, I don't mean this as a personal insult toward any of you. I am pointing this fact out because not everyone who is against firearms, or for, has the reasoning skills necessary to actually discern real reasons.
Many of you are currently unhappy with Bush and you don't even live in this country. How do you think some of us feel who live here and have to deal with things like the Patriot Act being put in place? Even if I weren't speaking for myself, there are other people, other citizens, whose rights and lives it is my duty to protect as well as my own. Firearms give every citizen the ability to protect themselves from harm and oppression no matter how old or feeble; no strong sword arm is needed but the pull of a trigger.
I would think that the nations of Europe, who were once under Soviet rule, would appreciate the value of an armed populace as the basis for a stable government free from a large threat of corruption and oppression. Both the fascists and communists invoked crime control as a reason for their real intent, gun control. They realized that an armed populace would not tolerate to be starved to death because their government felt they needed to sell the grain to pay for their new war machine. Fascism and communism as ideals only go so far when you and your family are starving. As an old Jewish man once said, if I recall correctly, "If every Jew had a rifle and a few rounds of ammunition there would be far fewer Germans now and many more Jews."
Do I fear a hostile take over of the United States government in the foreseeable future? Do I think I should take up arms because our current elected official decides to do what I consider idiotic things? No, I don't. I am a perfectly sane and reasonable person. To take up arms so lightly is a foolish action and an abuse of a right.
I must ask you all this: Is it that you do not trust me with firearms though I have shown a repeated and ample knowledge of their use , responsibilities, and safety? Or is it that you believe there is absolutely no need for firearms in our modern and advanced world? That America will never fall and nothing will ever change, things will only get better from now on?
I must say that my main interest in firearms is from a purely technical and mechanical
viewpoint. This is why I design them, this is why I haven't been to a firearms range in nearly two years. Through my interest though, I also acknowledge the responsibility and problems that come with owning them. If one of you could say a few magical, fantasy, words right this instant that would cause all weapons to disappear and for no man to ever raise his hand against another again... I would gladly go with you in that endeavor.
Thank you for reading this, I assure you I am reading what you are taking the time to write. - Col
Don't start this argument agian dammit. Nobody can win it, it all comes down to personal attacks, just do not continue.
Dove said:
Yay! Let Mortal Kombat begin!
Colt said:
"Needless to say, the founding fathers knew a lot more about how the 21st century would turn out than we do."
Colt said:
"This isn't about my bazooka. This is about your not trusting me with my bazooka. You sad insecure person. How dare you!"
Colt said:
"Tsk. You may have your arguments. But I have it on good authority that they're not even real, so nyah."
Colt said:
"We're working on integrated neurochips so all you have to do is think about shooting and BAM!"
Colt said:
"You'll never see me take up anything lighter than an M60!"
Colt said:
"Is it? Is it? You fear me, don't you? Hate me, even? This C-4 making you nervous, eh? Thinking about bumping me off while I'm sleeping, huh? I'll be ready for you! You'll see! Me and the howitzer in my basement!"
Sarcasm aside, you seem like a well-articulated guy and your interest genuine enough. A few of your arguments ring true, and I have nothing against hunting rifles or controlled conditions like firing ranges. However, the old arguments for a populace equipped with Uzis still seem like rather poor rationalizations in face of the main question whether these guns ultimately benefit a society or not. It should be obvious that they don't, and I don't even like Michael Moore.
The Vault Dweller
always looking for water.
Dove said:
I had so much to say...yet Dove's right. Hate to admit it too 'cause I have things to say.
I think Sander mentioned in the past that of all the info he's seen there's just as much evidence for or against freedom to bear arms that no one can make a logical decision on the matter.
Man Colt...your well-spoken. Good to see a gun-rights activist who isnt a fool.
Sincerely,
The Vault Dweller
The_Vault_Dweller said:
Thanks. I did that from memory in about 20 minutes with some distractions.
I can't say that I'm a "gun-rights activist". I barely read anything about it from either side, mainly if I just stumble across it. As I said, a mechanical interest, not political. I wish Ratty hadn't derailed this, could have been an interesting thread on obscure cartridges or something.
Per, very funny. I really like the Bazooka line.
- Colt
Now that sounds like fun, I'll discuss mechanical, historical aspects, but when it gets political is when it gets messy.
So, have you found out what those 7.62 rounds were? Or did I miss it while I was trying to diffuse the flame fest that was bound to happen?
So, have you found out what those 7.62 rounds were? Or did I miss it while I was trying to diffuse the flame fest that was bound to happen?
Indeed, which is one of the reasons why arguiong this is more or less outlawed here: the few researches that have been conducted are all controversial, and contradict eachother. Every argument has been overly articulated and almost every gun thread you can find here ultimately turned into a personal insult fest. Go look for them, if you really want to read all the arguments.
wow, my intenet connection goes down for a night... and look what happens.ive narrowed it down to 2 rounds, either the 7.62 x 20 that was brought up, or something called 7.62 "makerov" or something like that. unfortunately, we lack any ammunition specialists at the store.
WarMonger said:
Alright then, if it's not the Pedersen cartridge, it's probably .32 ACP / 7.62x17mm I think it's also referred to as "Browning Short" but that's not a very exact name.
As you can see, the actual differences between them would be minute (Definately not interchangable) so you probably need to find a way to measure the case length exactly. You guys should have .32 ACP lying around the shop though. - Colt
I actually have much less problems understanding the political and sociological arguments for guns than the psychological and existential ones. I assume many people here will have heard of Eric S. Raymond, who wrote in an essay on the subject:
I recommend the essay to gun lovers, btw, you'll no doubt find it inspiring.
ESR said:
I recommend the essay to gun lovers, btw, you'll no doubt find it inspiring.
And here's the link to the article:
http://www.catb.org/~esr/guns/gun-ethics.html
ESR is an intelligent and well-spoken man, and he's done much good for the Open Source movement and other nerdy stuff, but damn I disagree with him a lot.
http://www.catb.org/~esr/guns/gun-ethics.html
ESR is an intelligent and well-spoken man, and he's done much good for the Open Source movement and other nerdy stuff, but damn I disagree with him a lot.
PsychoSniper
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
Sander said:Yes, indeed.master_of_flamaster said:Riiiiight
EDIT: Saying 'Riiiight' is no argument of any form, come back when you learn the difference between disimissing someone else's argument with a dumb statement, and with an actual argument.
If guns were outlawed, then only the lawless would posess guns.
Sorry to derail again, but I find this quite amusing.Colt said:
Only 1 (Ratty) of the anti-gun lobby in this thread was from a former Communist state. The others included an American (Maddog), a Dutchie (Sander), a Swede (Per, I think) and a Brit (Your's Truly).
Unless you mean "the threat of Soviet rule".
Anyway, carry on with the technical debate.
Oh, Psycho, somebody already produced a variant of that saying.
Psycho's just reponding to his basic instinct of spamming us with a quote pyramid.
Big T said:Sorry to derail again, but I find this quite amusing.
Only 1 (Ratty) of the anti-gun lobby in this thread was from a former Communist state. The others included an American (Maddog), a Dutchie (Sander), a Swede (Per, I think) and a Brit (Your's Truly).
Unless you mean "the threat of Soviet rule".
I wasn't only specifying you here who are against the ownerhip of weapons but it seems to be a general concensus amongst those in eastern Europe that guns are horrible creations of the Devil. Yes, though, you could also say those that were once under the threat of Soviet rule, as much of Europe was, should be more inclined toward a better defense. Otherwise it would seem the plan all along was to simply scream "Whoops. Well, that's a botched game, there. All hail the iron fist of communism!" once the Soviets invaded.
I've never heard of Eric S. Raymond before but damn, he is a good writer. - Colt
master_of_flamaster
Mildly Dipped
Ok, no problem. Here's an argument:
Owning guns in Poland is not illegal but it is closely monitored by the state and sanctioned by law. It is very hard to get a "gun permit" in Poland. You either have to be a cop, a prison guard/worker, a civilian army worker (or be in the army) or a security guard.
Even then you have to pass phisicall and mental exams each year to not get your "gun permit" revoked.
All of these laws/restrictions/precedures/whatever don't prevent criminals from owning and using guns.
For example: in Poland when you're 18, you can legally own certain weapons for self defence. Those include: stun-guns, pepper spray and most important - pistols that fire gas rounds. Those "gas-guns" use harmles paralising gas BUT a person with the right knoledge, skills and materials can "upgrade" those things so that they can fire real rounds. Many criminals in Poland use them along with real guns that were either stolen or bought on the black market (from Russia or The Ukraine)
BTW: I'm sorry if I offended you by saing "Riiiight". I didn't mean no offense. I just can't help my self when I hear someone saying stuff like: "outlaw owning guns, it really works!"
What am I? Chopped liver?
But then again I don't think that owning guns should be "completly" legal or illegal. Owning guns should be sanctioned and monitored so that people who shouldn't own guns, can't buy them.Belive me they don't.
Yes, that is a good idea. I agree.
Whoops! Sorry man, but I wasn't sure whether you were arguing against guns, or just against the Polish police force.master_of_flamaster said:What am I? Chopped liver?