My stance on guns

[spacemaverick]

Thanks.  Anyway, I am mostly in agreement with what is said no matter who Pravda supports or is operated by whoever.  You taught me a small lesson here along withknowing more about the background of Pravda.  Thanks again.  I could be wrong in my opinions and I am certainly open to change my opinion but not right now.  The articles I presented best reflect my own opinion.  It seems everyone has quite a discussion going on here.  I appreciate seeing the difference of opinions from different people and cultures.

[PLAYSWITHMACHINES]

Spacemaverick has a point;

I retired as a Lt. and have had to deal with criminals the entire 20 years.  They have their way of getting guns and it's not through a gunshop.

That's why there are so many shootings in so-called gun-free countries like the UK
The english gubmint response is to have more armed police, which is sad, but true.

I understand you also, Pim (loved the pics btw) i think there are only 2 real choices we can make here, & that's no guns at all, or everybody must have the right to bear arms.

In the former case, we can eventually use robocops to deal with violent criminals, and almost every police force in the world already have non-lethal weapons like tasers, pepperspray etc.

In the latter case, it would be mayhem. First there will be all the nutcases who will easily get themselves a gun & go shoot up a school or shopping mall. The only real defense against that (assuming everyone IS armed) would be if one of our citizens has the courage to do his or her duty & put a bullet in him, preferably fatal, because it would save us a LOT of money in court costs, cops, guards, prisons etc.

Sure you can be all liberal & try to reform the guy, but if he's that far gone, what's the point. It's taking needless risks with peoples lives, to try & parole a killer, or change him.

What i DO NOT understand, is why such non-lethal weapons as tasers are illegal in the UK?
Cant they just issue you with a permit, after a quick backround check?
At least then, you could defend yourself & your loved ones, & still be incapable of killing someone.
Simple.

Me, I am going to defend my family against all enemies foreign or domestic.
Besides, I would rather be tried by 12 than carried by 6

Me too, mate!

[petrus4]

I've deleted all copies of the linked post, both from my hard drive, and from my web host.

I don't know how to do it, and I am not going to claim to definitely be able to, but somehow I must work on ceasing to care about American domestic politics.

[PLAYSWITHMACHINES]

Right you are
I simply don't have the time to get involved in the whole quagmire that is politics in general.
I like to think more in binary, it's 'yes' or 'no' & i like to keep the 'maybe's' as few as possible

[petrus4]

You can say that guns need to be regulated.  You can say whatever else you want in response.

I will simply say this.

My grandfather was a bomber pilot during WW2.  I have spent the last 20 years of my own life, Americans, watching the evil that he, and millions of others, put their minds and bodies at risk to fight, gradually re-establishing itself in your country.

I am uncertain as to why, but I am apparently upset by this to a much greater degree than most of you apparently are yourselves.

It is becoming extremely difficult, and extremely painful, to watch.

[robomont]

we are against a wall.
the new tech that could get us out of the hole is being held back.saving it for ww3.

now the country is stagnating back towards religion again.another form of cannibalism.

[spacemaverick]

I believe there are many different stances on guns.  Influencing factors are:  A particular culture may see gun ownership one way having been influenced by their culture.  Countries and the type of government and it's laws influence gun ownership.  Your upbringing by your parents would be another influence.  There are many factors that influence how a person would think if they needed or wanted to have certain types of guns.  All of our countries have been violent at one time or another.  Look back in the history of each country and you will find violence with guns.  The main thing with America is that we have been given the right to bear arms.  When you look back at our American Revolution you will know why.  We do not wish that right to be taken away.  Our government does a knee jerk reaction to to many crisis and tries to take whatever they can from the populace because they can.  It is whatever is "IN vogue" to get the votes.  Power is intoxicating and when you have money what else is there.  "I" must have power is what a good deal of politicians want.  There are those of course who have pure motives.  Then if you want to go even further, those in power do not want to have the populace armed because they can walk in with their power and do what they please.  Some Americans like to just target practice with their weapons.  Others like to hunt.  There are those who want to protect from the armed criminals.  There are those who want to make sure the government doesn't step in (elements of the gov't) and take away our rights.  My beliefs are a mixture.  Those people of other countries have their views.  I respect that.  The decision (bottom line) is a personal decision.  Thanks for your attention.

[zorgon]

My opinion on Guns...

Islamic nations have no qualms about being armed to the teeth... even their kids learn early to handle machine guns..

Kindergarten Level





So... you want to take MY guns away?

Just try it

[spacemaverick]

Hi Zorgon, ditto on what you said.  My guns are staying with me.  If they want them, then they will have to pry them from me.

[spacemaverick]

This history of gun control will help really know my stance on guns.

[ArMaP]

My opinion on Guns...

Islamic nations have no qualms about being armed to the teeth... even their kids learn early to handle machine guns..

And why they do it?

[ArMaP]

Then if you want to go even further, those in power do not want to have the populace armed because they can walk in with their power and do what they please.

Those in power can use their power to get you away from your guns, even if you are allowed to have them, like they did in Nazi Germany, where people could have guns but the Nazis found ways of sending those that they knew were against them to prison for other reasons.

Think about it: when did the established powers did something they didn't want? Do you really think that the government does all that it wants except when guns are involved? Why did the "founding fathers" (that expression always reminds me of the way the Portuguese fascists talked about government, always presented as a kind of a "father figure") added that second (it's the second, isn't it?) amendment? Because someone told them that 200 years later the people would need guns to throw down the government? And if they were so intelligent and thought everything so well, why is it the second amendment and it was not part of the original document? Probably because it was in their interest and because it was not really something that was needed to be in the constitution (or whatever document it was), like it was in someone else's interest to make alcoholic drinks illegal (where were the guns then to stop that stupid idea?).

[Phedre]

I have been wondering?  For those not in this country or even those that are. It seems some are under the impression that "machine guns" (like in the movies) where used in the current tragedies. This is not so. One pull of the trigger, one bullet. Although "machine guns" are not illegal, one can get a special permit to own one, they are not the guns used in the tragedies. Although "gangs" police and government have all the access they want. They can make a BB gun look like a "machine gun"   

[ArMaP]

It seems some are under the impression that "machine guns" (like in the movies) where used in the current tragedies.

I haven't seen anyone saying that. 

From what I understand it, the gun (or guns) were always presented as "semi-automatic".

[Amaterasu]

I bet if I asked any One of You if You believed in freedom You would say, "Oh, sure,"  But many here seem to think the solution to life as risk is to strip freedoms away from People.

The fact is that life IS a risk, and One cannot make Us safe by taking away freedoms.  All it does is drive Us closer and ever closer to fascism.  And decidedly NOT free.