Page 22 of 23 FirstFirst ... 1220212223 LastLast
Results 211 to 220 of 225

Thread: Obama to Seek New Assault Weapons Ban

  1. #211
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Seen
    09-24-17 @ 04:38 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    29,261

    Re: Obama to Seek New Assault Weapons Ban

    Quote Originally Posted by stevenb View Post
    Boy, how did I figure you'd go there.
    .
    Sheeeesh lighten up

  2. #212
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

    Re: Obama to Seek New Assault Weapons Ban

    Quote Originally Posted by WillRockwell View Post
    Oh really? explain these statistics

    Yearly firearm murders by country:
    Australia: 65 per year
    Canada: 165
    France: 255
    United Kingdom: 68
    Germany: 381
    Japan: 39
    United States: 11,127.

    My explanation is it's because the firearm community in America refuses to act responsibly in creating legislation to limit the availability of guns. What's your explanation?
    Limiting guns will not make people more responsible. Leaps of logic are common with you.

    What do you not get, being a free people involves risk and danger. The world is not a padded room for you or anyone else to avoid danger in.

    Why do you insist on giving up peoples rights just so you feel safe?
    What do you plan on doing to stop the biggest murderer of the 21st century?

    It seems you will let them keep all of their weapons with no problems.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

  3. #213
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Obama to Seek New Assault Weapons Ban

    Quote Originally Posted by WillRockwell View Post
    20 times more violent than Australians? I think there's more than cultural aggression at work here.
    No, Australians are thieves. Americans are violent.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  4. #214
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,323

    Re: Obama to Seek New Assault Weapons Ban

    Quote Originally Posted by WillRockwell View Post
    You have statistically proven that the number of murders in a country is directly related to the number of guns in that country. You probably didn't intend that, but the truth has a sneaky way of revealing itself. Thank you
    Haven't we then also proven that the elimination of guns does not lower a rate?
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  5. #215
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Obama to Seek New Assault Weapons Ban

    Quote Originally Posted by American View Post
    Haven't we then also proven that the elimination of guns does not lower a rate?
    Well there's definitely a dependency of gun crime on number of guns. Say for instance, you had 0 guns; there would be zero gun crime as you can't have gun crime without guns (of course crime itself will not be zero..so long as there are humans in significant population there will be some amount of crime). At some point this dependency does saturate, if you add more guns or take away more guns you won't affect the rate too much. That's the spot we sit in now. To affect greatly the reduction in crime due to guns you would have to make a marked reduction in the physical number of guns available in the United States. That's going to take some rather draconian methods which would not be in our best interest if the government engaged in.

    The point is not that guns enable gun crime, I mean no **** Sherlock. Thanks for the update. Crime in general will always exist, and in countries of great freedom, you will have a good amount of crime. Though crime can and does exist in areas of complete despotism, authoritarianism, etc. too; no free society will be without a good amount of crime. It's an innate consequence of freedom. So the point isn't the restriction of guns, the removal of guns; for to do so is an act of treason. The point is to understand what we can and can't do to affect the gun crime rate while refraining from infringing upon the rights of the individual. The individual does have the right to keep and bear arms, furthermore in this country we recognize that right. Now our government was primarily constructed for the protection and proliferation of our innate and inalienable rights; rightful government works towards these goals; treasonous and tyrannical government works against these goals. So at some level, we must accept as consequence of freedom that there will be gun crime. Like there will be incite to riot and libel and slander. Like there will be gangs and riots anti-government actions. Like there will be those whom hide illegal activities on their property knowing cops can't get to them without a warrant. Freedom carries with it significant consequence and responsibility. There will be people that murder with a gun, but that's not the gun's fault and that is not the fault of other gun owners. The person at fault is the one who pulled the trigger and it is with that person with whom we must take exception.

    In a free society, everything is dealt with on an individual basis (which is why automatic sentencing is a very bad and dangerous practice). You can not go after the rights of others because some choose to abuse those rights. You have to go after the individual who committed the crimes; knowing that because you are free means that there will be crime. But I still say it sure as hell beats the alternative. Rather free than a slave I say.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  6. #216
    Professor
    Marilyn Monroe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    03-06-14 @ 03:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    2,137

    Re: Obama to Seek New Assault Weapons Ban

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    How is that a relevant standard by which to determine what firearms are protected by the 2nd?

    To answer your question:
    Depending on the specific police department, police usually carry some sort of 'assault weapon' in the car, either in the passenger compartment or in the trunk.
    Well none of these weapons were around when the 2nd amendment was created. The right to bear arms seems like it could be rather vague in it's original implications as compared to what is out there today.

    I realize certain SWAT Teams and so forth carry assault type weapons when there is grave danger, but most policemen don't go to domestic disturbances with their assault weapons out in the open.

    I think the right to bear arms should be different in different arenas. Everyday citizens should be allowed to have guns and even high powered weapons within some standard of reason, but when it's all too lethal, it's too lethal. Mostly it's the nuts who usually do all the damage with the really high powered weapons.
    "It's not that I'm afraid to die, I just don't want to be there when it happens." Woody Allen.

  7. #217
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Obama to Seek New Assault Weapons Ban

    Quote Originally Posted by WillRockwell View Post
    Seems to me that responsible gun owners, hunters, and law enforcement personnel would be first in line to advocate the control of assault weapons. These weapons have no practical use beyond murder. Firearms enthusiasts should take the lead in limiting access to dangerous weapons because they understand the responsibility and dangers of gun ownership.

    There was an article in the New Yorker about the inventer of the AA12 automatic shotgun. Take a look at the video of this streetsweeper, and then explain to me why the NRA would approve its sale?
    YouTube - AA12 Automatic Shotgun
    Keep in mind that the expressed point and purpose of the 2nd amendment is to secure the state.

    You seem to be of the opinion that guns are only for use against animals.

    I don't know what data lead you to conclude that this nation needed to be secured against flying monkey armies or demonic bunnies, but may I suggest you lay off of both the pot and the Monty Python.

    Yes, guns are made to kill people. That is their primary use. We buy guns so that we can kill people. That's what we want to be capable of doing.

  8. #218
    Dorset Patriot
    Wessexman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Sydney, Australia(but my heart is back in Dorset.)
    Last Seen
    10-17-17 @ 04:17 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    8,468

    Re: Obama to Seek New Assault Weapons Ban

    Quote Originally Posted by WillRockwell View Post
    Oh really? explain these statistics

    Yearly firearm murders by country:
    Australia: 65 per year
    Canada: 165
    France: 255
    United Kingdom: 68
    Germany: 381
    Japan: 39
    United States: 11,127.

    My explanation is it's because the firearm community in America refuses to act responsibly in creating legislation to limit the availability of guns. What's your explanation?
    The problem is you are comparing different cultures, it is apples and oranges.

    In the UK gun violence has only increased with restrictions. Handguns were banned in the mid-90s but gun violence continued to grow until it peaked in the early 2000s. It is slightly lower now but it shows no sign of going back to the pre-ban levels.
    "It is written in the eternal constitution that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters." - Edmund Burke

  9. #219
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Last Seen
    12-26-10 @ 06:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,083

    Re: Obama to Seek New Assault Weapons Ban

    Quote Originally Posted by LaMidRighter View Post
    This is one Americans will probably never solve, or completely let go.


    It really is all of the above to be perfectly honest. Assault rifles simply have a few differences like select fire switches, shorter barrels for clearing, tactical changes, etc. But assault rifles fire the same rounds as typical hunting rifles, sub-machine guns? pistol rounds....they just do this at an increased rate of fire.

    The original intent was to allow citizens the same rights to ownership that the government could exercise, merchant ships at the time of the constitutions writing had large cannons much like the federal troops, and I believe the original Howizters were legal for civilian ownership. That doesn't mean the pro 2nd side means people should have M-180 grenade attachments or artillery cannons without an explosives license, and no one should have nukes, but I digress, wanted to give you a sample of the thinking behind our side.
    Thank you for responding with maturity and decency.

  10. #220
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Last Seen
    12-26-10 @ 06:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,083

    Re: Obama to Seek New Assault Weapons Ban

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    Well there's definitely a dependency of gun crime on number of guns. Say for instance, you had 0 guns; there would be zero gun crime as you can't have gun crime without guns (of course crime itself will not be zero..so long as there are humans in significant population there will be some amount of crime). At some point this dependency does saturate, if you add more guns or take away more guns you won't affect the rate too much. That's the spot we sit in now. To affect greatly the reduction in crime due to guns you would have to make a marked reduction in the physical number of guns available in the United States. That's going to take some rather draconian methods which would not be in our best interest if the government engaged in.
    In relation to the gun/death statistics posted a bit earlier, it would be interesting to correlate those statistics to other forms of violent crime in the same countries. For instance, in Canada, I believe the stabbing rate is much higher than in the U.S., and Canada's gun violence rate is much lower than the U.S. one.

    All this means is that if you remove access to one weapon, crime will compensate with another. The issue itself, I believe, is crime in general. How do you reduce the tendency to want to commit violent crime? Social programs? Tougher prison sentences? Educating the public? Etc.

    While I have issues with guns, I don't agree that eliminating them will necessarily stop murders and reduce violent crime.

Page 22 of 23 FirstFirst ... 1220212223 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •