• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

If America banned the Second Ammendment tomorrow what would you do?

If America banned the Second Ammendment tomorrow what would you do?

  • Join a violent revolution

    Votes: 20 29.9%
  • Start a National Petition to repeal the act

    Votes: 17 25.4%
  • Move out the Country

    Votes: 2 3.0%
  • Celebrate

    Votes: 2 3.0%
  • Go on with my life and comply with the new law

    Votes: 17 25.4%
  • Other - state opinion below

    Votes: 9 13.4%

  • Total voters
    67
Are the people claiming they would shoot police officers who would enforce a gun ban Ron Paul supporters?

The courage people have behind anonymous IDs on forums is impressive.
When you consider the fact that the police officers would be acting in violation of the Constitution and the sacred oath they swore to uphold and defend it, they would nolonger be enforcers of law, but armed perpetraters in the commission of a crime__ie; criminals.
 
I try any legal means available to me to get the ban repealed, but that would be the end of it. I don't care enough about the matter to rebel against the government over it.
Now there's a deliciously "slightly liberal" response. Thank you, molten_dragon. ;)

I imagine a straight "liberal" person would do the same as you, but go one step further and try to talk conservatives into giving up as well. I suspect the "very liberal" group would also try and talk conservatives out of opposition, or just resort to violence to help preserve government control.
 
Last edited:
I just dont think there will ever be a scenario where the 2nd amendment is repealed. I think the great majority of thinking rational intelligent human beings...even those who hate guns...realize that once the Bill of Rights is altered, the very next one to go might be one they actually give a **** about. I doubt they would support it and without the amendment process engaged it isnt going to happen. Unless of course the country reaches some point of mass crisis where they outright suspend the entire constitution.

But if politicians should ever decide to demonstrate an effective means of banning firearms by finding a way to actually go after criminals and firearms, well...they should have at it.
 
Now there's a deliciously "slightly liberal" response. Thank you, molten_dragon. ;)

I imagine a straight "liberal" person would do the same as you, but go one step further and try to talk conservatives into giving up as well. I suspect the "very liberal" group would also try and talk conservatives out of opposition, or just resort to violence to help preserve government control.
Most liberals are more concerned about the matrimonial rights of homosexuals than the constitutional rights of all.

The left has a serious lack of judgement concerning priorities__With voters like this it's no wonder we're in such a mess.
 
Everyone always speaks big on this issue but they have been restricting it when they have no authority to do so for decades and which one of them did anything about it? A big fat none. I can't just say I will revolt because no one will ****ing join me! It will be a party of one getting shot in the street.

Sadly, this is probably the most honest post in the entire thread. :(

There is no need to repeal the second amendment, when it can just be whittled down, watered down, and deformed just a little bit at a time, until it is, in essence, meaningless. It's te same way most societal strengths are degraded over time.
 
Everyone always speaks big on this issue but they have been restricting it when they have no authority to do so for decades and which one of them did anything about it? A big fat none. I can't just say I will revolt because no one will ****ing join me! It will be a party of one getting shot in the street.
And the 11 oclock news will report; "a crazed right-wing radical extremist was killed today by police officers whose lives he was threatening for attempting to perform their lawful duties while bystanders cowered in fear for their safety"

RIP_
 
Are the people claiming they would shoot police officers who would enforce a gun ban Ron Paul supporters?

The courage people have behind anonymous IDs on forums is impressive.

Considering the fact police are an arm of the government they are a legitimate target just as much as those running the country are should the government become tyrannical.Because those who make and write the laws are going to be using law enforcement and military to help enforce it's tyranny,therefore that makes them legitimate targets should those in law enforcement and military decided to stay and enforce the government's tyranny.
 
Considering the fact police are an arm of the government they are a legitimate target just as much as those running the country are should the government become tyrannical.Because those who make and write the laws are going to be using law enforcement and military to help enforce it's tyranny,therefore that makes them legitimate targets should those in law enforcement and military decided to stay and enforce the government's tyranny.
There was an example in another thread about a sheriff that said in a press conference he wanted all guns banned and retroactively collected. The beat officers all pretty much said something along the lines of "let him go get his own ass shot off if he wants them that bad, we won't do it".
 
Sadly, this is probably the most honest post in the entire thread. :(

There is no need to repeal the second amendment, when it can just be whittled down, watered down, and deformed just a little bit at a time, until it is, in essence, meaningless. It's te same way most societal strengths are degraded over time.

Well if they decide to ban bullets instead of guns or ban semi automatics and leave us with muzzle loaders it's basically the same act as banning guns so my answer is the same violent revolution.

Though the government could definately justify themselves more if they went with the above route and say we haven't banned arms at all. Hopefully this will never happen but politicians are vile sleezebags.
 
I think many of you would be surprised what people will do when pushed.

The 1 time I was pushed to that point, Illinois has a misdemeanor assault to plea down to from felony aggravated assault.

People will fight and shoot to defend those rights. I was fortunate in that all I lost was my favorite AK. If pressed like that again, I would do the same.

No internet bravado here. I imagine I am not the only one.
 
Last edited:
I think many of you would be surprised what people will do when pushed.

The 1 time I was pushed to that point, Illinois has a misdemeanor assault to plea down to from felony aggravated assault.

People will fight and shoot to defend those rights. I was fortunate in that all I lost was my favorite AK. If pressed like that again, I would do the same.

No internet bravado here. I imagine I am not the only one.
Good point. There is a breaking point in either direction for all of us, some people will break towards the fighting side and some will just break down. That's evident enough when you see the bullied person fight the big dog, or when you see the tough guy in a corner crying because he's just had enough. The honest answer is most of us don't have any factors to go on other than SHTF in this hypothetical but there are other things to consider like "is it rebellion or suicide based on the options", "who are the targets and what are their protections", "how good are communications", etc.
 
If that happened ... the way things are going ... I wouldn't be surprised ...

Why wouldn't something that does not deserve attention be given it?

For example, I couldn't believe it when people spent their time trying to ban certain words from the dictionary, when there are people dying of starvation and of exposure ... what a way to set priorities aye?
 
Considering the fact police are an arm of the government they are a legitimate target just as much as those running the country are should the government become tyrannical.Because those who make and write the laws are going to be using law enforcement and military to help enforce it's tyranny,therefore that makes them legitimate targets should those in law enforcement and military decided to stay and enforce the government's tyranny.


Somewhere on the forum there should be a list of those who call for killing police officers who enforce laws those members don't like. It'd give a clue of what mentality and ethics of the person you are debating on other topics has.
 
I think many of you would be surprised what people will do when pushed.

The 1 time I was pushed to that point, Illinois has a misdemeanor assault to plea down to from felony aggravated assault.

People will fight and shoot to defend those rights. I was fortunate in that all I lost was my favorite AK. If pressed like that again, I would do the same.

No internet bravado here. I imagine I am not the only one.

It seems that you have a story you want to tell. What is it?
 
It seems that you have a story you want to tell. What is it?

Not really, hehehe. It was just one of those situations where you have to take matters into your own hands to get justice. In the end I got lucky.
 
Somewhere on the forum there should be a list of those who call for killing police officers who enforce laws those members don't like. It'd give a clue of what mentality and ethics of the person you are debating on other topics has.

We are not talking about any old "law" here, we are talking about what many consider a basic inalienable right. The thread is about armed revolution, jeeees.
 
Somewhere on the forum there should be a list of those who call for killing police officers who enforce laws those members don't like. It'd give a clue of what mentality and ethics of the person you are debating on other topics has.
As Blackdog put it a outright ban on a basic constitutional inalienable right is not any old law or just simply a law we disagree with. The fact you would see a ban on the second amendment as just any old law and not worthy of a revolt only further proves you are no 2nd amendment proponent or advocate.
 
As Blackdog put it a outright ban on a basic constitutional inalienable right is not any old law or just simply a law we disagree with. The fact you would see a ban on the second amendment as just any old law and not worthy of a revolt only further proves you are no 2nd amendment proponent or advocate.
Notice he keeps repeating "......because of laws you don't like" as if rights are a popularity contest. I've noticed that this is a phrase that seems to be a go to for multiple posters. I don't play populace games and don't care for emotional arguments, I have noticed though that this phrase seems to be the emotional counter every time the argument is lost by small percentage of posters here.
 
Notice he keeps repeating "......because of laws you don't like" as if rights are a popularity contest. I've noticed that this is a phrase that seems to be a go to for multiple posters. I don't play populace games and don't care for emotional arguments, I have noticed though that this phrase seems to be the emotional counter every time the argument is lost by small percentage of posters here.

For some reason I think if the government banned a basic constitutional inalienable right that he is a proponent or adovcate of he wouldn't be using the "......because of laws you don't like" line.
 
For some reason I think if the government banned a basic constitutional inalienable right that he is a proponent or adovcate of he wouldn't be using the "......because of laws you don't like" line.
I tend to think so myself. Even if I didn't agree with the BOR in one fashion or another I would still be an advocate for keeping those I didn't like intact for I know that if any one falls the rest are up for grabs. As well I follow the mentality that the founding fathers were incredibly intelligent men and very much ahead of their time and in some ways ahead of ours as well.
 
Demand full payment at pre-ban retail value for all firearms prior to turning them in. It's a fun hobby, but not worth any sort of legal trouble (I only use them for target practice and as historical relics [WWII guns, main rifle for each participant]). I'm not in a situation where I can imagine needing one for self-defense. I wouldn't, however, take a full loss on the value of the guns, as I'd be taking a significant $ beatdown...
 
Demand full payment at pre-ban retail value for all firearms prior to turning them in. It's a fun hobby, but not worth any sort of legal trouble (I only use them for target practice and as historical relics [WWII guns, main rifle for each participant]). I'm not in a situation where I can imagine needing one for self-defense. I wouldn't, however, take a full loss on the value of the guns, as I'd be taking a significant $ beatdown...

Did the Britons pay people for their firearms when they enacted a ban?
 
I'd say that a good majority of us are still "gun-lovers".
I prefer women....and then mankind.
Guns should stay in our past.
 
Back
Top Bottom