• 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

'Assault weapons' - How long before...

See OP

  • Total voters
    28
Kandahar said:
If our government turns to tyranny, your guns aren't going to protect you anyway. They'll mow you down with a tank or drop a nuke on your house.
Click to expand...

Right, cause our volunteer army and police force would do just that. :roll:
 
stevenb said:
Right, cause our volunteer army and police force would do just that. :roll:
Click to expand...

We were talking about if the government turned to tyranny, not what the government would do right now. If you're stockpiling your guns to overthrow the government as it exists now, they absolutely SHOULD be taken away from you, and you should be sent to prison and/or a mental hospital.

You guys who talk about overthrowing a tyrannical regime with your guns obviously never outgrew adolescence. This isn't a ****ing movie.
 
Kandahar said:
We were talking about if the government turned to tyranny, not what the government would do right now. If you're stockpiling your guns to overthrow the government as it exists now, they absolutely SHOULD be taken away from you, and you should be sent to prison and/or a mental hospital.

You guys who talk about overthrowing a tyrannical regime with your guns obviously never outgrew adolescence. This isn't a ****ing movie.
Click to expand...

Right, cause Iraqis with ak47s and improvised explosives aren't doing all that great against the mighty United States military.

You should probably pay attention to things other than the nifty commercials that you see all day.

And it doesn't take a stockpile to pick up a weapon and fight... it does take a stockpile to arm a like minded militia to fight, though.
 
Kandahar said:
If our government turns to tyranny, your guns aren't going to protect you anyway. They'll mow you down with a tank or drop a nuke on your house.
Click to expand...

Well assault rifles and home made explosives seem to be working quite well for insurgents in Iraq.
 
earthworm said:
The gun lobby is still too strong; maybe in another 20 years they will become more civilized.
If the top ten gun lobbyists are assassinated plus a few judges, things may be sped up a little...
But it makes no sense to prevent the law abiding citizen from assault weapon ownership and then do nothing about organized crime.
Click to expand...

By organized crime, you mean wall street? the rest of it is in no way organized....
 
If our government turns to tyranny, your guns aren't going to protect you anyway. They'll mow you down with a tank or drop a nuke on your house.
Click to expand...

A statement such as this shows a profound ignorance not only of military history but of current operational methodologies and capabilities. How many instances of a technologically and numerically inferior force defeating its enemy can you think of off-hand? More importantly, even if your statement were true it wouldn't matter to me. I'd rather die fighting a tyrannical government than living under the yoke of its oppression. I guess we're just different that way.

We were talking about if the government turned to tyranny, not what the government would do right now. If you're stockpiling your guns to overthrow the government as it exists now, they absolutely SHOULD be taken away from you, and you should be sent to prison and/or a mental hospital.

You guys who talk about overthrowing a tyrannical regime with your guns obviously never outgrew adolescence. This isn't a ****ing movie.
Click to expand...

You act as if government tyranny is some sort of fantastical concept that exists only in our imaginations. Are you suggesting that such a thing could never happen? Or that it is wrong to prepare for such an eventuality? It's scary to know that you feel anyone who is prepared to resist the tyranny of their government should be jailed or thrown into a mental institution; King George couldn't have put it better himself. And do not attempt to twist my words because I am not advocating the active overthrow of our government, I am merely asserting our right to do so should it become tyrannical.
 
Ethereal, I can understand a position that you might feel the need to fight against a tyrannical government. Although I don't see it happening anytime soon, many nations have become corrupt (see WW2) and the U.S. isn't immune to this. However, that has no bearing on current gun legislation. If you want to lead a revolution against the government, load up on all the illegal military grade weapons you can import from Russia. If you going to commit treason, who cares if you also own illegal weapons? The evil regime could only execute you once if you got caught. There are many good reasons for law abiding citizens to own legal firearms, but rebelling against the government isn't one of them.
 
Ethereal, I can understand a position that you might feel the need to fight against a tyrannical government. Although I don't see it happening anytime soon, many nations have become corrupt (see WW2) and the U.S. isn't immune to this. However, that has no bearing on current gun legislation.
Click to expand...

I would hope that all Americans felt the same way. Is there anyone here who could honestly say they wouldn't subvert tyrannny? Also, I disagree that current gun legislation has no bearing on such an eventuality. Stricter gun control laws could act as an effective precursor to tyranny. Nazi Germany is a good example of strict gun control policy facilitating a tyrant's ascendancy to power.

If you want to lead a revolution against the government, load up on all the illegal military grade weapons you can import from Russia. If you going to commit treason, who cares if you also own illegal weapons? The evil regime could only execute you once if you got caught. There are many good reasons for law abiding citizens to own legal firearms, but rebelling against the government isn't one of them.
Click to expand...

I don't understand why it's not. Are you afraid that the stockpiled weapons will grow legs and start executing people? Do you think it would be strategically sound to start stockpiling weapons after the government became tyrannical? Also, I would like to inform you that I do not even own a firearm, so any attempts to paint me as a gun fanatic will fail.
 
stevenb said:
Right, cause Iraqis with ak47s and improvised explosives aren't doing all that great against the mighty United States military.

You should probably pay attention to things other than the nifty commercials that you see all day.
Click to expand...

Actually, A) they *aren't* doing all that great against the US military. Most US soldiers have died from bombs and whatnot, not AK-47s. And B) the US military is not a tyrannical government that is willing to crush all opposition at any cost. We could flatten Iraq in two hours if we wanted to.

stevenb said:
And it doesn't take a stockpile to pick up a weapon and fight... it does take a stockpile to arm a like minded militia to fight, though.
Click to expand...

I repeat: This is not a ****ing movie. You aren't going to overthrow the government with your gun.
 
Last edited:
Federal Assault Weapons Ban - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

We had one already, but it expired.

Now:

H.R. 6257 was introduced by Mark Kirk (R IL-10) on June 12, 2008 and seeks to re-instate the Assault Weapons Ban indefinitely as well as to expand the list of banned weapons. The bill was also referred to the House Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security on 7/28/08.​

A Republican is asking for it to be reinstated. LOL.
 
Stricter gun control laws could act as an effective precursor to tyranny. Nazi Germany is a good example of strict gun control policy facilitating a tyrant's ascendancy to power.
Click to expand...

Gun control had nothing to do with Hitlers rise to power. Hitler was elected in office, and had enough popular and political support to become a dictator. The German people did not rebel against Hitler, they either supported him or refused to speak out against him.

I don't understand why it's not. Are you afraid that the stockpiled weapons will grow legs and start executing people?
Click to expand...

I don't really care if people want to keep normal guns in case they are worried about the government. It stupid, but they aren't hurting anyone. However, I do have a problem with using such an argument to push for automatic weapons or preventing the creation of records for gun ownership.

Do you think it would be strategically sound to start stockpiling weapons after the government became tyrannical?
Click to expand...

Yes. Once the government has become unbearable and can no longer be stopped by peaceful means, you start importing military hardware from Russia. For starters, nobody has any record you of having the guns, so nobody knows where they are. Second, you can get your hands on explosives, missiles, mortars, machine guns and other useful weapons. Finally, I'd rather at least wait until my government truly starts to take steps towards evil before I plot against it. The U.S. has done some nasty stuff in its life, but never enough to cause me to rebel. I'll give our country the benefit of the doubt.

Also, I would like to inform you that I do not even own a firearm, so any attempts to paint me as a gun fanatic will fail.
Click to expand...

I am not attempting to paint you as a gun fanatic. I simply think your analysis about the benefits of stockpiling weapons is incorrect. Also, you can find plenty of gun fanatics who don't own guns, and plenty of anti-gun fanatics who also own guns. Its a weird world.
 
I generally oppose gun control. I just don't think people need to walk around with AK47s. Handguns? Fine. Rifles & Shotguns? Fine. Automatic Weapons? No.
 
Gun control had nothing to do with Hitlers rise to power. Hitler was elected in office, and had enough popular and political support to become a dictator. The German people did not rebel against Hitler...
Click to expand...

This is a valid point but it can be conversely viewed as a perfect affirmation of my argument. A dictator does not necessarily have to assume power through force so retaining an attitude of preemption towards tyranny in a democracy isn't irrational.

they either supported him
Click to expand...

Tell that to the Jews. Guess who were the first people to start having their firearms confiscated? Let's ask Hitler...

"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the supply of arms to the underdogs is a sine qua non for the overthrow of any sovereignty. So let's not have any native militia or native police. German troops alone will bear the sole responsibility for the maintenance of law and order throughout the occupied Russian territories, and a system of military strong-points must be evolved to cover the entire occupied country." --Adolf Hitler

I don't really care if people want to keep normal guns in case they are worried about the government. It stupid, but they aren't hurting anyone. However, I do have a problem with using such an argument to push for automatic weapons or preventing the creation of records for gun ownership.
Click to expand...

Once again, I'm not sure what the problem with stockpiling automatic weapons is or how gun control laws would actually stop somebody from doing it. Are automatic weapons more likely to grow legs and execute people than "normal guns" are?

Yes. Once the government has become unbearable and can no longer be stopped by peaceful means, you start importing military hardware from Russia. For starters, nobody has any record you of having the guns, so nobody knows where they are. Second, you can get your hands on explosives, missiles, mortars, machine guns and other useful weapons.
Click to expand...

Thankfully, you are not a general. I don't think procuring arms from Russia would be as easy as you make it out to be nor would it be strategically advantageous to start arming ourselves after the battle has begun. Most people who plan to obtain a weapon after the fight has begun tend to lose. Lastly, assuming we could procure weapons from Russia with efficacy and regularity how would we pay for these weapons, exactly? I don't think the Russians would take credit cards.

Finally, I'd rather at least wait until my government truly starts to take steps towards evil before I plot against it. The U.S. has done some nasty stuff in its life, but never enough to cause me to rebel. I'll give our country the benefit of the doubt.
Click to expand...

Preparation is an integral part of waging war. Also, who's plotting? I'm not drawing up plans or recruiting anybody. I'm merely engaging in hypotheticals.

I am not attempting to paint you as a gun fanatic. I simply think your analysis about the benefits of stockpiling weapons is incorrect. Also, you can find plenty of gun fanatics who don't own guns, and plenty of anti-gun fanatics who also own guns. Its a weird world.
Click to expand...

Indeed.
 
Kandahar said:
Actually, A) they *aren't* doing all that great against the US military. Most US soldiers have died from bombs and whatnot, not AK-47s. And B) the US military is not a tyrannical government that is willing to crush all opposition at any cost. We could flatten Iraq in two hours if we wanted to.



I repeat: This is not a ****ing movie. You aren't going to overthrow the government with your gun.
Click to expand...

Right guy, you've shown your ignorance when it comes to guns.. and obviously you've done no research, and care to do no research on them.

Done talking to you.

Macintosh said:
I generally oppose gun control. I just don't think people need to walk around with AK47s. Handguns? Fine. Rifles & Shotguns? Fine. Automatic Weapons? No.
Click to expand...

There is already quite a few laws on possessing Full Auto weapons. Assault weapons as they are quite often referred to here are weapons with larger magazine capacities, and anything that looks scary... oh, and they're all semi-automatic. And, it's generally not ak47s they're after... it's everything that fires anything more than a .22lr caliber. That's where the problem exists.
 
Kandahar said:
If our government turns to tyranny, your guns aren't going to protect you anyway. They'll mow you down with a tank or drop a nuke on your house.
Click to expand...
Hmm.
Tell us about how we lost the war in Iraq...?
 
Kandahar said:
I repeat: This is not a ****ing movie. You aren't going to overthrow the government with your gun.
Click to expand...
You do agree that even if it is doomed to failure, there is a right to TRY -- yes?
 
Macintosh said:
I generally oppose gun control. I just don't think people need to walk around with AK47s. Handguns? Fine. Rifles & Shotguns? Fine. Automatic Weapons? No.
Click to expand...
The 'assault weapon' ban doesnt have anyting to do with automatic weapons.
 
jamesrage said:
I say with in six months after he starts his term or within 6 months after the midterms so that voters will be immune to the fact he flushed one our constitutional rights. Or he will be sneaky about it and just appoint the most anti-American,ACLU rat lawyers to be a supreme court judges.
Click to expand...
Some say he'll go after the ammo.
 
Goobieman said:
Hmm.
Tell us about how we lost the war in Iraq...?
Click to expand...

I already addressed this. The US military is not a tyrannical regime willing to do whatever it takes to maintain its power. We could flatten Iraq in a couple hours if we wanted to. And the US was certainly not defeated in Iraq by AK-47s. :roll:
 
Last edited:
Goobieman said:
You do agree that even if it is doomed to failure, there is a right to TRY -- yes?
Click to expand...

So in other words, you fantasize about murdering people with your guns even though you know full well it will accomplish nothing.

I find it somewhat scary that the people who are obsessed with the Second Amendment are the same people who I would least trust with a gun.
 
Kandahar said:
So in other words, you fantasize about murdering people with your guns even though you know full well it will accomplish nothing.
Click to expand...
You didnt answer my question.
 
Kandahar said:
I already addressed this. The US military is not a tyrannical regime willing to do whatever it takes to maintain its power.
Click to expand...
So... it -is- possible that an armed populace could indeed successfully resist the US military.
Right?
 
Goobieman said:
...the Obama Administration and the Dems in Congress try to pass a federal ban on 'assault weapons'?
Click to expand...

As is the case with many government assistance programs, I believe the weapons ban will come as an unsung requirement to receive the assistance. Although the left has and will always seek to restrict personal freedom, IMO the next assault on weapons will not be as overt as previous attempts.
 
Macintosh said:
Federal Assault Weapons Ban - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

We had one already, but it expired.

Now:

H.R. 6257 was introduced by Mark Kirk (R IL-10) on June 12, 2008 and seeks to re-instate the Assault Weapons Ban indefinitely as well as to expand the list of banned weapons. The bill was also referred to the House Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security on 7/28/08.​

A Republican is asking for it to be reinstated. LOL.
Click to expand...



sshh.... focus on Obama. He's the one to blame!:doh
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom