Is it even possible to get rid of guns in the US?

Well, it's more the threat of a random check. Going on 20 years and I haven't had one yet.
Only one guy I know has, had his bong and weed on the table at the time, but they said they were only there to check his firearms and storage.

Not sure that'd work in the US though (it's only an expiation notice here anyway). :icon_lol:
 
skombolis said:
You'd die before handing over something that God-willing you would only need in the case of a dire emergency to protect the safety of you and loved ones? Given odds are pretty good you could go your whole life and never need to fire one that seems like an extreme position to take. Yet I see it taken a lot, like people want to tell you every chance they get how they would turn it into a life and death fight and with those presumably tasked to enforcing the law of collecting the guns if that ever came to be. Have you ever considered the irony, which is it is probably that kind of extremism that makes some people uncomfortable about even legal gun owners in the first place?
Click to expand...

Its only ironic if ones default mode of thinking is a servile one ( not implying this describes you).

You just don't thinks its important, so it seems silly draw the proverbial sand there.......to you , and that's fine. Surely there is some other ideal closer to your heart that you could substitute in order to relate though ?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Al Gorithm said:
Its only ironic if ones default mode of thinking is a servile one ( not implying this describes you).
Click to expand...

Just seems like there is a lot of steps between servile and 'to the death' with someone doing their job. You rarely see any other topic or right discussed where people regularly claim they would protest the law changing in this manner. It is hard to feel there is a not a correlation.

Mind you I am not saying i think a majority of gun owners would do this but let's just say I don't find it a helpful addition to the debate that centers in part around legal owners being responsible in their use. "Try to take my gun and I'll try to kill you" doesn't inspire a lot of confidence. And again, not trying to broad-brush gun owners but just making a point i guess .
 
.......................okay then lets simplify it even more for our government. Everyone has one and it's more powerful than any weapon one can wield if taught to use it correctly. Hint, it rhymes with find. :icon_chee
 
WorldofWarcraft said:
Just what we need.. some random motherfucker is going to randomly knock on my door to see if I'm storing my guns and ammunition properly.
Click to expand...

Guns? What guns? Lost them all in a boating accident. :icon_cry2
 
Ruprecht said:
The guy started off by saying the idea of disarming Americans wasn't realistic at this stage, and then outlined regulations for responsible ownership (as defined by essentially every other first world nation).

To then post some meme about criminals still getting guns looks like someone having a conversation with themself, or a complete strawman argument.
Click to expand...

I agree he did that. Then the conversation continued because there was uncertainty as to the purpose/benefit of imposing those regulations. Here they are again.

you need to show you know how to store, clean, maintain and shoot accurately to get one.
Click to expand...

Storage could be for crime prevention or accident prevention.

Cleaning makes no sense to me why the government would make that law.

Maintain is the same. Is it to make sure those defending themselves are successful? One could argue that's counter to safety in terms of malfunctions preventing accidental discharges.

Accuracy makes sense for crime prevention (i.e. defending against a crime in action) and safety.

That isn't obviously all explained by safety to me, as you insist. Therefore the guy's question about potential benefit to the main problem of crime isn't without connection (especially considering the first suggestion made above is touted here as a crime prevention measure).


Terry Noonan said:
Is it possible to remove free speech in America?
Click to expand...

Yes, by making the government everyone's employer or directly dependent on government conducted business.
 
threelions said:
If you think your gun is ever going to stop your government forcing you to do their will you're very naive. In this day and age an internet connection and the ability to hack is far more powerful against governments than a gun.
Click to expand...

Well, one of us is naive, but it's certainly not me. If weapons haven't been confiscated by a previous administration, the first order of business with oppressive regimes has always been to round them up. It's quite funny how notoriously consistent that action is among tyrants. In fact, registration is another one of those absurdly predictable indicators.

Do firearms guarantee that a citizenry will prevent or win against an oppressor? No. Not by a long shot. But in almost every case its a necessary condition, even while its not a sufficient condition to prevent oppression. And further still, even if its necessity wasn't uniform, its still a massive force multiplier to the people's advantage.

Frankly, people are so blinded by normalcy bias. The default condition for humanity has been one of suffering and oppression. In the 20th century alone, 120 million people were killed by their governments outside of war. To give that some perspective, that's a full third of the US population plus a good bit of change.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gVnalUNTCK4
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,936
Messages
55,456,010
Members
174,787
Latest member
Freddie556

Share this page

Back
Top