why are weapons still legal in america?

[Vriggchan]

The American Economy.
snip

Yes i understand that the culture of violence is big over there.

Gun control does work but its how to enforce it, thats the problem in a society such as the United States. I do understand your point but it is a very valid argument.

Also i could imagine on the news Headlines "Obama attempts to control gun ownership Massive Revolts all over the country" but im sure many would hand in their weapons willingly if they enforced the message that the cops are to be trusted and are taking weapons of unlawful owners.

Its not that the culture is more violent its that the ability to access these weapons is more prominant. I spent some time in the dangerous areas of Atl, trying to understand why so many people kill one another. All the people I met carried guns. I'd hang out at their place watching tv and someone would knock on the door unexpectedly, suddenly I'd see four out of the five men pull out hand guns, ranging from .306 to Uzis. They don't believe the police is there to protect them and they know that the person on the other side of that door will be strapped as well. Most of the guns that i was introduced to had "fallen off the back of a truck". Idk if gun control could work in that area because the people feel that guns are a necessity.

 

[Lord George]

I think the Americans like to have this whole idea that they can defend there home and country from anything, though the fact that against any form of organised armed force they'll all be killed seems to be largely ignored.

 

[sneakypenguin]

Also i could imagine on the news Headlines "Obama attempts to control gun ownership Massive Revolts all over the country" but im sure many would hand in their weapons willingly if they enforced the message that the cops are to be trusted and are taking weapons of unlawful owners.

No because as crazy as this sounds a lot have guns for fear of a police state. Plus what about us sport shooters? why take away our AR15s for competitions or our winmag 300s or 308's for the 1k yard comps? What about handgun comps? Would we stop skeet shooting comps because those shotguns are pump action with multiple shells?

Cops aren't to be trusted in my limited experience with them. Heck the local head sheriff was arrested for selling the drugs they took in. And the police chief in pigeon forge(or one of those counties around here was fired for threatening someone who was auditing the dept.

Anyways why should I as a law abiding citizen who shoots for fun be required to hand over my firearms just to potentially stop a few homicides?

 

[KSarty]

The militia is in place specifically to fight AGAINST the government which the army, national guard, and police all fall under. The second amendment is to protect our right to rebel, simple as that.

Yeah, I'd love to see the day a couple of barely trained rednecks with shotguns manage to have the upper hand on the American Army, National Guard and Police.

Come on people, as much as you want it to happen, the U.S. government is not going to "fall under".

I don't want it to fall under, and I don't want to fight the Army. I am only saying that the amendment was made because our country was founded by rebelling against our government of the time. The founding fathers intended for us to have that ability again in the future.

 

[vampirekid.13]

"Amendment 2 - Right to Bear Arms. Ratified 12/15/1791.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

so basically, it says people have the right to bear arms because a militia is needed.

well, a militia is MOST DEFINATELY NOT needed anymore. we have the army and the national guard, and police.

so why havent guns been made illegal yet? (w/ exception of hunting rifles)

i dont get it, its like people just like seeing more homocides...

The militia is in place specifically to fight AGAINST the government which the army, national guard, and police all fall under. The second amendment is to protect our right to rebel, simple as that.

because your non armor penetrating bullets are totally effective against our tanks.

 

[GodsOneMistake]

LOL good luck getting the guns taken away. XD Makes me laugh just thinking about the poor soul who even attempts this

EDIT: one more thing, do you think that outlawing guns will stop homicides? You do realize plenty of people died before guns were invented, in an even more brutal action.

So when you look at it from my point of view it goes like this. Kill someone quickly with a bullet to the head or heart. or kill somebody in a much more painful fashion with other means..

EDIT2: you live in Hawaii anyway what do you care. How many people get shot in fucking Hawaii

So... you're saying that if we didn't have guns then JUST AS MANY homicides would happen, but we'd just find different weapons? I personally think it'd be pretty hard to recreate Columbine by bashing people over the head with rocks.

The largest mass School Killing Happened with explosives NO guns were used. Soooooo....

 

[KSarty]

I think the Americans like to have this whole idea that they can defend there home and country from anything, though the fact that against any form of organised armed force they'll all be killed seems to be largely ignored.

Tell that to the Iraqis. Guerilla warfare does indeed work, and has worked many many times throughout history.

 

[ChromeAlchemist]

"Amendment 2 - Right to Bear Arms. Ratified 12/15/1791.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

so basically, it says people have the right to bear arms because a militia is needed.

well, a militia is MOST DEFINATELY NOT needed anymore. we have the army and the national guard, and police.

so why havent guns been made illegal yet? (w/ exception of hunting rifles)

i dont get it, its like people just like seeing more homocides...

Do you know what the hell you're talking about?

1) If we don't have a well armed militia, the government can become too powerful. I don't support militia men (as they think things are already bad in that regard), but the idea of being ready should a dictator rise up is good.

2) This is an old argument, yes, but it's still sound. Making guns illegal insures that only those who break the law will have them. Normal citizens will be unable to protect themselves.

3) The National Guard and the police ARE the government, and when push comes to shove are the people the militia will more than likely be fighting against.

4) Owning a gun doesn't make you a future murderer, period. Guns don't kill people, people kill people.

5) If you want to ban guns, how come hunting rifles are okay? Last I checked, a bullet from one of those can kill people, too. You just inferred all people who own guns will kill someone.

Concerning 1), all the government has to do is remove the right to bear arms via loopholes or whatnot, thus rendering many a militia useless, only leaving the illegal weapon holders, can they not? They are the government after all. I don't see a corrupt government as a valid reason to justify firearms, no other developed country has a militia for this reason, and no other developed country may ever need it for this reason.

 

[Zenode]

Also i could imagine on the news Headlines "Obama attempts to control gun ownership Massive Revolts all over the country" but im sure many would hand in their weapons willingly if they enforced the message that the cops are to be trusted and are taking weapons of unlawful owners.

No because as crazy as this sounds a lot have guns for fear of a police state. Plus what about us sport shooters? why take away our AR15s for competitions or our winmag 300s or 308's for the 1k yard comps? What about handgun comps? Would we stop skeet shooting comps because those shotguns are pump action with multiple shells?

Cops aren't to be trusted in my limited experience with them. Heck the local head sheriff was arrested for selling the drugs they took in. And the police chief in pigeon forge(or one of those counties around here was fired for threatening someone who was auditing the dept.

Anyways why should I as a law abiding citizen who shoots for fun be required to hand over my firearms just to potentially stop a few homicides?

You dont have to ban ALL firearms lol just restrict them...see you as a skeet shooter can be trusted (I hope) with a firearm as you are trained with it.

other people.....now thats a different story

 

[sneakypenguin]

The militia is in place specifically to fight AGAINST the government which the army, national guard, and police all fall under. The second amendment is to protect our right to rebel, simple as that.

Yeah, I'd love to see the day a couple of barely trained rednecks with shotguns manage to have the upper hand on the American Army, National Guard and Police.

Come on people, as much as you want it to happen, the U.S. government is not going to "fall under".

No one believes they would fight the army but it would be against a police action say if the day ever came where say your brother was getting arrested for publishing a blog decrying X government action.

 

[The Infamous Scamola]

The founding fathers intended for us to have that ability again in the future.

The founding fathers also owned slaves and shot Indians for sport, what is your point?

 

[KSarty]

"Amendment 2 - Right to Bear Arms. Ratified 12/15/1791.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

so basically, it says people have the right to bear arms because a militia is needed.

well, a militia is MOST DEFINATELY NOT needed anymore. we have the army and the national guard, and police.

so why havent guns been made illegal yet? (w/ exception of hunting rifles)

i dont get it, its like people just like seeing more homocides...

Do you know what the hell you're talking about?

1) If we don't have a well armed militia, the government can become too powerful. I don't support militia men (as they think things are already bad in that regard), but the idea of being ready should a dictator rise up is good.

2) This is an old argument, yes, but it's still sound. Making guns illegal insures that only those who break the law will have them. Normal citizens will be unable to protect themselves.

3) The National Guard and the police ARE the government, and when push comes to shove are the people the militia will more than likely be fighting against.

4) Owning a gun doesn't make you a future murderer, period. Guns don't kill people, people kill people.

5) If you want to ban guns, how come hunting rifles are okay? Last I checked, a bullet from one of those can kill people, too. You just inferred all people who own guns will kill someone.

Concerning 1), all the government has to do is remove the right to bear arms via loopholes or whatnot, thus rendering many a militia useless, only leaving the illegal weapon holders, can they not? They are the government after all. I don't see a corrupt government as a valid reason to justify firearms, no other developed country has a militia for this reason, and no other developed country may ever need it for this reason.

Not many other countries were founded by fighting a corrupt government with a militia were they?

 

[KSarty]

The founding fathers intended for us to have that ability again in the future.

The founding fathers also owned slaves and shot Indians for sport, what is your point?

Being wrong regarding certain subjects does not mean everything they did was wrong. What is your point?

EDIT: sorry for the double post.

 

[Del-Toro]

I'm not against people owning side arms and the like to protect themselves from home invasions, but seriously, what would happen to these people, when weapons that can be easily obtained on the black market lands in the hands of people who would actually use them in when attempting to rob your house?

2 Rogue vigilante assumed that a mexican immigrant family had drug money somewhere in their basement, they went in, killed the father and 8 year old daughter, and if it weren't for the side arm of the husband, the widow would have never been able to make it out alive. Yeah, some people are badass enough to give their would be aggressors a complete facial makeover, but a having a weapon to protect oneself and one's family, is better than taking chances.

I think JWAN, the local gun nuts might give a much better insight on this matter. Although, I am completely against civilians possessing assault rifles and military grade weaponry.

Yeah no civilians need assault weapons. Hunting rifles could be used in case of a resistance against totalitarianism or invasion, and against home invasion, and for hunting, or for shooting cans, they really are great tools, and too big to conceal so nobody is suprised. In the case of an invasion or whatever, civilians shouldn't have to just lie down and suffer, that was the beauty of the french resistance, they stood up and refused to be the victims.

 

[The Infamous Scamola]

No one believes they would fight the army but it would be against a police action say if the day ever came where say your brother was getting arrested for publishing a blog decrying X government action.

You wouldn't be able to shoot anyone. I'm sure one of the first actions of this "government that has fallen under" would be that of taking away all registered guns, to prevent such a thing.

Being wrong regarding certain subjects does not mean everything they did was wrong. What is your point?

I'm just saying, in my opinion the Second Amendment is just as outdated as the two examples I gave earlier.

 

[sneakypenguin]

You dont have to ban ALL firearms lol just restrict them...see you as a skeet shooter can be trusted (I hope) with a firearm as you are trained with it.

other people.....now thats a different story

But how do you go about restricting them? The gun I used for skeet looks like this but not black and with a longer barrel

Or say my target shooting AR15 looks like this except with a leupold optic (and its a bushmaster)

Spoiler

Under most any nations gun restritions all my firearms would be banned AR15 yep Mossberg prolly Glock 32 with 13 round mags yep. And why should I be forced to give those up?

 

[sneakypenguin]

No one believes they would fight the army but it would be against a police action say if the day ever came where say your brother was getting arrested for publishing a blog decrying X government action.

You wouldn't be able to shoot anyone. I'm sure one of the first actions of this "government that has fallen under" would be that of taking away all registered guns, to prevent such a thing.

Non of my guns are registered. Most guns aren't if bought used(which i dare say most are) So unless they search everyhouse yeah most people would still have them.

EDIT: my glock 32 is registered I forgot.

 

[Zenode]

You dont have to ban ALL firearms lol just restrict them...see you as a skeet shooter can be trusted (I hope) with a firearm as you are trained with it.

other people.....now thats a different story

But how do you go about restricting them? The gun I used for skeet looks like this but not black and with a longer barrel

Or say my target shooting AR15 looks like this except with a leupold optic (and its a bushmaster)

Spoiler

Under most any nations gun restritions all my firearms would be banned AR15 yep Mossberg prolly Glock 32 with 13 round mags yep. And why should I be forced to give those up?

You could keep them in a special locker at a licensed shooting area? I dont see a need for them to be at your home.

 

[sneakypenguin]

You could keep them in a special locker at a licensed shooting area? I dont see a need for them to be at your home.

Well the padre owns some land where we shoot why should I be kept from shooting there? What about people who don't live near a licensed shooting area? Why should they have to drive 20-30 min just to shoot their gun? What about shooting events in the desert?

See it's not quit so easy when you delve into it.

 

[Olfinbedwere]

.................