I wish Piers would have just said: "Lolumad?"
I wish Piers would have just said: "Lolumad?"
In the fell clutch of circumstance
I have not winced nor cried aloud.
Under the bludgeonings of chance
My head is bloody, but unbowed.
Perhaps you haven't been reading my posts.
I'm against a ban. But what's being targeted isn't full automatics, and I'm aware of this.
What's being targeted are semi-automatic "assault weapons" (bullshit term, but what the fuck ever) that have at least two of a number of features. Prominent among them are A) the pistol grip and B) the ability to readily accept high capacity clips.
Some pistols and a lot of non-hunting rifles fit this bill. It's a stupid waste of legislation, but it does not ban all handguns.
3DS Friend Code: 0146-9205-4817. Could show as either Chris or Chrysia.
I have never said anything about banning anything in here.
Go back, and check. For all I did was ripping Linkedblade's statement apart, that everyone from other countries than the USA is anti-gun, which is simply not true. And that I made clear. If anything at all, I stated that I was a regulation supporter, and that not even directly. Linkedblade apparently has no idea that not a single European country has a total weapon ban. Yet, almost all Europeans here are pro-control supporters, since they know how well it works.
The per capita stats are clear on that.
Do certain weapons need to be restricted one way or another? Yes.. At some point it exceeds the necessity for self defense in our own homes. Weapons that have been banned, and were available again because congress let the ban expire out of laziness, should be banned again. There was apparently a reason for banning them in the first place. I support exceptions in that matter on such weapons, when they are valid, and plausible. But for every Joe Doe to have it, that's not a valid reason to me. Not right now with all those flaws existing.
But it goes hand in hand. The better the regulations and requirements are laid out and enforced, the less the weapons themselves becoming an issue.
Actually that is pretty interesting information, and I admit the Wild West actually safer, than the cities mentioned. I was curious as to why, so I did a little digging.
Turns out...it was gun control. Gun control made the wild west safer...go fig.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/adam-w..._b_956035.htmlGuns were obviously widespread on the frontier. Out in the untamed wilderness, you needed a gun to be safe from bandits, natives, and wildlife. In the cities and towns of the West, however, the law often prohibited people from toting their guns around. A visitor arriving in Wichita, Kansas in 1873, the heart of the Wild West era, would have seen signs declaring, "Leave Your Revolvers At Police Headquarters, and Get a Check."
A check? That's right. When you entered a frontier town, you were legally required to leave your guns at the stables on the outskirts of town or drop them off with the sheriff, who would give you a token in exchange. You checked your guns then like you'd check your overcoat today at a Boston restaurant in winter. Visitors were welcome, but their guns were not.
In my new book, Gunfight: The Battle over the Right to Bear Arms in America, there's a photograph taken in Dodge City in 1879. Everything looks exactly as you'd imagine: wide, dusty road; clapboard and brick buildings; horse ties in front of the saloon. Yet right in the middle of the street is something you'd never expect. There's a huge wooden billboard announcing, "The Carrying of Firearms Strictly Prohibited."
While people were allowed to have guns at home for self-protection, frontier towns usually barred anyone but law enforcement from carrying guns in public.
and
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0111/47366.htmlThe irony ... is that Tombstone lawmakers in the 1880s did more to combat gun violence than the Arizona government does today.
For all the talk of the “Wild West,” the policymakers of 1880 Tombstone—and many other Western towns—were ardent supporters of gun control. When people now compare things to the “shootout at the OK Corral,” they mean vigilante violence by gunfire. But this is exactly what the Tombstone town council had been trying to avoid.
In late 1880, as regional violence ratcheted up, Tombstone strengthened its existing ban on concealed weapons to outlaw the carrying of any deadly weapons within the town limits. The Earps (who were Republicans) and Doc Holliday maintained that they were acting as law officers—not citizen vigilantes—when they shot their opponents. That is to say, they were sworn officers whose jobs included enforcement of Tombstone’s gun laws.
More here:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/0...-then-than-now
Try to forcefully take away my guns and you will be shot with them regardless of what law you put in place beforehand, I am not the only American that feels this way, but if you consider the act of opening fire on government officials an act of rebellion against their leaders then yes I would say the crazy loudmouth is actually right even if he does make himself look like a total douche.
That was hilarious, and I think Alex is a retard and is an insult to the US.
You do realize that if a ban occurs, as was the case in all previous bans, all existing weapons already in private possession would be grandfathered in, right?
Yes, if they try to outright ban all guns I'd be for ousting the government. That's not what is happening, though, so his calls for a second American Revolution are both premature and pointless.
3DS Friend Code: 0146-9205-4817. Could show as either Chris or Chrysia.
The whole thing is a congressional strawman to distract from the real issue: U.S. society creates crazy people that go on murder/suicide rampages far more often than any other country. It's not movies, it's not video games, it's not guns. There's some underlying factor specific to U.S. society that leads to these things. Rather than investing time and money into determining what that underlying factor is, they vilify the object used to commit those crimes. It's literally the exact same position taken by politicians to start the "Drug War", and with addiction and availability at an all-time high, it's obvious that the issue needing to be addressed is NOT objects, but rather the people that utilize those objects in a destructive manner.
I'm well aware, but at the same time, it's not strictly Obama and Bush. It's congress and the whole shebang, yet reelection of Congressman continues at insane rates. If people honestly want change, the first thing we should do is vote "the good ol' boys" out. All non-violent recourse should be pursued before we turn to revolution. That's how America started, in point of fact.
3DS Friend Code: 0146-9205-4817. Could show as either Chris or Chrysia.