Poll: Do you Support Assault Weapons Ban?

  1. #201
    Immortal Schattenlied's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    7,475
    Quote Originally Posted by Palmatum View Post
    You're right, that's totally what happens in the US... lol

    ---------- Post added 2012-12-16 at 09:08 PM ----------



    And an AR15.
    The ar-15 was not actually used.
    A gun is like a parachute. If you need one, and don’t have one, you’ll probably never need one again.

  2. #202
    Quote Originally Posted by tankbug View Post
    Just ban everything but bolt-action rifles and shotguns that cannot be concealed easily. You can still hunt, but if you woke up crazy one morning, it would be hard to kill a lot of people in a short time.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Whitman

    This was done with hunting rifles.

  3. #203
    Quote Originally Posted by araine View Post
    I suggest you read up on the laws that we have in USA instead of assuming things that arent true.

    http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2385 clearly states you are NOT allowed to organize and participate in actions looking to overthrow any US elected office regardless if you consider them tyrannical. The laws clearly states that you can NOT overthrow them with your presumed 2nd amendment rights so that makes the 2nd amendment irrelevant in regards to national safety.
    You need to understand a clear difference here.

    The United States has given all citizens the safety of mind that if a tyrannical leadership should occur, we can overthrow it using our weapons since we have a right to bear arms. However, it is still illegal to overthrow the government of the United States. Obviously we need a law for that, because then I could charge into my city's council room and announce that me and my 18 friends are overthrowing their command and taking control, whether they're tyrannical or not.

    Having the rights to bear arms protects the citizens in the future and gives us the means to overthrow oppression. Obviously if we're being oppressed by our government we don't care if it is illegal to then topple that government.

    Something is really wrong with our laws when you can buy a rifle at age 18 but cannot drink a beer until you are 21.

    The Second Amendment states:

    "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."

    No where does it state that people have the right to bear all types of arms, so I am for banning certain types of weapons from public use.
    Slippery slope. Start banning one kind and it leaves all room to interpretation to ban every other kind. Clearly that Amendment was written back in the late 1700s, so people should have only barrel-loading muskets in their homes.

  4. #204
    From the article, "The purpose of this bill is to get... weapons of war off the streets."

    Ya, good luck with that.

  5. #205
    Quote Originally Posted by Stormtrooperz View Post
    It's not crazy, how do you think people killed others when guns didn't exist, or they don't have access to guns?

    One person, Typhoid Mary, look her up if you don't know who she is. She infected 51 people, all of them hospitalized, 3 of them died.

    You have Graham Young, poisoned 70 people, 3 of his family of whom died, and two others who died. This was without access to current day house hold chemicals that could kill you in several minutes if mixed correctly, and with the correct knowledge. IMAGINE if Mary and Young had access to these things, and went on their poisoning rampages. Poison is the 4th biggest killer in younger ages, a GUN is not the only thing that can kill someone. You have pipe bombs, knives, so many things, im sick of this gun control bullshit.

    A gun is a convenience.
    http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr...10shrtbl07.xls

    Yeah, people can kill each other with various other things, but they seem to do so A LOT better with firearms.

  6. #206
    The Patient the1seth's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    my own reality
    Posts
    321
    I honstly don't think that people outside the US have a right to an opnion on this. You want us to mind our own business, start by minding yours.

  7. #207
    Yet another attempt by the Democrats to use a tragedy as an excuse to take away Constitutional rights. We were meant to have access to the same kinds of weaponry as the Gov't in the event of it becoming necessary to rise up against them like the founders did. There are already too many restrictions in place that violate the intent of the second amendment. Passing such a bill would only compound the tragedy that has occurred.
    Desktop ------------------------------- Laptop- Asus ROG Zephyrus G14
    AMD Ryzen 5 5600X CPU ---------------AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS with Radeon 680M graphics
    AMD RX 6600XT GPU -------------------AMD Radeon RX 6800S discrete graphics
    16 GB DDR4-3200 RAM ----------------16 GB DDR5-4800 RAM
    1 TB WD Black SN770 NVMe SSD ------1 TB WD Black SN850 NVMe SSD

  8. #208
    Banned This name sucks's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    A basement in Canada
    Posts
    2,724
    Quote Originally Posted by Stormtrooperz View Post
    It's not crazy, how do you think people killed others when guns didn't exist, or they don't have access to guns?

    One person, Typhoid Mary, look her up if you don't know who she is. She infected 51 people, all of them hospitalized, 3 of them died.

    You have Graham Young, poisoned 70 people, 3 of his family of whom died, and two others who died. This was without access to current day house hold chemicals that could kill you in several minutes if mixed correctly, and with the correct knowledge. IMAGINE if Mary and Young had access to these things, and went on their poisoning rampages. Poison is the 4th biggest killer in younger ages, a GUN is not the only thing that can kill someone. You have pipe bombs, knives, so many things, im sick of this gun control bullshit.

    A gun is a convenience.
    Don't forget extracting chlorine gas (2 NaCl + 2H2SO4 + MnO2 → Na2SO4 + MnSO4 + 2 H2O + Cl2) and gassing someone so all that good elemental Cl gas reacts with the moisture in your lungs to form HCl resulting in very effective internal chemical burns.


    MnSO4 is a common inexpensive chemical. NaCl is obviously salt. H2SO4 can either be bought on ebay, or worse case scnenario the Silk Road, or you could just make your own!
    Last edited by This name sucks; 2012-12-16 at 09:20 PM.

  9. #209
    Quote Originally Posted by semaphore View Post
    Or we can examine the source issue rather than the venue. Like really, I didn't make the Aurora reference clear enough for you?
    The source issue is that people are flipping out and killing people. The reason is probably societal induced stress from a bad economy and a government that wont come together and fix the problem. The US is bad at fixing psychological issues until someone goes over the edge. Instead we rely on security and try to take away the tools people use to do bad things when they inevitably go crazy. So we could take a good look and try to fix major problems with our society that will help everyone or we can take away freedoms and hope no one does anything illegal.

  10. #210
    Quote Originally Posted by cjm721 View Post
    ^^^ I don't understand why that is so hard to understand. If they are going to break laws they won't care about legality, and that the rifles are already in circulation and available, and by passing this law every person that tries to be legal will have to give theirs up and the felons won't which will make shooting more likely not less as if the shooter believes he can get away with it he is more likely to try.

    Edit: also as Stormtrooperz said its the person behind not the item itself. Hell people driving cars kills many people each year.
    the problem this this line of thinking is that the criminals your referring to are not interested in mass murder or killing children, they are interested in robbery and killing other criminals. In Australia where are automatic, semi automatic and hand guns are banned(you can use hand guns in shooting clubs but they cannot leave the premises) the vast majority of gun crimes are between organised criminals shooting at each other.
    If you want a gun for "self defense", you are too paranoid, this level of been paranoid is not normal, and you shouldn't be allowed guns for this reasons. It really is sad how paranoided all these gun owners are. Its kind of funny when people say if everyone had a gun on them gun crime would stop, no instead of one person been shot you would have a bloodbath on your hands.
    Also you cannot compare a car to a gun, a car was designed for transport, a gun was designed to kill.

    Please enlighten me why hand guns, semi automatic guns etc.. should be legal, they have no use., no one living in suburban areas has a legitimate use for a gun unless they hunt. If you are paranoid about your house install heavy duty doors with proper locks as well as barring your windows.

  11. #211
    Quote Originally Posted by Rommon64 View Post
    I see you rebuilt your White House, real shame if it was burnt down again.
    Joke's on you! We rebuilt the Executive Mansion, painted it white, and renamed it White House. Now you'll never know where it is, it's super duper secret and hidden.

  12. #212
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Flappy View Post
    Okay so let me get this strait:
    Even mentioning the largest failure in human history is "continent bashing" but using a national tragedy as ammunition to fuel your political views is A-okay?
    Comparing civilian life nowadays to armed tension between states almost a hundred years ago is smrt. Rael smrt.

    Anyway, bout time, who needs an assault rifle ?
    How many "national tragedys" wil it take for people to open their eyes ?

  13. #213
    Quote Originally Posted by Wowalixi View Post
    You need to understand a clear difference here.

    The United States has given all citizens the safety of mind that if a tyrannical leadership should occur, we can overthrow it using our weapons since we have a right to bear arms. However, it is still illegal to overthrow the government of the United States. Obviously we need a law for that, because then I could charge into my city's council room and announce that me and my 18 friends are overthrowing their command and taking control, whether they're tyrannical or not.

    Having the rights to bear arms protects the citizens in the future and gives us the means to overthrow oppression. Obviously if we're being oppressed by our government we don't care if it is illegal to then topple that government.



    Slippery slope. Start banning one kind and it leaves all room to interpretation to ban every other kind. Clearly that Amendment was written back in the late 1700s, so people should have only barrel-loading muskets in their homes.
    And back then when muskets and cannons were the only weapons of war, it would have been a lot easier to overthrow a tyrannical government. The US military is probably the most well equipped and well armed force in the world. Short of allowing average citizens to own tanks and machine guns and anti-aircraft missiles, the average citizen doesn't have much chance to resist the military. The only realistic way tyranny could be prevented nowadays is if the military refused to go along with the tyranny. Either way, the point of average citizens owning assault weapons for resisting the government is lost, unless the plan is to go out and let some people buy the weapons and vehicles the military uses.

  14. #214
    How about they make it easier to commit someone who is obviously wrong in the head? This country needs a more positive outlook on mental health rather than sweeping the problem under the rug and pushing people with mental health issues into situations that help no one (prisons). Everyone is quick to call a ban on a gun, but they completely refuse to look at the underlying problem, which is mental health and the blind eye people turn to it in this country.

    There is an absolutely incredible article about this on a gawker affiliated website that was posted this morning about a mother dealing with a child that threatens to kill her and the other children because he doesn't get his way. She has sent him to numerous places for help and every single mental helath professional told her the only rational thing she can do is start a police record which would help get him into prison. No, they didn't suggest help for these issues, they are so far gone they suggest creating a record to get him into prison because this country has no sort of help when it comes to these mental health issues and getting her son committed is nigh impossible.

    Then there is another article on Salon.com that idiotically calls for a ban on guns, because apparently that magical ban would stop people like the Chinese man from brandishing a knife, entering a children's school and slashing/stabbing children. That is also not even close to the first time it has happened in China, where getting a gun is nearly impossible. Just last year a guy entered a children's school and killed up to 18 children, which was all neatly swept under the rug by Chinese officials.

    So please tell me how this ban on guns would magically stop anyone from a mental health issue into grabbing a knife and going on a stabbing rampage in an enclosed area? I've had people actually argue, "You can kill more people easily with a gun!" Please, the people that died at the kindergarten had no chance from that psycho, your average Kindergarten teacher is likely a female age 24-40 against a crazed man targeting children who cannot defend themselves, a gun made no difference here.
    Last edited by ShuttleXpC; 2012-12-16 at 09:32 PM.

  15. #215
    Legendary! Collegeguy's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Antarctica
    Posts
    6,955
    At least you made it a public poll. I only looked over three names and could tell it wasn't Americans voting in it.

    Only interesting to me considering that the polls I have seen on unbiased news networks in the last days have a majority that say no.

  16. #216
    Best damn thing the USA ever did if it passes!! All that's left is to get handguns out of their hands too!

    Quote Originally Posted by Collegeguy View Post
    At least you made it a public poll. I only looked over three names and could tell it wasn't Americans voting in it.

    Only interesting to me considering that the polls I have seen on unbiased news networks in the last days have a majority that say no.
    Which is why the states will always be number one in the world for shootings! They can't smarten up after the last 15 school shootings in 2 years.

    And que: "it aint our guns, its dem people". I ask the people who can only repeat this line over and over, if it isn't your guns than why do countries with even higher populations but complete gun bans have far FAR less shootings and all around homicides than you? Nope, sure can't be those guns of yours, no sir!
    Last edited by Alcomo; 2012-12-16 at 09:31 PM.

  17. #217
    The Patient Al3sinth's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Where you bleed Blue & Gold
    Posts
    339
    Quote Originally Posted by Collegeguy View Post
    At least you made it a public poll. I only looked over three names and could tell it wasn't Americans voting in it.

    Only interesting to me considering that the polls I have seen on unbiased news networks in the last days have a majority that say no.
    Yeah that's why a discussion on this topic is useless on a site that is multi-country and already extremely one-sided.

  18. #218
    Quote Originally Posted by Alcomo View Post
    Best damn thing the USA ever did if it passes!! All that's left is to get handguns out of their hands too!
    Great, so then we'll just be just completely fucked with criminals running rampant with firearms and law-abiding citizens left defenseless.

    Opinion invalid.

  19. #219
    Quote Originally Posted by whathump View Post
    And back then when muskets and cannons were the only weapons of war, it would have been a lot easier to overthrow a tyrannical government. The US military is probably the most well equipped and well armed force in the world. Short of allowing average citizens to own tanks and machine guns and anti-aircraft missiles, the average citizen doesn't have much chance to resist the military. The only realistic way tyranny could be prevented nowadays is if the military refused to go along with the tyranny. Either way, the point of average citizens owning assault weapons for resisting the government is lost, unless the plan is to go out and let some people buy the weapons and vehicles the military uses.
    So your suggestion is the 2nd amendment is outdated due to the modernization of the military, and thus we should just repeal it?

    The 2nd amendment's spirit alone keeps the government from trying to become too tight with its laws. The point of it is to provide citizens with the means if anything should occur. That means acting before things get too out of control. Look at how people respond to even taking away some of their guns. Do you really think the people will respond any better when more of their freedoms are threatened? That's the freedom the 2nd amendment gives us, the freedom that at any time the people could revolt and overthrow the government with their weaponry and the United States government knows that. They have to tread carefully when it comes to this amendment because of the spirit of it, not because of the practical implications.

    Besides the fact that we're assuming the United States military wouldn't revolt against a tyrant at the same time. But too many assumptions are being thrown around here.

  20. #220
    Quote Originally Posted by Dch48 View Post
    Yet another attempt by the Democrats to use a tragedy as an excuse to take away Constitutional rights. We were meant to have access to the same kinds of weaponry as the Gov't in the event of it becoming necessary to rise up against them like the founders did. There are already too many restrictions in place that violate the intent of the second amendment. Passing such a bill would only compound the tragedy that has occurred.
    I believe the worst infringement on our rights recently has been the PARTIOT Act which was a republican sponsored bill. The Bush administration pretty much said FU to your privacy. Theres also the defense act that recently gave the government the power to detain you indefinitely without charging you for anything if they think you are a terrorist. That bill was supported by both parties though.

    Oh and republicans also want to take away your rights to vote(voter ID) and to get an abortion. The pretty much just want to make it illegal to do anything they dont like.
    Last edited by Prokne; 2012-12-16 at 09:35 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •