Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Gun Control Discussion
#1
Shocked 
Let's discuss this "gun control" issue. To be properly labeled, it is a domestic terrorist issue, since the enemy is within. I've been reading a lot of the government's stance on the said issue. And their puppet/ventriloquist ministry which is called Hollywood. As we've talked several times about the dumbing down of the American public, we have to be prepared for their uprising. Stupid is as stupid does, and as we've seen recently and historically that ARs and semis do have a place and purpose in the civilian sector. 

The argument over gun control is pure rediculousness. Saying that guns are the problem over the mind that handed the gun is absurd.
The argument can be compared to blaming a car for an alcohol related death. And, you never see anyone blame the alcohol for the death. Why? You blame the person who took upon themselves to consume so much that they couldn't operate the vehicle properly. Isn't guns the same?? Yes. Blame the people who shouldn't have the weapon in the first place.
After the wake of gun deaths, we always see there were red flags that led straight up to the deaths. So, you can ignorantly argue that the guns are exclusively the problem, but really, the issue is the person who should never have had that gun to begin with.

Hence, we need terrorist control. As well as tyrannical government control.
In The Age Of Information, Ignorance Is A Choice.
Reply
#2
All you have to do is remove the gun from "gun control" and you have what the Left really means.
Reply
#3
Like I've mentioned elsewhere, our founding fathers were private citizens who rose up against a tyrannical and oppressive government.  That was the climate of the times in which they forged the Constitution.  The second amendment exists first a foremost so that the law abiding private citizen can be sufficiently armed to resist and/or overthrow the government should it ever become a tyranny and oppressive.  Too be honest, it isn't far from that right now.   That doesn't mean you start an armed uprising if your favorite candidate doesn't get voted into office.  But should TPTB ever attempt to repeal the second amendment (or the first or any of them) it would be no different than trying to repeal the Emancipation Proclamation.  Then it is time for an armed uprising.  Really is simple as that.  Many Sheriffs and Chiefs of Police have already gone on record stating they will NOT enforce firearm confiscation legislation or Executive Order and will fight (using force) against it if necessary.  And soldier, marine, seaman, airman, police officer, trooper or deputy that is true to their oath will also fight against such unlawful orders.  Any that do not honor their oath no longer carry the auspice of their office and in effect become the enemy.  That may sound harsh, it may not be politically correct in this very liberal/entitled age but it is where the rubber meets the road.
Governmental dependance makes for poor self reliance.

"What could possibly go wrong with a duct tape boat?"  Cody Lundin

The best defense against evil men are good men with violent skill sets.
Reply
#4
Not trying to take the thread off course, but I don't think our law enforcement and military will/would enforce the confiscation. The government would use their overbearing power to allow the UN to step in to do it.

That is, unless, Obama doesn't let his brothers (the Islamic terrorists) have at that opportunity.
In The Age Of Information, Ignorance Is A Choice.
Reply
#5
(06-27-2016, 09:09 PM)JRSC Wrote: Not trying to take the thread off course, but I don't think our law enforcement and military will/would enforce the confiscation. The government would use their overbearing power to allow the UN to step in to do it.

That is, unless, Obama doesn't let his brothers (the Islamic terrorists) have at that opportunity.

You have a naive view of how that occurs.  First of all - they can't just "confiscate the guns"

Assuming a rate of ~35% gun owners these days, and 320M people in the US
- 112 Million weapons

US Military = 1.8 (Active + Reserve
US Police = 1
So say 3M armed forces

That means on the morning that .Gov wakes up and issues and "edict" for every three guns going to Billy Buds house, to take his - there could be as many as 111 pointed back at him.

We have a denser population of guns than South Yemen.  Find me a soldier that want to walk into that and I'll show you an idiot that will get killed. You are going to say "But Apache's and Dragon missiles, and blah blah blah).  Basically - they are going to kill everyone in a 50 yard radius to taker a Marlin 336.  No….

They won't even ban assault weapons. What they will do is "common sense" extremely thorough background checks. They will cut the number that gets them by eliminating people we all probably agree should have a BB Gun. Then they will make it more and more difficult. And tax it (safety + Accidental death tax). Then zone places to shoot it out of existence, etc etc….eventually it will become such a pain that you won't want to get an AR. Or AK or whatever.

Then - they will make sure every one of those things is registered. All of the "Won't be putting' a chip in me!" tinfoils will let them go. On and on until semis are rare, and only low cap hunters exist.

Then, you collect ONLY those from the few that have them. Then we start talking about concealed handguns. Subcompact semi's etc….

Final point: when it comes to feeding THEIR family or taking YOUR gun - guess how that will turn out?
Reply
#6
I wouldn't say naive, just don't put anything past the government.
In The Age Of Information, Ignorance Is A Choice.
Reply
#7
Again - if you want to start an armed revolution that results in a loss for the residing government…I agree, never underestimate the collective stupidity of any group. But why fight if you don't have to.

Wake up tomorrow, say guns are banned, and send troops to take them. 112M vs 3M….every other or every third house, everywhere, in the entire country. Pass….
Reply
#8
(06-27-2016, 09:09 PM)JRSC Wrote: Not trying to take the thread off course, but I don't think our law enforcement and military will/would enforce the confiscation. The government would use their overbearing power to allow the UN to step in to do it.

That is, unless, Obama doesn't let his brothers (the Islamic terrorists) have at that opportunity.

All depends on how it is worded.
Also, the government is not stupid enough to try to outright ban everything at once. Their current strategy is to demonize, demoralize, and marginalize gun owners. Once they have an overwhelming majority of people thinking that gun owners are dangerous, deranged, psychotic killers in training, they can easily call for a ban which would be supported by both the people and LE.  If people resist, that is just proof that they were psychotic killers, and provides even MORE justification for confiscation.
The majority of LE will go along, even if they do not agree, as to lose your pension, and everything you worked for, putting your family at risk, will be too high a price to pay (at the point that gun owners are merely a kook fringe or people).
And don't think such a thing is too far in the future.  I'll bet close to 50+% of the folks out there are scared to even see a gun, as they think it will kill them on sight.

I actually say, thank god for video games. I do see that many young folks don't by into the guns are inherently evil. They are so used to using them in video games, they want to try them out in real life. They find that they can be fun, and just a hobby. Funny, that using guns the way the Left thinks all guns are used (in video games), leads to less anti-gun attitude. Ahh, irony, you are funny wench.
Reply
#9
Good points. And is seemingly the way things are working. It's my firm hope that a good majority remain cognizant of these tactics. For what it's worth, staying a member of the NRA can only help the good of the country.

Speaking of video games, reminds me of the hypocrisy of Hollywood. They advocate for everything the left leans towards. Yet, I do not see a single actor or actress that refuses to star in a movie that has gun violence in it. I'm already a harsh critic on modern entertainment. There hasn't been a movie or song that's caught my attention in several years. Because the entertainment industry is more interested in money and promoting a liberal agenda. I wish people would wise up and put these people in their place.

No celebrity cares for anyone outside of Hollywood. If they did, they would be using their millions of dollars to help the situations that are plaguing the middle class. But yet, Hollywood lives sumptuously off their fans money. The rich get richer off the middle class money. It's a political game. The gay issue is a textbook example. These celebrities stir the gay pot so the "small people" will buy into what they're doing and feel like they're doing something good. All the while, the time and money invested is only profiting these celebrities and this corrupt organization like the LGBT. 

And for reasons like this, when I see a celebrity on a commercial acting pitiful with a sad song playing, asking me to send my money to help a cause, I'll turn the channel. If they, with their millions of dollars, who can greatly contribute to the cause much better than I, don't expect me to pay for their endorsement. Because that's what it is. They might throw in a little million or 2,but it's casting in of their abundance while they're asking me to cast in all my living so to speak. Use our money while their bank account isn't hurting at all. No says I.

Hollywood should be boycotted. These people have to be humbled and put in their place. Otherwise, were entering a "Metropolis" like society where there is no middle class. There will be rich and the rich man's slaves.

Ok, slightly got off topic. But my point is made. End of rant.
In The Age Of Information, Ignorance Is A Choice.
Reply
#10
"SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Gov. Jerry Brown signed six stringent gun-control measures Friday that will require people to turn in high-capacity magazines and mandate background checks for ammunition sales, as California Democrats seek to strengthen gun laws that are already among the strictest in the nation."
-Associated Press

Must suck to be in California.
In The Age Of Information, Ignorance Is A Choice.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)