Ban democrats from owning guns

[Harm94]

Unrelated to any argument; does anybody know how they are collecting all the weapons that violate the ban?

During Katrina National Guard soldiers would go door to door and take weapons. Police can also seize weapons that don't have the required permits or violate laws.

[Ad Bot]

[Narkro555]

Regardless of your stance on guns, the "protect from tyrannical government" mantra is a load of crap. All decisions are made by elected officials. Those decisions are also subject to review by the court system.

We don't live under a dictator. Our government consists entirely of normal people, who may have a shot at some influence for at the most 8 years. There are 535 members sitting in Congress, and the majority of them must agree on "Hey, let's get the military to kill our citizens." Funny thing is, most of them will be citizens after a few years. Then they who made that decision will be subject to the horrific laws they set forth. And how do they decide will and won't be eligible to get shot? I'm sure most of Congress has your average family of citizens sitting at home.

The United States government will not and cannot "get you". It just doesn't work that way. We are a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. But one way it will certainly perish from the earth is giving millions of uneducated, drunk, and spiteful hillbillies assault rifles.

[Anybody]

Unrelated to any argument; does anybody know how they are collecting all the weapons that violate the ban?

During Katrina National Guard soldiers would go door to door and take weapons. Police can also seize weapons that don't have the required permits or violate laws.

also they could do something like this,

Due to changes to the legislation, unregistered firearms may now be handed over to the police without punishment for illegal possession of a firearm, provided that the owner of the firearm does so of his own initiative. The firearm is then stored while the owner applies for a permit. If he chooses not to, it will be auctioned, or destroyed if it is deemed dangerous to use due to its condition. Historically valuable weapons are sometimes handed over to museums. Un-licensed weapons may be turned over to the police, without fear of prosecution. This practice is called "mercy year", as it originally started as a one-year experiment, which was very successful. Thousands of unregistered firearms and several tons of explosives and ammunition are collected each year. Many, if not most of these items are old "souvenirs" dating back to World War II or even the Finnish Civil War.

example of what happened in finland when the gun laws were changed recently

[Harm94]

Regardless of your stance on guns, the "protect from tyrannical government" mantra is a load of crap. All decisions are made by elected officials. Those decisions are also subject to review by the court system.

We don't live under a dictator. Our government consists entirely of normal people, who may have a shot at some influence for at the most 8 years. There are 535 members sitting in Congress, and the majority of them must agree on "Hey, let's get the military to kill our citizens." Funny thing is, most of them will be citizens after a few years. Then they who made that decision will be subject to the horrific laws they set forth. And how do they decide will and won't be eligible to get shot? I'm sure most of Congress has your average family of citizens sitting at home.

The United States government will not and cannot "get you". It just doesn't work that way. We are a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. But one way it will certainly perish from the earth is giving millions of uneducated, drunk, and spiteful hillbillies assault rifles.

There is also the arguement that only law abiding citizens will turn in their guns and the criminals will have them. I'm curious what you have to say about that.

[Kalphiter]

There is also the arguement that only law abiding citizens will turn in their guns and the criminals will have them. I'm curious what you have to say about that.

Isn't that the point of law enforcement? Oh wait, my bad, it was cut.

These terrible arguments get tiring.

[dorkdotdan]

Regardless of your stance on guns, the "protect from tyrannical government" mantra is a load of crap. All decisions are made by elected officials. Those decisions are also subject to review by the court system.

We don't live under a dictator. Our government consists entirely of normal people, who may have a shot at some influence for at the most 8 years. There are 535 members sitting in Congress, and the majority of them must agree on "Hey, let's get the military to kill our citizens." Funny thing is, most of them will be citizens after a few years. Then they who made that decision will be subject to the horrific laws they set forth. And how do they decide will and won't be eligible to get shot? I'm sure most of Congress has your average family of citizens sitting at home.

The United States government will not and cannot "get you". It just doesn't work that way. We are a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. But one way it will certainly perish from the earth is giving millions of uneducated, drunk, and spiteful hillbillies assault rifles.

Protection against a tyrannical government is the exact reason why the right to bear arms was introduced. If you don't think the system is rigged when we have a 96% re-election rate for congressmen with %16 approval ratings than you are fooling yourself.

and people are currently getting "got" in other countries. Isn't it kind of weird that after wikileaks was established Julian Assange was charged and tried for rape?

[Kalphiter]

Protection against a tyrannical government is the exact reason why the right to bear arms was introduced. If you don't think the system is rigged when we have a 96% re-election rate for congressmen with %16 approval ratings than you are fooling yourself.

I bet you can't back up these unfounded, untrue and misleading statements.

[Anybody]

Protection against a tyrannical government is the exact reason why the right to bear arms was introduced. If you don't think the system is rigged when we have a 96% re-election rate for congressmen with %16 approval ratings than you are fooling yourself.

and people are currently getting "got" in other countries. Isn't it kind of weird that after wikileaks was established Julian Assange was charged and tried for a rape?

approval ratings are national and for the entire congress, congressmen are selected by the state they represent individually?

[Kalphiter]

approval ratings are national and for the entire congress, congressmen are selected by the state they represent individually?

Don't use facts!

[Anybody]

Don't use facts!

trigger ze alarms!

[Narkro555]

There is also the arguement that only law abiding citizens will turn in their guns and the criminals will have them. I'm curious what you have to say about that.

I'm sure a government crackdown (like the ones all the smart European countries do) would fix most of that. We also have to take into a risk and benefit brown townysis. I find millions of America's morons with mankind's most efficient killing machine far more dangerous then the occasionally smuggled import.

The alternative to no guns is the common mindset of "everyone needs guns". Now, with this type of correlation in regards to the guns/crime ratio, is turning the US into an armed camp a smart idea?

Also, this:

Isn't that the point of law enforcement? Oh wait, my bad, it was cut.

These terrible arguments get tiring.

We're pumping more money into killing people in other countries than protecting people who pay for it.

Protection against a tyrannical government is the exact reason why the right to bear arms was introduced. If you don't think the system is rigged when we have a 96% re-election rate for congressmen with %16 approval ratings than you are fooling yourself.

approval ratings are national and for the entire congress, congressmen are selected by the state they represent individually?

[Harm94]

Isn't that the point of law enforcement? Oh wait, my bad, it was cut.

These terrible arguments get tiring.

In the academy they tell you that you aren't a crime fighter, you are peace keeper. While the motto is to serve and protect, you are just there to keep drunk dudes from beating each other up and to respond to calls. In city's like Los Angeles if can't take one to two hours for a squad car to arrive on scene. Traffic and buisy streets can slow an officer down. In San Jose it can take 30 minutes. Speaking of San Jose, they cut funding to their police force and many officers left. Now they are so understaffed you can call the police and only respond to certain calls. Robberies and Burglaries are low priorities unless the bad guy has a weapon.

[Narkro555]

In the academy they tell you that you aren't a crime fighter, you are peace keeper. While the motto is to serve and protect, you are just there to keep drunk dudes from beating each other up and to respond to calls. In city's like Los Angeles if can't take one to two hours for a squad car to arrive on scene. Traffic and buisy streets can slow an officer down. In San Jose it can take 30 minutes. Speaking of San Jose, they cut funding to their police force and many officers left. Now they are so understaffed you can call the police and only respond to certain calls. Robberies and Burglaries are low priorities unless the bad guy has a weapon.

Exactly! Maybe if we stopped cutting money from the police department and putting into the military we wouldn't have a situation like this.

And that first part makes no sense. The job of a police officer is to stop crimes, where did you get that?

[Harm94]

Exactly! Maybe if we stopped cutting money from the police department and putting into the military we wouldn't have a situation like this.

And that first part makes no sense. The job of a police officer is to stop crimes, where did you get that?

Other cops. My criminal Justice teacher, who was a cop. He said that impossible to patrol every street and stop a crime before it happens. Most of the time as a patrolman you are securing a crime scene while the investigators are off looking for the man who killed John Doe. Anyway if get that job in law enforcement I'll tell you what it's really like.

[Doomonkey]

lol vermont had 4 gun murders, 2nd in the us. There is no way that the entirety of new england had a high amount of gun violence.
image is faked

You must be wrong.

In 2005, 11,346 persons were killed by firearm violence and 477,040 persons were victims of a crime committed with a firearm. Most murders in the United States are committed with firearms, especially handguns.

Hint, this is from a .gov website.