Victory...?

[+420Atheist]

I own several guns and am a believer that we should retain those rights. However most of the arguments for gun ownership are not very logical. The argument that guns keep us free does not stand up to the examples around the world. There are many examples of countries who enjoy more freedom than we do. Some allow private ownership of firearms and some do not. I can also point to countries who are less free who allow private ownership and those who don't.

 

I would also challenge anyone to explain HOW firearm ownership makes us free. Normally it is because an armed society can keep government in check. That may have been true 200 years ago when the technology private citizens had was the same as the government. But now even if every citizen had a AK47 the government still wins with it's attack helicopters with infra red night vision and 10,000 rounds per minute guns. Predator drones that a solider can kill from the comfort of his office chair. All the pistols and AR15s will not be able to adequately defend our freedom.

 

Now I know someone will point to our current wars and say they have defended their countries with small arms. That really is an over simplification of what is going on there. They are using terrorist tactics to fight their war. Who would we terrorize in our own country? Timothy McVey tried to do that and public opinion did not go his way.

[peanutbutter]

I own several guns and am a believer that we should retain those rights. However most of the arguments for gun ownership are not very logical. The argument that guns keep us free does not stand up to the examples around the world. There are many examples of countries who enjoy more freedom than we do. Some allow private ownership of firearms and some do not. I can also point to countries who are less free who allow private ownership and those who don't.

 

I would also challenge anyone to explain HOW firearm ownership makes us free. Normally it is because an armed society can keep government in check. That may have been true 200 years ago when the technology private citizens had was the same as the government. But now even if every citizen had a AK47 the government still wins with it's attack helicopters with infra red night vision and 10,000 rounds per minute guns. Predator drones that a solider can kill from the comfort of his office chair. All the pistols and AR15s will not be able to adequately defend our freedom.

 

Now I know someone will point to our current wars and say they have defended their countries with small arms. That really is an over simplification of what is going on there. They are using terrorist tactics to fight their war. Who would we terrorize in our own country? Timothy McVey tried to do that and public opinion did not go his way.

 

True that!!

 

If we are supposed to protect ourselves from a rogue government, then the people should be able to have every weapon the government might possibly use against the people.

 

It is interesting to note that the very people that gave us that right, had just gotten done killing every government official they could. Just the kind of response you would expect to get when you go to war with the American people.

[______]

Everyone in favor of gun control raise your right hand.

 

[Zombiefied]

Everyone in favor of gun control raise your right hand.

 

+1000

[Ryoki]

I own several guns and am a believer that we should retain those rights. However most of the arguments for gun ownership are not very logical. The argument that guns keep us free does not stand up to the examples around the world. There are many examples of countries who enjoy more freedom than we do. Some allow private ownership of firearms and some do not. I can also point to countries who are less free who allow private ownership and those who don't.

 

I would also challenge anyone to explain HOW firearm ownership makes us free. Normally it is because an armed society can keep government in check. That may have been true 200 years ago when the technology private citizens had was the same as the government. But now even if every citizen had a AK47 the government still wins with it's attack helicopters with infra red night vision and 10,000 rounds per minute guns. Predator drones that a solider can kill from the comfort of his office chair. All the pistols and AR15s will not be able to adequately defend our freedom.

 

Now I know someone will point to our current wars and say they have defended their countries with small arms. That really is an over simplification of what is going on there. They are using terrorist tactics to fight their war. Who would we terrorize in our own country? Timothy McVey tried to do that and public opinion did not go his way.

 

Spot on!

Now I assume you'll be painted as a gun control advocate and gun owners will now tell you how no one is going to take their guns away. Even though no one has even suggested it.

 

"It's just a ride and we can change it any time we want. It's only a choice. No effort, no work, no job, no savings and money, a choice, right now, between fear and love. The eyes of fear want you to put bigger locks on your door, buy guns, close yourself off. The eyes of love instead see all of us as one."

Bill Hicks

[trix]

I have been watching this topic since the beginning, Boy O Boy !!!

 

Personally I own a gun, use it for safety purposes someone comment about " do you feel safer having that gun"or " make me you less in fear " speaking for myself ...I do I can barely get walk yet alone run away from a dangerous encounter? its a last ditch effort in protection

 

But Who am I to say what you can do its your right... but this topic is like politics we will never all agree on whats right or wrong or smart or not smart

 

on almost everything You touch there is some form of a WARNING label on it that is no different then a gun case..... be responsible.

[+420Atheist]

Spot on!

Now I assume you'll be painted as a gun control advocate and gun owners will now tell you how no one is going to take their guns away. Even though no one has even suggested it.

 

Let no one make that mistake. I am not a gun control advocate. A person who shows the ability to reasonably own firearms should be able to do so.

 

To address the question of feeling more secure/living in fear. I do not live in fear. Well maybe a little from the tyrannical government but no gov official ever has to fear me or my guns. I do not live in fear of being attacked nor do my guns make me feel any more safe from being attacked. However they do make me feel better prepared to protect myself from criminals if necessary.

 

Now I know some people are confused. I come off super fiscal liberal in other threads and super pro gun conservative in this one. My stance on issues is based on weighing the evidence not on the hyperbole of any one party. People in the US need to do better at applying critical thinking and exposing intellectually dishonest debate techniques.

[lkline300]

Let me pose a question.

 

Would our representatives in government or any group that welds power & influence in our government act differently if we were not allowed to poses guns,.would they feel more comfortable taking more freedoms away if they didn't have to worry about an armed citizenry. ? & not just now but in the future

[Ryoki]

IMHO they have no fear of that now. I have trouble believing that Americans would be able to organize and fight back. We've been losing our freedoms and an ever increasing rate over the last 40 years with almost no public outcry. If the people won't protest, strike, organize or boycott when their freedoms are being chipped away how can you hope to have them organize and fight back and risk death?

 

I'm a member of a union and if you even mention ANY type of action other then voting Democrat you get the response "Why? It does no good and you'll only get beat-up and arrested". But many of these same union members are gun owners and I've heard many give the "we need guns to protect our freedom" argument. These are people already organized with a common goal who are to afraid to do anything. What do you think the average citizen will do?

 

Let me make my point clear: I have no problem with gun ownership. But I do have a problem with the argument that they some how preserve freedom and are defence against tyranny. Events over the last 40 years prove different.

 

"Beware of those who would use violence, too often it is violence they want and neither truth nor freedom." -Louis Lamour

[lkline300]

You have trouble believing Americans would fight back? You are part of the group what would you do ?.

 

Your in a union but you have trouble believing that we have the ability organize .............

 

There are examples in recent history where violent civil disobedience got results. Civil rights movement was not completely peaceful. The Vietnam issue was influenced by people who were vigorously demonstrating their opposition. If the issue is big enough & outrages enough people Americans will not just sit back & take it.

 

40 years is not very long, its the blink of an eye as far as history goes. In fact sometimes 40 yrs ago feels like it was yesterday. lol...

 

Would you feel safer if we were not allowed to have guns ? If the answer is no than doesn't that mean we feel safer with them ?

 

Accually carrying a gun does not make me feel safe because I already feel safe in the environment that I live in. But I would feel very unsafe on the day someone decides to start taking our guns away.

[Ryoki]

You have trouble believing Americans would fight back? You are part of the group what would you do ?.

 

Your in a union but you have trouble believing that we have the ability organize .............

 

There are examples in recent history where violent civil disobedience got results. Civil rights movement was not completely peaceful. The Vietnam issue was influenced by people who were vigorously demonstrating their opposition. If the issue is big enough & outrages enough people Americans will not just sit back & take it.

 

40 years is not very long, its the blink of an eye as far as history goes. In fact sometimes 40 yrs ago feels like it was yesterday. lol...

 

Would you feel safer if we were not allowed to have guns ? If the answer is no than doesn't that mean we feel safer with them ?

 

Accually carrying a gun does not make me feel safe because I already feel safe in the environment that I live in. But I would feel very unsafe on the day someone decides to start taking our guns away.

 

Allow me to repeat it for the third time. I AM NOT ADVOCATING GUN CONTROL!

But I'm for civil disobedience 100%! And that is exactly what we need right now! I mention my union because they have been a political force before. But now all the unions (I speak more of those in the AFL-CIO) have become mere pawns of the corporations and their drolling lap dogs the politicians. The issues and outrages are big enough now, I just think we have past the point where people even remember how to organize or to even recognize that they should. They have been beaten down to the point of total submission by fear and a constant barrage of propaganda.

 

I would not feel safer having guns taken away. In fact that would scare the hell out of me, but I still don't feel safer when I have one. If you do fine. Just be careful where you point that thing! I just don't think that the argument that owning one is a symbol of freedom; or that having one and will make you more or less likely to be the victim of tyranny holds much water.

 

 

“Freedom lies in being bold.”-R.Frost

 

“Freedom is the right to tell people what they do not want to hear."-Orwell

 

And one final quote that sums up my feelings..

 

"I will not carry a gun.... I'll carry your books, I'll carry a torch, I'll carry a tune, I'll carry on, carry over, carry forward, Cary Grant, cash and carry, carry me back to Old Virginia, I'll even hari-kari if you show me how, but I will not carry a gun!" ~Hawkeye, M*A*S*H

 

Peace to you my Friend. Let's hope that someday we all can make a world where the idea of having to carry a weapon for safety or freedom would be unconceivable.

Besides,if my pockets are full with a gun and ammo, where will I keep my stash and one-hitter?

[christinax4]

Yeah because guns are the reason people get murdered , not violent-people. And since guns are the only way people get killed, that would be really effective ! lol...... It seems like people like to beleive that criminals obtain their guns in a legal fashion, and if we outlawed all guns crinimals wouldnt be able to get their hands on guns any more. That is such Sheltered logic i have to laugh everytime i hear it.

 

its that same ridiculous logic that prevents alot of people from legalizing marijuana...their impression is that it will be more accessible to kids...i have to laugh when people say this...your kids can probably score some weed faster than you can drive to Walgreen's to get milk. only they are getting it from god knows where...mexico probably...and its been grown with who knows what added to it...i had a friend once that bought a brick that had a rat smashed into it.

 

Guns keep people more law abiding, and if they shoot a effing ahole that breaks into their house? SO WHAT, 1 less criminal roaming the streets.

[wingnut]

I'm a long time proud member of the NRA, And I believe with out them we would have lost our rights a long time ago.

[+420Atheist]

Let me pose a question.

 

Would our representatives in government or any group that welds power & influence in our government act differently if we were not allowed to poses guns,.would they feel more comfortable taking more freedoms away if they didn't have to worry about an armed citizenry. ? & not just now but in the future

 

From the evidence I have seen the gov is perfectly comfortable taking freedoms away with our 2nd amendment rights intact. Your question is a false dichotomy as there are a lot of factors that play into the gov level of comfort at taking away freedoms. But as I pointed out before there are a lot of countries who don't allow private ownership of firearms that enjoy many more freedoms than we do. What the people in gov fear more than our guns is not getting reelected. Now how can we have an effect on that. . . I ponder. <insert smiley scratching his chin here>

 

Really the only good argument I have ever heard for private firearm ownership is that every responsible citizen has the inalienably right to defend themselves and pursue happiness. It clearly lowers our creditability when argue using appeals to emotion.

[420blaze]

From the evidence I have seen the gov is perfectly comfortable taking freedoms away with our 2nd amendment rights intact. Your question is a false dichotomy as there are a lot of factors that play into the gov level of comfort at taking away freedoms. But as I pointed out before there are a lot of countries who don't allow private ownership of firearms that enjoy many more freedoms than we do. What the people in gov fear more than our guns is not getting reelected. Now how can we have an effect on that. . . I ponder. <insert smiley scratching his chin here>

 

Really the only good argument I have ever heard for private firearm ownership is that every responsible citizen has the inalienably right to defend themselves and pursue happiness. It clearly lowers our creditability when argue using appeals to emotion.

 

 

Why dont you actually list those countries then?

[+420Atheist]

Why dont you actually list those countries then?

 

I don't for a minute believe you don't know a few examples. Instead of arguing the premise that gun ownership does not effect how tyrannical a government is, you will attempt to discredit the whole argument based on some minute detail you believe I got wrong. But I will give a few examples that run the gambit.

 

Look at any EU country (with the exception of Switzerland.) Most do not accept self defense as a reason to own a firearm. Most firearms are sporting only and firearm ownership is very low due to restrictive laws. With the logic that "guns keep us free" how do you explain a country like the Netherlands with super low gun ownership but yet a government that respects it's citizens rights? Decriminalized drugs and legal prostitution. It seems they give their citizens more freedom over their own bodies than the US does. What is keeping them free if not the firearms?

 

Netherlands 3 firearms per 100 people

US 90 firearms per 100 people

 

Now in Switzerland every male of military age has to keep an automatic weapon issued by the gov in case of war. And they enjoy many freedoms. Like I said you can point to every possible combination.

 

To show the other side the Czech Republic has very liberal gun laws and is about the only European country that accepts private ownership for self defense. Check the Amnesty International web site if you want to see all their human rights violations.

 

Iraq has the 4th largest number of firearms per capita. For some reason when I think of freedom Iraq does not come to mind.

 

Yemen is number 2 and again not a very free place. I guess they have freedom of religion but Islam is the official religion of the country. Of course if you are caught proselytizing another religion you will probably be detained by authorities.

 

Now I am looking to you to prove a correlation that gun ownership equals less tyrannical government and more freedom.

[420blaze]

I don't for a minute believe you don't know a few examples. Instead of arguing the premise that gun ownership does not effect how tyrannical a government is, you will attempt to discredit the whole argument based on some minute detail you believe I got wrong. But I will give a few examples that run the gambit.

 

Look at any EU country (with the exception of Switzerland.) Most do not accept self defense as a reason to own a firearm. Most firearms are sporting only and firearm ownership is very low due to restrictive laws. With the logic that "guns keep us free" how do you explain a country like the Netherlands with super low gun ownership but yet a government that respects it's citizens rights? Decriminalized drugs and legal prostitution. It seems they give their citizens more freedom over their own bodies than the US does. What is keeping them free if not the firearms?

 

Netherlands 3 firearms per 100 people

US 90 firearms per 100 people

 

Now in Switzerland every male of military age has to keep an automatic weapon issued by the gov in case of war. And they enjoy many freedoms. Like I said you can point to every possible combination.

 

To show the other side the Czech Republic has very liberal gun laws and is about the only European country that accepts private ownership for self defense. Check the Amnesty International web site if you want to see all their human rights violations.

 

Iraq has the 4th largest number of firearms per capita. For some reason when I think of freedom Iraq does not come to mind.

 

Yemen is number 2 and again not a very free place. I guess they have freedom of religion but Islam is the official religion of the country. Of course if you are caught proselytizing another religion you will probably be detained by authorities.

 

Now I am looking to you to prove a correlation that gun ownership equals less tyrannical government and more freedom.

 

So Switzerland is an example of a country that enjoys many more freedoms that America? And those freedoms are legal prostitutes and decriminalized drugs? So you are relating the fact they have harsh gun laws, but allow prostitution and drugs, so they are therefor better then the USA? What if your criteria for judging a countries worth and its liberties lies elsewhere besides Drugs and prostitutes?

[Guest Wayne]

Millions go through life never experiencing the necessity of dealing with an intruder or assailant, as it should be in a civilized society. But have just one experience in a lifetime where a firearm deterred or stopped someone perpetrating violence on your person or loved ones and your view will change forever. I support your right not to carry a concealed weapon or own any firearms. Respect mine. It's the neighborly thing to do.

[imiubu]

 

 

SMA. brilliant!

I like how you think

peace

[+420Atheist]

So Switzerland is an example of a country that enjoys many more freedoms that America? And those freedoms are legal prostitutes and decriminalized drugs? So you are relating the fact they have harsh gun laws, but allow prostitution and drugs, so they are therefor better then the USA? What if your criteria for judging a countries worth and its liberties lies elsewhere besides Drugs and prostitutes?

 

You might want to work on your reading comprehension. For one I never said they were "better." Secondly Switzerland is the exception in the EU that has high firearms per capita count. It was the Netherlands is the one with decriminalized drugs and legal prostitution.

 

But lets remember to the premise. It was said that firearms keep us free. I pointed to real examples of countries that have a high firearm per capita and that has not made them more free. I pointed out countries that have a low firearms per capita that are very free.

 

So lets here it. Instead of just the emotional response back up the assertion that 'guns keep us free' with some facts.

[+420Atheist]

Millions go through life never experiencing the necessity of dealing with an intruder or assailant, as it should be in a civilized society. But have just one experience in a lifetime where a firearm deterred or stopped someone perpetrating violence on your person or loved ones and your view will change forever. I support your right not to carry a concealed weapon or own any firearms. Respect mine. It's the neighborly thing to do.

 

Absolutely! Your right to protect yourself and your family is inalienable. It is the one argument that makes sense and can't be adequately countered in this debate.