Well this is the root of everything, there are lot of church goers in the US, probably dwindling numbers but still a lot AFAIK. They don't want a godless society. So therein lies the real problem.
Today's mass shooting in the US
- Thread starter Rroff
- Start date
Well this is the root of everything, there are lot of church goers in the US, probably dwindling numbers but still a lot AFAIK. They don't want a godless society. So therein lies the real problem.
Although it will happen eventually any way, the number of people who believe in a god today is far lower than 100 years ago, and the same will be true 100 years from now.
I don't care if America has guns or not, it would be a multiple century job of getting rid of them all, even then criminals would still have access and the police would still have them.
America is too damn big and too damn populous to get rid of guns, the problem of shootings is just a symptom that people who live in that type of society need to deal with.
The idea that guns are a right to protect from governmental tyranny is also an idiotic idea, no militia big or small could stand against the force of the united states military, if the people wanted to over-throw the government they could do it peacefully by marching in multitudes to the white house and beyond.. Look at the end of V for vendetta for comparison.
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Jan 2009
- Posts
- 4,590
It is pointless.
I spoken to some Americans this week, who fully believe, there should be no rules or laws around firearms. They believe in "Shall not be infringed" to the letter.
They believe criminals should have committed a felony should be allowed firearms, they believe mental crazy people should be allowed guns, goes without saying, kids too, no age limits, like I said before, nothing, they are ******* crazy.
You can't reason with them.
The vast majority of Americans want common sense gun laws, every poll conducted, from literally every angle and every agency, has shown that in general - the will of the people supports common sense legislation on firearms, not outright bans - just common sense stuff (age restrictions, bump stocks, background checks, cooldown periods, assault style rifles etc)
The problem is the NRA have bought everyone in congress, to the point where it's practically impossible to even talk about, let alone vote on legislation. The end result is the the politicians are working for the NRA rather than people whom they're supposed to serve.
The problem is the NRA have bought everyone in congress, to the point where it's practically impossible to even talk about, let alone vote on legislation. The end result is the the politicians are working for the NRA rather than people whom they're supposed to serve.
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Jan 2009
- Posts
- 4,590
Ehhh, that's some weird logic you got there mate. If an tyrannical government came to power and in the worst fears that the Americans has, that peaceful match will be turned in a blood bath.
There is lots of examples of that happening too in history, one that everyone knows about is the Tiananmen Square where over 200 people died in 1989.
Current big examples are where people had light firearms are the Iraqi Insurgency, Afghanistan current. Syria, Yemen, Vietnam War and a good one is the Soviet-Afghan War.
All the above started out with very light firearms against superior firepower, some managed to collect more heavy firearms in the middle and late stages.
Look at how all that turned out.
A lot of Americans think, in an event of a Tyrannical takeover of the United States, that it would turn into a civil war with state guard and parts of the military choosing sides.
Personally, my own thought that the people don't stand a chance against the US military and with new weapons and equipment they getting all the time which increases the gap between the military and what the civilians have access too. I don't think they have a chance in hell.
That said, I do believe we should have the right to self defence.
Which we have
Caporegime
He lives there. That gives him just as much right to talk about gun control in America as everyone else.
Yes he would.
No they're not.
Absolute nonsense.
So I'm guessing you didn't watch the videos.
Caporegime
None of your examples prove that armed American civilians could defeat their own military.
* the Iraqi insurgency is actually a full scale civil war, with Russia supporting the rebels
* Afghanistan: the country has been in a state of civil war for years, with different factions supported by various foreign powers
* Syria: the rebels are supported by Western powers, and they're still losing
* Yemen: the rebels are supported by Iran, Hezbollah and North Korea, and they're still losing
* Vietnam War: North Vietnam had its own army, and was supported by China, North Korea, Cuba, the Soviet Union, and the Khmer Rouge
We've already got it.
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Jan 2009
- Posts
- 4,590
Our right of defence, is pathetic compared to their Second Amendment.
And the best firearms we have access too are shotguns.
It's not about having the ability to actually defeat the US military, that's obviously ridiculous as it is actually made up of US citizens who most likely aren't going to gun down other US citizens, it's about the US government knowing that civilians are armed and cannot be controlled easily by force.
I don't know why people WANT to give governments power over their citizens, are you so secure with your leaders that you think it's beyond reason that one day you could get a bad group of people in charge? It's ironic that the same people who are in panic mode about Trump being some evil right wing dictator are also keen to take away their own ability to do resist a bad government.
Caporegime
But even armed civilians can be easily controlled by force. We see it every day, as the police go about their business. The USA has the world's largest incarcerated population, despite the presence of armed civilians. All those guns don't mean jack ****: the government remains in control.
You give government power over its citizens every time you vote. So... what was your point again?
What on Earth are you talking about? Police enforcing laws doesn't equate to a tyrannical government seeing as those laws are implemented democratically with full checks and balances. People generally agree with the laws that are in place and have a say in those laws them self. Why are you making these ridiculous straw men arguments?
Yes? I can only assume since you're picking and choosing which parts of my post to quote that you're either trolling or don't have an argument, probably both.
Caporegime
You're talking complete ********.
https://news.sky.com/story/high-school-on-lockdown-after-shooting-in-maryland-11297932
Business as usual yet again, (sounds like a close call) thankfully looks like nobody was killed
Business as usual yet again, (sounds like a close call) thankfully looks like nobody was killed
Gone up then since I read the details.
Associate
- Joined
- 15 Feb 2010
- Posts
- 1,080
He lives there, works there, has resident status, a US wife and a US child. It's fair to say the laws in the US affect him directly.
Soldato
- Joined
- 31 May 2009
- Posts
- 21,456
Several clusters within the US do believe this, oddly, because they are taught it, from the ground up, it is almost taught with the learning of the fifty states.
What they fail to comprehend is that their military is, in fact, them.
They are the ones most likely to want to bear arms, hold weapons, worry about 'big government', even though that governments main spending line is the military.
They are an extreme state after a fashion.