Gun "control" - to protect or disarm the citizens?

Post Reply New Topic

Well, I am not drafting these gun controls out of any need to protect a government, but rather to protect people. I have no love for government, just people. I think you are paranoid at worst, and at best, extremely sceptical of governments. I never said what the gun laws were in Australia, just what I'd propose. I said I only know really of one point of Australian gun control law, and that was that air guns were banned (the sort that fires a pellet by compressed air).

I am not suggesting any political aspect to these, like I would not deny a gun to an immigrant or non-citizen of Australia providing they can pass the checks. Or I would deny a gun to anyone because of differences in political alignment (although Nazis and KKK I'd make an exception for), or religion, but rather mental and emotional capability, as well as understanding of responsibility.

I would suggest to you, Mr Litigous, that if you shot someone, you'd deny responsibility. You do not think responsibly. I would not hesitate in giving Bazza a gun under my "laws", because he attacks my reasoning on my mental processes, and he appears to understand responsibility, but just from what you've said, I would certainly hesitate in giving you one. You seem to spew the old ad hoc argument that "it's to protect from tyranny". Okay, lemme see....

Well, I've just read up on the basics of Australian Gun Politics. They are even worse than what I had suggested.

Litigious, miladdio, you should have been born in that other neutral European country, ha ha!




And....

In other words, Nazi Germany, besides the Jews, was actually a pretty gunnish state.

Maybe I should send you a copy of my short story, "Go Jump", which is a case of revenge against a bully gone wrong.

But there was one who I dearly would have wanted to have seen molested...

The others, including my father, I would just love to see with a LOT of broken bones.

But even so, can a child comprehend their actions? Some bullies will grow out of it, and even might regret what they did. But also this is assuming they are given a chance for redemption. I sympathise with some school shooters, but their acts were reprehensible.

Next, you'll be saying that David Berkowitz was right to shoot all the women he did because of his perceived misogyny against his mother...

By the way, I support gun usage for toecutters. After all, they generally target other criminals...

You try being a politician, Litigious, seeing as you're keen to change Sweden's gun laws. But remember, being a politician means trying to please everyone, which, naturally, is an impossible task.

I know. And there are probably much less people by percentage shot to death in Switzerland than in the US, and that has more to do with the difference between American and Swiss mentality, then most males in Switzerland have access to guns and most killers are males.

And you see that even if guns were easy to get in Nazi Germany as good as no one used them to fight the system. But that's not an argument in favour of gun control, it just proves that free guns don't automatically make people willing to kill tyrants.

Therefore I suggest free guns and compulsory lessons of why the Second Amendment and laws like that were written. Free guns and awareness.

At least you got one half right.

My Latin's a little rusty. What's this mean?

It's from a German song from 1840, called The Guard by Rhine in English. It means:

"Should my heart not survive this stand,
You'll never fall in foreign hand,
Much, as your waters without end,
Have we our heroes' blood to spend."

It symbolises that you'd never give up what you believe in, no matter the odds.

Weelll...

In case, I won't give up fighting in this thread!

BTW, "Vi veri veniversum vivus vici", which I hope to live up to... Except whom it was attributed to, of course, as he went a rather wrong way to achieve this, I think...

In case anyone is intersted, I just bought a new AR 15 this morning...16 in barrel 1 in 7 twist, BUIS, EoTech 552, rail system and a goodly supply of ammo...the entire transaction was completed in less than half an hour...that is freedom.

That's what I've tried to explain to Quatermass and the others but they simply won't listen.

I must have been about 5 years old when I realised that guns were free in America and not in my own country. That's when I decided my country was a country of cowards...otherwise, they'd never let a law like that be made.

License
I'm too lazy to read the entire post so sorry if this is a repeat but:
Think about it. If you outlaw guns, then only outlaws will have guns.

Is that what you want?

That's certainly not what I want, no.

Lets be clear, the rifle was not free, I had to pay for it. But there was no burdersome paperwork...form 4473 a look at my concealed carry permit and my driver's license and it was all done. IF I did not have the concealed carry permit, a criminal background check would have been required.

Why do you want a fully-automatic rifle? Is there a sane reason why?

A handgun I can understand.

A boomstick I can understand.

A semi-automatic rifle, perhaps I can understand.

But a fully-automtic rifle? Does it have any use other than to kill someone and/or make you feel like you have a big 'un?

Freedom to have guns. So how does having a fully-automatic rifle, one whose purpose clearl is to kill lots of people in a short period of time, feel, hmm?

Why?

If anyone uses the ad hoc argument of freedom or to protect against tyranny, and I am seriously going to lose all forms of civility I have used here. You think I was being uncivil before? You ain't seen nothing yet....

What makes you think that it is a full automatic rifle? It is not.