True or false.... Taking guns away from civilians leads to..

Post Reply New Topic

Tyrannical governments? I agree.... When guns are banned in a society, the government knows their people cant fight back if they get out of hand....

I agree also. While armed civilians carries some risk, it's not as large a risk as a government with no fear of it's people.

I think it i more the case that tyrannical forces may need to be overthrown/countered.

When you use the words "leads to" you are establishing a concrete relationship cause and effect, when in fact there are examples where it is not the case. Better to say "may lead to", that is more accurate. As a statement on its own it is false.

More likely the government in question was already tyrannical, but hadn't revealed the true extent of it yet.

Not necessarily, alto it does serve to make the population more depended on government protection, it should be considered a symptom that the government might be tyrannical.

Idiots with guns are what leads to the most messed up conflicts.

Umm....."Banned" doesn't make anything disappear, it just makes it illegal. I have several guns and will still have several guns after any ban. If need be I can sell one now and then at a huge profit.

"but but but rapter yool go 2 jale if you du that!!"

More like I'll be able to sell one on the front lawn of the police station and have it go unnoticed since the cops will be so busy chasing thier own tails in the kind of society where guns would be banned.

Illicit drugs have been banned for generations, does that mean there are none?
Why do people have such a tough time wrapping thier minds around this?

Personally I think guns can actually be useful in a lot of cases. For instance I couldn't find my cake knife one time and my AK made short work of dividing the cake. Otherwise I would have had to use a hammer or something.

In all seriousness my interpretation of the 2nd Amendment is more in case of tyranny or invasion. If all else fails.

The American revolution had only just happened.

The English civil war killed more English than any other conflict. The Roundheads were not all Puritan (counter to common misconception) and made up of many groups. There was cause for change. However they ended up with a tyrant that was worse than what they replaced.

The reality is gun can depose a tyrant bu that is not the end of the process, just look at the Middle East it is a mess. back and forth constant killing.

I thought cake knives were illegal over there, too.
Or do you just have to have it registered and keep it under lock and key when not in use?

You can go to a cake knife range, where we sling cake knifes, at cake effigies of people we despise.

In all seriousness, in primary school were encouraged to bring pocket knifes to school and out parents bought them for us. Only flick knifes weren't allowed.

They were used for outdoor activities and such. I was held at knife point by one of the kid once. It was difficult to tell if he was serious, or just playing. It is fair to say he had a screw loose and was later expelled. Had there been more of an incident, I'm sure one of the masters would have take one of shotguns out though I would have been brown bread by then. But generally nobody was harmed, it was just for woodcraft/bushcraft.

I also whilst there I set a lawn mower on fire with my cap gun, becuase someone someone said it wasn't possible. Damn stubbornness. Once you have set it on fire, putting it out is the hard part. Thankfully we moved away. Of course I had no matches so I couldn't have done it

Nothing?
Seriously people America is the only country on earth in which people really think that owning a load of guns will make one freer. We have them under tons of restrictions here in the EU and most other stable modern nations have strong laws restricting them. If guns were the only thing stopping people from falling under the sway of brutal dictators how come the whole western world other than the USA is still free?
In Australia there were ulta-liberal guns laws, with one able to easily acquire high powered assault rifles and the suchlike. Then in 1996 35 people were killed in the Port Arthur massacre. The government and people decided to massively tighten gun laws at the federal level.
Those on the right were concerned - Austrians like Americans feared the rise of a brutal totalitarian government - or the invasion of a foreign country. The latter point is much more important for Australia, the country is only a few hours by ship away from (for example) Indonesia, a country with a vastly larger population and which was carrying out a brutal (some would argue genocidal) policy against those living in east Timor.
So guns were banned.
Did Australia become a military dictatorship? No.
Did the Indonesians or the Chinese invade? No

I'd like to point out that banning guns will not stop people from massacering others. the UK ban on guns didn't stop the IRA, they just switched to terror bombing and rocket attacks, in addition to shooting.

That big explosion that killed a bunch of people in China a couple of months ago was the result of what happens when somebody 'goes postal' in what is still essentially a totalitarian country where guns are banned.

--If there are no guns available, people will think of other ways to f*** other people up permantly, and with outcomes and kill ratios that are much higher that a gun rampage.

I don't think will either. I don't make this argument. I this it is really silly to just focus on guns with crime. This applies equally to gun advocates as it does with the gun regulation advocates. Spree Killings get attention, but they aren't a good time to rush through legislation. Proposals need to look at overall picture.

You extend you point guns didn't stop 9/11 or 7/7. Asymmetric attacks are very difficult to stop.

Btw with the IRAs capability using guns was no problem even on the mainland. They just used different options. In NI has different gun regulations anyway. They have 153,000 legally held guns.

My father was actually in the vicinity of two IRA bombs. The rocket attack on 10 Downing street garden, and the Territorial Army Recruitment office bombing, which I think was in or between or in the Whitehall buildings. The latter he was walking down the street with his colleague and suddenly BANG!, then as if in slow motion he saw the windows being being shattered an cascading. When the dust settled he suddenly realised that his colleague was wrapped around him in a tight embrace Fortunately nobody was seriously hurt.

People over-focus on guns with crime. They aren't any more solution as they are the problem. Guns are a secondary factor to the crime rate.

Well, I heard that some European Jewish people have started to ask for special dispensation to be allowed to carry firearms for protection of their businesses, etc. I'd tend to sympathize with them on this, provided that the threat is there. I think the same special circumstances might apply to apostates, young women, homosexuals, journalists, satirists, etc.

Last edited by Nebogipfel on 08 Nov 2015, 1:24 am, edited 12 times in total.

anyone who thinks their guns will be any good against drones and tanks has another thing coming. the "guns as anti-tyranny" argument is specious.

If I'm not mistaken, all lockblade knives regardless of size are also illegal over there.


I went through a pyromania stage when I was 13-14. One of my favorite things to burn was aerosol cans.