my profile | register | search | faq | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
»  COMBATSIM.COM Forum Archive   » Real Military Discussions   » Air Defense, Weapons, Platforms   » right to bear arms (Page 4)

 
This topic is comprised of pages:  1  2  3  4  5 
 
Author Topic: right to bear arms
Dan.
unregistered

posted 05-24-2000 11:05 AM       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Raver,

Outstanding questions, and while I cannot answer personally for anyone but myself, I can also vouch for the fact that most police officers will feel the same way. I train, and train with, and have been trained by many law enforcement officers ranging from street cops to Federal Hostage Rescue and Counter Terrorist guys (they trained me!)

Your first question:

"What is Mr Richards view on armour-piecing rounds?"

<<"Armor peircing rounds" is somewhat misleading. Handgun rounds are typically never armor peircing, and those few rounds that have attempted to do so through design have never been used against law enforcement officers or civilians, primarily because of their cost and lack of availability. As for rifle armor peircing rounds, the standard NATO 5x56mm round is semi-armor peircing. But, remember, ANY rifle round will go through police bullet proof vests, and most military ones, like a hot knife through butter! Rifle and handgun rounds are in two distinctly different classes of performance. Therefore, "armor piercing rounds" are somewhat of a moot point.>>

"What is his feelings on the availablity of semi-auto military style weapons that the gangs (and law abiding people) in the states are armed with? Surely as a cop on the beat these would be a concern?"

<<This is a major concern. However, the officers I've dealt with realize that it is not the legally owned guns that are the problem. So, to narrow it down to criminal use and possession, the gut reaction is to ban all of them. However, realize that of ALL firarms related shootings, "assault" style weapons (ie militry semi- and full-autos)were used in less than 1.5%. They are not the problem that the media makes them out to be; much like a shark attack, their unlawful use makes headlines. The bottom line is that banning them will NOT affect availability, only create another market for them.>>

"Is there any TYPE of handgun/firearm that you are NOT comfortable with being in general circulation at the moment? "

<<Constitutionally speaking, any firearm that the average infantryman would be expected to carry during combat would be acceptable, UNDERSTANDING the difference between "arms" and "ordinance." The M-16 constitutes "arms" which is protected by the 2nd Amendment, while LAWS rocket launchers (explosive), and Browning 50 caliber machine guns (crew served weapons) are considered "ordinance" and therefore NOT gauranteed. Many pro-gun people do not realize, or choose to forget this. No, there is no handgun or other smallarm that is deemed inappropriate to lawfully possess, according to those who are pro-gun. I agree with this, using the above definitions.>>

"Question:I am having a bit of trouble trying to sort the wheat from the chaff, just what is the REAL issue here, is it that you don't want your FREEDOMS tampered with, or is it that you don't want your guns removed?"

<<Both, really. First, you must realize that historically, the gun is one of the tools that Americans used to aquire our freedoms. Freedoms and guns are thus intertwined. From a Constitutional perspective, we were gauranteed the right to own firearms; this is a fact that even the most liberal Constitutional scholars (Daniel Lazar amongst them) have come to agree with over the last few years. As for gun ownership itself, I believe, and teach, that a gun can be used lawfully as a weapon of self-defense. I believe, as do you, that "self-defense" is a right, not a privilege. (If you disagree, pick a fight and let the other guy hit you! )

To remove lawful ownership of guns is tantamount to saying: "You no longer have a right to defend yourself."

Some will say, "Use your fists!" or "Use a bat!" Those who say that are missing the point. I use a gun do defend myself because I DO NOT want to fight, not because I do. I use a gun, because it is by far the most effective tool to a) prevent an attack (the guy with the bat, or even using his hands, will most likely stop his attack) and b) stop the attack immediately if there is no other recourse.>>

Raver, I hoped this has helped, please feel free to have me expand on or clarify any points I have made here.

Si Vis etc

Dan


IP: Logged
Raver
Member
Member # 2100

posted 05-24-2000 05:52 PM     Profile for Raver   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Dan,

Thanks for the reply, your answers go a long way in helping me understand what is going on over "there".

While I do agree with you in that everyone should have the right to self-defense, I also feel that gunownership should be a privilege....something that has to be earned, not just given away.

Glad to see that this topic has returned to an open exchange of ideas rather than rabid name-calling


The Raver has spoken!


Posts: 276 | From: Melb/Aust | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged
Dan.
unregistered

posted 05-25-2000 12:45 PM       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Raver,

You said "While I do agree with you in that everyone should have the right to self-defense, I also feel that gunownership should be a privilege....something that has to be earned, not just given away."

Here, I think, you have summed up the crucial point regarding gun control. Put simplistically, our Constitution guarantees us the right to own guns, almost all Constitutional scholars agree although the finer points are debated.

So, the matter comes down to: should it really be a right? Or, a privilege?

Some issues we would have to deal with if it were indeed a privilege:

1) Could, or would, the Government revoke the privilege at will, especially if said Government decided to make a few "changes," such as moving a little closer to a Dictatorship. Now, before I get labeled as paranoid, let me state that I just do not see the Government doing that anytime soon. But then, with no guns to worry about, and over a long enough period say ten, fifteen, or twenty years, who's to say?

2) As a privilege, who decides who gets guns and who does not? What standards shall we use?

3) As a privilege, and using driving and getting a drivers license as a model, does that mean that I can now take my gun with me, concealed or unconcealed, where ever I go? Who is to set the restrictions, and who is to say those restrictions are fair?

I am somewhat uncomfortable with the idea that my privilege to own a gun can be modified, revoked even, at the whim of the current governing body.

While we currently ALMOST live in a situation where gun ownership is considered more of a privilege than a right (new and current gun laws have made our "right" feel more like a "privilege"), there is one major difference: the Government cannot come outright and say: "NO MORE GUNS." The Government knows that this would create an incredible uproar from all the moderates, and many of the conservative liberals. The conservatives would just lock and load!!

And, finally, gun ownership as a privilege: when a mugger, armed with knife, bat, or fist (he's REALLY big!), attacks me you have just reduced my right to safely defending myself to a privilege based on whether or not I have the "privilege" of owning a gun, instead of the "right" to defend myself based on the CHOICE of whether or not to own a gun.

When a mugger attacks, and I defend myself with fist, knife, or bat, violence WILL ensue. By using a gun, it's mere presence most often deters any attack and therefore NO violence will occur. Of the two, I prefer the latter choice.

Raver, while I do very much understand your feelings regarding rights and privileges, I must respectfully disagree with you on this one. While the "right" to own firearms may not be the correct thing for all cultures, my culture like it or not, as an American, is steeply rooted in independence and self-sufficiency, where the gun plays a very important role. This in itself is worthy of a long discussion, so I will save it for any questions you may have.

Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

Dan


IP: Logged
[email protected]
unregistered

posted 05-25-2000 06:39 PM       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
quote:
Originally posted by 11bravocharlie2:
I hear alot of people talk about the right to bear arms to protect ourselves against criminals, but I don't here anyone talk about the right to bear arms against our own government. One of our founding fathers said something like "A people who fear the government live in tyranny.A government who fears the people there is freedom." I for one believe the American citizen should be able to own the basic infantry rifle that our military has. And I do own one except it is not automatic which is of little use in accurate shooting and does not bother me. During our Revolutionary War if the average citizen did not own an equal or better weapon as the British did we probably would have lost the War. It was close enough as it was. I do not believe our government will in the near future go nuts or we will get a dictator. At the same time, time changes and as history tells us so do governments. If you believe that crime will stop without guns or our government will never become more corrupt than you are ignorant about history. Just pick up any world history book and look at how many wars there have been in the last century. How many countries have been occupied by other countries.If the citizens can not own decent weapons than governments can pass any laws they want to. We may have more murders than most other nations, but we are by far the most free country in the world. Alot of out crime is caused from social and parenting issues. No stable two parent homes where there is almost always a parent at home(greed). Kids are not being watched after school to see who they are spending time with.Perpetual welfare class of people where crime and ignorance runs rampant.

gun control is not about crime, if they take our guns away tyey dont have to worry about an armed revolt when they change our constition does anyone believe in patriotism
or is that treason against the one world government sorry BUT I HATE THIS but they got way more planned yhen changeing the Constition DOES ANYONE BELIEVE WHAT I DO
THE GOVERMENT IS FIR THE PEOPLE NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND THIER DESTROYING MY COUNTRY AND I'M MAD


IP: Logged
mbaxter
Member
Member # 191

posted 05-25-2000 08:02 PM     Profile for mbaxter   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
What about women? The only way an average woman can defend herself is with a gun. Guns are the great equalizer. For women, the elderly, and others who can't fight hand-to-hand, a firearm is their only hope of self-preservation when a criminal attacks.

And what about when you're outnumbered? Again, one person with a gun has a much better chance against a larger number of equally armed assailants, as opposed to one man with a baseball bat against two or more criminals with baseball bats.

And of course, baseball bats, mace, fists, etc. aren't going to do you any good at all if the other guy is armed. And in disarmed societies, chances are the criminal WILL have a gun and you won't.

For all these reasons and more, I believe gun ownership is essential, especially for women and the elderly.


Posts: 1687 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
Big Stick
Member
Member # 596

posted 05-25-2000 08:16 PM     Profile for Big Stick     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
quote:
Originally posted by [email protected]:
gun control is not about crime, if they take our guns away tyey dont have to worry about an armed revolt when they change our constition does anyone believe in patriotism
or is that treason against the one world government sorry BUT I HATE THIS but they got way more planned yhen changeing the Constition DOES ANYONE BELIEVE WHAT I DO
THE GOVERMENT IS FIR THE PEOPLE NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND THIER DESTROYING MY COUNTRY AND I'M MAD

My position exactly. Unfortunatelly the liberals were successful in brainwashing this society into thinking that it is OK to take someone's rights away, if it is for a "greater good". Once they've achieved that, it's just a matter of gradually re-defining a "greater good", until all our right are gone.

The Constitution is not simply a collection of current laws. It is an affirmation of the inherent, fundamental and unalienable rights we all poses without the government approval or permission.

These fundamental rights do not change. The Constitution can change, and there is a precise mechanism of doing so, but it is sufficiently difficult to keep Mr. Gore's ("The Constitution is a living and breathing document") paws away from it. Thus, Gore and his ilk resort to raping the Constitution instead. It happens with a silent approval of the uneducated public (expressed via polls), whom they convinced that saving some stupid rat is "greater good" than your right ...

"...to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures..." Amend. IV

How gullible and naive you have to be to watch the government strip someone else's rights away, and still feel safe about your own rights.


[This message has been edited by Big Stick (edited 05-25-2000).]


Posts: 571 | From: | Registered: Oct 1999  |  IP: Logged
mbaxter
Member
Member # 191

posted 05-26-2000 05:19 PM     Profile for mbaxter   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Greater good my ass! If you want to be safe, the ironic thing is, your best bet is to find the most heavily armed places in this country and live in one of those states.

If you want to live in a crime zone, pick a state the liberals have already disarmed for the "greater good".


Posts: 1687 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
Toecutter
Member
Member # 436

posted 05-26-2000 11:17 PM     Profile for Toecutter   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Lemme give you all friggin boot lickin` liberals an xample.
I live in North Hollyowood. I carry every day AND I drive a motocycle. One of these nights a pair of Mexican-national cops pulled me over for a traffic stop and b4 they got to pat me down I`ve warned them: I`m armed, I also have knife, this what I do for living and this is where I live...blah blah blah...

I`ve been cuffed, stripped, checked with an other cruiser in stndby, and then let go with all my hardware with a comment: Yeah man, I don` blame you. In this neighbourhood you` re still outgunned tho...lol...
I know. Newyears night I have to take my dog under some sort of cover...no shite...because she shakes so friggin bad from all the autos goin` up...
There are streets over here that the cops simply don`t drive through without backup...

I `ve been told by the law to drag any perp into the house and at that point forget`bout it...

The point being that all you aussies, canadians, euro-pussies, and yes, even the swiss(since they have a monolitic, stable society) can kiss my hairy bag, and have no merit to even raise your voices in your predominately white communities. Come, live over here a while, and lets see you sing a different tune...

The movement against the availability of arms and the effects of them has it`s solution in the same path that causes most of today`s American tragedies:

The war on drugs.


Posts: 1724 | From: States | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
Rosco
Member
Member # 1779

posted 05-27-2000 12:43 AM     Profile for Rosco   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Not all us Europeans/Canadians Toe, though where I live now is many years away from becoming another Norte Hollywood, it was much the same scene when I lived in Seattle's Central District. I'd also love for some of these "friggen boot licking liberals" to see what it can be like.

BTW Toecutter, Mexican-national cops? I'm starting to worry about you, that sounds almost politically correct!

------------------
"And if you don't like it, eat a gun"


Posts: 984 | From: Hazzard County | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged
Toecutter
Member
Member # 436

posted 05-27-2000 01:03 AM     Profile for Toecutter   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Man I was tryin` to ..."relate"... ...off guard...touche!
They were mexicans....and since I work with some of them...I know they are the hardest on their own. I can`t blame them, they know the best. Now I carry countrmeasuerses, but hell, I`d NEVER have it any other way...

Posts: 1724 | From: States | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
[email protected]
unregistered

posted 05-27-2000 03:05 PM       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
quote:
Originally posted by JFA:
I agree, let every citizen have a basic infantry rifle. Assuming the government doesn't resort to the use of aircraft, armored vehicles, or artillery to crush a rebellion, our freedoms will be safeguarded.

what are you gonna do when they take away yuor gun then threy'll be able to do whaterer they want


IP: Logged
[email protected]
unregistered

posted 05-27-2000 03:27 PM       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
quote:
Originally posted by 1:
the second amendment is not about keeping the government in chek, its about assembling a militia that will be under government control to repell any invasion and to put down any rebellion, wich was common back then.

your dead wrong
i was gonna say under the new order i hope they shoot you, but you would probably go to Hell


IP: Logged
[email protected]
unregistered

posted 05-27-2000 03:30 PM       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
quote:
Originally posted by 11bravocharlie2:
I hear alot of people talk about the right to bear arms to protect ourselves against criminals, but I don't here anyone talk about the right to bear arms against our own government. One of our founding fathers said something like "A people who fear the government live in tyranny.A government who fears the people there is freedom." I for one believe the American citizen should be able to own the basic infantry rifle that our military has. And I do own one except it is not automatic which is of little use in accurate shooting and does not bother me. During our Revolutionary War if the average citizen did not own an equal or better weapon as the British did we probably would have lost the War. It was close enough as it was. I do not believe our government will in the near future go nuts or we will get a dictator. At the same time, time changes and as history tells us so do governments. If you believe that crime will stop without guns or our government will never become more corrupt than you are ignorant about history. Just pick up any world history book and look at how many wars there have been in the last century. How many countries have been occupied by other countries.If the citizens can not own decent weapons than governments can pass any laws they want to. We may have more murders than most other nations, but we are by far the most free country in the world. Alot of out crime is caused from social and parenting issues. No stable two parent homes where there is almost always a parent at home(greed). Kids are not being watched after school to see who they are spending time with.Perpetual welfare class of people where crime and ignorance runs rampant.

why are some people so blind?
you can e-mail me. i like your style


IP: Logged
[email protected]
unregistered

posted 05-27-2000 03:58 PM       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
the only hope for peace is a benevolent dictator ruling the whole world that way he would have all earth resorces to deter aggression by any rebelion, but this man could not be human, because any man would mess up the whole system. the Bible predict Jesus Christ will do just that.

His cause is true though the whole world reject it

will you be ready for His coming


IP: Logged
Toecutter
Member
Member # 436

posted 05-27-2000 04:39 PM     Profile for Toecutter   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Sorry Josh I`m waaay too busy...keep up the hope tho...
Posts: 1724 | From: States | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
Raver
Member
Member # 2100

posted 05-27-2000 05:19 PM     Profile for Raver   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Dan

Thankyou you for reply....while I still think of gun-ownership as a privilage, your points, written in the context of a US based citizen, have given me pause to think.

I will consider your issues about privileges and get back to you.

btw, I much prefer a sound and well though-out argument, rather than jingoistic "from my cold dead hand" statements. I dips me lid to Dan.

The Raver has spoken!


Posts: 276 | From: Melb/Aust | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged
[email protected]
unregistered

posted 05-27-2000 05:47 PM       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Billzilla:
In 1988, handguns killed -
7 people in Great Britain
8 people in Canada
13 people in Australia
19 people in Sweden
25 people in Israel
8,915 in the USA

Fiddle the numbers any way you like, but the US is a damn dangerous place to be ...
(Sorry I don't have any more current figures)


its not because of guns


IP: Logged
[email protected]
unregistered

posted 05-27-2000 11:33 PM       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Big Stick:
My position exactly. Unfortunatelly the liberals were successful in brainwashing this society into thinking that it is OK to take someone's rights away, if it is for a "greater good". Once they've achieved that, it's just a matter of gradually re-defining a "greater good", until all our right are gone.

[b]The Constitution is not simply a collection of current laws. It is an affirmation of the inherent, fundamental and unalienable rights we all poses without the government approval or permission.

These fundamental rights do not change. The Constitution can change, and there is a precise mechanism of doing so, but it is sufficiently difficult to keep Mr. Gore's ("The Constitution is a living and breathing document") paws away from it. Thus, Gore and his ilk resort to raping the Constitution instead. It happens with a silent approval of the uneducated public (expressed via polls), whom they convinced that saving some stupid rat is "greater good" than your right ...

"...to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures..." Amend. IV

How gullible and naive you have to be to watch the government strip someone else's rights away, and still feel safe about your own rights.


[This message has been edited by Big Stick (edited 05-25-2000).][/B]


why are people so blind
if you could e=mail i would love to havve a discusion
theres so much apathy


IP: Logged
[email protected]
unregistered

posted 05-28-2000 12:59 AM       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
dan,

can i get a trial of your newsletter
QUESTION: how do we protect 230 million+ dumb sheep from a pack of raging wolves


IP: Logged
Dan.
unregistered

posted 05-28-2000 09:36 PM       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Josh,


Anyone can get a subscription to my newsletter. It comes out once a month, and all I need is your mailing address.

Anyone can contact me at [email protected] for details, PLEASE put "DSC Newsletter" in the subject line so I DO NOT delete your email as junk mail! Thanks.

Si Vis etc

Dan


IP: Logged
icebrain
Member
Member # 1981

posted 05-29-2000 08:04 PM     Profile for icebrain   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
the second amendment is not about keeping the government in chek, its about assembling a militia that will be under government control to repell any invasion and to put down any rebellion, wich was common back then.

Ok.... "A well-regulated militia, being necessary for a free state, the right of the people to bear arms may not be infringed" now notice that the well-regulated deals solely with the fact that MILITIAS must be. It does not say that personal weapons must be restricted or regulated. This means that, while I cannot just form a militia, my guns are not required for regulation.

have any of you heard of califoria politician feinstein? she has a concealed handgun permit. she also claims that, if she could have gotten 51 members of the senate to ban all guns, she would have done it. in a speech calling for better gun control, she was holding an ak-47 with a high-capacity drum attached. while speaking, she swept the audience with it--WITH HER FINGER ON THE TRIGGER! you NEVER assume a gun is unloaded. you NEVER point a gun at something unless you are going to shoot it. this woman's hypocracy and stupidity amazes me.


Posts: 589 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged
[email protected]
Member
Member # 4935

posted 05-29-2000 10:00 PM     Profile for josh_greeno@hotmail.com   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
quote:
Originally posted by 1:
"I'm sorry but when you start screwing around with the Constitution...I'm reaching for my rifle. Those sacred words that were put on paper by our fore fathers were NEVER meant to be toyed with...nough said!"

Then why did our Fore Fathers put in a amendment process in the Constitution?




17 countries have already ratified a world constition that would override the U.S. Constition. But I'm not worried, because I know a God who controls ervthing.
If they do not take the guns away I trust there will be an armed coflict shortly smart americans against the government.
I'm not saying attack the government, but DON'T let them take your guns.
I don't own a gun, but I'm not stupid. Also because of my medical condition I need the social programs I hate. I'm not stupid I see th government becoming a socialistic state. Please tell me somthing I can do, other than show people there's a way out. Maybe start a page with a big banner "DANGER: THE GOVERNMENT IS NOT YOUR FRIEND" what do you think. Also I like your post, Raver is at me now. I don't know why?
Well, my fingers hurt, because I'm not a very good typist and my illness makes me tired,well not the illness,the meds.
Well keep up the good work Mr.Fan
Your friend,
Josh

------------------
I pledge allegance to the Lamb


Posts: 42 | From: Colombia,tn,usa | Registered: May 2000  |  IP: Logged
[email protected]
Member
Member # 4935

posted 05-29-2000 10:09 PM     Profile for josh_greeno@hotmail.com   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
quote:
Originally posted by 1:
"I'm sorry but when you start screwing around with the Constitution...I'm reaching for my rifle. Those sacred words that were put on paper by our fore fathers were NEVER meant to be toyed with...nough said!"

Then why did our Fore Fathers put in a amendment process in the Constitution?




17 countries have already ratified a world constition that would override the U.S. Constition. But I'm not worried, because I know a God who controls ervthing.
If they do not take the guns away I trust there will be an armed coflict shortly smart americans against the government.
I'm not saying attack the government, but DON'T let them take your guns.
I don't own a gun, but I'm not stupid. Also because of my medical condition I need the social programs I hate. I'm not stupid I see th government becoming a socialistic state. Please tell me somthing I can do, other than show people there's a way out. Maybe start a page with a big banner "DANGER: THE GOVERNMENT IS NOT YOUR FRIEND" what do you think. Also I like your post, Raver is at me now. I don't know why?
Well, my fingers hurt, because I'm not a very good typist and my illness makes me tired,well not the illness,the meds.
Well keep up the good work Mr.Fan
Your friend,
Josh

------------------
I pledge allegance to the Lamb


Posts: 42 | From: Colombia,tn,usa | Registered: May 2000  |  IP: Logged
[email protected]
Member
Member # 4935

posted 05-29-2000 10:16 PM     Profile for josh_greeno@hotmail.com   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
quote:
Originally posted by 1:
"I'm sorry but when you start screwing around with the Constitution...I'm reaching for my rifle. Those sacred words that were put on paper by our fore fathers were NEVER meant to be toyed with...nough said!"

Then why did our Fore Fathers put in a amendment process in the Constitution?




17 countries have already ratified a world constition that would override the U.S. Constition. But I'm not worried, because I know a God who controls ervthing.
If they do not take the guns away I trust there will be an armed coflict shortly smart americans against the government.
I'm not saying attack the government, but DON'T let them take your guns.
I don't own a gun, but I'm not stupid. Also because of my medical condition I need the social programs I hate. I'm not stupid I see th government becoming a socialistic state. Please tell me somthing I can do, other than show people there's a way out. Maybe start a page with a big banner "DANGER: THE GOVERNMENT IS NOT YOUR FRIEND" what do you think. Also I like your post, Raver is at me now. I don't know why?
Well, my fingers hurt, because I'm not a very good typist and my illness makes me tired,well not the illness,the meds.
Well keep up the good work Mr.Fan
Your friend,
Josh

------------------
I pledge allegance to the Lamb


Posts: 42 | From: Colombia,tn,usa | Registered: May 2000  |  IP: Logged
[email protected]
Member
Member # 4935

posted 05-29-2000 10:18 PM     Profile for josh_greeno@hotmail.com   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
quote:
Originally posted by 1:
"I'm sorry but when you start screwing around with the Constitution...I'm reaching for my rifle. Those sacred words that were put on paper by our fore fathers were NEVER meant to be toyed with...nough said!"

Then why did our Fore Fathers put in a amendment process in the Constitution?




17 countries have already ratified a world constition that would override the U.S. Constition. But I'm not worried, because I know a God who controls ervthing.
If they do not take the guns away I trust there will be an armed coflict shortly smart americans against the government.
I'm not saying attack the government, but DON'T let them take your guns.
I don't own a gun, but I'm not stupid. Also because of my medical condition I need the social programs I hate. I'm not stupid I see th government becoming a socialistic state. Please tell me somthing I can do, other than show people there's a way out. Maybe start a page with a big banner "DANGER: THE GOVERNMENT IS NOT YOUR FRIEND" what do you think. Also I like your post, Raver is at me now. I don't know why?
Well, my fingers hurt, because I'm not a very good typist and my illness makes me tired,well not the illness,the meds.
Well keep up the good work Mr.Fan
Your friend,
Josh

------------------
I pledge allegance to the Lamb


Posts: 42 | From: Colombia,tn,usa | Registered: May 2000  |  IP: Logged
[email protected]
Member
Member # 4935

posted 05-29-2000 10:24 PM     Profile for josh_greeno@hotmail.com   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
quote:
Originally posted by 1:
"I'm sorry but when you start screwing around with the Constitution...I'm reaching for my rifle. Those sacred words that were put on paper by our fore fathers were NEVER meant to be toyed with...nough said!"

Then why did our Fore Fathers put in a amendment process in the Constitution?




17 countries have already ratified a world constition that would override the U.S. Constition. But I'm not worried, because I know a God who controls ervthing.
If they do not take the guns away I trust there will be an armed coflict shortly smart americans against the government.
I'm not saying attack the government, but DON'T let them take your guns.
I don't own a gun, but I'm not stupid. Also because of my medical condition I need the social programs I hate. I'm not stupid I see th government becoming a socialistic state. Please tell me somthing I can do, other than show people there's a way out. Maybe start a page with a big banner "DANGER: THE GOVERNMENT IS NOT YOUR FRIEND" what do you think. Also I like your post Mr Dan, Raver is at me now. I don't know why?
Well, my fingers hurt, because I'm not a very good typist and my illness makes me tired,well not the illness,the meds.
Well keep up the good work Mr.Dan
Your friend,
Josh


------------------
I pledge allegance to the Lamb

[This message has been edited by [email protected] (edited 05-30-2000).]


Posts: 42 | From: Colombia,tn,usa | Registered: May 2000  |  IP: Logged
Raver
Member
Member # 2100

posted 05-29-2000 10:30 PM     Profile for Raver   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
er josh,

Any chance of sending some of that medication my way? It looks good

The Raver has spoken!


Posts: 276 | From: Melb/Aust | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged
Nacant
Member
Member # 4357

posted 05-30-2000 04:54 AM     Profile for Nacant   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Bogey:
So, if someone told you to pay tax and you didn't want to, you'd shoot hi,? Is that the theory, or what?
It's probably the most stupid suggestion I've ever heard.
There should be NO guns whatsoever allowed.
Only the police and territorial defence units should be allowed to have any kind of weapons.
Americans claim that they wouldn't be safe unless they have a gun to fend of criminals.
what they don't realize is that all those guns in the society is what is making it unsafe.
In Sweden, "civilians" are only allowed to have hunting rifles and competition guns.
They are not allowed to be carried in public places and are to be locked in certain rifle safes when not used.
In the last decade there have been (as far as I know) three or four incidents with random killings (the kind we hear happening in the US hundreds of times every year).
Of course bank robbers and such use guns, but they're mostly stolen military weapons.

Anyway, there is NO need for any american citizens to carry guns, if you ban and collect them at once.
You're f***ing brainwashed.


Once again, I absolutely agree.


Posts: 28 | From: Koethen, Germany | Registered: Apr 2000  |  IP: Logged
Nacant
Member
Member # 4357

posted 05-30-2000 04:55 AM     Profile for Nacant   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Bogey:
So, if someone told you to pay tax and you didn't want to, you'd shoot hi,? Is that the theory, or what?
It's probably the most stupid suggestion I've ever heard.
There should be NO guns whatsoever allowed.
Only the police and territorial defence units should be allowed to have any kind of weapons.
Americans claim that they wouldn't be safe unless they have a gun to fend of criminals.
what they don't realize is that all those guns in the society is what is making it unsafe.
In Sweden, "civilians" are only allowed to have hunting rifles and competition guns.
They are not allowed to be carried in public places and are to be locked in certain rifle safes when not used.
In the last decade there have been (as far as I know) three or four incidents with random killings (the kind we hear happening in the US hundreds of times every year).
Of course bank robbers and such use guns, but they're mostly stolen military weapons.

Anyway, there is NO need for any american citizens to carry guns, if you ban and collect them at once.
You're f***ing brainwashed.


Once again, I absolutely agree.


Posts: 28 | From: Koethen, Germany | Registered: Apr 2000  |  IP: Logged
Nacant
Member
Member # 4357

posted 05-30-2000 04:57 AM     Profile for Nacant   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Bogey:
So, if someone told you to pay tax and you didn't want to, you'd shoot hi,? Is that the theory, or what?
It's probably the most stupid suggestion I've ever heard.
There should be NO guns whatsoever allowed.
Only the police and territorial defence units should be allowed to have any kind of weapons.
Americans claim that they wouldn't be safe unless they have a gun to fend of criminals.
what they don't realize is that all those guns in the society is what is making it unsafe.
In Sweden, "civilians" are only allowed to have hunting rifles and competition guns.
They are not allowed to be carried in public places and are to be locked in certain rifle safes when not used.
In the last decade there have been (as far as I know) three or four incidents with random killings (the kind we hear happening in the US hundreds of times every year).
Of course bank robbers and such use guns, but they're mostly stolen military weapons.

Anyway, there is NO need for any american citizens to carry guns, if you ban and collect them at once.
You're f***ing brainwashed.


Once again, I absolutely agree.


Posts: 28 | From: Koethen, Germany | Registered: Apr 2000  |  IP: Logged
Skoonj
Member
Member # 80

posted 05-30-2000 06:07 AM     Profile for Skoonj   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
If strict and complete gun control were so effective, Olaf Palme would be alive today. Come to think of it, no great loss. Do what you're doing!

Skoonj

------------------
Excelsior, Fathead!
--Jean Shepherd



Posts: 541 | From: Naples, Florida, United States | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
[email protected]
Member
Member # 4935

posted 05-30-2000 07:52 AM     Profile for josh_greeno@hotmail.com   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Raver:
er josh,

Any chance of sending some of that medication my way? It looks good

The Raver has spoken!


sorry for all the post,but Ihaven't firured out how this all works yet.

------------------
I pledge allegance to the Lamb


Posts: 42 | From: Colombia,tn,usa | Registered: May 2000  |  IP: Logged
[email protected]
Member
Member # 4935

posted 05-30-2000 08:08 AM     Profile for josh_greeno@hotmail.com   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Mr. Dan
Did you read my post, also you mever answered my question about the sheep.

------------------
I pledge allegance to the Lamb


Posts: 42 | From: Colombia,tn,usa | Registered: May 2000  |  IP: Logged
[email protected]
Member
Member # 4935

posted 05-30-2000 08:14 AM     Profile for josh_greeno@hotmail.com   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Nacant:
Once again, I absolutely agree.


if guns were baned the only people who would have guns would be criminals, how safe would that be?

------------------
I pledge allegance to the Lamb


Posts: 42 | From: Colombia,tn,usa | Registered: May 2000  |  IP: Logged
Dan.
unregistered

posted 05-30-2000 10:32 AM       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Josh,

I saw your question about the sheep. I felt it somewhat rhetorical.

Also, I try to keep my postings minimal, speaking only when I have something relevant to say, or correcting a gross mistatement of fact. I will usually not comment or question someone's opinion.

I prefer to discuss facts and situations, rather than argue emotions and opinions.

"Nacant" from above is an excellent example; while he is obviously unclear on the gun issue, he is still entitled to his opinions. If he had mistated a fact, or misrepresented a situation involving either Constitutional interpretation, or tactical use of a firearm, I may speak my mind.

Si Vis etc

Dan


IP: Logged
Dan.
unregistered

posted 05-30-2000 10:38 AM       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Icebrain,

You said (paraphrased), <<Ok.... "A well-regulated militia, ..." now notice that the well-regulated deals solely with the fact that MILITIAS must be...This means that, while I cannot just form a militia, my guns are not required for regulation.>>

It is so very important, for proper interpretation, to understand the use of words during the time the Constitution was written. "Regulated" at that time meant "equipped" and "lead." Therefore, a "well regulated militia" is a well equipped and properly lead militia.

Si Vis etc

Dan


IP: Logged
icebrain
Member
Member # 1981

posted 05-30-2000 07:37 PM     Profile for icebrain   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Well, I figured I had to put it so that some certain people could understand

Josh, can you please try not to post the same message five times?

Getting rid of guns will not solve anything. First, you would have to come up with a plan to get them away from people without violating the constitution. Also, getting them from criminals will not be as easy as "Mr. Criminal, guns are banned now. You need to give it to me so I can dispose of it." He'll just shoot you, after laughing.

No matter how idealistic, there is no way everyone in this world will unite peacefully without some powerful divine intervention. Until that point, you can forget it. Ain't gonna happen.

This is also the reason that crime will never be eliminated. Someone will always try to buck the system.

In short, until the Second Coming or Judgement Day, nothing will be perfect.


Posts: 589 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged
Raver
Member
Member # 2100

posted 05-31-2000 05:09 PM     Profile for Raver   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Dan,

Would you mind listing for me the general requirments needed of a person to be able to purchase a handgun/rifle within the US.

Yes I do understand that it will be differant from state to state, but I am only looking for a general over-view of what is required to own a weapon.

Thanks

The Raver has spoken!


Posts: 276 | From: Melb/Aust | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged
mbaxter
Member
Member # 191

posted 05-31-2000 05:35 PM     Profile for mbaxter   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Raver - in general, you must have a clean record (no mental illness, no criminal record) and be 21 years of age. In some states, it's 18 years of age, but usually only for rifles (to get a pistol you still have to be 21). I think there is one state where you own a rifle at the age of 16, but I'm not sure.

Of course, there are some states where you can't own a gun at all. These, by the way, are the most crime plauged states. The states with the least strict gun laws universally have the lowest crime rates compared to those that have stricter laws.

As a general rule, if you want to be as safe as possible live in a state where the population is heavily armed. This is an undeniable fact which the anti-gun people and the media routinely ignore.


Posts: 1687 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
Skoonj
Member
Member # 80

posted 06-01-2000 06:07 AM     Profile for Skoonj   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Raver: Also, the rules vary not only from state to state, but from city to city, and from a shop or from an individual.

Buying from an individual you need no paperwork if you don't want to do any, just turn over the weapon for money.

From a dealer the Brady law has changed things from just a few years ago. You have to first buy the weapon and fill out federal paperwork, then you will be checked for your legal right to buy through a phone call to law enforcement authorities. Felonies and certain other crimes, plus time in a nut house, would disqualify you.

If you clear the phone call (better hope no one that's been convicted of something has the same name!) you get the gun. Some states and locations impose a waiting period. In Florida where I live I think it's five days. However, since I have a concealed carry permit (which involves a complete background check) the waiting period doesn't apply to me.

You cannot buy an "assault weapon" like an AR15, TEC-9, etc., in certain states like California and Massachussetts. Laws with these restrictions were passed in recent years, taking advantage of gullible and ill-informed constituents. Those laws are based essentially on whether a weapon has a military appearance, not functionality.

Skoonj

------------------
Excelsior, Fathead!
--Jean Shepherd



Posts: 541 | From: Naples, Florida, United States | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged

All times are MST (US)
This topic is comprised of pages:  1  2  3  4  5 
 

   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | COMBATSIM.COM Home

COMBATSIM.COM, INC. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by Infopop Corporation
Ultimate Bulletin Board 6.04b

Sponsor
2014 COMBATSIM.COM - All Rights Reserved