Hand Guns

[rocks 494]

Doesn't seem all of your native countrymen agree with the ban across the pond.

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/search?q=gun+laws

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/forum/view/2500/Time-to-Repeal-the-UK-39-s-Draconian-Gun-Laws/

I don't know this newspaper above, it's the best I can do while driving in traffic.

It's barely a newspaper. It has pictures of naked women on page 3, it attracts those kinds of readers.

Almost no one has signed those petitions. The most popular one, with a whopping 100 voters, is "Guns Off Our Streets".

[bsd058 296]

Yes, I fail to see why they thought this was a good idea. I don't think the constitution applies under martial law. No one can argue with the military pointing assault rifles at them! I totally disagree with these actions, I just wanted to point out that it has been done before and it can be done again.

The consititution always applies. Even under martial law, the constitution is the HIGHEST law of the land.

It probably won't happen again because of the precedents set by the courts in these lawsuits.

[Captain Oates 910]

We don't need a handgun ban, we just need tighter control of handgun sales. I fully support laws that stop straw purchases - i.e. waiting periods / limits per month etc.

I don't support feature or magazine restrictions.

Criminals don't go to a gun shop and fill in the federal form and wait x days

They buy them from someone else and that is legal in many places

I bought a 303 Lee Enfield rifle in a car park outside a jewelry shop in Washington state - its legal - should have seen the faces of the customers inside !

In order to get hand guns away from criminals, its necessary for the supply from legitimate sources to be choked off and then there should be draconian penalties and then the state should offer to buy them

It has worked elsewhere - it will work here

Half a dozen crazies with long gray hair and poppy-out eyes will make a gun battle out of it - then there will be relative peace

[Captain Oates 910]

Doesn't seem all of your native countrymen agree with the ban across the pond.

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/search?q=gun+laws

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/forum/view/2500/Time-to-Repeal-the-UK-39-s-Draconian-Gun-Laws/

I don't know this newspaper above, it's the best I can do while driving in traffic.

I say no to a handgun ban. The majority of murders around these parts of the country take place in Killadelphia, Camden and Chester City. The majority of these are black on black crime over drug territory, a baby momma or a perceived slight(street cred). So even with a ban on handguns, they would still have disputes and try to kill each other. And since most are unemployed or have illegitimate income(drug dealing) they don't have health insurance; now we'll be paying even more for their care as they'd be stabbed or beat to near death with bats. Obamacare will fix that??? Maybe that's how he's got their back and they'll come out and vote for him in November?

Black people eh ? Buyers remorse ?

[rocks 494]

The consititution always applies. Even under martial law, the constitution is the HIGHEST law of the land.

It probably won't happen again because of the precedents set by the courts in these lawsuits.

It "should" always apply.

Meanwhile the police were out killing unarmed people and covering it up.

New Orleans is a different case than anywhere else in this country. Not sure anything can be done about gun crime here while the level of corruption is so high.

[bsd058 296]

My point is that any war that would threaten the integrity of the USA would be fought with nuclear weapons and not rifles

In fact the idea of 'them' coming here is out of date - seeking better farm land is not a very moderns scenario for conflict

Fighting off 1,500,000,000 nuclear armed Chinese is no reason to own a 38 special

The only reason the US went to Iraq was knock out their weapons in circumstances where they couldn't incinerate the whole population from afar and get away with it. They had no other reason to physically invade

A country attacking the US would not be subject to that same restriction and would incinerate the US from thousands of miles away without coming to the west coast and running about in the sage brush with rifles

They always says people get ready to fight the last war rather than the next war - you can see it in the VJ keyboard warriors who actually think there would be a role for their pop guns if they got in a real war with China or Russia

It would probably be over before they could find their ammo box

I remember going on a nuclear war course where we were told what would happen.

At the end of the week, the instructor said "I have been told to tell you what to do and you have learned it , however I am a specialist in this business and I know a lot - if it happens, I wont be running around commandeering buses like you - I am off home to F the wife to death !"

At the time of that course, a normal thermo-nuclear device yielded 50 megatons - the Hiroshima bomb was 200 times smaller

Stick that in your holster you gun nuts !

I just disagree. In fact, I'm reminded of the movie War Games, while created by Hollywood, was based on game theory. Nuclear war is not a high probability nor will it ever be highly probable after the US used them in WW2 (assuming both sides wish to remain alive). On top of this, most people who have read Sun Tzu's The Art of War would suggest that the most probable type of attack would keep the US intact in order to use its resources to protect its invaders from attacks from other nations. Again, though, this is assuming the invaders are not fighting a religious war and actually care about their own survival.

In saying this, even if they were fighting a religious war, there are other nations that would attempt to invade the US with conventional weapons in order to preserve its infrastructure and natural resources.

Nuclear war was not an option to the US because Iraq was believed to have been able to retaliate with their own weapons at the time. Game theory in action.

Edited July 5, 2012 by bsd058

[bsd058 296]

It "should" always apply.

True.

[rocks 494]

True.

Insurance companies "should" always pay out when you are covered too. That's a different story though.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Criminals don't go to a gun shop and fill in the federal form and wait x days

They buy them from someone else and that is legal in many places

I bought a 303 Lee Enfield rifle in a car park outside a jewelry shop in Washington state - its legal - should have seen the faces of the customers inside !

In order to get hand guns away from criminals, its necessary for the supply from legitimate sources to be choked off and then there should be draconian penalties and then the state should offer to buy them

It has worked elsewhere - it will work here

Half a dozen crazies with long gray hair and poppy-out eyes will make a gun battle out of it - then there will be relative peace

In California you must use an FFL to conduct transfers. Before we go all draconian, I think its logical to try other laws instead.

[Harsh_77 716]

referring to 'gun nuts' as a generality is not the same as a specific and pointed attack on a specific VJ member

Are you trying to disqualify opposition to your views by the back door, in the same way as people who claim the President is not an American ?

I have a short barreled AR 15 carbine which is very handy and has a 30 round clip in it at all times with 2 more at hand - so there is no need for a pistol.

That is your personal choice and why you think your choice is the right one.

Let ppl have whatever they want.

If they like hand gun let them keep hand gun, if they like shot gun let them keep shot gun.

[rocks 494]

That is your personal choice and why you think your choice is the right one.

Let ppl have whatever they want.

If they like hand gun let them keep hand gun, if they like shot gun let them keep shot gun.

What about for these people?

whole communities who think its right and they should get things for free. No one should be able to question them and they are above law and can do whatever they want.

[Captain Oates 910]

I just disagree. In fact, I'm reminded of the movie War Games, while created by Hollywood, was based on game theory. Nuclear war is not a high probability nor will it ever be highly probable after the US used them in WW2 (assuming both sides wish to remain alive). On top of this, most people who have read Sun Tzu's The Art of War would suggest that the most probable type of attack would keep the US intact in order to use its resources to protect its invaders from attacks from other nations. Again, though, this is assuming the invaders are not fighting a religious war and actually care about their own survival.

In saying this, even if they were fighting a religious war, there are other nations that would attempt to invade the US with conventional weapons in order to preserve its infrastructure and natural resources.

Nuclear war was not an option to the US because Iraq was believed to have been able to retaliate with their own weapons at the time. Again, game theory in action.

Sun Tzu doesn't apply in the Nuclear Age, he would have to open a restaurant in Toronto - and computer games are for spotty kids

The natural resources are in Russia/Saudi/Australia/Brazil/Canada

A chain of Walmarts and wig factories is hardly a natural resource

If you want to play internet games, surely you can't devise a scenario where the one billion Chinese armed with tactical (artillery fired) nuclear weapons, are repulsed by a bunch of obese Texans with 45 autos and red pickup trucks ?

[Harsh_77 716]

What about for these people?

Rock what are u talking about?

Have you lost your mind?

You copying and pasting from different topics.

[rocks 494]

Rock what are u talking about?

Have you lost your mind?

You copying and pasting from different topics.

You never explained what you meant by that rather bizarre comment. Just wondering if these "whole communities" were going to be allowed to have guns, or if you had some other crazy idea in your head.

[bsd058 296]

Sun Tzu doesn't apply in the Nuclear Age, he would have to open a restaurant in Toronto - and computer games are for spotty kids

The natural resources are in Russia/Saudi/Australia/Brazil/Canada

A chain of Walmarts and wig factories is hardly a natural resource

If you want to play internet games, surely you can't devise a scenario where the one billion Chinese armed with tactical (artillery fired) nuclear weapons, are repulsed by a bunch of obese Texans with 45 autos and red pickup trucks ?

I honestly do not know whether to laugh or cry, because I think you might be serious.