Gun Ban

[Technosoul]

Originally posted by bugsbunny04,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (bugsbunny04,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-Technosoul, As long as people think they are free to do whatever they want just because they have a gun in hand, we will have problems in our nation relative to gun related crimes.  If stupid people think they can get free money with a gun, then that freedom must be eliminated. If people think they must regulate freedom with a gun then they need their guns regulated.  (how about that as a good "quote"?) If you want to regulate topless women by keeping them inside a strip club, why not regulate guns by keeping them in a gun club?  Same thing.  Here is a CNN linkpage http://www.cnn.com/2002/SHOWBIZ/TV/07/30/c...oon.characters/ Technosoul

More "we need to ban guns because of criminal misuse"



Hey f*** stick, (mods, butter it if you want, I just cant hold this in anymore, sometimes in order to argue with stupid people you have to speak so they can understand you, I dont care, at least leave the link below in here, just edit the post) When are you going to get it through your thick head that gun control only takes guns away from those who CHOOSE to OBEY the LAW!?! ARE YOU F***CKING DELUSIONAL? I know a shrink who would put you on anti-psychotic drugs for persisting to beleive such weak crap after being proved wrong so repetitively. You want a link? HERE, check this out, and you keep watching until the end and PAY EXTRA ATTENTION TO THE INTERVEIWS WITH THE CRIMINALS FROM BEHIND BARS!

http://members.tripod.com/old_skool_fattie...mypersonalsite/

NOTICE: ABC is the most viciously anti-gun network in a sea of networks that hate guns as much as YOU do![/b][/quote]


See how mad you got, how you lost your temper(ment). See what a rage you went into because someone ticked you off .... and I should trust you with a gun?

No thanks.

Thanks for making my case for me.

Technosoul.

[bugsbunny04]

I bet you probably wouldnt want to trust me with a chainsaw or sledge hammer either, but are you going to ban those implements too?

BTW, I was perfectly calm the whole time. I just needed to make sure you were paying attention, which, up until that point, you obviously havent been.

I bet a pack of Guiness you didnt even watch the damn video.

[Technosoul]

Originally posted by bugsbunny04, I bet you probably wouldnt want to trust me with a chainsaw or sledge hammer either, but are you going to ban those implements too? BTW, I was perfectly calm the whole time. I just needed to make sure you were paying attention, which, up until that point, you obviously havent been. I bet a pack of Guiness you didnt even watch the damn video.

You win the bet, I did not watch any video.

What makes you think I would pay attention if you acted like a bully with your ranting speech?

At least if you had a sledge hammer I could unarm you before you could do any damage or I could make tracks and keep my distance, but I cannot outrun a speeding bullet.

As I posted before in my other debates it is not the gun that kills people but the person behind it, and so true gun regulation is about people learnig how to regulate their anger, hatred, greed, selfishness, fears, plus the fake sense of power, and all that phycholical stuff. If people were peacefull minded then guns would just be dust collectors. Just like our culture attempted to regulated cigarette control via educational programs so shold we regulate gun useage by educating people about the attitudes and false perceptions that are behind our gun culture and teaching people how to overcome those phycholical problems that lurk behind the trigger of the trigger, and behind the patriotic sounding concept of bearing arms.

Technosoul.

[Rainbow]

Originally posted by TheColdTruth, The gun ban is over. We can joyfully buy our TEC-9's and 50 round mags for our ak's and carbines without uncle sam getting all uppity about it. What do you guys think of the recent gun ban lift?

Money, that is all about it.

[bugsbunny04]

Originally posted by Technosoul, You win the bet, I did not watch any video.

Its official, you are in denial. Im bringing you documents, interviews, PROOF presented in such a manner so even a complete bo-bo could understand it, and you refuse to even consider it. It is presented by a network that has a long history of supporting your side, and uses documentation from an organization that has a long history of supporting your side (even though they admit THEIR OWN DATA proves they are wrong), and you still wont give it any credibility? Just watch the video, Disillusionment wont hurt as much as you think, and only for a little while.

At least if you had a sledge hammer I could unarm you before you could do any damage...

First of all, you wanna bet? If I lose, Ill buy you a six pack, if I win, well, you wont be around for me to pay up so, lets not go there, eh?

...gun regulation is about people learnig how to regulate their anger, hatred, greed, selfishness, fears, plus the fake sense of power, and all that phycholical stuff...

You dont get it, people who dont give a flying f*** about life imprisonment or the death penalty for murdering somebody could really give a f*** less about 10 years for having an inanimate object that just happens to have more range than a chainsaw.

As for the rest of that crap, false preceptions behind our gun culture? Psychological problems that lurk behind the trigger? How about the psychological problems behind the ball bats, that in your world, would have bashed my brains in three years ago? Of course, they are hunky dory, because then you wouldn't have me trying to foist on you that pesky thing called reality.

[bugsbunny04]

Originally posted by Rainbow,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Rainbow,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-TheColdTruth, The gun ban is over. We can joyfully buy our TEC-9's and 50 round mags for our ak's and carbines without uncle sam getting all uppity about it. What do you guys think of the recent gun ban lift?

Money, that is all about it.[/b][/quote]

I agree with you, sort or, shortly after the ban, a dealer selling pre-ban guns and magazines told a 60 minutes reporter "Bill Clinton (giggles)...I love this guy, he is the best sales rep Ive ever had and hasnt cost me a penny".

Some dealers actually tried to pull all sorts of crap after it lifted, trying desperately to sell off all the 10 rounders and comsmetically nuetered semis. And none of us are giving them anymore business either.

It was really about politically motivated folks trying to (a) make us gun guys look like terrorists, and (b) make it look like they were doing something about it.

I bought an AK and some 30 rounders two months ago, and the only difference between the rifle I bought then and the ones made now is the ones made now have a mount for a bayonet. Have you ever heard of a "drive by bayoneting". As far as I know, the last incident of someone being killed with a mounted bayonet happened while thirteen of our southern states were temporarilly not part of the US.

[Technosoul]

That way you can stab them if they stand still and shoot them if they run.

Like I mentioned, we have groups of guys who like to go off in the woods and play army on the weekend, they sometimes believe they are a para-military group getting ready for some imaginary invation or needed revolution to keep extreme governmental control in check.

I think they would have lots of fun with that weapon you mentioned, and I personally doubt if some bank robber would find such a weapon anymore useful, and perhaps less effective then standard guns that might not be as difficult to hide until needed.

The gun is designed to market to people who have that patriot feeling about bearing arms in respect of the Bill of Rights.

I do not see how that particular weapon could be a "set back" for anit-gun control people, if people did not pick that model they would pick another one, so it makes no real difference relative to controlling anything. The only thing I would suggest is that they drop the title "assult weapon" so people do not get so confused.

It is more of an adult toy then anything else.

So like it or not Bugs and I might even be in agreement on this one point relative to that one weapon in particular.

So if I am out deer hunting and miss my target, and the deer charges me with his sharp antlers, I can stick him at close range with my bayonet (and we can duke it out antler to antler). It is always good to be prepared you know. hee hee.

technosoul.

[bugsbunny04]

Like I said, the last time anybody killed anything with a bayonet mounted on a rifle while on US soil was probably during the civil war.

As for your whole deal about the militias, I wouldnt exactly write these people off, unless I was poorly educated. Do you know the mission objectives of the English forces that showed up in Lexington and Concord? Those particular objectives were the reason the colonists decided to fire "the shot heard 'round the world". And guess what, if the ATF, under instruction of people like you, show up at these guys houses with the same objectives, they will react the same way as the residents of Lexington and Condord. And I'll be right there with them.

And btw, I dont wanna regulate topless women either.

[Technosoul]

Originally posted by bugsbunny04, Like I said, the last time anybody killed anything with a bayonet mounted on a rifle while on US soil was probably during the civil war. As for your whole deal about the militias, I wouldnt exactly write these people off, unless I was poorly educated. Do you know the mission objectives of the English forces that showed up in Lexington and Concord? Those particular objectives were the reason the colonists decided to fire "the shot heard 'round the world". And guess what, if the ATF, under instruction of people like you, show up at these guys houses with the same objectives, they will react the same way as the residents of Lexington and Condord. And I'll be right there with them. And btw, I dont wanna regulate topless women either.

I never advocated at any time that all guns should be rounded up by some house to house search, as you have imagined.

Everyone knows that such a mission to collect all guns in he USA by force would be impossile to carry out.

Technosoul.

[bugsbunny04]

Originally posted by Technosoul,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Technosoul,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-bugsbunny04, Like I said, the last time anybody killed anything with a bayonet mounted on a rifle while on US soil was probably during the civil war. As for your whole deal about the militias, I wouldnt exactly write these people off, unless I was poorly educated. Do you know the mission objectives of the English forces that showed up in Lexington and Concord? Those particular objectives were the reason the colonists decided to fire "the shot heard 'round the world". And guess what, if the ATF, under instruction of people like you, show up at these guys houses with the same objectives, they will react the same way as the residents of Lexington and Condord. And I'll be right there with them. And btw, I dont wanna regulate topless women either.

I never advocated at any time that all guns should be rounded up by some house to house search, as you have imagined.

Everyone knows that such a mission to collect all guns in he USA by force would be impossile to carry out.

Technosoul.[/b][/quote]

No, you didnt directly, but, you live in Kali? Did you vote for DiFi? Do you support the Brady (whatever they call themselves this week unified with whatever)? Do you support registration of all weapons, and if so, are you aware of what has happened in EVERY single case of national registration of all weapons anywhere else? How about what has already happened in NY? Yeah, I thought so. You say you dont advocate it, you just vote for people who do. Thats like saying you are against the war and then you vote for Kerry. Oh wait, he is against the war this week, or mabey that was last week?

Do we see a pattern here? You are the only liberal I know that is actually consistent. You are consistently wrong, but at least you are consistently wrong the same way. Most liberals keep trying out new wrong answers.

[Technosoul]

The idea of registraton was effected for a couple of reasons, first if your wife showed up dead with a certain kind of bullet the police could check to see if you ever owned such a gun, that is why criminals (only) want guns that cannot be traced back to them as the one buying them. So you cannot just ditch the gun after murdering someone with it because no one knew you just went to a gun shop and got it for that purpose.

It is not because they wanted to have addresses so they can round up everyones guns. That is like thinking you must registor your car in case some anti-smog President wants to round up everyone's automobles. Also, if someone steals your gun they can check the records and return it to you. (if such is in their budget to do so).

You are simply paranoid about it. That is all.

I honestly have no idea what the Bradly bill is, or that other stuff you mentioned. So cannot say if those things were good or not.

However I have already stated all my views in other gun-related message treads so no point in a re-play.

When I vote for a President his gun philosophy is at the bottom of my list, hardly would make a difference if I liked the person's thinking about the important stuff.

Technosoul.

[bugsbunny04]

Originally posted by Technosoul, The idea of registraton was effected for a couple of reasons, first if your wife showed up dead with a certain kind of bullet the police could check to see if you ever owned such a gun, that is why criminals (only) want guns that cannot be traced back to them as the one buying them. So you cannot just ditch the gun after murdering someone with it because no one knew you just went to a gun shop and got it for that purpose. It is not because they wanted to have addresses so they can round up everyones guns. That is like thinking you must registor your car in case some anti-smog President wants to round up everyone's automobles. Also, if someone steals your gun they can check the records and return it to you. (if such is in their budget to do so). You are simply paranoid about it. That is all.

Lets see, the Jews registered their guns. Next thing you know, they are being confiscated and the Jews are defensless against the SS. The brits registered their guns. Next thing you know, confiscated from people whose only crime was having an inanimate object. Australians registered their guns. Can you guess what happened? They got confiscated from more law abiding citizens. New Yorkers registered their guns, later, certain types were confiscated. Sarah Brady (the leader of the anti gun movement, and the source of most of the doctored statistics Bill Clinton used to justify gun control measures) has actually said that her end game objective is to register, ban and confiscate ALL firearms of ALL types, including those used for hunting and target shooting. US Senator Dianne Fienstein (or whatever) D-CA has said she will not be happy until she can say "Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in" ("or else").

Now, can you guess how many crimes registration has helped solve in New York, Maryland, New Jersey and California COMBINED? Just guess, I'll give you three guesses. If you get it right, I'll buy you a six pack of your favorite beer. I'll even let you cheat and use Google. If get this wrong Im gonna call you an idiot.

Im not paranoid, you are just unaware of the facts.

[Technosoul]

And so let us look at England, Australia and New York state.

Which one became a dictatorship, which one had gaint concentration camps after rounding up all those people? So here we have three places that did not become like Germany under Hitler, seems like good odds to me. Which one fell prey to an enemy attack because their people were not armed with pop guns?

Seems like those places turned out okay and did not end up selectivly wiping out their own population. Now in Germany they were having economic problems and so they blamed the wealthy few and it happened to be that the Jewish community were better capitalists and had most of the money, they ran the banks, were famous for jewery stores and so forth. And so someone came up with a poltical plot to get rid the the Jewish people because they thought they were not recycling the money and they took the guns to prevent any insurgency backlash later on, but then the hate got out of control and so they rounded them up and put them in those camps. It does not seem reasonable that people in this country would have a revolution attacking the wealthy few that would be supported by the government, and so I see no trend in your data at all.

The only wealthy few I know that went to a concentration camp here in Ameirca was Martha Stewart the Democrat, and no one raided her house and took her guns.

Why are going on about this anyway, it has nothing to do with the topic about Congress not voting to continue a ban on one type of weapon.

I do not need to look up all those old lines the NRA has been using for many years now, everyone knows all about that silly argument.

technosoul.

[bugsbunny04]

England has a history of not being very nice to people, including subjects it doesnt like. And Im putting that lightly. England has censorship, and a law was passed after 9/11 that makes it illegal (as in, you get bunched in with the OBL crowd) to have a list of your elected officials. Free? My ass. Sheep. Happy sheep? Mabey, but anybody who is willing to sacrifice liberty for safety/comfort deserves neither.

I'll give you Australlia, they are not an out of control dictatorship, but crime is on a very slight increase since confiscation, especailly home invasions.

New York state still has to worry about being reminded that they are part of a whole, with military force, as certain southern states where forced to be about 140 years ago. Give them time.

You dont think some people in this country are trying to head in that direction? Have you ever heard of the Patriot acts?

Martha Stewart is a criminal. She cheated financially. She commited fraud against everyone she sold to. If you dont know that, it means you dont have all the facts and you need to back the f*** out.

Silly lines? SILLY LINES? Im tlaking hard numbers. You think we are making this shit up? This shit is coming from people who actually oppose us and they STILL (to their chagrin) put out numbers that support our cause.

Oh wait, "silly lines" is what you call the facts that disprove your theories.

Who needs fact when you can have theory?

By the way, the answer: 0

Thats right, registration has helped solve 0 crimes so far. Criminals are, by a high court ruling, are actually exempt from having to register weapons. If you are caught with an unregistered weapon, you can get the weapons charge dropped by claiming you were going to do something illegal with it and registraion violates your fourth ammendment rights. This ruling was handed down by anti gunners!

Here is an idea! Lets just make it illegal for CRIMINALS to have guns...wait, we already do that. Okay, to make sure that works, lets say in order to buy a gun you have to fill out a bunch of paper work and submit to a background check to make sure you are not a criminal and dont have a restraining order against you and have not been declared mentally incompetent...oops, we already do that too...lets make everyone register their guns so when they commit crimes with them they can be traced...oops, that violates their fourth ammendment rights so we can only require people to register their guns if they have no intention of doing anything illegal.

In that case, whats the point? If it doesnt help solve or stop any crimes, and we KNOW that it doesnt, why are we going to do these things? Mabey so when they cancel the elections, or start arresting people for disagreeing with the war, nobody will show up at city hall with an AK-47 to say GIVE ME MY GOD DAMN BALLOT!

[Technosoul]

Well, if you are correct that arming the country folks can save a population from some governmental plot to enforce such controls, then you might as well bring the ttoops home from Iraq because the arms bearing population will "save" their country from our government.

[bugsbunny04]

The Viet Cong whipped our ass didnt they? I happen to agree that it is time to pull out of Iraq. If we are going to continue to use the same BS tactics that we already know from Vietnam are doomed to fail (fighting a gurilla war with ground punders), its time to cut our losses and quit letting the towel heads use our sons and daughters for target practice. I happen to think Iraq was far less a threat than Iran was and continues to be, and I would have gone to North Korea before I went anywhere else.

See gurillas are effective, or are they only effective in Vietnam and Iraq?

[Technosoul]

Anyway that is some data you can use in some future debate (with someone else - if you ever find anyone else? Is anyone ever calling for a total ban on hand guns - I would imagine the gun people have a hard time getting anyone to debate them).

It would seem we are having much more trouble winning the war in Iraq relative to the armed insurgency then we did with Saddam's Army (aka Guard). However rifles are not the weapons they find most effective, rather it would be those bombs they plant along the roads with remote controls and larger "car bombs". It seems of the old days of one militiary fighting another military have changed and it is now gurilla (also called torrorist) methodolgies which are being used between CIA and other politically motivated groups in other contries, sometimes acting seperate from any need of a government or state supervision. However our government has placed a ban on the CIA's terrorist like activities as well as private training here in the USA to prepare for any event when the people must defend their self from a non-democratic occupation force.

[bugsbunny04]

There is a difference between gurillas and terrorists. The difference is that terrorists waste as many civilians as possible and if they knock off a few milpers, goody. Gurillas kill as many enemy milpers as possible and put various amounts of effort into minimizing civilian casualties.

And what do you mean a ban on private training? They must have forgotten to tell the militias.

[Technosoul]

Better idea - let's ban stupid debates about gun regulation.

[bugsbunny04]

Yeah, especially the ones where the anti gunner just cant comprehend that gun control is a total failure at preventing crime.