• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

40 Reasons guns should be banned

Pugs

Back from the range
None
Tongue firmly in cheek. I'd like to believe that Heller changed some of this but you still hear the same crap from the anti-gun crowd (and flash)


Banning guns works, which is why New York, DC, Detroit & Chicago cops need guns.

Washington DC’s low murder rate of 69 per 100,000 is due to strict gun control, and Indianapolis’s high murder rate of 9 per 100,000 is due to the lack of gun control.

Statistics showing high murder rates justify gun control but statistics showing increasing murder rates after gun control are “just statistics.”

The Brady Bill and the Assault Weapons Ban, both of which went into effect in 1994 are responsible for the decrease in violent crime rates,which have been declining since 1991.

We must get rid of guns because a deranged lunatic may go on a shooting spree at any time and anyone who would own a gun out of fear of such a lunatic is paranoid.

The more helpless you are the safer you are from criminals.

An intruder will be incapacitated by tear gas or oven spray, but if shot with a .357 Magnum will get angry and kill you.

A woman raped and strangled is morally superior to a woman with a smoking gun and a dead rapist at her feet.

When confronted by violent criminals, you should “put up no defense - give them what they want, or run” (Handgun Control Inc. Chairman Pete Shields, Guns Don’t Die - People Do, 1981, p. 125).

The New England Journal of Medicine is filled with expert advice about guns; just like Guns & Ammo has some excellent treatises on heart surgery.

One should consult an automotive engineer for safer seat belts, a civil engineer for a better bridge, a surgeon for internal medicine, a computer programmer for hard drive problems, and Sarah Brady for firearms expertise.

The 2nd Amendment, ratified in 1787, refers to the National Guard, which was created 130 years later, in 1917.

The National Guard, federally funded, with bases on federal land, using federally-owned weapons, vehicles, buildings and uniforms, punishing trespassers under federal law, is a “state” militia.

These phrases: “right of the people peaceably to assemble,” “right of the people to be secure in their homes,” “enumerations herein of certain rights shall not be construed to disparage others retained by the people,” and “The powers not delegated herein are reserved to the states respectively, and to the people” all refer to individuals, but “the right of the people to keep and bear arms” refers to the state.

“The Constitution is strong and will never change.” But we should ban and seize all guns thereby violating the 2nd, 4th, and 5th Amendments to that Constitution.

Rifles and handguns aren’t necessary to national defense! Of course, the army has hundreds of thousands of them.

Private citizens shouldn’t have handguns, because they aren’t “military weapons”, but private citizens shouldn’t have “assault rifles”, because they are military weapons.

In spite of waiting periods, background checks, fingerprinting,government forms, etc., guns today are too readily available, which is responsible for recent school shootings.

In the 1940’s, 1950’s and 1960’s,anyone could buy guns at hardware stores, army surplus stores, gas stations,variety stores, Sears mail order, no waiting, no background check, no fingerprints, no government forms and there were no school shootings.

The NRA’s attempt to run a “don’t touch” campaign about kids handling guns is propaganda, but the anti-gun lobby’s attempt to run a “don’t touch” campaign is responsible social activity.

Guns are so complex that special training is necessary to use them properly, and so simple to use that they make murder easy.

A handgun, with up to 4 controls, is far too complex for the typical adult to learn to use, as opposed to an automobile that only has 20.

Women are just as intelligent and capable as men but a woman with a gun is “an accident waiting to happen” and gun makers’ advertisements aimed at women are “preying on their fears.”

Ordinary people in the presence of guns turn into slaughtering butchers but revert to normal when the weapon is removed.

Guns cause violence, which is why there are so many mass killings at gun shows.

A majority of the population supports gun control, just like a majority of the population supported owning slaves.

Any self-loading small arm can legitimately be considered to be a “weapon of mass destruction” or an “assault weapon.”

Most people can’t be trusted, so we should have laws against guns, which most people will abide by because they can be trusted.

The right of Internet pornographers to exist cannot be questioned because it is constitutionally protected by the Bill of Rights, but the use of handguns for self defense is not really protected by the Bill of Rights.

Free speech entitles one to own newspapers, transmitters, computers, and typewriters, but self- defense only justifies bare hands.

The ACLU is good because it uncompromisingly defends certain parts of the Constitution, and the NRA is bad, because it defends other parts of the Constitution.

Charlton Heston, a movie actor as president of the NRA was a cheap lunatic who should be ignored, but Michael Douglas, a movie actor as a representative of Handgun Control, Inc. is an ambassador for peace who is entitled to an audience at the UN arms control summit.

Police operate with backup within groups, which is why they need larger capacity pistol magazines than do “civilians” who must face criminals alone and therefore need less ammunition.

We should ban “Saturday Night Specials” and other inexpensive guns because it’s not fair that poor people have access to guns too.

Police officers have some special Jedi-like mastery over handguns that private citizens can never hope to obtain.

Private citizens don’t need a gun for self-protection because the police are there to protect them even though the Supreme Court says the police are not responsible for their protection.

Citizens don’t need to carry a gun for personal protection but police chiefs, who are desk-bound administrators who work in a building filled with cops, need a gun.

“Assault weapons” have no purpose other than to kill large numbers of people. The police need assault weapons. You do not.

When Microsoft pressures its distributors to give Microsoft preferential promotion, that’s bad; but when the Federal government pressures cities to buy guns only from Smith & Wesson, that’s good.

Trigger locks do not interfere with the ability to use a gun for defensive purposes, which is why you see police officers with one on their duty weapon.

Handgun Control, Inc., says they want to “keep guns out of the wrong hands.” Guess what? You have the wrong hands.
 

torpedo0126

Member
I am confused over the gun argument. Where do people fall who believe in gun regulation, as in mandatory safety mechanisms, no ownership by felons, strict background checks, and regulation on sales at gun shows?
 

scoolbubba

Brett327 gargles ballsacks
pilot
Contributor
i can agree with one of the above. no ownership by felons. The rest are just another means of controlling a population for no good reason.

I can break it down barney style if you'd like...

Your car: you MIGHT go out and drink and drive one day. If you did this, you could very well kill someone... an automatic safety device to prevent this might save a life... how bout you go get yourself and interlock ignition device, just to be on the safe side...regardless of how much driving experience or training, the government better mandate one more costly piece of technowizardry for you to shell out dinero.

Strict background checks: how strict are we talking? no guns for felons. alright, i'll buy that, but we already have a system in place for this. it's called NICS. what about your mental health? do you want any FFL with a phone to have access to your mental health records? if they can get to it, who else has a right to know what dreams you tell your head shrink about?

Gun shows: for the most part, are a way for private collectors to show off/sell their pieces to other collectors. back to the car analogy...you might hurt someone with that thing, better not let you buy it from joe blow... you'll have to go thru a dealer to get that used vehicle. Controlling what people do with their property once they own it is none of the governments business.
 

The Chief

Retired
Contributor
I am confused over the gun argument. Where do people fall who believe in gun regulation, as in mandatory safety mechanisms, no ownership by felons, strict background checks, and regulation on sales at gun shows?

People just do not know. Was on a jury, major Federal drug/murder case involving Wash DC folks. All jurors were left, left, educated, articulate and etc. All guns owned/used by the felons were stolen, most from police sources. The Govt's case was air tight but most jurors were for acquittal their argument "Lax gun laws; easy criminal access to guns and gun shows, ryv/. ergo we were making the perps scapegoats for bad policy". I tried to point out that the crimes were all committed in DC where an almost total gun ban had been in place before most of the perps were even born. They, jury, would not believe - sent foreman request to the judge on the subject - judge replied that the issue was not presented in evidence. However, we (two of us) prevailed and changed minds. Perps convicted on most charges less the more serious gun charges.
 

Bevo16

Registered User
pilot
I am confused over the gun argument. Where do people fall who believe in gun regulation, as in mandatory safety mechanisms, no ownership by felons, strict background checks, and regulation on sales at gun shows?

If you want "mandatory safety mechanisms" then you are an idiot. It's not the job of the government to decide how to make a gun safe. It is the job of gun owners to be responsible and operate their guns in responsible manner. How would you feel about a government regulation that prevented cars from going more than 70 miles per hour? How about mandatory breath tests every time you start your car? How about helmets for all passengers in cars? That will save lives, right?

Gun ownership by felons is already illegal. Are you advocating home and vehicle inspections for all ex-cons to ensure that they are not in possession of firearms? The 4th Amendment would like to have a word with you.

Strict background checks? What else do you want in a background check that is not already done? I live in Tennessee (a gun friendly state) and have to produce a photo ID, give my residence, phone number, social security number, and be fingerprinted just to buy a gun. Do you want a blood and stool sample as well?

Regulation on sales at gun shows? Do you know what you are talking about here? Guess what, sales at gun shows are already regulated. If I buy at a gun show, I have to fill out the same paperwork that I would in a gun store. What the liberals call the "Gun Show Loophole" does not have jack shit to do with gun shows. They are talking about making sales of firearms between private citizens illegal. Can anyone think of a good reason that if I wanted to buy a gun from RocketMan, he could not sell it to me? It's about taxation and government control. We have enough of that already thank-you-very-much. If you think that the "gun show loophole" allows firearms to get into the hands of felons, well, that's bullshit too. If you really want to cling to that argument than we can arrange someone to show up and slap a governor on your car that will prevent going more than the speed limit.

Does that answer your questions?
 

m26

Well-Known Member
Contributor
Please be nice.

Honest question. Why do you need a gun (other than a hunting rifle), except to protect yourself from other people with guns?
 

Rocketman

Rockets Up
Contributor
Just enforce the current laws. Why pass new laws that by definition criminals will break. I keep thinking they should just pass a law making it illegal to murder someone with a gun.....wait....never mind

Bevo is right about the gun show loophole. It doesn't exist. It never did.
 

magnetfreezer

Well-Known Member
Please be nice.

Honest question. Why do you need a gun (other than a hunting rifle), except to protect yourself from other people with guns?

To protect my self from someone with a knife, baseball bat, zip-gun, chain, crowbar, throwing star, straight razor, broken bottle, or taser.

And to protect myself from other people with guns since they most likely don't care if their guns are illegal (they obviously don't have a problem with severe bodily injury or death which is even more illegal).
 

Rocketman

Rockets Up
Contributor
Please be nice.

Honest question. Why do you need a gun (other than a hunting rifle), except to protect yourself from other people with guns?

Killing things and having fun is what guns are good for. That's why I own a metric shit ton of nasty weapons. That and to piss Chucky off.
 

Rocketman

Rockets Up
Contributor
What part of the world are you living in? :D

Most likely New York, DC, Detroit or Chicago. Because of strict gun control laws the bad guys who follow those laws must use a knife, baseball bat, zip-gun, chain, crowbar, throwing star, straight razor, broken bottle, or taser to commit a crime.
 

usmarinemike

Solidly part of the 42%.
pilot
Contributor
Please be nice.

Honest question. Why do you need a gun (other than a hunting rifle), except to protect yourself from other people with guns?


Honest answer. To protect myself and my family from other people with guns.

Anybody who lives in Milton knows that there has been a rash of burglaries in which the main suspect finally got into a standoff yesterday with the police. He had a gun. If he would have broken in here while I was at work there is nothing else my wife could do but defend herself. The police will not get here in time.
 

statesman

Shut up woman... get on my horse.
pilot
Please be nice.

Honest question. Why do you need a gun (other than a hunting rifle), except to protect yourself from other people with guns?

Is this not reason enough to own a gun? If someone breaks into my house I have a German Shepherd, but he isnt bullet proof. I can call the police but they don't teleport, yet. The only way to ensure that I am on a level playing field is a gun.


Also lets break this bad boy down:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

A well regulated Militia,

TITLE 10 > Subtitle A > PART I > CHAPTER 13 > § 311Prev | Next
§ 311. Militia: composition and classes

(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

So the military is the ORGANIZED militia, everyone else is the UNORGANIZED militia. EVERYONE who is male, and between 17 and 45 (with few exceptions). Remember ORGANIZED != REGULATED.

being necessary to the security of a free State

Just like the military oath is to the Constitution and is taken in its defense against foreign and domestic enemies, a free state can turn to despotic rule from outside or within. This is about the protection of the idea of the United States and that whole free country thing.

the right of the people

The people is the populace of the country. The Joe the Plumbers, my dad, your mom, you, and I.

keep and bear
In the 18th Century this means to personally own, and carry.


No specification here. No exceptions made for pistols (which did exist), long guns, etc. Arms is arms. And ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about deer/duck hunting. Hunting is not a human right, protection of ones person and property are.


shall not be infringed.
Should be clear enough, but this means the above shall not be infringed.


Who cares if I need it. I dont need to speak my mind, or blog about zombies, but it would be a violation of the 1st Amendment for the GOVERNMENT to take it away from me.
 

Flash

SEVAL/ECMO
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
....No specification here. No exceptions made for pistols (which did exist), long guns, etc. Arms is arms. And ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about deer/duck hunting. Hunting is not a human right, protection of ones person and property are......

What about artillery? Anti-tank missiles? Are they included?
 

scoolbubba

Brett327 gargles ballsacks
pilot
Contributor
People are afraid... and not of the right things. They are afraid of what they need the government to give them, without realizing what it's taking away from them at the same time...
 
Top