Pretty good read on guns. Thought you all would enjoy this, too.
http://munchkinwrangler.blogspot.com/2007/03/why-gun-is-civilization.html
http://munchkinwrangler.blogspot.com/2007/03/why-gun-is-civilization.html
-
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
Why the gun IS civilization
- Thread starter FastMover
- Start date
Sidewinder7
New Member
Personal Firearms
I agree with you and your article that our country and civilization is intact because we have the right to carry arms. In third world countries only the military and police have weapons and are mostly corrupt anyways so these countries are at the mercy of thugs so they can not progress in the developement of their society. I will always have a collection to keep me and my family safe.
Sidewinder7
I agree with you and your article that our country and civilization is intact because we have the right to carry arms. In third world countries only the military and police have weapons and are mostly corrupt anyways so these countries are at the mercy of thugs so they can not progress in the developement of their society. I will always have a collection to keep me and my family safe.
Sidewinder7
Are you serious? Getting a gun is easier than buying food in most 3rd world countries. In Africa anyone can buy a full auto ak-47 for less than $20.
MasterBates
Well-Known Member
Which is more than Americans have been allowed in the select-fire arena since 1986 (1934, if you take into account the NFA pain in the rear, and the fact that some local CLEOs will not sign off on form 4s)
There are ways around that. One of them being to form a corporation.
*The idea of the only people with guns being police and military is exactly what alot of Dems want.*
Not to mention violent criminals.
While I agree with the article's argument, I have to say that I don't agree with your statement, sidewinder. The United Kingdom is a great example of a country that's doing pretty well without the level of private gun ownership that we have in the States. (As far as I'm aware, at least.) There are successful developed countries without any sort of private arms ownership. In fact, I would say that if every private citizen needs to own guns to defend themselves from constant and overwhelming violence (as in many unstable third-world countries), there's a big problem. Like xmid said, in third-world countries it's often the case that guns are all over the place for cheap - because they're crucial for day-to-day survival.
I'm not saying that private citizens do not face danger in the US, or that they shouldn't own guns - I'm just saying that I don't agree with your statement that third world countryfolks don't have guns, or that countries without private gun ownership are automatically screwed.
I'm not saying that private citizens do not face danger in the US, or that they shouldn't own guns - I'm just saying that I don't agree with your statement that third world countryfolks don't have guns, or that countries without private gun ownership are automatically screwed.
MasterBates
Well-Known Member
Have you seen how high Britan's violent crime rate has spiked in the last 15 years (since they have had some draconian gun bans?)?
When guns are outlawed, only the outlaws have guns. And they know it.
When guns are outlawed, only the outlaws have guns. And they know it.
True, and I'll definitely agree there's a relationship there - there are other factors, certainly, but that's definitely a major contributor and I can't say too much more since I haven't made an in-depth study of violent crime in the UK.
I agree, and I don't advocate any such gun bans. We saw in LA what happens when only outlaws and cops have guns, and the criminals outgun the police; if just one person in that bank with a gun and a pair of balls had been there, that whole thing could have been ended much sooner. My real objection was to the statement that seemed to say that if you're not in the US, you're in the third world. I'm not trying to argue for or against gun restrictions, I was just being pedantic.
I agree, and I don't advocate any such gun bans. We saw in LA what happens when only outlaws and cops have guns, and the criminals outgun the police; if just one person in that bank with a gun and a pair of balls had been there, that whole thing could have been ended much sooner. My real objection was to the statement that seemed to say that if you're not in the US, you're in the third world. I'm not trying to argue for or against gun restrictions, I was just being pedantic.
Seriously... Britain's violent crime rate since their ban has been a rallying cry for supporters of private gun ownership. Sorry dude, but I seriously doubt you were basing that statement on anything other than a warm and fuzzy.
The L.A. shoot out has been used by many who support the Assault Weapons Ban. In actuality that shoot out is a perfect example of why gun laws don't do what they are intended to do. While lawmakers would like you to believe that the "Assault Weapons" they were using are the same ones you can walk in to a gun shop and buy, in actuality they were illegaly converted guns that were made to be select fire (they could fire full-auto). The process for converting the weapons they were using is no more dificult than many other "less menacing looking" weapons. If caught with the guns even without a robbery they would have been going to prison for a good long time. It's just further proof that the bad guys don't play by the rules, and they aren't going to follow some bullshit Nancy Pelosi sponsored gun law.
/end rant
The L.A. shoot out has been used by many who support the Assault Weapons Ban. In actuality that shoot out is a perfect example of why gun laws don't do what they are intended to do. While lawmakers would like you to believe that the "Assault Weapons" they were using are the same ones you can walk in to a gun shop and buy, in actuality they were illegaly converted guns that were made to be select fire (they could fire full-auto). The process for converting the weapons they were using is no more dificult than many other "less menacing looking" weapons. If caught with the guns even without a robbery they would have been going to prison for a good long time. It's just further proof that the bad guys don't play by the rules, and they aren't going to follow some bullshit Nancy Pelosi sponsored gun law.
/end rant
I was just being pedantic.
adj.
Characterized by a narrow, often ostentatious concern for book learning and formal rules: a pedantic attention to details.
Point taken. I haven't done much looking at their violent crime rate, before or after, so you're right - I shouldn't have used the UK as an example.