You were wrong you fat fuck Michael Moore

[Facetious]

It's a matter of principle rather than a realistic issue, of course, our citizens probably couldn't take down the military no matter how many guns we have. The point is that we did it during the revolutionary war, and it's a large part of our culture. In the back of every adult male's mind, there is the thought that you could get drafted to go fight some other country's war. If you don't think that has an affect on the collective mentality of our people, you're nuts. Personally, while I don't want to go fight some bullshit war, and I don't think what we're doing with our military at the moment is good, I'm proud to live in a country that at least on some level attempts to help others by defending freedom. Our role as an enforcer has come in handy for a LOT of countries that are anti-gun, and I don't really think we could have that enforcer role without having citizens that feel they should own guns. While we aren't the poster children for true freedom, compared to the other countries with huge militaries, we're as free as it gets.


I tried to discuss this in the other thread, because it's not really the same discussion that gen started, but that shit got moved to trash talk.

[Squeezer]

Same as Sar.

I wanna say something, but right now I need to pack up so I can go home for Thanksgiving.

[Kolar]

It's a matter of principle rather than a realistic issue, of course, our citizens probably couldn't take down the military no matter how many guns we have. The point is that we did it during the revolutionary war, and it's a large part of our culture. In the back of every adult male's mind, there is the thought that you could get drafted to go fight some other country's war. If you don't think that has an affect on the collective mentality of our people, you're nuts. Personally, while I don't want to go fight some bullshit war, and I don't think what we're doing with our military at the moment is good, I'm proud to live in a country that at least on some level attempts to help others by defending freedom. Our role as an enforcer has come in handy for a LOT of countries that are anti-gun, and I don't really think we could have that enforcer role without having citizens that feel they should own guns. While we aren't the poster children for true freedom, compared to the other countries with huge militaries, we're as free as it gets.


I tried to discuss this in the other thread, because it's not really the same discussion that gen started, but that shit got moved to trash talk.

There actually is a rating done on each country's freedom every year. The US is pretty far from the top. Canada is falling behind also.

Edit: I think the major factors in the report are based on freedom of the press, multiple outlets of information, spying on citizens, illegal detention ect... When you live in a developed, post industrialized country like the United States the factor of self defense becomes moot. You nor I are fending off the hordes looking to steal from us or kill us day in and day out. The US Military's role in a lot of countries over the last 50 years would prove differently. It should be something you and every single American should feel ashamed and concerned about. The culture has to change and don't take it as an assult on only Americans. Toronto has a growing gun problem and people need to view these tools as for what they are. Deadly weapons not meant for protection or to incapacitate a person, they kill and in the hands of the wrong people they do too much damage to be widely viewed as acceptable means of force or protection for the common human being.

[Reaver]

hmm so reaver you think that in every country where they dont have a free gun market the government is gonna take over? or is this an american phenomenon only?

You completely missed my point. For me, personally, the right to bear arms is important because primarily it's additional security in my home and for other reasons I stated above. Im pretty sure Dabram was posting about what I wrote as well, so he additionally missed my point, I was hoping when I said that it added additional security I wouldn't have to clarify that but now I did for you guys.

Edit: There are other additional reasons, hunting, target practice, etc.

I wasn't even talking about any other countries and their policies at all, so I don't know why anyone brought other countries policies up in regards to my post. Not to say they don't matter, Im just saying I can't and won't speak for their policies because I don't have first hand experience. Believe it or not but my post actually pertained to my own experience as an American so when I talked about government policies and freedom in my post without specifying which nation Im referring to, you'd think one would be able to figure out that Im talking about my own nation. Elaborating beyond that, when I said that you can't have a higher level of security and safety without taking away some of the freedom I was partly referring to public transportation.

[Mantra-Slider]

Ok reaver, you feel safer with gun, I feel safer w/o

No, It's an historical phenomenon that when you have a totalitarian regime, among their first actions is to disarm the group of peoples they consider to be their "enemies." But I guess a little thing like history shouldn't be allowed to get in the way of people feeling uncomfortable, right?

So having a restricted gun policy actually IS the first step towards a totalitarian regime? everywhere, even historicly?
Doesnt it seem kinda naive to think that only cos the elected government, maybe after a referendum who knows, wants to try to stop the violence in their country by changing the gun policy, its automaticly a first step to a totalitarian regime?

also you talk so much about freedom and the right to do what you want. how does this go hand in hand with you accepting patriot act?

and to face: no doubt that you should feel proud about being an american. Too much good stuff about that country to not do that but not everything is great about all countries and it shouldnt be wrong for outsiders to adress those issues, specially not on an open forum like this one. Only cos you criticize some parts doesnt mean you criticize everything

[Galleleo]

The thing that most bothers me about people that want to ban guns, is that they are so fucking blind to the simple fact that they want to live a certain way, and so they feel like they get to enforce it on everyone else.

I am pro banning guns, but not because I want to live a certain way. Because I believe that a "gun free" society is much safer then a society which allows guns. I am all for letting people do and believe what they want. And I am the exact same when it comes religion and stuff, do what you as long as you don't bother me with it. But everyone being able to have guns goes beyond just doing what you want, it comes dangerously close in bothering my freedom with, imho. Now days people use guns so easily to do what they want, when you hear of gun threats in traffic because some guy went in the line ahead of you or whatever. I think the issue of allowing guns goes beyond your own freedom and doing/believing what you want and affects people way differently then having your own religion.

Besides all that, if you want gun freedom, you need way better laws then in America. I mean if you can just open a bank account and get a free gun with it, that's just wrong. If you want to allow guns, do background checks on the people, do tests, have them undergo training when to use a gun, how to use a gun etc. If you want a gun, you should be willing to do something for it, show that you are responsible enough. You can also just start hunt clubs, store all your guns in some secured building and only use them for hunting, not take them home with you. No I don't believe you need guns in home to feel safe, if you do, I would say there is something wrong with your society as a whole.

Personally, while I don't want to go fight some bullshit war, and I don't think what we're doing with our military at the moment is good, I'm proud to live in a country that at least on some level attempts to help others by defending freedom. Our role as an enforcer has come in handy for a LOT of countries that are anti-gun, and I don't really think we could have that enforcer role without having citizens that feel they should own guns. While we aren't the poster children for true freedom, compared to the other countries with huge militaries, we're as free as it gets.

Question is, starting a war in Afghanistan, Iraq, etc.. does that really help others to defend their freedom? Same reason as I disagree with us going to Iraq and Afghanistan, main reason was: If we don't go there, we'll be screwed and overtaken by them any day now (it was worded differently but this is basicly what they said). I don't see that, in fact, I think the only reason that the Netherlands has terrorist threats is because of us going to Afghanistan, Iraq, choosing the side of America and sending our soldiers there. I think, that if we just kept our noses out of that war we wouldn't have gotten terrorist threats. In other words, America likes to claim they are fighting for the worlds freedom when they invade countries, but I highly doubt they are doing that. There was no indication whatsoever that Iraq would ever try and take over the world. And there are people in the Netherlands too with ties to Al Quadi and terrorist shit, I don't see America attacking the Netherlands because we have ties with Al Quida.

And if America is fighting for the freedom of the world, why haven't they gone to Israel and fought to give the Palestine's their freedom? Because there is no oil in it for them. I am not trying to attack Americans here, I am not trying to say that every single American is a fat, racist, world dictator wannabee, idiot. I am merely stating that I don't think America is going about the right way to fight for the world's freedom by invading countries.

[Zerzera]

This is obviously a case of American influences on the European society.

[Sarien]

So having a restricted gun policy actually IS the first step towards a totalitarian regime? everywhere, even historicly?
Doesnt it seem kinda naive to think that only cos the elected government, maybe after a referendum who knows, wants to try to stop the violence in their country by changing the gun policy, its automaticly a first step to a totalitarian regime?

Doesn't it seem kina naive to think that any elected government has a rational ability to deal with and take away people's rights? That's why there's a jury system. Can you honestly name anything that a government makes better by handling it? Anything that they don't seem to make incredibly more laborious, annoying, and prone to break down? I'm not comfortable with giving over any more power of that sort to my government.

also you talk so much about freedom and the right to do what you want. how does this go hand in hand with you accepting patriot act?

I've never said I accepted the patriot act. In fact? I hate it. It's an injustice. It's terrible legislation and I said from right after 9/11 when they first even ran with it, that it's a goddamned awful idea to let government be passing LAWS when the population was still too afraid and in shock to take anything into consideration. It's like seeing your mother horribly slaughtered right in front of your eyes, and then 20 minutes later going out and performing surgery. It just shouldn't have happened, but as my favorite quote from Penn Jillette says "Fear is a politician's dance partner."

Because I believe that a "gun free" society is much safer then a society which allows guns.

Gall, honeybun.. that IS the certain way you want to live.

That's fine, if you're ok with selling off that part of your freedom of choice to feel that safety, alright. That's your choice.
I'm not ok with it though, and I never ever ever will be. I will be damned if I'm ever ok with any other person telling me that I might do something bad possibly maybe, so I can't be trusted with making my own choice.

I mean if you can just open a bank account and get a free gun with it, that's just wrong.

Why? That bank was also a firearms dealer AND Moore had a background check run on him in order to make sure he was allowed to legally own it before they gave it to him. Don't believe me?

http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/wackoattacko/

Read it there. As much as I disbelieve his crap? He says so right there:
"Within 10 minutes, the "OK" came through from the firearms background check agency and, 5 minutes later, just as you see it in the film, they handed me a Weatherby Mark V Magnum rifle"

My brother had a firearms check done when he bought a new pistol last month. I can confirm that all told it does take about 10 minutes for the check to go through.

[Mantra-Slider]

I think you are way too sceptical sarien

[Displaced]

I dont mean to rain on anyones parade, but i cannot fathom how the notion that everyone you walk past on the street is potentially armed with some sort of pocket cannon = security.

I mean, sure, guns, when used correctly and when kept in the proper fashion do bring about some sense of security. I for one like hunting, as such shotguns and rifles can be found in my fathers residence.

But getting these wasnt as simple as walking down to kmart and buying them.

In order to be allowed to purchase firearms, you need to aquire a firearms permit from the police, where they check all kinds of stuff to make sure you are who you claim to be and arent a convicted felon, etc.

Once that stage is done, you fill in papers depending on which type of firearm you want to aquire, handguns, rifles, shotguns, etc.

If you state that you want a handgun just for the sake of it, you wont get it, you need a "valid" reason for it, i.e. you want to hunt rabbits, during rabbit hunting season.
The police then check to see if you are a member of any sort of hunting club, if you aren't, chances are you wont get a permit to purchase, if you are a member, it shouldnt be a problem.

Once the permit clears, you can walk into a hunting store, and purchase a shotgun with said permit, if you try to purchase a rifle with your shotgun permit, you're shit out of luck.

Now, for handguns you really need some good ass reason, cause getting handguns here is quite difficult, hunting is pretty much the only way (unless you're in law enforcement), and pretty much only if you hunt the Lynx (since you dont need a handgun for any other game).

Rifles are common for bear and moose hunting, but for those you need to go back to the police, and "clear" a moose/bear/whatever test, i.e. you have a certain amount of time, to hit a certain moving target a certain number of times from a certain distance (in a controlled environment)

Sure, its not a "fast" system, but its not a major inconvenience either, and im pretty sure that hardly anyone sitting next to me on the bus is strapped.

Now, i dont understand why the US wouldnt be able to adopt some sort of a similar system, where they thoroughly check whomever it is that wants to purchase the firearm, and if they are actually capable of using it, it would eliminate (im assuming) a lot of "accident" related killings.

I would like to think that it would also eliminate all kinds of other firearms related deaths or injuries.

Lets just pretend that you're sitting on the bus, and Mr.George is sitting behind you, he happens to be having a bad day, and you're iPod is blasting, he asks you to turn it down, after your little "fuck off grandad" retort, he pops a cap in your head.

Sure its far fetched, but i bet it has happened, (and yes i know it could happen here too due to illegal firearms), buti guess chances would be decreased if gun laws were made stricter.
Making them stricter, (to me) doesnt seem like its limiting anyones "rights" to bear arms, or to be able to go hunting, or go to a shooting range... what it would do would make it slightly harder for people to gain access to firearms, and it should weed out people who shouldnt be allowed near a gun.

If someone could explain why a system that is thorough, but allows people to have access to firearms, is somehow against this notion of freedom/security, how is a system that is lax more in conformity with your notions of freedom/security?

[Facetious]

No matter what system we adopted, criminals that don't already have guns (hahaha) would be able to get guns extremely easily. The only problem stricter gun laws would even remotely help is (maybe) the school shootings and things of that manner. That said, the fact that (as far as I can tell) you can go to a gun show and get a gun without even a background check is ridiculous. It shouldn't be that easy.

Gall, I said in one sentence "I don't agree with what our military is doing right now" and then you spent two paragraphs convincing me that I shouldn't agree with what our military is doing right now in response. What?

Mantra, I agree that people should be able to criticize certain aspects of American government, and I certainly wouldn't bug you about doing so. However, you are one of the few people on these forums to ever say anything along the lines of "there are good things about America." I find many people use these forums to just come on here and bash us, and it drives me up the fucking wall. It makes it hard to have a discussion with someone when I can't tell if they would criticize America about literally anything, or if they actually have a legitimate problem with a policy we've got.

[Displaced]

face, i agree that there will be a bigger black market presence, sure.

but if it would help eliminate some of the firearm related deaths in america today, i would like to think that it is an improvement over the current system.

and no im not trying to bash america, but i do think that their current policy on firearms is something that could be bettered.

[Squeezer]

Though I personally would never own a firearm, I believe the second amendment is very legit, and that any right minded American has a right to have a gun. In a Democracy, things can't always go my way. There are certain comprimises one has to make. For me, I would ultimately like to see equal rights for gays in our country. I understand that to accomplish this, I'm going to have to sacrifice a few rights in return. So, in hopes that one day gays will gain their civil rights movement, I'm willing to appease others by not fighting the laws on gun control (which to be honest can't get much mor strict.)

[Galleleo]

That's fine, if you're ok with selling off that part of your freedom of choice to feel that safety, alright. That's your choice.
I'm not ok with it though, and I never ever ever will be. I will be damned if I'm ever ok with any other person telling me that I might do something bad possibly maybe, so I can't be trusted with making my own choice.

Fact is, a lot of people can't be trusted with making their own choices, it's that simple. And when it comes to guns, government should make laws against it, to control it, etc.

And 10 minutes hardly sounds like a thorough well done check.

And face, you said you were proud of what your country does for freedom, or tries to do, and I just discussed that what your country is doing right now for freedom is quite nonsense.

[GoldenPlums]

It's a matter of principle rather than a realistic issue, of course, our citizens probably couldn't take down the military no matter how many guns we have. The point is that we did it during the revolutionary war, and it's a large part of our culture.

But weren't most of the arms, money, military equipment/knowledge/navy (and many men too) provided by the French?

It's rather sad that that's been forgotten.

Still, fuck those cheese eating surrender monkeys, I got me a gun.

Thanksgiving, my arse.