stop bringing up the founding fathers in gun arguments

[Daldolma]

Originally Posted by Hitchens [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I don't see any Fourth Reich rising in Australia after they banned automatic weapons in 1996.

I don't think concern about a possible future trumps concern about present day issues. I understand some do, and that's fine. I just don't see it that way.

inb4movetoaustralia

I'm not defending automatic weaponry. Like I said, the specifics are open for discussion. I'm speaking in generalities -- the right to bear arms. The right to own a gun. I'm not breaking down what types of guns, in particular. That's a different debate.

But aside from that, it's not really evidence of anything that one country has managed to avoid catastrophic tyranny for 16 years without an armed populace. Tyranny isn't an inevitability with an unarmed populace, and certainly not within a timeframe of a decade or two. It's merely a possibility, which is too much for some.

I'd also quibble with the notion that this is a matter of possible future issues vs. present day issues. Many people would disagree that there is an issue in America. Committing a violent act with a gun is illegal. Violators are prosecuted. Law abiding citizens are free to own firearms. To many, that is perfectly acceptable and the fact that murder rates are higher in the United States is an unfortunate side effect of greater degrees of liberty. Many Americans would see it as a bigger issue that citizens of other countries are legally incapable of defending themselves -- whether from crime or government.

[Hitchens]

@Daldoma,

I would not advocate for a blanket gun ban. I just don't think certain guns should be in the hands of civilians merely for the sake of protection against a tyrannical government when the guns in the hands of civilians wouldn't really stop a tyrannical government.

This doesn't seem unreasonable to me.

[Daldolma]

Originally Posted by Hitchens [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

@Daldoma,

I would not advocate for a blanket gun ban. I just don't think certain guns should be in the hands of civilians merely for the sake of protection against a tyrannical government when the guns in the hands of civilians wouldn't really stop a tyrannical government.

This doesn't seem unreasonable to me.

Well that's very different, and doesn't put you at odds with the Founding Fathers. They supported the right to bear arms -- not the right to own an arsenal of AK-47s.

I believe a person has a fundamental right to self defense. Sufficient weaponry to protect oneself is a necessary extension of such a right.

But where the bounds of 'sufficient weaponry' end is a matter of legitimate debate. Obviously, things like grenades and mines do not qualify. Neither should automatic weaponry. I think extended magazines should absolutely be on the table for a possible ban. You have a right to defend yourself, not a right to be Rambo.

[Hitchens]

Originally Posted by Daldolma [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Well that's very different, and doesn't put you at odds with the Founding Fathers. They supported the right to bear arms -- not the right to own an arsenal of AK-47s.

I believe a person has a fundamental right to self defense. Sufficient weaponry to protect oneself is a necessary extension of such a right.

But where the bounds of 'sufficient weaponry' end is a matter of legitimate debate. Obviously, things like grenades and mines do not qualify. Neither should automatic weaponry. I think extended magazines should absolutely be on the table for a possible ban. You have a right to defend yourself, not a right to be Rambo.

So I don't have to move to Australia after all?

Sweet!

[Rikimeru]

Originally Posted by Daldolma [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Well that's very different, and doesn't put you at odds with the Founding Fathers. They supported the right to bear arms -- not the right to own an arsenal of AK-47s.

I believe a person has a fundamental right to self defense. Sufficient weaponry to protect oneself is a necessary extension of such a right.

But where the bounds of 'sufficient weaponry' end is a matter of legitimate debate. Obviously, things like grenades and mines do not qualify. Neither should automatic weaponry. I think extended magazines should absolutely be on the table for a possible ban. You have a right to defend yourself, not a right to be Rambo.

you are aware that you cant just go out and buy an automatic weapon right?

[Hasbinlulz]

Originally Posted by Rikimeru [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

you are aware that you cant just go out and buy an automatic weapon right?

You've never been to a city, have you Country Mouse?

[Daldolma]

Originally Posted by Rikimeru [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

you are aware that you cant just go out and buy an automatic weapon right?

Yes. You also can't just go out and buy landmines. I was demonstrating what is and isn't an example of sufficient weaponry to defend oneself.

[Hasbinlulz]

Originally Posted by Daldolma [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

the right to bear arms

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Hasbinlulz]

Originally Posted by Daldolma [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

the right to bear arms

Originally Posted by Hasbinlulz [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Humerox]

Originally Posted by Daldolma [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I'm not defending automatic weaponry. Like I said, the specifics are open for discussion. I'm speaking in generalities -- the right to bear arms. The right to own a gun. I'm not breaking down what types of guns, in particular. That's a different debate.

But aside from that, it's not really evidence of anything that one country has managed to avoid catastrophic tyranny for 16 years without an armed populace. Tyranny isn't an inevitability with an unarmed populace, and certainly not within a timeframe of a decade or two. It's merely a possibility, which is too much for some.

I'd also quibble with the notion that this is a matter of possible future issues vs. present day issues. Many people would disagree that there is an issue in America. Committing a violent act with a gun is illegal. Violators are prosecuted. Law abiding citizens are free to own firearms. To many, that is perfectly acceptable and the fact that murder rates are higher in the United States is an unfortunate side effect of greater degrees of liberty. Many Americans would see it as a bigger issue that citizens of other countries are legally incapable of defending themselves -- whether from crime or government.

/best in thread

Some thoughts:

The two greatest expansions of personal liberty in American history, the abolition of slavery and desegregation, were enforced by the armed forces, over the objections of state governments and in the face of violence by certain armed citizens fond of gray uniforms or white hoods.

As long as we are writing science fiction, in the event that a Hitler, Stalin or Mao seized control in Washington, D.C., this American tyrant would worry far more about being murdered by the praetorian guard or overthrown by the military than about the near-impossibility of defeat of the U.S. armed forces by ordinary armed citizens, particularly the kind of pathetic right-wing militia members who would have trouble taking over a trailer park.

Many democratic nations of western Europe and east Asia have more civil liberties protections for their citizens than the U.S., and few have political systems as corrupted by gerrymandering and big money as the U.S. (Italy is a prominent exception). No other advanced industrial democracy is in imminent danger of becoming a tyranny because of gun control regulations and the lack of an American-style gun culture among Brits or Swedes or Japanese.


Last but not least...


BAN BOOBIES BECAUSE THEY'RE MURDER WEAPONS

Can't believe I missed this whole troll thread.