Are Americans any different?

[Rob Henderson]

Biased information? by who's opinion? yours? That doesn't carry any weight whatsoever. I've given you plenty of proof and facts yet you ignore it. Why would I waste my time giving you more and more facts when you ignore them?

I've not seen one fact from a neutral source.

Now I'm a conservative lol, but yes I AM a pro gun advocate. At least you got that bit right. Only see what I want to see? I see plenty of evidence just about every day. You should try talking to rape and attack victims or talk to the families of murder victims like I have. Not that it concerns you, two weeks ago I was a state witness regarding a double murder. I wont go into the facts of the case as its still ongoing. However, what I can say is, a beautiful young girl of 18 years was murdered along with her boyfriend in cold blood. Both victims were unarmed and defenceless.

And I'll tell you AGAIN!!! that I'm not for the banning of all guns! Get that through your thick skull!

I'll debate with anyone with an ounce of knowledge on the subject, you haven't. As for talking down to you, I don't give a toss what your tired of. Compete with you? lol why would I even want to compete with anyone who is as blinkered, conceited and arrogant as you are. lol You wont be called stupid? Then stop making stupid statements on a subject that you don't have a clue about.

You can't compete with me. That's the reason you make statements like that... You have to call me blinkered, conceited, and arrogant because you have nothing else to say. You resort to name calling because you cannot debate with me LOGICALLY on the subject... It happens all the time on this forum, ask the mods...

I didn't say you was sniffing at the 38 Special, I was adding a comment that a 38 Special is not to be sniffed at, yet once again a 38 Special is not going to put anyone down with one round if they are high on drugs. I've known criminals hit with multi rounds of 357 magnum who haven't gone down.

I don't doubt it... But I'd bet it's enough to at least slow down an attacker.

Punk? You've been watching too many Dirty Harry movies.

Never heard of them... I was using the word punk because it describes what I think of people who mug other people.

Neither do I split hairs regarding firearm types, makes and caliber's, I was giving you some examples, which was obviously a waste of my time and energy.

I said 9 millimeter, and you proceeded to give me numerous makes and models... All of the 9 mm caliber... Why would a specific like that matter in a general example?

Gasp, a bit of sense at last. I bet it wont last



You made a statement, and as I said, I proved you wrong.

You didn't give me the whole picture either. You're splitting hairs, AGAIN.

Again, I proved you wrong, now your trying to claw back some credibility.

Do you deny that buckshot would be much harder to hit someone with at 100 yards? Or are you AGAIN splitting hairs and trying to beat me through specifics?

You are forever spouting your all knowing idea's and opinions, yet when it comes down to it, you know bugger all about the subject. if you want to know about the book I mentioned, then get a copy and read it. You wont read it, because your too lazy, too cocky and big headed and have made your own mind up about the book being biased DESPITE the fact you've never read it.

I can educate myself from neutral, 3rd party sources, I don't have to use someone who is sitting next to me at the local NRA dinner to give me my opinions, I can form them myself.

Educating yourself? And where do you get this all consuming knowledge? If you like educating yourself as you say you do, get a copy of John Lotts book and study it CAREFULLY.

And I suggest you get a copy of the Good Book and start praying.

lol where did God come into it? lol

I REALLY suggest that you stick to watching cartoons, action movies, playing computer games and playing with GI Joe, because you don't have a clue about the real world. When you get a lot more life experience, then come back and talk to me.

God complexes are the main reason I think pro-gun advocates cling to their guns as (if not more) violently than they would their own children. They feel that they lack masculinity in the physical aspect of their lives, and feel a weapons makes up for that lack of physical strength. They feel "macho" when they have a big gun, because they think it makes them look tougher.

 

[BritinBritain]

I've not seen one fact from a neutral source.
And I'll tell you AGAIN!!! that I'm not for the banning of all guns! Get that through your thick skull!

As it happens John Lotts book WAS a neutral source, he carried out YEARS of UNBIASED research. Even he was surprised at the results GET THAT THROUGH YOUR THICK SKULL. While you may not be for banning all guns, you spout on and on why others should be banned without a shred of evidence.

You can't compete with me. That's the reason you make statements like that... You have to call me blinkered, conceited, and arrogant because you have nothing else to say. You resort to name calling because you cannot debate with me LOGICALLY on the subject... It happens all the time on this forum, ask the mods...

I cant compete with you? Why would I want to compete with someone like you? Yes you are blinkered, conceited and arrogant. Maybe it does happen all the time, because I have no doubt that people have TRIED to debate with you and given up as a total waste of time and effort. They have real life experiences and you haven't. People relate real life experiences, while you thumb suck idea's and then try and tell them that they are wrong.. I'm surprised you can spell LOGICALLY let alone know what it means, or did you use your spell checker?

I don't doubt it... But I'd bet it's enough to at least slow down an attacker.

Again your talking out the back of your head and have no freaking idea of what your talking about. As I asked you before, what knowledge have you got regarding internal, external and wound ballistics. You have none, no idea whatsoever.

Never heard of them... I was using the word punk because it describes what I think of people who mug other people.

As I said, you've watched too many Dirty Harry movies....................or cartoons.

I said 9 millimeter, and you proceeded to give me numerous makes and models... All of the 9 mm caliber... Why would a specific like that matter in a general example?

Each and everyone of the 9mm calibres I gave you are all totally different, with different ballistics. Again you have shown your ignorance and complete lack of knowledge.

You didn't give me the whole picture either. You're splitting hairs, AGAIN.

I don't split hairs, I look at the whole picture, its not my problem if you cannot manage to do that. Thank God your not in command of troops, you'd get everyone of them killed.

Do you deny that buckshot would be much harder to hit someone with at 100 yards? Or are you AGAIN splitting hairs and trying to beat me through specifics?

How am I splitting hairs, neither am I denying anything. I give you facts as to the capability of the 12 bore. As I said, you are trying to claw back some credibility after making your stupid remarks.

I can educate myself from neutral, 3rd party sources, I don't have to use someone who is sitting next to me at the local NRA dinner to give me my opinions, I can form them myself.

You can form opinions yourself? You couldn't form a sensible opinion if your life depended on it. Maybe you should sit next to someone at an NRA dinner, they might (though I doubt it) manage to talk some sense into you.

And I suggest you get a copy of the Good Book and start praying.

Why would I want to start praying? Don't be stupid

God complexes are the main reason I think pro-gun advocates cling to their guns as (if not more) violently than they would their own children. They feel that they lack masculinity in the physical aspect of their lives, and feel a weapons makes up for that lack of physical strength. They feel "macho" when they have a big gun, because they think it makes them look tougher.

Now your a psychologist? That statement alone backs up my statement that you are a silly, conceited and arrogant little boy. Lack of physical strength? Met me face to face, then we'd see how much I lack physical strength and how macho I am. As for my children, you have no damn idea what your talking about AGAIN.

Somehow I get the impression that you are one of those who gets his lunch money stolen by bigger boys, then comes on this forum to try and impress. Take my word for it, your not impressive.

I REALLY suggest that you stick to your cartoons, computer games and GI Joe and leave the debating to adults.

 

[pixiedustboo]

Just to throw in my .02;

God complexes are the main reason I think pro-gun advocates cling to their guns as (if not more) violently than they would their own children. They feel that they lack masculinity in the physical aspect of their lives, and feel a weapons makes up for that lack of physical strength. They feel "macho" when they have a big gun, because they think it makes them look tougher.

...every person I know (in real life) is pro gun. None of them have God complexes. (Well except one, but he's a trip).

As for clinging to their guns more violently they would their children...what's to stop someone from taking their children if they have no guns to protect themselves? I know that probably sounds way off in left field, but I'm just throwing it in.

The last comment, feeling "macho," I don't doubt some people feel that way. However, most I'm sure have a serious respect for human life and the minute you put a firearm in their hands they don't have a feeling of anything "macho" or superior. (Unless you count the feeling when they do a decent job on the target).

 

[Rob Henderson]

I'm not going to continue debating with someone who ( I didn't even know it was possible) is more stubborn than me. You won't even read what I have to say because you have "real life experience"... AKA, you're older than me, and because of that, you are right and I am wrong, no matter what I try to show you. As long as you feel that way, you'll never learn what young people actually have to offer the world, and you'll end up falling behind the rest of the world... Though it won't be too long.


I'm putting you on my ignore list... You can have the last word if you'd like, but I'm through trying to argue with a brick wall.


Pixie... You said there's nothing to stop someone from taking their children if you have no guns... Well, that scenario would never happen, because I have said COUNTLESS INFINITE times before that I am not for the banning of all firearms.

 

[senojekips]

I'm not going to continue debating with someone who ( I didn't even know it was possible) is more stubborn than me. You won't even read what I have to say because you have "real life experience"... AKA, you're older than me, and because of that, you are right and I am wrong, no matter what I try to show you.

That's just a cop out Rob, and you know it. Did you ever stop to think that just maybe because of that extra age, he has far more life experience than yourself. No amount of data from books will ever out weigh one seconds worth of personal experience.

 

[tomtom22]

That's just a cop out Rob, and you know it. Did you ever stop to think that just maybe he has far more life experience than yourself. No amount of data from books will ever out weigh one seconds worth of personal experience.

Good reply, spike. I have to agree with you.

Rob just wants to pick up his toys and not let anyone play with him unless they play by his rules.

 

[Rob Henderson]

That's just a cop out Rob, and you know it. Did you ever stop to think that just maybe because of that extra age, he has far more life experience than yourself. No amount of data from books will ever out weigh one seconds worth of personal experience.

Not necessarily... I mean there are some things that can't be learned, but a person can still have a perfectly logical debate with another person based on facts. But when that person has a biased opinion on the person he/she is having a debate with, there is no way anything constructive will be said... All that will be said is name calling and put downs... Visible by BritinAfrica's last few posts. It's not the first time it's happened to me, and as much as I hate it, I've realized that it's going to happen on this sort of conservative website. It takes a much more open mind to realize that youth's opinions are just as valid as seniors opinions.

 

[senojekips]

Not necessarily... I mean there are some things that can't be learned, but a person can still have a perfectly logical debate with another person based on facts.

And from what we see here, you have only other peoples "facts" which don't really count when put up against another's personal experience.

But when that person has a biased opinion on the person he/she is having a debate with, there is no way anything constructive will be said... All that will be said is name calling and put downs...

Every person's point of view is biased, it is biased as a result of their opinions formed from their past experience and that is where the crunch comes, you have no real experience, merely what you have heard or read, of the opinions of others. That alone puts you a mile behind the eight ball to start with.

I've realized that it's going to happen on this sort of conservative website.

That is another cop out Rob, It would have happened anywhere where someone starts debating a subject in which they have very strong views but no practical experience.

It takes a much more open mind to realise that youth's opinions are just as valid as seniors opinions.

Yes,... you are quite correct... it takes a day dreamer to "recognise" it. Because in 99% of cases it is just not true. I can see that you are doomed to a lot of disappointment in life, because where ever we go we will find someone who is better informed or has more experience. The unfortunate thing about this, is that in your case nearly everyone you have to deal with in these matters will be older and in all probability more experienced than yourself for many more years yet. You'd better get used to it, because at 19 years of age, it will be a long time before you get some real experience under your belt.

It's called the "Pecking order" and at the moment you are only a chicken. If you live long enough, you will find that there is a very good reason for the pecking order being the way that it is.

Most people on this site are not members of the Utopian Society, they are persons who have seen some of life in the raw and they have a few clues on how the world really works. I'm sorry to have to break it to you like this Rob, but that's just the way it is, and neither you, nor anyone else your age is going to change it. You can put big bucks on that.

 

[A Can of Man]

When I look back at all the things I believed in when I was 19...
The real world is complicated, weird, and quite frankly doesn't seem to make a lot of sense.
You'd think logically with all those nukes, chemical and biological weapons, the world should have ended decades ago. Instead it has forced its owners to be on a leash and at times have brought antagonizing powers together (i.e. after the fall of the USSR, former Soviet Republics who couldn't handle their nuclear weapons cooperated with the US in removing or securing them). If you just look at the surface of it, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense... but apparently it does.
Or all those pro-reunification protests that engulfed South Korea for such a long time... when reunification looked like a real possibility they lost over 30% of their previous support (and that's a conservative number). So former President Noh Mu-hyeon worked his balls off thinking he was providing what the public wanted only to be dumbfounded in the end at the lack of support. Who knew?
Switzerland, full of guns... very little gun crime. Hard to believe, but true.
Marijuana, legal in Holland, yet their use rate is half of that in Britain.
Free market - apparently not such a hot idea.
Dictatorship - destroyed a lot of countries.
Dictatorship - saved quite a few countries.

But the books will tell you that dictatorship is always bad. That to reduce drug use you have to illegalize it. To reduce gun crime you have to ban guns and to raise good children you must never ever punish them.
And then one book says this, another book says that.

You won't believe the sort of stuff I learned over the years compared to what I learned in books and yet I still have a long way to go.
You realize how much nonsense I "learned" about Korea and its history etc. etc. only to see from every day life that there is simply no way that could have ever been true? Who would have thought that eight years later I'd think that unquestioning patriotism is for f*cking idiots?

This is what I know of belief so far (and I'm sure it'll change in future again)...
1) You believe anything and everything (even if you think you don't)
2) You believe in nothing except bull sh*t (usually one love, one world, hold hands sort of bull sh*t)
3) You don't believe in anything anymore.

 

[BritinBritain]

Marijuana, legal in Holland, yet their use rate is half of that in Britain.
.

Those who cause problems in Holland with the use of weed, isnt the Dutch, but tourists.

 

[Rob Henderson]

I have recently been watching a fair few pro-gun films and debates on you tube.
Most of them have this view: The Australian and British gun owners 'gave up' and that Americans would NEVER surrender their firearms.
The constant opinion voiced by American gun owners is that they would die rather than be disarmed.
Is this really true? If the US government banned semi auto long guns or all pistols tomorrow how many citizens would put their money where their mouth is?
We Brits and Australians tried to protest but were ignored,I know there are some Americans who would have it end in a seige (waco shows this) but would the average law abiding gun owner in the US throw away everything (job,family,liberty or even life) to prove a point or would they comply with the law even though they disagreed with it because they ARE law abiding?
I hope they would.As much as I want you guys to keep your freedoms,especially that of being armed I would hate to see numerous instances of law abiding family men(and women) becoming criminals and being locked away or worse.
So if you are a US citizen. What would you really do if you had 24hours to surrender your weapons?
I would like to know so I can decide whether all these 'from my dead hands' statements are just an emphasis of a peoples belief in something or whether common folk are latently suicidal and would throw away everything just because they have a bad government.????

Sooo..... Original topic anyone?


I'd be glad to continue this oh-so-helpful discussion on how wrong I am in a PM though, Spike. [/sarcasm]

 

[tomtom22]

Sooo..... Original topic anyone?


I'd be glad to continue this oh-so-helpful discussion on how wrong I am in a PM though, Spike. [/sarcasm]

Remember Rob, you are not a Moderator, I am.

 

[Rob Henderson]

Wouldn't you agree we've wandered a bit?

 

[The Other Guy]

Wouldn't you agree we've wandered a bit?

I do.

On the original topic, I highly doubt that there will ever be a full firearms recall, because it would be too difficult; though the majority of Americans would be no different than Britons or Australians, there would be a considerable number that would take "from my cold dead hands" to heart. And guess which group the media would report on.

 

[Del Boy]

When I look back at all the things I believed in when I was 19...


1) You believe anything and everything (even if you think you don't)
2) You believe in nothing except bull sh*t (usually one love, one world, hold hands sort of bull sh*t)
3) You don't believe in anything anymore.

How about 4) You believe in your:smil:self.


And BTW 13th - I reckon that your post was a very good post indeed.:bravo:

 

[A Can of Man]

Cheers Del Boy.

 

[Del Boy]

13th, I only said it because it is true; I am often struck at how well measured your responses can be. You could be instructing a bright class in that respect, and I find it impressive. I did not wish to sound patronising, I would not go there; respect, that's all.

 

[Chukpike]

I have recently been watching a fair few pro-gun films and debates on you tube.
Most of them have this view: The Australian and British gun owners 'gave up' and that Americans would NEVER surrender their firearms.
The constant opinion voiced by American gun owners is that they would die rather than be disarmed.
Is this really true? If the US government banned semi auto long guns or all pistols tomorrow how many citizens would put their money where their mouth is?

Given from your hypothetical statement "the US government banned semi auto long guns or all pistols tomorrow.'
Who would enforce it?
Being a federal ban, the local police would not be automatically charged with enforcing it.
State and local governments have not been willing to enforce federal immigration laws. In California medicinal Marijuana shops operate legally under California law in defiance of federal law.

Homeland security is tasked with coordinating various law enforcement agencies and doesn't have unlimited field police powers.
Basically only the FBI and ATF could be used to enforce this ban. They do not have anything close to the number of officers it would take to enforce.

A federal ban might well be seen by state governments as intruding on states rights. The state governments might actually be forced to defend their citizens rights. (Not because they didn't want the ban, but because they would consider it a tactic to takeover state powers).

If you assume that this ban is somehow legal then it would have to be some what enforced legally. They could go door to door and ask for the guns. If people said come back with a warrant then that would have to be done. (No clear concise records of who owns what guns exists).
Using Federal troops to enforce it would be illegal.

We Brits and Australians tried to protest but were ignored,I know there are some Americans who would have it end in a seige (waco shows this) but would the average law abiding gun owner in the US throw away everything (job,family,liberty or even life) to prove a point or would they comply with the law even though they disagreed with it because they ARE law abiding?

Without getting the states to ratify a Constitutional amendment changing the Second amendment or getting the Supreme Court to rule that it was legal, Americans would not see the ban as legal. So law abiding citizens would still consider themselves as law abiding in not turning in their guns. Similar to pot smoking for medicinal purposes as legal.

I hope they would.As much as I want you guys to keep your freedoms,especially that of being armed I would hate to see numerous instances of law abiding family men(and women) becoming criminals and being locked away or worse.
So if you are a US citizen. What would you really do if you had 24hours to surrender your weapons?
I would like to know so I can decide whether all these 'from my dead hands' statements are just an emphasis of a peoples belief in something or whether common folk are latently suicidal and would throw away everything just because they have a bad government.????

You bet your a**. It has only been 233 years since we overthrew the last "bad" government.

When I enlisted in the military I swore to serve and defend the government. I took that seriously, to the point that when my enlistment ended, my allegiance didn't. If a ruling body violates what I swore allegiance too, I am still sworn to support a legitimate government. I may have over the years disagreed with the job the government is doing but it has not become a bad government yet.

In short your hypothetical question will remain hypothetical for the foreseeable future.

 

[tomtom22]

Chuckpike you make some very good points.
I particularly agree with your last two paragraphs.

 

[03USMC]

State and local governments have not been willing to enforce federal immigration laws. In California medicinal Marijuana shops operate legally under California law in defiance of federal law.

Homeland security is tasked with coordinating various law enforcement agencies and doesn't have unlimited field police powers.
Basically only the FBI and ATF could be used to enforce this ban. They do not have anything close to the number of officers it would take to enforce.

To put even more of a point on it.

Any United States Criminal Code would have to be written to allow enforcement of that USCC by Non-Federal LEA's or be adopted into the individual states criminal code. That would allow enforcement by State, City and County officers.

Currently several USCC's are unenforceable due to having no similar State Code and thus must be turned over to Federal LEA's. Until recently Immigration was a case in point. It was only to be enforced by ICE primarely and the FBI in some cases.....until state codes were passed thru the various state legislatures and partnerships with ICE were reached.

Here in lies the the rub. Yes a USCC could be passed and added to the books. But locals are bound to enforcing state and local criminal codes...all violations would have to be passed to Federal Agencies for enforcement,As chukpike pointed out this would probably land in the laps of the FBI & BATF&E, Niether of these agencies have enough agents to fan out across the entire country.

Stat legislator's in alot of areas of the country will be unwilling to add such a code unless they wish to see their political career in flames.