Subject: GUN CONTROL

5.56X45mm

Milforum Mac Daddy
Subject: GUN CONTROL

Whether you agree or not, it's an interesting lesson in history. Something to think about...
In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control.
From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents,
unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
-----------------------------------------------
In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
-----------------------------------------------
Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.
-----------------------------------------------
China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
------------------------------------------------
Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
-----------------------------------------------
Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
-----------------------------------------------
Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million 'educated' people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
------------------------------------------------
Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million.
------------------------------------------------
It has now been 12 months since gun owners in
Australia were forced by new law to surrender
640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by their own government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars. The first year results are now in: Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2 percent Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 percent Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)! In the state of
Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up300 percent. (Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not, and criminals still possess their guns!) While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the past 12 months, since criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is unarmed. There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the ELDERLY. Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort and expense was expended in "successfully ridding Australiansociety of guns." The Australian experience and the other historical facts above prove it. You won't see this data on the American evening news or hear our president, governors or other politicians disseminating this information. Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws affect only the law-abiding citizens.

Take note my fellow Americans.....before it's too late! The next time someone talks in favor of gun control, please remind them of this history lesson. With guns, we are citizens. Without them, we are subjects. If you value your freedom, Please spread this antigun control message to all of your friends."

I got this as an email and have no way of verifying it. Perhaps some of our Australian posters can help with the dates and stats from their country. But it IS food for thought!

Good Hunting,
Andy Cooper
 
"Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million."

That's really stretching it, though I do agree with the overall message. I wanna keep my guns!

:santam16:
 
Hell, without guns, we Americans wouldnt be speaking in Southern Drawls, we would be speaking in an English accent. We may not have these computers, or these white teeth(no offence to the Brits of the forum...just a joke), we may not have any of this. We would be flying a British flag. Americans forget that we had guns and the fact that we had them gave us the ability to overthrow kings government here and become an independent nation, which in turn enabled us to become one, if not the only, superpower of the natural world...The Founding Fathers knew what they were doing when they gave us the right to keep and bear arms. They knew that if the government got too oppressive, we could unite, band together, and with our guns, overthrow the aformentioned government and start anew. Thanks to the FF for givin me that right. And screw anyone who wants to take my rights away.
 
5.56X45mm said:
Subject: GUN CONTROL
------------------------------------------------
It has now been 12 months since gun owners in
Australia were forced by new law to surrender
640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by their own government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars. The first year results are now in: Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2 percent Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 percent Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)! In the state of
Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent. (Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not, and criminals still possess their guns!) While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the past 12 months, since criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is unarmed. There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the ELDERLY. Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort and expense was expended in "successfully ridding Australian society of guns." The Australian experience and the other historical facts above prove it. You won't see this data on the American evening news or hear our president, governors or other politicians disseminating this information. Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws affect only the law-abiding citizens.

Take note my fellow Americans.....before it's too late! The next time someone talks in favor of gun control, please remind them of this history lesson. With guns, we are citizens. Without them, we are subjects. If you value your freedom, Please spread this antigun control message to all of your friends."

I got this as an email and have no way of verifying it. Perhaps some of our Australian posters can help with the dates and stats from their country. But it IS food for thought!

Good Hunting,
Andy Cooper
Better check out all your "so-called" facts first. At least look at this from Urban Legends (Snopes.com) concerning the above Australian story. The "facts" are twisted. Look here: http://www.snopes.com/crime/statistics/ausguns.asp
 
Oh come on Luis! What are you saying? If the German population had guns, they wouldn't have had the need to sent the Jews to camps. They would have been massacred there and then in the streets! To link gun control to mass murder is quite far fetched. We have gun control in Holland and have never exterminated any (ethnic) minorty in our days. We did however killed quite a few Catholics in the 16th century, but we did have no gun control law then...
 
They would not have been killed in the streets by the Germans. They sent them to the camps so they wouldn't have to personally deal with the nasty business of ending another's life. It is an absolute fact that in Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia post WWII the Soviet forces first had the locals register their weapons, then confiscated them and then announced that these fine republics were now part of the Soviet Empire. An unarmed populace has no defense against the tyranny of the state. Geo. Washington said it himself that if you are unprepared to fight a war you cannot have real peace. I say the same applies to the rights of the individual. Were it not for the second amendment I am quite sure we would have gone down the same path as the Europeans and the Australians. "Where the people fear the government there is tyranny and where the government fears the people there is liberty" - Thomas Jefferson

Here's some further food for thought...
http://www.gunowners.org/fs9402.htm
 
Last edited:
bulldogg said:
Washington said it himself that if you are unprepared to fight a war you cannot have real peace. I say the same applies to the rights of the individual. Were it not for the second amendment I am quite sure we would have gone down the same path as the Europeans and the Australians.

What path would that be Bulldogg? I am in the opinion that if a government wants to repress it's people, they will. Irrespective of the costs. More guns out on the streets will highten the costs for the gov. But if they want to repress what is the life of some of their subjects worth?
 
bulldogg said:
Geo. Washington said it himself that if you are unprepared to fight a war you cannot have real peace. I say the same applies to the rights of the individual. Were it not for the second amendment I am quite sure we would have gone down the same path as the Europeans and the Australians. "Where the people fear the government there is tyranny and where the government fears the people there is liberty" - Thomas Jefferson

Here's some further food for thought...
http://www.gunowners.org/fs9402.htm


Responsibility or political ideology is not the key issue here. The key issue here is neighborhood protection.

The more firearms obtained by individuals in the streets, the more closer the country edges towards a higher homicidal rate involving firearms. I do not care whether citizens are law-abiding. They may respect the law today, but tomorrow they could become criminals.

National Defense should be handled in the hands of professional soldiers or law enforcement officials, not petty militias or gangs who can make a profit by forming a protection racketeering business in poor inner-city urban areas.

Whenever there is firearms, there are always gang wars. Or even perhaps worst, sectarian violence, insurgencies, or national rebellions. A good example of a country that has no restrictions at all is Iraq.

The Admendment for freedom to firearms is unnecessary since other rights in the Constitution exists. There is only one dominant protection racketeering firm in the US and that is the US Military itself. People pay taxes and they should recieve reliable security in return. If not....their government is a failure.

State exists because they offer the first service to the public: security
 
Last edited:
If firearms are purchased illegally, the Government should respond appropriately to protect its citizens. But if their security is not guaranteed by the state, then whats the point of paying taxes? If no guarantee exists, then that Government becomes a corrupt organization who squander the wallets of law-abiding citizens.
 
Last edited:
I've always liked to believe that American soldiers would simply refuse to become the instruments of tyranny.

But if they should choose the wrong path... we must be prepared. :sniper:
 
It Ain't Gonna Happen ...

Gun control (in this country), does not mean no weapons allowed. What it means here is that there is no possible usage that can be put forward for a machine gun or and auto-fire assault weapon ... you can NOT use them for deer hunting ... the only possible usage for these types of weapons are as "man killers". Restricting them to specially licensed collectors, special police squads and to the military makes a lot of sense (even to those of us who do own weapons).

The right to bear arms has been guaranteed by the constitution and I can not see Americans anytime soon voting to give up that right. I know that if/when the authorities tried to confiscate my firearms and the firearms of my neighbors, there would be a war border to border by those Americans who value their freedom above all else.

As soon as that legislation hit the floor in the House and Senate, Americans everywhere would rise up in opposition ... our legislators will NOT cross that line. IT AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN.
 
Last edited:
CABAL said:
If firearms are purchased illegally, the Government should respond appropriately to protect its citizens. But if their security is not guaranteed by the state, then whats the point of paying taxes? If no guarantee exists, then that Government becomes a corrupt organization who squander the wallets of law-abiding citizens.

Pipe dream. It is impossible to prevent illegal firearms from entering the country.

While it is nice to preach ideals and rhetoric, they do nothing to deal with reality.

The Admendment for freedom to firearms is unnecessary since other rights in the Constitution exists. There is only one dominant protection racketeering firm in the US and that is the US Military itself. People pay taxes and they should recieve reliable security in return. If not....their government is a failure.

Please read the Posse Comitatus Act. It is not the military's function to protect law abiding US citizens from those that would choose to commit crimes.

Whenever there is firearms, there are always gang wars. Or even perhaps worst, sectarian violence, insurgencies, or national rebellions. A good example of a country that has no restrictions at all is Iraq.

In the US millions of Americans have legally owned firearms, they aren't members of gangs or militias. They aren't killing Baptists because they're Catholic. They aren't staging insurgencies against the US government. I have several several thousand dollars worth of firearms and I've never had the desire to harm anyone outside of my job.

Guns are merely tools. They do not force anyone to stage coups or go out and cap their next door neighbor.

If you were somehow able to remove all of the illegally owned firearms from every gang within the United States, do you honestly believe the violence would stop? No, of course you don't because it wouldn't.


 
PJ24, I am not suggesting what the US should do or not do. The US can do all it want on Gun Control.

However what I suggested is that the American Idea of the 2nd Admendment will not simply work in other nations, especially in nations who have already experienced a series of anti-government rebellions which Bulldogg is probably suggesting. The US is far away from a national security crisis, most of its concern is externally related.
 
Last edited:
Violence is a living creature, guns are a cause of it. PEOPLE ARE.

I own 86 firearms. Everything from pocket pistols and "assualt rifles" to high power hunting rifles.

I believe that every American Citizen should be able to own anything that they want too.

The 2nd Amendment is about duck hunting or collecting folks. It's about the right to bear arms shall not be infringed.

'Nuff Siad....

CABAL said:
PJ24, I am not suggesting that the US should do or not do. The US can do all it want on Gun Control.

But what Bulldogg suggested about implying the idea of arming citizens in Western Europe is an insane idea.

Hell, I think an armed society is a polite society. Everyone should own a firearm.

Cabal, if someone broke into your house and held your loved one hostage with a knife. Would you want to wait the three to five minutes for the police or would you want to drop that sonva ***** right there and now.

Please tell me that you would not want to wait for the police.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
5.56X45mm said:
Please tell me that you would not want to wait for the police.

He's not going to give a straight answer. He will come up with a "I would want a gun but the State can't think like a private citizen does because...". Wait and see.
 
A guy breaking into my house and holding a loved one with a knife? Would I shoot him? No thanks. I havn't fired live ammunition since I was serving in the Bundeswehr.

Originally I wanted a Taser as a second line of defense, should the security alarm fails, but I found it was too expensive to maintain and is quite dangerous to handle.

So I decided to buy something more cheaper that is non-lethal which is the pepperball launcher. I tried it out and surprisingly it packs a huge punch for more than a 50 meters.

So for that guy who held my loved one hostage, of course my loved one would be irratated by that powder, but can dissolve the dangerous situation.

And besides 5.56X45mm, collecting 86 firearms sounds more like a hobby. And if you said that the 2nd Admendment is about is about hunting or a hobby, I hope you're right on that one.

But like I said, US can do anything it want on Guns. This topic is not much of a big deal in Germany.
 
Last edited:
Ooh, that answer is even worse than expected.
Won't it make it more likely for the bad guy to randomly hit the loved one with the knife? Just asking.
 
Italian Guy, the SA10 looks more lethal than a knife. Especially if the guy sees it pointing at directly at him. Plus the velocity is strong enough.

But anyhow, buying lethal firearms in the US is impossible for me. I live in the US for schooling and I am not an American Citizen. Therefore the 2nd Admendment does not apply for me.
 
Last edited:
CABAL said:
A guy breaking into my house and holding a loved one with a knife? Would I shoot him? No thanks. I havn't fired live ammunition since I was serving in the Bundeswehr.

Originally I wanted a Taser as a second line of defense, should the security alarm fails, but I found it was too expensive to maintain and is quite dangerous to handle.

So I decided to buy something more cheaper that is non-lethal which is the pepperball launcher. I tried it out and surprisingly it packs a huge punch for more than a 50 meters.

So for that guy who held my loved one hostage, of course my loved one would be irratated by that powder, but can dissolve the dangerous situation.

And besides 5.56X45mm, collecting 86 firearms sounds more like a hobby. And if you said that the 2nd Admendment is about is about hunting or a hobby, I hope you're right on that one.

But like I said, US can do anything it want on Guns. This topic is not much of a big deal in Germany.

The man who breaks into my home first has to get a car down my 1/4 mile long driveway without me seeing or hearing, because my west window faces it. Then he's looking at three men with the capacity to retaliate, after he breaks in and climbs a flight of stairs. Is he dead? Certainly.

Gun control is a good sight picture- if you take the guns away from the citizens, we won't have any way to protect ourselves. However, I would like to get a load of that pepperball launcher, I've never seen them in action except for videos. Doesn't look fun to be on the receiving end.
 
Back
Top