Opinions/Editorials
See other Opinions/Editorials Articles
Title: Libertysflame's Question of the Day: If we ban guns will there be an increase in knife related deaths?
Source:
[None]
URL Source: [None]
Published: Dec 24, 2012
Author: A K A Stone
Post Date: 2012-12-24 00:45:54 by A K A Stone
Keywords: None
Views: 31904
Comments: 78
So I was thinking about all this talk of banning guns. If they ban guns do you think that there will be an increase in knife violence? I do. I know it If you are going to kill someone you are going to do it. Murder has existed since the first family. It will always exist. It is already against the law to kill someone. So by outlawing guns you are just taking peoples rights away and leaving them defenseless to someone can simply print out a gun and kill you anyways. It is pointless. Or is there an ulterior motive? 1. Would there be an increase in knife violence if guns were banned. (note you are dumb if you think they will stop with the guns currently targeted). 2. What is that ulterior motive?
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: A K A Stone (#0)
Banning guns in the USA, and confiscating them are two different things, and that damn well isn't going to happen over night, nor do I believe, in my lifetime. jmho! "The Idiots Who Say It's Physically Impossible To Find 15 Million Illegal Aliens Are The Same Idiots That Think They Are Going To Find And Confiscate 300 Million Guns" - BIGFURHAT
(“You can't always control who walks into your life but, you can control which window you throw them out of.”)
Confiscating guns? Why? Who would suggest such a thing?
We're set. Expecting yeast to moderate it's growth and save, create redundancy is unrealistic......;} It is now two days until Christmas, and as I was casting about for something to write about today, I got so depressed that I thought I'd write this little essay instead. Over my entire lifetime, I can not remember a time when the Holiday Season was as dreary as it is in 2012. The reason is simple—there is nothing to celebrate. Nothing at all. America is a defeated nation, and its self-defeating behavior is everywhere on display. The 2012 election charade, which changed nothing, morphed seamlessly into a Fiscal Cliff charade which only proves beyond a shadow of doubt that nothing changed. This silly debate is the latest distraction "designed" to give Americans the impression that important changes are afoot. Nothing could be further from the truth. This country's fate was cast in stone decades ago. No current policy debate changes our fate in the slightest, but these sham debates do serve to remind us of how helpless we feel. As if that weren't depressing enough, the ghastly massacre at an elementary school in Newtown is still fresh in our minds, and has now morphed into the usual, futile gun control debate. peakwatch.typepad.com/decline_of_the_empire/ “Evil in Our Backyard:” The Rudi Dekkers Dossier Posted on December 21, 2012 by Daniel Hopsicker When Rudi Dekkers, the man who ran the flight school where terrorists who crashed airliners into the Twin Towers learned to fly was arrested for drug trafficking in Houston last week, one of the first congratulatory calls I received, after covering his continuing criminal activity for the past ten years, was from his son.
"They" won't ban all guns, not even most guns. So the question of knife violence is a completely different matter. I certainly do not have many answers with regard to gun control ...... But I do believe that there are some steps that can be taken that might make some sense, from a big picture perspective. For instance, effective at a certain date in the near future, all firearms must be registered. The registration must be renewed each year, and a registration tax must be paid. Additionally, all gun owners must pass a competency test, and carry specific liability insurance. In the course of normal law enforcement, when guns are discovered, absent valid registration and proof of insurance, the individual in possession of the firearm will be charged with a crime, and the weapon in question would be confiscated. Obtaining a firearm would become much more challenging, requiring a more in depth background check, including medical and criminal history, and a semi- annual drug and alcohol screening. (at the gun-owners' expense) Qualifying for Concealed Carry permits would require additional proof of competency, higher levels of liability insurance, a more thorough background investigation and registration with law-enforcement. Reasonable?
In the course of normal law enforcement, when guns are discovered, absent valid registration and proof of insurance, the individual in possession of the firearm will be charged with a crime, and the weapon in question would be confiscated. I don't think that is reasonable at all. In your scenario since it obviously violates the second amendment. You would want a constitutional amendment to implement this correct?
obviously? Not obvious at all. While I am not an expert on constitutional law, I don't see how the simple registration of an object violates anyone's rights.....
What is a constitutional scholar? It is someone who is "taught" something that is not true about the constitution. You only have to know the English language. It is not a complicated document. Lawyers use words to try and make it complicated and mean something that it doesn't. infringe [jnÈfrjnd’] vb 1. (tr) to violate or break (a law, an agreement, etc.) 2. (intr; foll by on or upon) to encroach or trespass Would what you suggested about the second amendment be constitutional to put those restrictions on say free speech?
Because you are saying that you have to give them your information to exercise that right. A right is something that can't be taken away. It is a pre existing natural right. Remember we are to be free from unreasonable searches of our papers persona and affects. If the right to bear arms can't be infringed. Then it would take a court ordered search warrant to lawfully get that information. You are proposing a law to do that. A law that is plain as day unconstitutional.
You do realize that Hitler registered the guns too? Do you not see a danger in that?
you are saying that you have to give them your information to exercise that right. Gun registration would not take away anyone's right. . Requiring personal accountability and responsibility for ownership of a deadly weapon is simply common sense. As a proud law-abiding American I would feel that it was my patriotic duty to do what is right and register my weapons, pay my taxes and provide the appropriate liability insurance. I suspect that many of the people who would be reluctant to registering their weapons would probably have serious "issues" that would possibly prevent them from gun ownership.
Straw man - irrelevant
It is not irrelevant and it is not a straw man. It is historical. It shows the nature of man. History repeats itself.
I suspect that many of the people who would be reluctant to registering their weapons would probably have serious "issues" that would possibly prevent them from gun ownership. It isn't patriotic to obey an illegal government screwing with God given rights. I would suggest it is unpatriotic to register your gun.
There will be if foolish criminals use a knife to attack people who didn't give their guns up.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
So you are saying that people with violent tendencies are prone to use guns? I thought all violent criminals were liberals. And liberals don't own guns.
Almost every country in the Middle East is awash in oil, and we have to side with the one that has nothing but joos. Goddamn, that was good thinkin'. Esso posted on 2012-01-13 7:37:56 ET
Of course. A very reasonable request. After all,when has that never worked out and led to gun confiscation after the various governments that have done this found out where all the guns are. Nothing to see here,people. Move on. In the course of normal law enforcement, when guns are discovered, absent valid registration and proof of insurance, the individual in possession of the firearm will be charged with a crime, and the weapon in question would be confiscated. Nothing wrong with that,either. Makes good sense and it is very reasonable and moderate approach to solving all the violence in this country. After all,if people knew that murdering other people was illegal,surely nobody would commit murder,right? There is one pesky little thing standing in the way of this,though. The US Constitution,which says this is a RIGHT,not a privledge. While you are at it,which of the other 9 Bill of Rights do you want to nullify? Obtaining a firearm would become much more challenging, requiring a more in depth background check, including medical and criminal history, and a semi- annual drug and alcohol screening. (at the gun-owners' expense) Good idea! This will keep all of those poor darkies and rednecks from having guns,and our bodyguards get to keep theirs. The very people who need to defend themselves the most. Excellent idea! Other than that "equal protection under the law" nonsense,that is. Qualifying for Concealed Carry permits would require additional proof of competency, higher levels of liability insurance, a more thorough background investigation and registration with law-enforcement. Reasonable? VERY reasonable and sensible. IF you are a Nazi or a Stalinist.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Your Korean heros in that photo you posted on that other thread were on the side of the GOVERNMENT.
Almost every country in the Middle East is awash in oil, and we have to side with the one that has nothing but joos. Goddamn, that was good thinkin'. Esso posted on 2012-01-13 7:37:56 ET
You would want a constitutional amendment to implement this correct? Who cares? Obviously the last several presidents didn't and don't give a damn about it other than to hate it for stopping them from doing what they wanted to do.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
It will and it does. Only a fool or a liar would claim it doesn't. Which is it in your case?
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Guns, knives, fists, gasoline, automobiles matches. There are more murders by knife and feet then guns. FBI Crime statistics.
So what. The government isn't always wrong. I know you side with the rioters and say they had a just cause.
TNT.
And I agree. None of mine are registered,and will never be registered as long as I own them. Or even after I own them. I have recently started to give away some of the ones I never carry or shoot to the adult children of friends. People I know who are under the radar screen and who will never register them,either. I recently gave away a 1930's S&W 22lr "kit gun" with a 6 inch barrel to the son of a dead friend of mine who is currently in college. Very nice kid who is very conservative and who is holding a 4.0 grade average. I hadn't even shot the damn thing in 20 years,so I gave it to somebody who would shoot it. Being in college,a 22 is about all he can afford to shoot. I highly recommend that others start to do this,too.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Sure they do,and you are wrong about something else,too. They are NOT liberal in ANY sense of the word. They are communists or communists adult brother,fascists. *I* am a liberal,not you or they.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
There are more murders by knife and feet then guns. FBI Crime statistics. I never said that there wasn't. BUT the conservative position is that the violent criminal element that prefers guns as it's weapon of choice tends to be more liberal than conservative and that the gun owning public tends to be very much more conservative than liberal. Both fallacies BTW but plenty believe them to be true. Just like you still think I'm Lucy.
Almost every country in the Middle East is awash in oil, and we have to side with the one that has nothing but joos. Goddamn, that was good thinkin'. Esso posted on 2012-01-13 7:37:56 ET
They are NOT liberal in ANY sense of the word. They are communists or communists adult brother,fascists. *I* am a liberal,not you or they. Why... there are Commies under every bed now, and you need to kill a few more for Mommy.
Almost every country in the Middle East is awash in oil, and we have to side with the one that has nothing but joos. Goddamn, that was good thinkin'. Esso posted on 2012-01-13 7:37:56 ET
I don't recall anyone making that argument. But it is probably true as conservatives have better morals. For example "liberals" see nothing wrong with killing a kid. They think it is a right.
Should 3d printers be illegal?
The conservative movement now claims the violent criminal element as their own? LOLOL I must have missed that. Actually the Tea Party's corporate owners have NO morals.
Almost every country in the Middle East is awash in oil, and we have to side with the one that has nothing but joos. Goddamn, that was good thinkin'. Esso posted on 2012-01-13 7:37:56 ET
There are lots of liberal gun owners. A good friend of mine who's a liberal, went out and bought a Chinese AK-47 just before the AW ban took effect in the '90's. He loaded up a hi-cap mag and started blasting at the rocks on the other side of the arroyo about 20 feet away, until a ricochet broke a bottle of Bullseye barbeque sauce sitting on the tailgate between two people. We gave him a few gun safety tips, but he's still a hardcore liberal.
Should files and tempered steel pipe be illegal?
Almost every country in the Middle East is awash in oil, and we have to side with the one that has nothing but joos. Goddamn, that was good thinkin'. Esso posted on 2012-01-13 7:37:56 ET
You sure lie a lot. Do you have a conscience?
There are lots of liberal gun owners. I used to work for this restoration company. There was one liberal Jim. He was for Clinton and hated Bush. Had that bumper sticker "To hell with the environment re elect George Bush. He was liberal on almost everything. But he wasn't on guns. He was very pro second amendment. He was a good guy too. Learned a lot from him.
For example?
Your Korean heros in that photo you posted on that other thread were on the side of the GOVERNMENT. So what. The government isn't always wrong. I know you side with the rioters and say they had as just cause. I said THEY thought they had a just cause. Someday you will learn to discuss topics without always having to put your biases into it. And you sided with cops and and said they had as just a cause. Like the safety of the general populace.
Almost every country in the Middle East is awash in oil, and we have to side with the one that has nothing but joos. Goddamn, that was good thinkin'. Esso posted on 2012-01-13 7:37:56 ET
CEOs routinely put their morals aside for the good of the corporation and stockholders which in all cases is to return a profit. Making money for the owners is always their primary concern, and their legally bound fiduciary duty.
Almost every country in the Middle East is awash in oil, and we have to side with the one that has nothing but joos. Goddamn, that was good thinkin'. Esso posted on 2012-01-13 7:37:56 ET
For example?
How can you be in favor of a movement run by corporations with their corresponding new found "rights" as "individuals" yet not know anything about the legal responsibilities that those same corporationss have to their owners?
Almost every country in the Middle East is awash in oil, and we have to side with the one that has nothing but joos. Goddamn, that was good thinkin'. Esso posted on 2012-01-13 7:37:56 ET
I guess the silly question I have is how do you plan on making all the criminals register their firearms??? All you are doing is making it harder for the average person to defend themselves adequately from the people I mentioned in the above sentence... And if you think the police are going to solve the problem by responding faster well that ain't gonna happen either, some people live "HOURS" from police response!! Of course I know you don't see it that way because you think that what you think is right even though it's wrong, and that you also think money grows on trees!!!
“We have four boxes with which to defend our freedom: the soap box, the ballot box, the jury box, and the ammunition box.”
All you are doing is making it harder for the average person to defend themselves adequately from the people I mentioned in the above sentence... And if you think the police are going to solve the problem by responding faster well that ain't gonna happen either, some people live "HOURS" from police response!! Of course I know you don't see it that way because you think that what you think is right even though it's wrong, and that you also think money grows on trees!!! Why can't we follow Israel's lead on this one?
Almost every country in the Middle East is awash in oil, and we have to side with the one that has nothing but joos. Goddamn, that was good thinkin'. Esso posted on 2012-01-13 7:37:56 ET
And what would that be anyway???
“We have four boxes with which to defend our freedom: the soap box, the ballot box, the jury box, and the ammunition box.”
I do enjoy killing them,but I did it for myself,not mommy.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Is it really lying if you don't know the difference between a lie and the truth?
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Kinda like political parties,huh? ESPECIALLY leftist political parties,like the Dims and the Mini-Dims.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
I KNOW! I KNOW! I KNOW! CALL ME! CALL ME! We just make it illegal to have unregistered firearms. See how simple this is? In EVERY sense of the world "simple".
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Anyone who disagrees with you is considered lying because you have no idea what the definition of the word "lying" is. Just like you have no idea what the definition of "corporation" really is.
Almost every country in the Middle East is awash in oil, and we have to side with the one that has nothing but joos. Goddamn, that was good thinkin'. Esso posted on 2012-01-13 7:37:56 ET
ESPECIALLY leftist political parties,like the Dims and the Mini-Dims. If you say so. But so far I haven't had to buy stock in either one in order to vote for their candidates.
Almost every country in the Middle East is awash in oil, and we have to side with the one that has nothing but joos. Goddamn, that was good thinkin'. Esso posted on 2012-01-13 7:37:56 ET
See how simple this is? In EVERY sense of the world "simple". LOL..... At least you could have used the sarc tag, I almost spewed my Margarita into my keyboard!!
“We have four boxes with which to defend our freedom: the soap box, the ballot box, the jury box, and the ammunition box.”
What other "governments" have done, is irrelevant. "if people knew that murdering other people was illegal,surely nobody would commit murder,right? Straw man - irrelevant. There is one pesky little thing standing in the way of this,though. The US Constitution,which says this is a RIGHT,not a privledge. sp (privilege) Registering an inanimate object really has nothing to do with an individual's right...... While you are at it,which of the other 9 Bill of Rights do you want to nullify? Another straw man argument - boring This will keep all of those poor darkies and rednecks from having guns, Please keep your racist comments to yourself.
What other "governments" have done, is irrelevant. Why is it irrelevant? Are we a superior race and incapable of the evils of men of other nations?
"Making all the criminals register their firearms" Can't be done, However, illegally owning a firearm will result in criminals being incarcerated. Of course, lets understand that there are LOTS of nut jobs walking the streets who, if subjected to a simple background evaluation would not be allowed within 20 yards of a weapon. That is the point of this argument, I am not advocating any sort of gun ban, I am suggesting only that, our current approach has been a failure and perhaps some changes are in order.... Your point is valid, registration doesn't prevent all firearms from falling into the wrong hands - but it will help a lot more than pretending that nothing can be done, and sticking our heads into the sand.... if you think the police are going to solve the problem by responding faster well that ain't gonna happen either, some people live "HOURS" from police response!! Now you're just making shit up...I never suggested such a ridiculous thing....not even a valid argument Of course I know you don't see it that way because you think that what you think is right even though it's wrong, I DO believe what I've said is right. - just because you say it is wrong means nothing to me - it is just your opinion. and that you also think money grows on trees!!! Again, I have not suggested anything of the sort, don't make shit up!
Our society, and our form of government is indeed unique in the world, and this point in human history is also unique. And we are not predisposed to repeat the mistakes of other countries, and to suggest that we are is moronic.
Again, I have not suggested anything of the sort, don't make shit up! Uhhh yea you did when you said this... "For instance, effective at a certain date in the near future, all firearms must be registered. The registration must be renewed each year, and a registration tax must be paid. Additionally, all gun owners must pass a competency test, and carry specific liability insurance"... Your solution costs money and money is something that some people need more for food than they need to spend on another tax to feed the insatiable/insane needs of the local and federal governments... Some people only have weapons because they were given to them or they inherited them, otherwise they wouldn't have them (because they can't afford them) and wouldn't be able to protect themselves.... The way I see it poor people have just as much right to protect themselves as people who have more money, don't you???
“We have four boxes with which to defend our freedom: the soap box, the ballot box, the jury box, and the ammunition box.”
Now you're just making shit up...I never suggested such a ridiculous thing....not even a valid argument You know you really should get out more.... Have you ever been in the mountains where roads follow the natural terrain of the land??? And even though you might live 15 miles from a town (as the Crow flies) it is 60-100 miles by vehicle!! So what do those people do, hire a cop to hide in the bushes 1/2 miles down the road waiting for them to call?? Duhhh, I think not!!
“We have four boxes with which to defend our freedom: the soap box, the ballot box, the jury box, and the ammunition box.”
No, you're wrong. You are inferring what I did not imply. I never said a word about money growing on trees. Now as to your point about all the poor people who would go hungry because they would be required to pony up a registration fee for each firearm they possess.... One word - priorities
I never said a word about money growing on trees. I just pointed out the phallacy of your little plan!!
“We have four boxes with which to defend our freedom: the soap box, the ballot box, the jury box, and the ammunition box.”
One word - priorities So are you saying poor people should not be able to own weapons or that they should not eat so they can protect themselves??
“We have four boxes with which to defend our freedom: the soap box, the ballot box, the jury box, and the ammunition box.”
You know, maybe I should get out more - thanks. You should work on reading comprehension - or stop listening to the voices in your head - I haven't written a single word about the police responding faster - or about the police responding at all. I have no idea where you came up with this.
I am saying neither - I am confident that even the "poor" people can figure out for themselves their priorities and act accordingly.
Phallacy? seriously...... www.dictionary.com No you didn't You didn't even make a solid argument.
It really pisses you off that some people make money on their own,doesn't it?
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
I have no idea where you came up with this. You mean that isn't the typical Leftard response when talking about gun control?? Maybe I should just quit listening/reading what you guys say and just try to read your minds instead!! (But then again maybe not).. “We have four boxes with which to defend our freedom: the soap box, the ballot box, the jury box, and the ammunition box.”
Of COURSE is is! Why don't we just totally ignore any history that conflicts with our personal beliefs,ok? Why not just ignore human nature,too. After all,it ain't like none of that stuff matters,right? You got nothing other than stupidity and lies to back you up. Are you Joe Biden's more evil twin?
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Which is why you want to change it to a mode that has failed every time it has been tried.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
seriously...... www.dictionary.com No you didn't You didn't even make a solid argument. Looks like you don't know how to spell "dicked up idea" do you?? I haven't seen a solid plan yet if you really want to know the truth!!
“We have four boxes with which to defend our freedom: the soap box, the ballot box, the jury box, and the ammunition box.”
Personally,I think he should be more confined. In a mental institution.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
One word-sanity. You ain't got it. Not only are you insane,you are a habitual liar.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
In a mental institution. $5 say he already lives in a Leftard Ghetto... Can it really get any worse??
“We have four boxes with which to defend our freedom: the soap box, the ballot box, the jury box, and the ammunition box.”
WHO are the Tea Party's Corporate Owners? As you are so fond of saying,"Link,please".
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
You would want a constitutional amendment to implement this correct? You assume that the government (at *any* level) still gives a crap about the Constitution. There is abundant evidence to dispel this notion as nothing more than wishful thinking. The Constitution is dead, I regret to say. This is abundantly clear from your original post, where you infer that gun confiscation is a possibility. If the Constitution mattered, your statement would be dismissed as absurd. Given the number of responses on this thread, it is clear that it's *not* so absurd. Pity. And to your original question, I've spent a bit of time in communist countries, where firearms were difficult to acquire. The weapon of choice when you wanted to kill someone, was a knife. In such a society where guns are rare, traceability is much easier; knives are so common that traceability is impossible, as a practical matter.
WHO are the Tea Party's Corporate Owners? As you are so fond of saying,"Link,please". I think you meant to ask her this.
You're right. Sorry,and thanks for the correction.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
I have no idea what you consider to be the "typical" response.
Something impossible or ignorant...
“We have four boxes with which to defend our freedom: the soap box, the ballot box, the jury box, and the ammunition box.”
You are welcome to your opinion my friend..... It is clear that you have nothing to offer beyond empty accusations..... Your "position" is fairly typical, and carries no weight. I'll look forward a future discussion in which you might contribute something intelligent. Best wishes
In a mental institution. What a witty come-back - Your debating skills are absolutely underwhelming..... I hope you find something to be happy about soon.
I'm happy pretty much all the time.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
UK Considers Banning Kitchen Knives December 27, 2012 by Philip Hodges We joke about it here in the U.S. that maybe the UK should ban kitchen knives since they can be used to kill someone. It looks like the UK may have taken those jokes a little too seriously because they’ve been considering banning long, pointed kitchen knives for the past several years. Researchers from West Middlesex University Hospital found that crime in their country was on the rise, and that kitchen knives were used in as many as half of all stabbings. At least they’re being consistent. They thought guns were dangerous, so they banned guns. Now, they’re acknowledging that knives have taken the place of guns and are dangerous and should also be banned. BBC News reported: “The researchers said there was no reason for long pointed knives to be publicly available at all. They consulted 10 top chefs from around the UK, and found such knives have little practical value in the kitchen. None of the chefs felt such knives were essential, since the point of a short blade was just as useful when a sharp end was needed. The researchers said a short pointed knife may cause a substantial superficial wound if used in an assault – but is unlikely to penetrate to inner organs. In contrast, a pointed long blade pierces the body like ‘cutting into a ripe melon.’” After they’ve banned long, pointy kitchen knives, are they going to ban sharp pencils? Nail files? Screwdrivers? Fists? They can keep banning all these objects, but people will always find other means of inflicting injury or death if that’s what they really want to do. I think the U.S. is a long way away from banning kitchen knives. They’d first have to confiscate all the guns, and that’s just not going to be possible anytime soon. I really don’t think that those in power over us want an all-out bloody war in order to disarm us. They know they have to be careful. They would much rather “conquer” us through our consent. They just want us to submit. We’re the frogs in the pot of water, and with every law that gets enacted, the heat turns up a little. We acclimate, and then they turn up the heat again, but only a little. Over time, we Americans simply forget and get used to the tyranny that we’ve grown up in and lived through. Before we know it, the water will be boiling us, and by then it will be too late for us to fight back. They want nothing more than a bunch of willing slaves who believe they are free and secure in government’s chains, which they see as the protective arms of a loving mother. With every massacre that the media turns into an international spectacle, people’s brains will be numbed just a little more. With every opinion poll taken after each massacre, people will show their increasing willingness to just submit, turn in their guns and let the government take care of them. One hopeful thing is for sure, though. In the midst of all these self-deceived slaves, there will always be a remnant of real freedom-lovers who refused to acclimate to tyranny.
“We have four boxes with which to defend our freedom: the soap box, the ballot box, the jury box, and the ammunition box.”
"So I was thinking about all this talk of banning guns. If they ban guns do you think that there will be an increase in knife violence?"
#2. To: Murron (#1)
#3. To: A K A Stone (#0)
#4. To: A K A Stone (#0)
So I was thinking about all this talk of banning guns. If they ban guns do you think that there will be an increase in knife violence?
#5. To: Jameson (#4)
For instance, effective at a certain date in the near future, all firearms must be registered. The registration must be renewed each year, and a registration tax must be paid. Additionally, all gun owners must pass a competency test, and carry specific liability insurance.
#6. To: A K A Stone (#5)
In your scenario since it obviously violates the second amendment.
#7. To: Jameson (#6)
#8. To: Jameson (#6)
I don't see how the simple registration of an object violates anyone's rights.....
#9. To: Jameson (#4)
#10. To: A K A Stone (#8)
#11. To: A K A Stone (#9)
#12. To: Jameson (#11)
Straw man - irrelevant
#13. To: Jameson (#10)
Gun registration would not take away anyone's right. . Requiring personal accountability and responsibility for ownership of a deadly weapon is simply common sense. As a proud law-abiding American I would feel that it was my patriotic duty to do what is right and register my weapons, pay my taxes and provide the appropriate liability insurance.
#14. To: A K A Stone (#0)
#15. To: A K A Stone (#0)
(Edited)
#16. To: Jameson (#4)
For instance, effective at a certain date in the near future, all firearms must be registered.
#17. To: A K A Stone (#13)
It isn't patriotic to obey an illegal government screwing with God given rights. I would suggest it is unpatriotic to register your gun.
#18. To: A K A Stone, Jameson (#5)
In your scenario since it obviously violates the second amendment.
#19. To: Jameson (#10)
Gun registration would not take away anyone's right.
#20. To: mininggold (#15)
So you are saying that people with violent tendencies are prone to use guns?
#21. To: mininggold (#17)
Your Korean heros in that photo you posted on that other thread were on the side of the GOVERNMENT.
#22. To: mininggold (#15)
#23. To: A K A Stone (#13)
I would suggest it is unpatriotic to register your gun.
#24. To: mininggold (#15)
And liberals don't own guns.
#25. To: A K A Stone (#20)
Guns, knives, fists, gasoline, automobiles matches.
#26. To: sneakypete (#24)
Sure they do,and you are wrong about something else,too.
#27. To: mininggold (#25)
BUT the conservative position is that the violent criminal element that prefers guns as it's weapon of choice tends to be more liberal than conservative
#28. To: mininggold (#26)
#29. To: A K A Stone (#27)
I don't recall anyone making that argument. But it is probably true as conservatives have better morals. For example "liberals" see nothing wrong with killing a kid. They think it is a right.
#30. To: mininggold (#15)
liberals don't own guns.
"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul
#31. To: A K A Stone (#28)
Should 3d printers be illegal?
#32. To: mininggold (#29)
The conservative movement now claims the violent criminal element as their own? LOLOL I must have missed that.
#33. To: hondo68 (#30)
liberals don't own guns.
#34. To: mininggold (#29)
Actually the Tea Party's corporate owners have NO morals.
#35. To: A K A Stone (#21)
(Edited)
To: mininggold
#36. To: A K A Stone (#34)
For example?
#37. To: mininggold (#36)
CEOs routinely put their morals aside for the good of the corporation and stockholders
#38. To: A K A Stone (#37)
(Edited)
For example?
#39. To: Jameson, AKA Stone, sneakypete (#4)
For instance, effective at a certain date in the near future, all firearms must be registered. The registration must be renewed each year, and a registration tax must be paid. Additionally, all gun owners must pass a competency test, and carry specific liability insurance.
#40. To: CZ82 (#39)
I guess the silly question I have is how do you plan on making all the criminals register their firearms???
#41. To: mininggold (#40)
Why can't we follow Israel's lead on this one?
#42. To: mininggold (#26)
Why... there are Commies under every bed now, and you need to kill a few more for Mommy.
#43. To: A K A Stone (#32)
You sure lie a lot. Do you have a conscience?
#44. To: mininggold (#36)
CEOs routinely put their morals aside for the good of the corporation and stockholders which in all cases is to return a profit.
#45. To: CZ82 (#39)
I guess the silly question I have is how do you plan on making all the criminals register their firearms???
#46. To: A K A Stone (#32)
You sure lie a lot. Do you have a conscience?
#47. To: sneakypete (#44)
Kinda like political parties,huh?
#48. To: sneakypete (#45)
We just make it illegal to have unregistered firearms.
#49. To: sneakypete (#16)
After all,when has that never worked out and led to gun confiscation after the various governments that have done this found out where all the guns are.
#50. To: Jameson (#49)
After all,when has that never worked out and led to gun confiscation after the various governments that have done this found out where all the guns are.
#51. To: CZ82 (#39)
I guess the silly question I have is how do you plan on making all the criminals register their firearms???
#52. To: A K A Stone (#50)
Why is it irrelevant?
#53. To: Jameson (#51)
and that you also think money grows on trees!!!
#54. To: Jameson (#51)
if you think the police are going to solve the problem by responding faster well that ain't gonna happen either, some people live "HOURS" from police response!!
#55. To: CZ82 (#53)
Uhhh yea you did when you said this...
#56. To: Jameson (#55)
No, you're wrong. You are inferring what I did not imply.
#57. To: Jameson (#55)
Now as to your point about all the poor people who would go hungry because they would be required to pony up a registration fee for each firearm they possess....
#58. To: CZ82 (#54)
Have you ever been in the mountains where roads follow the natural terrain of the land??? And even though you might live 15 miles from a town (as the Crow flies) it is 60-100 miles by vehicle!!
#59. To: CZ82 (#57)
So are you saying poor people should not be able to own weapons or that they should not eat so they can protect themselves??
#60. To: CZ82 (#56)
I just pointed out the phallacy of your little plan!!
#61. To: mininggold (#47)
If you say so. But so far I haven't had to buy stock in either one in order to vote for their candidates.
#62. To: Jameson (#58)
You should work on reading comprehension - or stop listening to the voices in your head - I haven't written a single word about the police responding faster - or about the police responding at all.
#63. To: Jameson (#49)
What other "governments" have done, is irrelevant.
#64. To: Jameson (#52)
Our society, and our form of government is indeed unique in the world,
#65. To: Jameson (#60)
Phallacy?
#66. To: CZ82, Jameson (#54)
You know you really should get out more....
#67. To: Jameson (#55)
One word - priorities
#68. To: sneakypete (#66)
Personally,I think he should be more confined.
#69. To: A K A Stone (#34)
Actually the Tea Party's corporate owners have NO morals.
#70. To: A K A Stone (#5)
In your scenario since it obviously violates the second amendment.
#71. To: sneakypete, mininggold (#69)
Actually the Tea Party's corporate owners have NO morals.
#72. To: A K A Stone (#71)
#73. To: CZ82 (#62)
You mean that isn't the typical Leftard response when talking about gun control??
It was not my response, and you know it.
#74. To: Jameson (#73)
I have no idea what you consider to be the "typical" response.
#75. To: sneakypete (#67)
You ain't got it. Not only are you insane,you are a habitual liar.
#76. To: sneakypete (#66)
Personally,I think he should be more confined.
#77. To: Jameson (#76)
"I hope you find something to be happy about soon."
#78. To: A K A Stone (#0)
1. Would there be an increase in knife violence if guns were banned. (note you are dumb if you think they will stop with the guns currently targeted).
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]