Obama; New Type of Hope, Same Type of Stupid (Gun Control)

[CountArach]

but what about the big time crimnals?

What about them? They are going to get guns either way, but this way it is going to cost them more and be much harder to get - the black market can still be found-out.

you cant just assume that the small guy dont want guns.

If gun control prevents even one rape turning into a rape-murder then I would be happy with gun control.

under estimating in general is a bad thing to do.

Like underestimating what the police force is capable of?

[Strike For The South]

What about Texans who are being murdered by border gangs who are armed to the teeth.

[Mooks]

What about Texans who are being murdered by border gangs who are armed to the teeth.

If innocent texans are being murdered by foreigners from across the border, why isnt the military getting involved? Isnt that the whole purpose of the military?

[Strike For The South]

If innocent texans are being murdered by foreigners from across the border, why isnt the military getting involved? Isnt that the whole purpose of the military?

LOL. Im going to give you one guess. It starts with M and ends with exican

[Mooks]

LOL. Im going to give you one guess. It starts with M and ends with exican

I know that they are mexican, I shouldve put "americans" in place of texans.

both the border patrol and National guard are woefully understaffed. well, at least the BP is. most of the guardsmen are overseas. idk why, but they are.
but still, they cant be everywhere at all times. weve got a huge southern border.

Nobody really cares about illegal immigrants. But when they are literally raiding our border, why isnt the military (Not the weekend warriors) taking action?

Are the weekend warriors the reserves or the NG, I get them confused.

[Hooahguy]

b/c it will start a war maybe? as far as i can tell from the situation, they are making quick strikes into the US, then getting the heck outta there. then they strike somewhere else.
now tell me how the army is supposed to protect us from that 24/7.

the weekend warriors are the NG, AFAIK.

[Strike For The South]

I know that they are mexican, I shouldve put "americans" in place of texans.



Nobody really cares about illegal immigrants. But when they are literally raiding our border, why isnt the military (Not the weekend warriors) taking action?

Are the weekend warriors the reserves or the NG, I get them confused.

No the Texans on the border are 85-90% Tejano.

I see Count Arach has avoided my questions, therefore I win

[Hooahguy]

If innocent texans are being murdered by foreigners from across the border, why isnt the military getting involved? Isnt that the whole purpose of the military?

both the border patrol and National guard are woefully understaffed. well, at least the BP is. most of the guardsmen are overseas. idk why, but they are.
but still, they cant be everywhere at all times. weve got a huge southern border.

[Hooahguy]

What about them? They are going to get guns either way, but this way it is going to cost them more and be much harder to get - the black market can still be found-out.

thank you for just making my point.
doesnt matter how hard itll take. they will get them. and they will strike. and we lawful citizens wont have any means of self defense.

If gun control prevents even one rape turning into a rape-murder then I would be happy with gun control.

what if the would be victim had a gun? then there wouldnt be a rape in the first place.

Like underestimating what the police force is capable of?

it is well known that the police cant be everywhere at all times. in fact, most cities in the US are reducing the numbers of policemen, such as Atlanta.

[CountArach]

thank you for just making my point.
doesnt matter how hard itll take. they will get them. and they will strike. and we lawful citizens wont have any means of self defense.

You don't have a lawful means of self-defence now... you even said as much yourself - you aren't able to shoot. So how would your situation change if guns were banned?

what if the would be victim had a gun? then there wouldnt be a rape in the first place.

What if said person is taken by surprise by someone who has a gun? They reach for their concealed firearm, but their sudden movement gets them shot...

I don't see any good coming from that....

it is well known that the police cant be everywhere at all times.

No they can't, and nor do they need to be when there are fewer guns.

Anyway gun control debates get me wound up and I know that neither side is ever going to change their views. So I shall depart this thread.

[Hooahguy]

You don't have a lawful means of self-defence now... you even said as much yourself - you aren't able to shoot. So how would your situation change if guns were banned?

when did i say we dont have lawful self-defense now? ok, so you have to be 21 to own a gun, so what? ill wait. ill take precautions. i dont really have to go out in the real world until im 21 anyhow. until then ill be in college, high school, so....

What if said person is taken by surprise by someone who has a gun? They reach for their concealed firearm, but their sudden movement gets them shot...

I don't see any good coming from that....

but at least give them the chance. maybe if some woman in a vacant parking lot saw someone approaching her, she has time to pull out a gun. if she was taken by surprise then she is in deep trouble anyhoow, but give her the chance to defend herself in the first place.

No they can't, and nor do they need to be when there are fewer guns.

you just said before that the bad people who really want guns will get them. and now you are saying we will need fewer cops?
on the contrary. if we dont ban guns we will need fewer cops because there will be more people to protect others if the police isnt around.

EDIT: no one is replying, so ill assume victory...
horray!

[Fiddling_nero]

This is the exact issue that caused me to not vote for George Bush in 2004.
(Note I didn't vote for Kerry either. I'm not a fool to think that he would have done any different.)

[seireikhaan]

I repeat:



I see no reason people need an assault weapon to defend themselves, with the exception of the situation Strike mentioned- in cases of cross-border raids, regardless of political expediency, the police and/or military need to be on that job.

But if people feel more comfortable thinking that owning an assault weapon somehow makes them the torch-bearers of the founding fathers, I don't particularly care if assault weapons were legal either.

P.S.- No citizen group is overthrowing the US government with assault weapons anyways, FYI. You gonna be put down HARD. Y'all gonna need to be a bit less, ya know, obvious. Subterfuge and the like, in and out operations. Concealed weapons gonna be the best bet there.

[Hooahguy]

oh good, were back to assault weapons.
but i agree with seireikhaan on the topic of assault weapons. they arent needed nowhere near as much. anyhow, pistols are better.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

No they can't, and nor do they need to be when there are fewer guns.

Only there won't be fewer guns, or murders. It'll switch to knives. And then you'll have to ban knives. And then kitchen implements. And so on.

And, in spite of all this, even small-time criminals are still going to have means of getting guns. In Toronto, for example, where do small-time criminals get their handguns? From the bigger gangs.

[Fisherking]

This is only a smoke screen of an excuse to do what the Ds like to do…work on eroding the rights they don’t like…banning guns as a start.

Why would Mexicans buy expensive arms from the US that are only semi-automatic when they can get cheep automatic weapons from a hundred different countries.

Not to pick on the Ds for eroding rights…the Rs just erode different ones.