We need guns to protect the country from totalitarians like you. In your current frame-of-mind, you are effectively representing why most guns should remain legal.
I think it’s telling that gun rights are the second ammendment.
1st: we get to say whatever is on our minds
2nd: we get arm ourselves and defend our own turf
…
13th: No slaves
…
19th: Dames can vote
We are, first and foremost, a nation of cranky bastards who want to be able to sit on our front porches, issue verbal warnings to kids regarding the protocols governing their interactions with our lawns, and to be able to enforce said protocols without having to leave the comfort of our rocking chairs. Oh, and ok, we have to get our own drinks. And the wimmins can be useful at election time and vote for whomever we tell 'em to vote for…so we don’t have to leave our porches.
An all-out gun ban will never work in the U.S. There are simply too many guns out there. The bloodshed that would result from a gun ban would be enormous, and no politician would want to be blamed for it.
It won’t happen for the foreseeable future; America is completely irrational and amoral on the subject of guns.
Guns don’t protect anyone from totalitarians. Especially not in America, since the gun lovers tend to be the sorts who would be on the side of the tyrants. Forget all that nonsense about the gun nuts bravely fighting the evil tyrannical government; a much more likely scenario is them supporting a Christian-fascist government by forming into paramilitary death squads and breaking into the homes of liberals, homosexuals and non-Christians to massacre the people there. All the time telling themselves how they are fighting for FREEDOM! because they have guns. The only right, the only freedom the gun nuts care about is gun ownership; they will betray any person, any principle in the name of guns.
It’s not the guns, it’s the culture. And it is not the whole culture, so you foreigners stop saying “you people”, please. There is a large section of US culture which is characterized by what I would describe as defensive offensiveness.
They believe that Others are out to get them, give those Others an inch and they’ll take a mile, and that they are always under attack, against any evidence to the contrary. This is a large and usually irrational segment of US society. It is primarily rural, white, working class, poorly educated, with little experience of any culture but its own – but certainly is not limited to that description. Except maybe the white part.
The idea of gun control makes them immediately feel ATTACKED. The Others are trying to take away their only defense against ATTACK. It’s a purely emotional reaction which means it is completely insulated from any appeals to sanity. When you feel that you are surrounded by a dominant culture which is your enemy, you aren’t going to be reacting with logic. And that is exactly what they feel.
This culture came to the US fully formed, really, from the disenfranchised and marginalized immigrants from Europe (mostly Britain). It found a warm home here and lots of reasons to never give up its belief system. You would have to excise this entire culture from the US in order to achieve gun control.
Oh, also . . . I hate it. Being one of those Others and all.
Which is of course why Australia is full of criminals.
I agree.
To introduce some numbers here…
Support for much-stricter gun controls has been declining for years and by many measures is at or near modern-era lows. In this poll, for example, 43% said they would favor a ban on “semiautomatic guns known as assault rifles.” Only 26% favored a ban on handguns, except for police.
Presumably the support for a total ban on all private firearms, as BobLibDem imagines, would be much lower still–literally fewer people than believe that Bush knew about 9/11 attacks in advance, or that they have been in the presence of ghosts.
This is why we can’t have a reasonable discussion about guns. The loony leftists who get such a hard-on about anti-gun ownership will not allow one.
I think some of the posts to this thread have shown that the belief that “give them an inch and they’ll take a mile” is, in many instances, quite accurate and correct.
And it is difficult to find common ground on the subject of gun control if the other side thinks of you as either white trash, or fascists.
The anti-gun types are often reminiscent of the anti-abortion types. Different topic, but the same attitudes and rhetoric, at least on the extreme end.
Regards,
Shodan
This post is more full of balls than a bowling alley. The only thing that keeps out of complete BS territory is the use of the modifier: “-nuts”
I hypothesize the vast majority of gun owners are NOT in fact, gun nuts. The only way you know they have guns is if you ask and they feel your query comes from a place of hobby-interest and not from a quest for moral footing. Well, and when they’re shooting you in self-defense. This is based on personal experience. There are certainly elements of our society that fit the mold you present, but should they rise up in any sort of numbers to perform the atrocities you describe they will be quickly snuffed by the vast majority of other, reasonable and armed people.
I’m liberal-ish, and I’m armed. My friends are generally liberals and they, too, are armed. We don’t hope for it, but should the day come when The US sees the rise of a totalitarian, theocratic dictatorship, we will be the resistance; and we will not be outnumbered because there are just as many “conservatives” out there with whom we will argue vehemently over beers, and beside whom we will fight for the right to bicker our disparate views amongst ourselves.
That one goes both ways, but I do tend to see the wild “swing for the fences” mouth foaming irrationality tend to come first from those who are pants-wettingly afraid of guns, like our fine, rational, sensible poster, Der Trihs.
If we handed out penises to those lacking them, the demand for guns would drop. (not talking about women, they need to defend themselves from guys with no dicks).
Yes, we should be absolute amoral on the subject of guns, and many other things: “Not admitting of moral distinctions or judgments; neither moral nor immoral.”
Also, one has a smaller less, powerful. The other is more powerful and meant for hunting deer. E.g. the one on the left is for a AR-15 “assault rifle” but is considered by some to be underpowered for deer. The middle one was first made in 1895 and is mostly used for cowboy-style rifles. The one on the right is a more modern rifle round, and the right two are more often used for deer. There are bigger ones as well.
I feel the same way about brains and “gun=penis” jokes.
I wasn’t joking.
Wow, 2 jokes on the subject. You’re doing your best to remove all doubt, aren’t you.
You might want to talk to some other Democrats before proceding with this idea. This Gallup poll from last Fall shows 47% of the respondents reported owning guns.
Of these gun owners, 40% identified as Democrats. A new high and a clear spike on the graph.
Gun onwership by women has also spiked.
I guess I’ll have to spell it out for you.
I don’t think anything can be done unless the Constitution is amended. We have a right to possess arms, and the hedging on things like automatic weapons leads people to believe we can do something about arms related problems with legislative action. But that will never hold up over time, or have significant impact on the problem.
I don’t think there’s anything wrong with responisible people owning guns either, even the ones who use them to kill defenseless animals for fun.
I don’t think the right to own, possess, or bear arms is the problem at all. The problem is those people who *feel a need *to have a gun. The ones who are missing something, and fill that void with a gun. These aren’t the people who have an actual need for a gun, or people who are concerned with constitutional rights. They don’t have something, and you can call it whatever you want, but they are the reason that we don’t have reasonable measures to stop tragedies and rational gun laws.
I guess I’ll have to spell it out for you.
I don’t think anything can be done unless the Constitution is amended. We have a right to possess arms, and the hedging on things like automatic weapons leads people to believe we can do something about arms related problems with legislative action. But that will never hold up over time, or have significant impact on the problem.
I don’t think there’s anything wrong with responisible people owning guns either, even the ones who use them to kill defenseless animals for fun.
I don’t think the right to own, possess, or bear arms is the problem at all. The problem is those people who *feel a need *to have a gun. The ones who are missing something, and fill that void with a gun. These aren’t the people who have an actual need for a gun, or people who are concerned with constitutional rights. They don’t have something, and you can call it whatever you want, but they are the reason that we don’t have reasonable measures to stop tragedies and rational gun laws. As long as people obtain guns to feel better about themselves, those who oppose reasonable solutions have allies on their side to maintain a majority.
Yeah, what a doofus I was for not getting all that from gun=penis. :rolleyes: