|
Post by RagePatriot on Jul 9, 2002 17:38:00 GMT -5
Well as a very proud member of the NRA (National Rifle Association) i just wanted to inform you all on why gun ownership is good, and gun registration systems are bad. The first off is the most obvious, though not the most know. The more legally owned firearms there are in an area, the less crime per capita of 100,000 there are. For instance the murder rate in florida is 4.2 per 100,000, as compared to New York, my state, which was 10.2 per 100,000. The second is about the registration system. The only people that are going to register thier firearms are the ones that are going to obey the law. After all why would I register a gun I plan on using in a crime?? Third is that the second ammendment is a type of last resort. What we are to turn too when all else fails. By implimenting the registration system the seeds for complete government control are being planted. Adolf Hitler did it, Mussolini, Castro, Canada is doing it now, and we, Americans are slowly starting to. Think about what happened with Germany, Italy and Cuba, I forgot to mention the Soviet Union, and of course modern day russia. Look at what they became, is that what you want for us. The government can never go against the will of the people if they are armed and willing to sacrafice to keep this country the way it is meant to be. And the "unconstitutionality" or the second ammendment is just some b.s. argueement. It is clear that the founding fathers wanted to protect most basic right of all, the right to protect oneself. Becasue after all the constition was not written to give one a right, but to protect them I'm going over my friends now, I'd like to see what you all think about this....mabey there will be some posts i could respond to when i get back later tonight..... later -Rage
|
|
|
Post by soniktruth on Jul 9, 2002 23:57:30 GMT -5
patriot
do you think one should have a limit of how many guns they should own? or should we own as many guns as we'd like?...please answer this carefully.
|
|
|
Post by MercurySolo on Jul 10, 2002 16:10:29 GMT -5
Gun control is a shaky issue. Personally, I think that as long as the Second Amendment stands, then Americans should be able to own guns. Registration, it seems like a good idea, but it's just another way for the government to keep track on people, like you said, Patriot. I mean, credit cards, e-mail addresses, no matter what, they end up getting their "information". Trigger Locks on the other hand, I think those are a good idea, I mean, if a kid goes in his parents' closet and finds a loaded gun, A.) The parents are irresponsible, and B.) if the trigger lock is there, it makes it that much harder for an accident to happen. As long as gun owners are responsible, and not Homer Simpson-ing by opening beers and turning off TV's by shooting them, then I think we as Americans should retain the right to bear arms. If they take that right away, only the criminals will have 'em.
|
|
|
Post by RagePatriot on Jul 10, 2002 16:53:19 GMT -5
I think you should be able to own however many firearms you would like. Many people are collectors of guns, such as my father, and probally one day me. Something i frequently hear about collecting guns is "what socialble purpouse does collecting guns serve?." Well I would guess the same purpouse as collecting baseball cards, or using an electric toothbrush. It's for my personal use, thats it. Today though is a shaky time. With all the Islamic fundementalist/exremest people. Though I doubt that if they own many guns they were accuried legally, considering most are here on student visas, or were just smuggled in, and henceforth are not legally allowed to own a gun becasue they are not a citizen. So that should not affect my, yours, every citizens right to own a gun.
Now as for trigger locks. In just thinkin about them they sound like a good idea. But what if a person was to break into your house and you felt that you needed to confront them with your gun. Would you want to be fumbling around in the dark with a trigger lock? Of course not. Any adult that would leave a gun accessible to a child 5 or younger is wihtout a doubt irresponsible. The idea is that children should become familiarized with guns when they are little, the same way they were way back when, in the 17 and 1800's. An accidental shooting was unheard of back then, because children where given their own guns as soon as they were old enough to go out and shoot them. Thus they learned how to handle them safley.
|
|
|
Post by RagePatriot on Jul 10, 2002 17:03:26 GMT -5
I just thought I'd let all of you know, anyone that lives around the Long Island area, even mabey New Jersey, there is an incredible show coming up soon
Here's the show announcement... OSB Presents This Island Earth Fest Saturday August 31st Brookhaven Amphitheater $25, All Ages
Jimmy Eat World, The Movielife, Brand New, Taking Back Sunday From Autumn To Ashes, Midtown, Catch 22, The Youth Ahead The Starting Line, Drawn From Endings and more to be announced soon...
|
|
|
Post by headINcortex on Jul 13, 2002 19:52:48 GMT -5
where i live, you can't find a household without a gun in it. whether its 10 hunting guns or just one 9 to scare a burglar. my dad has the latter. he don't belive in hunting and shit, which is a virtually invisible opinion down here. its like have a person that doesn't belive in public transportation in new york. my dad killed a rabbit when he was like 11 and ended up burying it on the top of a hill. ever since, he's been a bit weird about the whole hunting thing. i mean, if a few of his friends wanted to take a day out hunting, i' sure he's go, but probably not shoot anything. this is also ironic since he is a great shot.
so i aint gonna hunt, but i'm gonna get a liscense so i can get a gun for home protection when i'm older. plus, they help in killing the rattle snakes that sneak up in your backyard from time to time.
|
|
|
Post by soniktruth on Jul 15, 2002 2:04:10 GMT -5
i agree with that but when a motherphucker has enough arms to supply an army.....ak's, m-16's , grenades...you know, militia shiit. that's phucking ridiculous. thats not a hobby(collection). that's phucking scary.....there's gotta be a line drawn..... collecting stamps never hurt anybody.
|
|
|
Post by MercurySolo on Jul 15, 2002 18:38:47 GMT -5
Yeah, very true. There's no distinction in the Second Amendment that says how many arms you can own. They should find a way to draw the line between self-protection and stockpiling for WWIII without taking the right to bear arms, itself, away.
|
|
|
Post by RagePatriot on Jul 20, 2002 21:48:25 GMT -5
The hole point of the militia is to be an army. In world war 1 and 2 the militia was called on to protect important industires. In WW1 Germany was sabatoging anything from powder plants to water systems. The miltia was in chanrge of gaurding these systems. Would you have prefered they were armed with a flintlock or a springfield bolt action that can fire like 12 times faster than a flintlock? In WW2 when the Japs attacked Pearl Harbor, the militia was called up to defend the beach heads until the army could arrive. since the army had no guns to distribute, the only men accepted were those with thier own guns, back then would you have rahter had them fight off a Jap envasion, which thank God never happened, with colt 6 shot revolver or garands a thompsons?? The reason why the govt today does not want us to have things liek mortars, bazookas, .50 cal high velocity rifles, is so when the tanks and armored vehiceles come down the street, we have no way of stopping them. the only reason, besides fighting alongside the military against other nations, for the militias existance is to prevent the govt from becoming tyranic. I mean somebody has to keep those things, they arnt jsut going to materialize out of the air when they are needed. O yea, and just incase ne of you think that the second ammendment refers to the national gaurd, is just stupid. the second ammendment was ratified in 1791, the national gaurd created in 1916. And the national gaurd is supposed to be the militia, but it is not what it was originally intended to be. They all operate on federal govt property, own federaly owned guns, ammo, ect......so they can not be considered a true militia. Also, if you believe that the second ammendment is a "collective" and not individual freedom, then that would mean every thing in the bill of rights that says "the people" is only for collective groups. So freedom of speach can only be safe in groups, along wiht the 4th, 9th, 6th, and of course 2cd ammendment. simple as that.......
|
|
|
Post by headINcortex on Jul 21, 2002 1:16:30 GMT -5
d*mn, rage...
you know your sh*t.
|
|
|
Post by RagePatriot on Jul 26, 2002 18:53:21 GMT -5
future U.S. senator Sen. Necci (R-NY) VOTE FOR ME!!
|
|
|
Post by headINcortex on Jul 26, 2002 19:25:36 GMT -5
i'll be your campaign manager.
|
|
|
Post by soniktruth on Jul 26, 2002 21:05:43 GMT -5
vote for me for president!!!
i promise i "WILL" inhale......
PARAN0IDANDR0ID FOR PRE$IDENT....nice little ring to it, huh?
|
|
|
Post by headINcortex on Jul 30, 2002 23:27:03 GMT -5
what is the significance of the money sign, if you don't mind.
|
|
|
Post by soniktruth on Jul 31, 2002 1:25:09 GMT -5
have you ever seen a poor ex-president?
|
|
|
Post by soniktruth on Jul 31, 2002 1:27:18 GMT -5
"WE WERE GIVIN THE RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS, WHEN ARE LAND WAS ALL RANCH AND FARMS, THE LAW IS OLD AND NEEDS UPDATING, THERE'S NO TIME FOR HESITATING"
GUN CONTROL-BY D.R.I.(ALBUM-THRASH ZONE)
|
|
|
Post by headINcortex on Jul 31, 2002 3:58:07 GMT -5
i've seen a dead ex-president.
well, not really.
'dead ex-president'. has a nice little ring to it doesn't it?
|
|