Poll of the Day > One gun control arugment I don't understand...

(+) Yeah! (+)

TsC_PoLiTiKz posted...

So... Why are we supporting a government if we're expecting them to bring hell down upon us? That just makes no sense.

We could just stop bending over for the NRA, but people are apparently more prepared to turn on our government so... I don't see that happening.

Here we go with more NRA boogeyman nonsense
---

"You can't kill a tank with a gun"

No, but you can trap a tank relatively easily.

Tanks have been and always shall be infantry support. They're not the invincible war machines Hitler thought they were.

Perhaps we should stop voting on people that got a chance of turning into dictators?
---

TsC_PoLiTiKz posted...

So... Why are we supporting a government if we're expecting them to bring hell down upon us? That just makes no sense.

I think the general idea is that any government has the capacity to become corrupt and tyrannical especially with a naive, trusting people as shown many many times throughout history. And history tends to repeat itself when a fattened, spoiled population thinks they're immune to such things

But the Government is already corrupt.
Turning into dictatorship will just cost them more pain and they will lose some of their benefits, so it is not worth it.
---

The presence of 2nd amendment itself would curtail the government from attempting certain kinds of tyranny, namely hugely reduce the chance of martial law.

But on the other hand, the gradual erosion of rights is still a possibilty, and even already in effect to some degree. Now whether the people will be wise enough to realize it, then find a proper way to unravel from this subtle oppresion, is another matter. People mostly can only see what's right in front of them, and no further. Furthermore most people are preoccupied with materialistic and visceral issues, like poverty and feelings, that have no real solutions; thus endless pointless struggle, wasting energy, time, money to combat the misguided issues.
---

XlaxJynx007 posted...

CarefreeDude posted...

OhhhJa posted...

You're not seeming very carefree right now dude

At the moment I'm just a BaitingDude

Baiting or 'Bating?

http://rwby.wikia.com/wiki/File:82733-why-not-both-meme-5LvD.jpeg
---

faramir77 posted...

I don't know why so many Americans live in total fear of a tyrannical government takeover. Literally nobody in Canada lives in fear like that.

Because Canada wasn't founded on a rebellion against a tyrannical power and your government doesn't actively spy on its own citizens, hasn't performed illegal experiments on its citizens, hasn't authorized the use of drone strikes against its own citizens, etc, etc, etc.

darkknight109 posted...

And that's not even counting the fact that Spain and France were waging war against Britain overseas and preventing her from deploying the full strength of Britain's forces against the revolutionaries. Had France and Spain stayed out of it, the American revolution would have been crushed in short order.

Unlikely, considering that America was a world away.

VeeVees posted...

Sacrificing actual, current security to prepare for some paranoid, apocalyptic future is stupid.

And those who would sacrifice freedom for the illusion of security will have neither.

VeeVees posted...

LMAO, ya, keep comparing shithole 3rd world countries to a developed country.

Everyone knows your government is corrupt as fuck. For example, NRA is paying millions to keep outdated laws that benefit them.

Literally nothing to do with corruption for starters (for actual corruption, look at a gun control advocating state senator who attempted to facilitate the illegal sale of weapons to a terrorist group), second things only got *worse* after the new laws went through. After the Gun-Free Schools Act of 1994 and other new legislation, we had Kip Kinkel in 1998 and Columbine in 1999.
---

I feel like we ignore the real reason why America has always had an issue with violence. This country is built on criminals and dysfunctional people. Europeans have always sent us their drunks, crazies, and criminals. It's not the guns. It's the people

USA military literally bombing and attacking other nations with extreme, unnecessary force. so why don't we protest for the disarming of US over-the-top military weapons, which would save a lot more lives around the world.
---

normally i take conspiracy theory with a grain of salt, but man that article about the nra suing as soon as a bill was passed. like the ink wasn't even dry on the paper, the people in the building hadn't even started walking out to their cars to go home and a lawsuit appears? cmon.
---

blackhrt posted...

normally i take conspiracy theory with a grain of salt, but man that article about the nra suing as soon as a bill was passed. like the ink wasn't even dry on the paper, the people in the building hadn't even started walking out to their cars to go home and a lawsuit appears? cmon.

What's the conspiracy exactly? If you're objecting to the speed of a lawsuit, keep in mind that people know well ahead of time what's being written and coming up for a vote.
---

OhhhJa posted...

I feel like we ignore the real reason why America has always had an issue with violence. This country is built on criminals and dysfunctional people. Europeans have always sent us their drunks, crazies, and criminals. It's not the guns. It's the people

And then import lunies to ruin your countries. Enjoy Saudi Europia.

What about Australia?
---

http://johnrlott.tripod.com/Australia_Gun_Buyback_EI.pdf

"The 1996-1997 National Firearms Agreement (NFA) in Australia introduced strict
gun laws, primarily as a reaction to the mass shooting in Port Arthur, Tasmania, in 1996,
where 35 people were killed. Despite the fact that several researchers using the same data
have examined the impact of the NFA on firearm deaths, a consensus does not appear to
have been reached. In this paper, we reanalyze the same data on firearm deaths used in
previous research, using tests for unknown structural breaks as a means to identifying
impacts of the NFA. The results of these tests suggest that the NFA did not have any
large effects on reducing firearm homicide or suicide rates."

"Although gun buybacks appear to be a logical
and sensible policy that helps to placate the
publics fears, the evidence so far suggests that
in the Australian context, the high expenditure
incurred to fund the 1996 gun buyback has not
translated into any tangible reductions in
terms of firearm deaths."
---