Gun control debate (merged)

#13,726
#13,726
LouderVol said:
That pretty much all stems from when americans were spreading across the nation and had nothing else to eat. Most americans dont live off hunting now. Or at least can shop for other stuff where during those times, not so much.

That and the railroads.

Not individuals game hunting.
Click to expand...

So your contention is that bison, deer, and beavers were basically wiped out because they were used for food?
 
#13,727
#13,727
OHvol40 said:
That’s your hope and mine... but what if it did? Isn’t that a big 2A talking point?
Click to expand...

I already said , the world will have gone to sh!t and the number of deaths and injuries wouldn’t matter . If you make your citizens give up their rights by confiscation and or force in this country .. there will be big problems .
 
  • Like
Reactions: NurseGoodVol
#13,729
#13,729
Mick said:
They are 100% in it for the money. If some meth head goes in and want's to buy a gun all twitchy like but he passed the BGC, What would you do? Hide behind some lawyer if he kills someone the next day? Next time you're in one, ask the shopkeeper about it.
Click to expand...
100% my FFL would not sell them a gun.
 
#13,730
#13,730
0nelilreb said:
I already said , the world will have gone to sh!t and the number of deaths and injuries wouldn’t matter . If you make your citizens give up their rights by confiscation and or force in this country .. there will be big problems .
Click to expand...

The contention is that people arm themselves against tyranny from within... I’m asking if that’s practical.
 
#13,732
#13,732
OHvol40 said:
Ok, without google, what are our other “rights”? Do you ardently defend every “right” as you do that one? Can you even name them?
Click to expand...
Are you as flippant with your other rights?

Willing to go thru a BGC, provide ID, go thru a wait period, be limited on number of occasions and where you can even exercise those rights?
 
#13,733
#13,733
OHvol40 said:
The contention is that people arm themselves against tyranny from within... I’m asking if that’s practical.
Click to expand...

You realize why it was practical when they put it in there right ? The greatest military the world had ever seen up until that point , had just tried to force its citizens to do as they were told and turned to tyranny . It’s not like the founding fathers were the ones with the great army , the opposite was in fact true and that is the whole reason why in it’s there . So yes it’s just as practical and applicable today as it was then .
 
  • Like
Reactions: NurseGoodVol, BennesseeVols, 37L1 and 2 others
#13,735
#13,735
OHvol40 said:
I understand wanting to arm yourself against tyranny, and I agree. BUT, if your fear is tyranny then you must lose your mind when you see our country’s DOD budget. No amount of personal gun ownership can make up for what we let them have.

My concern is people, regular citizens, continuously dying unnecessarily.
Click to expand...
The Taliban disagrees.

Your government calling them weapons of war disagrees.

Our Revolution disagrees.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 0nelilreb
#13,737
#13,737
LouderVol said:
That pretty much all stems from when americans were spreading across the nation and had nothing else to eat. Most americans dont live off hunting now. Or at least can shop for other stuff where during those times, not so much.

That and the railroads.

Not individuals game hunting.
Click to expand...

Not to mention the government was encouraging people to kill as many bison as possible.
 
#13,738
#13,738
LouderVol said:
Are you as flippant with your other rights?

Willing to go thru a BGC, provide ID, go thru a wait period, be limited on number of occasions and where you can even exercise those rights?
Click to expand...

If I’m unfit to be responsible and it means saving lives, absolutely, yes.
 
#13,739
#13,739
0nelilreb said:
You realize why it was practical when they put it in there right ? The greatest military the world had ever seen up until that point , had just tried to force its citizens to do as they were told and turned to tyranny . It’s not like the founding fathers were the ones with the great army , the opposite was in fact true and that is the whole reason why in it’s there . So yes it’s just as practical and applicable today as it was then .
Click to expand...

Everybody in the 18th century has the same muskets and flintlocks... so much question about the practicality of that same principle in 2020 is valid, like it or not.
 
#13,743
#13,743
OHvol40 said:
Everybody in the 18th century has the same muskets and flintlocks... so much question about the practicality of that same principle in 2020 is valid, like it or not.
Click to expand...

No they didn’t . Our farmers , fur traders , and city people , didn’t have the exact army issued rifles . They most certainly didn’t have the experience or training for war . We took on and defeated the greatest and most well funded army the world had ever seen , with what we could make due with . Like it or not it is very relatable and small countries around the world have proven it to be true since then.
 
#13,744
#13,744
OHvol40 said:
If you can’t count on that, and the military follows their orders against US citizens... what does that ultimately mean? Because that’s the excuse I hear consistently for keeping citizens armed.
Click to expand...
No the 2nd amendment and God given right to defense is why the citizens have the right to arm themselves. Which is perfectly normal and nothing will EVER change that, no matter how hard anti gun nuts wish it to be so
 
#13,745
#13,745
Mick said:
All they know is it's better to have a gun. Shame they have to try to encourage others to also have a gun. They're the dipsh!ts of the 2A.
Click to expand...
What’s wrong with encouraging others to exercise their rights. I would do the same for other rights as well
 
#13,746
#13,746
OHvol40 said:
Everybody in the 18th century has the same muskets and flintlocks... so much question about the practicality of that same principle in 2020 is valid, like it or not.
Click to expand...
It’s clear you don’t understand constitutional law. Better stick to mediocre healthcare
 
#13,748
#13,748
OHvol40 said:
Depends on what you consider a long time. I think 2 years max. No organization, no armor, no air defense... probably pockets of people hiding away in 6 months if the military invaded the citizens. They could blitz most areas and then weed out the rest.
Click to expand...

No organization now , that would change just like it did with the FF. No armor, that would change just like it did with the FF , you underestimate the will of American citizens when their government turns to tyranny just like the British did . How long before you start to see a correlation between what happened in our past and what could happen again ?
 
#13,750
#13,750
OHvol40 said:
So your contention is that bison, deer, and beavers were basically wiped out because they were used for food?
Click to expand...
also trade goods, and because they were in the way of the rail roads. I dont see those as issues now.

What underlying problem do you see to blame?

Habitat destruction? Cant blame guns, so it wont be that.
Migration limitation and change of grazing patterns? Again hard to blame guns.

Species getting killed off is not a uniquely gun problem. We were doing that long before we figured out the wheel.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top