Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Now only the criminals will have guns

Originally posted by Darth_Erebus
Now only the criminals will have guns

What a pile of rubbish.......anyone owning guns will have to turn in by April wow suckage.

I was unable to vote in this matter, since I haven't changed my voter registration yet.

But, I agree with the idea behind it.

However, this is a matter that must be handled on a national level. To say that one district allows guns, and not another...is like the christian right saying that over turning roe v. wade is going to stop abortion. When Rv.W is over turned, it's only going to put the descision to allow abortion in the hands of the states. So, it will still happen. So, guns will still find their way into the city...the criminals will just have to bring them here when they come.

But, I do believe that it is a good descision.

I also find it insulting that you feel the need to call everyone here idiots...yet can't point out why you feel that way.

I hate it when people just post links and then wait for everyone else to share their thoughts on the subject.

Kennesaw, Georgia (mandatory guns) vs. Morton Grove, Illinois (Gun ban) and the effects of crime after the laws went into effect.

I don't think it will hold up in court.

WOW!...I knew this day was coming....I own a gun, my father own oddles of them... and I like my knives....and it's true if someone really really wants a gun...ie. criminals..they'll get them anyway. and poor us..........in the mercy of our just court system for Justice.

Originally posted by debbiejo
if someone really really wants a gun...ie. criminals..they'll get them anyway

Exactly. The War on Drugs worked great, didn't it?

Originally posted by botankus
Exactly. The War on Drugs worked great, didn't it?

I know what you mean....though in CO you can smoke pot with no probs......Protection laws can be destructive and many times abused...If someone wants it...they'll get it.....You can't dictate morality....It's taking rights away from the citizens......OFF WITH THEIR HEADS I SAY!

I DON'T WANT JUDICIAL CAKE...I WANT MY GUN!!

Originally posted by botankus
Kennesaw, Georgia (mandatory guns) vs. Morton Grove, Illinois (Gun ban) and the effects of crime after the laws went into effect.

Can't argue with that.

But, we can't arm the whole country. As I said in my first post, this is a matter that can only be handled, realistically, on a national level.

But, I guess this link proves that the matter is one of 'everyone or no one'.

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
I hate it when people just post links and then wait for everyone else to share their thoughts on the subject.

Ah, yes, I believe there's another one that just popped up in this forum about ordering pizzas.

Not everyone has to have a gun.........you never know if someone has a gun now so criminals all have "pot luck" with the crime. However take away all citizen rights to own one and its a guarantee that you don't have one and become an easy target/victim.

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
I was unable to vote in this matter, since I haven't changed my voter registration yet.

But, I agree with the idea behind it.

However, this is a matter that must be handled on a national level. To say that one district allows guns, and not another...is like the christian right saying that over turning roe v. wade is going to stop abortion. When Rv.W is over turned, it's only going to put the descision to allow abortion in the hands of the states. So, it will still happen. So, guns will still find their way into the city...the criminals will just have to bring them here when they come.

But, I do believe that it is a good descision.

I also find it insulting that you feel the need to call everyone here idiots...yet can't point out why you feel that way.

I hate it when people just post links and then wait for everyone else to share their thoughts on the subject.


Do you want the entire gun debate? Probably not. The second amendment is there for a reason, so that if government becomes overbearing and oppressive then the people will be armed and thus be able to overthrow the government. Yes, I know that it refers to "militia" but a militia is an organization outside of government control. Afterall, why would the government need a constitutional amendment protecting it's right to bear arms?

As for guns contributing to the violence in society, the reasons why are debatable. In his anti gun propaganda film "Bowling for Columbine", spin doctor Michael Moore went so far as to admit that the media is as much responsible as guns for the violence in society. Should we ban the media as well?

I stand by my threads title, San Francisco voters, the majority of them anyway, are stupid, and I hope this illegal, unconstitutional ban, gets overturned.

Originally posted by Darth_Erebus
Do you want the entire gun debate? Probably not. The second amendment is there for a reason, so that if government becomes overbearing and oppressive then the people will be armed and thus be able to overthrow the government. Yes, I know that it refers to "militia" but a militia is an organization outside of government control. Afterall, why would the government need a constitutional amendment protecting it's right to bear arms?

As for guns contributing to the violence in society, the reasons why are debatable. In his anti gun propaganda film spin doctor Michael Moore went so far as to admit that the media is as much responsible as guns for the violence in society. Should we ban the media as well?

I stand by my threads titls, San Francisco voters, the majority of them anyway, are stupid, and I hope this illegal, unconstitutional ban, gets overturned.


No, I don't want the entire gun debate. The second amendment? LOL! That is the most ridiculous argument I've ever heard!

Let's look at this realistically! If the government wanted to 'git upity' and try to oppress the people of this country, they could do it. But, let's not forget that the govenments means to do so, would involve the military. So, who makes up the military? The ****ing people. Okay, so maybe they'll brainwash a couple of thousand people in the military to "do their bidding!"...they'll have tanks, helicopters and fighter jets....(as well as the BOMB) What is your six shooter gonna do? What difference is that shot gun going to make?

You want to talk about militia? You mean, like the state militia? The state militia is easily controlled by both the state governments and the federal government. This is also not the 1800's. This notion that the Nevada militia isn't American first, and Nevada citizens second, is long out dated.

I can assure you, the government will never make military threats against it's own citizenry. Why? Because that citizenry is sitting in their lounge chairs munching doritos and being swayed by the media into believeing ANYTHING! The population of this country is the governments greatest weapon...well, more like the populations stupidity is the governments greatest weapon. Should we ban the media? No, we should ban the special intrest groups and government regulations that allow for the media to be bought...by either liberal or conservative.


As for Michael Moore, he's a bloated idiot. I agree with several things he has to say, but I don't like him much at all. People who want to blame violence on videoo games and movies are misinformed. I grew up watching the most violent movies of the time, and I'm not out shooting other kids in my school because they don't like me. These kids who do, have issues that go way beyond "not being liked" by everyone else.


As Shaky said, it likely will not be held up in the courts. And, as I said, this is a national matter...not one that can be solved on a city by city or state by state basis.

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
No, I don't want the entire gun debate. The second amendment? LOL! That is the most ridiculous argument I've ever heard!

Let's look at this realistically! If the government wanted to 'git upity' and try to oppress the people of this country, they could do it. But, let's not forget that the govenments means to do so, would involve the military. So, who makes up the military? The ****ing people. Okay, so maybe they'll brainwash a couple of thousand people in the military to "do their bidding!"...they'll have tanks, helicopters and fighter jets....(as well as the BOMB) What is your six shooter gonna do? What difference is that shot gun going to make?

You want to talk about militia? You mean, like the state militia? The state militia is easily controlled by both the state governments and the federal government. This is also not the 1800's. This notion that the Nevada militia isn't American first, and Nevada citizens second, is long out dated.

I can assure you, the government will never make military threats against it's own citizenry. Why? Because that citizenry is sitting in their lounge chairs munching doritos and being swayed by the media into believeing ANYTHING! The population of this country is the governments greatest weapon...well, more like the populations stupidity is the governments greatest weapon. Should we ban the media? No, we should ban the special intrest groups and government regulations that allow for the media to be bought...by either liberal or conservative.


As for Michael Moore, he's a bloated idiot. I agree with several things he has to say, but I don't like him much at all. People who want to blame violence on videoo games and movies are misinformed. I grew up watching the most violent movies of the time, and I'm not out shooting other kids in my school because they don't like me. These kids who do, have issues that go way beyond "not being liked" by everyone else.


As Shaky said, it likely will not be held up in the courts. And, as I said, this is a national matter...not one that can be solved on a city by city or state by state basis.


But you said it was a "good idea". Why is that? Washington D.C. has a handgun ban for decades now yet it has one of the highest murder rates in the country.

And as for a national ban, it'll never happen. San Francisco is a liberal bastion. Somehow I can't see the majority of the country supporting a ban. One of the main reasons Shrub carried the South in the last election was the gun issue.

Originally posted by Darth_Erebus
But you said it was a "good idea". Why is that? Washington D.C. has a handgun ban for decades now yet it has one of the highest murder rates in the country.

And as for a national ban, it'll never happen. San Francisco is a liberal bastion. Somehow I can't see the majority of the country supporting a ban. One of the main reasons Shrub carried the South in the last election was the gun issue.

It is a good idea, but poorly executed in this instance. That's why I keep saying that it is a matter of NATIONAL action. Not local.

I'm not addressing the symantics of "will happen"...I'm saying it's the only way any sort of gun ban will ever be effective.

If you want to be informed of violence v. gun laws, look at several European nations that have bans on guns. No guns doesn't mean that no gun violence occurs, but it cuts WAY down on it.

Try not to turn this into liberal v. conservative...

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
It is a good idea, but poorly executed in this instance. That's why I keep saying that it is a matter of NATIONAL action. Not local.



If you want to be informed of violence v. gun laws, look at several European nations that have bans on guns. No guns doesn't mean that no gun violence occurs, but it cuts WAY down on it.



There are other factors in European society as well, not the least of which is they are far more homogenious than ours is. The way their media presents news, far less sensationalistic than ours, may also be a factor. There are currently 200 million guns in America, all a national ban would do is make 100 million (give or take a few million) of us criminals and would have very little effect on violence.

Originally posted by Darth_Erebus
There are other factors in European society as well, not the least of which is they are far more homogenious than ours is. The way their media presents news, far less sensationalistic than ours, may also be a factor. There are currently 200 million guns in America, all a national ban would do is make 100 million (give or take a few million) of us criminals and would have very little effect on violence.


I'm afraid I don't follow your example? Less sensational reporting helps cut down on gun violence?

So, if American society isn't capable of watching violent news/movies...then why should the number of guns be allowed to continue to grow?

If European socierty is more grown up than we are, then look how well it's served them not to have guns. If Americans are just big children, then why take the chance at all?

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
I'm afraid I don't follow your example? Less sensational reporting helps cut down on gun violence?

So, if American society isn't capable of watching violent news/movies...then why should the number of guns be allowed to continue to grow?

If European socierty is more grown up than we are, then look how well it's served them not to have guns. If Americans are just big children, then why take the chance at all?

All I'm saying is there are other contributing factors to the lesser violence in European society than the # of guns. For example Canada, (which I know isn't European) until they inexplicably banned most firearms a few yers ago, had as many guns in PROPORTION to it's population, that the US has, yet Canada has a far less violent society than we do. I'm not against someone having to show that they can properly use a firearm before they own one, or having to take a class, or classes teaching proper gun care and usage. But I am against gun bans, not only for handguns, but for ALL small arms.

Originally posted by Darth_Erebus
All I'm saying is there are other contributing factors to the lesser violence in European society than the # of guns. For example Canada, (which I know isn't European) until they inexplicably banned most firearms a few yers ago, had as many guns in PROPORTION to it's population, that the US has, yet Canada has a far less violent society than we do. I'm not against someone having to show that they can properly use a firearm before they own one, or having to take a class, or classes teaching proper gun care and usage. But I am against gun bans, not only for handguns, but for ALL small arms.

So basically what you are saying is that because the American society is way more violent it should have firearms? ....I don't really see your arguement. To be honest I'd say most European Countries, Canada, Australia and such actually have show to be mature enough to own guns. They still chose not too. But a society that kills 10 000 peopl with firearms each year really, really, shouldn't have the possibility to acces guns as easy as it is in the US

Originally posted by Bardock42
So basically what you are saying is that because the American society is way more violent it should have firearms? ....I don't really see your arguement. To be honest I'd say most European Countries, Canada, Australia and such actually have show to be mature enough to own guns. They still chose not too. But a society that kills 10 000 peopl with firearms each year really, really, shouldn't have the possibility to acces guns as easy as it is in the US


Is American society really more violent? Where I live there was like 2-3 gun crimes total last year in the 3rd largest city in Missouri near AK....I mean 45 minutes south is hickville..........most the violent crimes come from poor over populated cites not across the board. Anyway making guns illegal across the board won't help much I mean seriously pot's illegal yet I seem to see a bit of that passed around.

Originally posted by soleran30
Is American society really more violent? Where I live there was like 2-3 gun crimes total last year in the 3rd largest city in Missouri near AK....I mean 45 minutes south is hickville..........most the violent crimes come from poor over populated cites not across the board. Anyway making guns illegal across the board won't help much I mean seriously pot's illegal yet I seem to see a bit of that passed around.

Well, you undoubtedly have most Firearm homocides in the whole civilized world. And even if it won't make it better (which is just an assumption) It won't make it worse.

Originally posted by soleran30
Is American society really more violent? Where I live there was like 2-3 gun crimes total last year in the 3rd largest city in Missouri near AK....I mean 45 minutes south is hickville..........most the violent crimes come from poor over populated cites not across the board.

Good point. Last time I checked me and the other 90% of the country lived in small towns where they hardly have any crimes at all.

Not everyone lives in Los Angeles or New York City.

Originally posted by botankus
Not everyone lives in Los Angeles or New York City.

WHAT?!

Yes, yes, I'm afraid it's true. The rest of America lives in Chicago.

Originally posted by botankus
Good point. Last time I checked me and the other 90% of the country lived in small towns where they hardly have any crimes at all.

Not everyone lives in Los Angeles or New York City.
Could just be the ratio....Though in small towns there is less stress, and more intermingling and friendliness....I live in a small town....Just like the sitcom.."Cheers" where everybody knows your name....kinda cool

Originally posted by Bardock42
Well, you undoubtedly have most Firearm homocides in the whole civilized world. And even if it won't make it better (which is just an assumption) It won't make it worse.


LoL I don't have the most firearm homicides the USA does Anyway as I said before just because it becomes illegal doesn't mean it stops it just means there are more criminals now.....ie Pot illegal and still used by a shiot load of people.....

Anyway laws are only effective if people believe in them and want to follow them as well as a system to make sure the laws are followed and the only way that would happen is a serious infringment on everyone in the USA......knock knock sorry we have to check your house to make sure you comply with the new handgun bans

Originally posted by debbiejo
Could just be the ratio....Though in small towns there is less stress, and more intermingling and friendliness....I live in a small town....Just like the sitcom.."Cheers" where everybody knows your name....kinda cool

Isn't "Cheers" placed in Boston

Originally posted by botankus
Good point. Last time I checked me and the other 90% of the country lived in small towns where they hardly have any crimes at all.

Not everyone lives in Los Angeles or New York City.
Even worse....

Originally posted by Bardock42
Isn't "Cheers" placed in Boston
Sure is, but still everybody knows who I am. ........How could no one not know me......It's just my essential essence that flows around that people are attracted to.

Originally posted by botankus
Yes, yes, I'm afraid it's true. The rest of America lives in Chicago.


HA, I lol in your direction...