Any Petitions out there PREVENTING "Assault" Rifle bans?

[The True Adonis]

True adonis you asked me for my definition of an assault weapon. I think you want to know where I would draw the line.  I think your suggestion of limiting guns to one shot might be good. Single shot rifles and hand guns. That way you can protect yourself from other people, even if they do have a semi or fully automatic weapon. One good shot and they are dead.

[The True Adonis]

Hey, look. Here's someone who shares your views.

Good luck with that.

 http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/12/17/tennessee-pastor-mass-shootings-because-schools-teach-evolution-and-how-to-be-a-homo/

How does that person share my views? 

[The True Adonis]

I guess he also forgot about the history of Afghans just riding it out with small weaponry and the guerrilla tactics of the Viet Cong.

[The True Adonis]

True adonis you asked me for my definition of an assault weapon. I think you want to know where I would draw the line.  I think your suggestion of limiting guns to one shot might be good. Single shot rifles and hand guns. That way you can protect yourself from other people, even if they do have a semi or fully automatic weapon. One good shot and they are dead.

What happens if you miss?

[Shockwave]

What happens if you miss?

Or more than 1 assailant?

[The True Adonis]

Or more than 1 assailant?

Something tells me this was not well thought out. 

[whork]

Genie is already out of the lamp on that

True.

[whork]

Wrong.

Lets see how long you last when they send a SWAT team then.

What are you carrying?

[Roger Bacon]

How does that person share my views? 

Forgive him True Adonis, he's an idiot.

[garebear]

How does that person share my views? 

You're an otherwise smart guy.

Figure it out.

[Shockwave]

Lets see how long you last when they send a SWAT team then.

What are you carrying?

Don't be a moron. Civilians employing guerrilla tactics with rifles and homemade explosives are extremely hard to defeat. See Afghanistan. They held out against the full might of the Russians AND the US, not to mention that the Russians were 50x as brutal as the Americans could even dream of.

By the way, if a man knew the SWAT team was on the way and had time to prepare, he could set one hell of a deadly ambush using simple rifles. You clearly have no idea what you're talking about.

[The True Adonis]

You're an otherwise smart guy.

Figure it out.

I can`t.  Please explain it to me.  You made the charge.

[tbombz]

What happens if you miss?

Or more than 1 assailant?

Something tells me this was not well thought out.  

maybe more thought than you think.

the proposition certainly would put one at a tremendous disadvantage against multiple enemies or an enemy with an illegal semi- or fully automatic weapon.

however really take into account the idea that no matter where you draw the legal line, the law abiding citizens are always at a tremendous disadvantage
to those individuals who break the law.

for me, when i take that into account, i first consider the need for the freedom to arm oneself. it is essential to liberty i think, being able to defend oneself. and i realize that firearms are probably an integral part of that ability to defend oneself. especially if the government is going to have them. but i do not think that the citizens should be able to keep all the same kinds of firearms that the government should be able to keep. and i think i draw the line at single-shot firearms because the ability to shoot a single bullet is probably the most significant benchmark a person can meet in terms of physical defense. they are now almost assured of success if they ever need to kill anyone. no government official is safe.  

idealistically i am an anarchist but i find it difficult to see the argument for liberalization of the laws concerning weapons. i consider it the top priority of the government, as keeping dangerous weapons out of the hands out of those who would use them for harm is the single most powerful tool in protecting national security.

(as for what if you miss your shot and what if you are confronted by multiple assailants..  well, sorry joe, looks like the forces against you trumped the forces with you.. government cant pretend to be able to stop that from ever happening)

[whork]

Don't be a moron. Civilians employing guerrilla tactics with rifles and homemade explosives are extremely hard to defeat. See Afghanistan. They held out against the full might of the Russians AND the US, not to mention that the Russians were 50x as brutal as the Americans could even dream of.

By the way, if a man knew the SWAT team was on the way and had time to prepare, he could set one hell of a deadly ambush using simple rifles. You clearly have no idea what you're talking about.

Thats true unless they get pissed and send in a Apache.

Remember the Iraq videos?

[Shockwave]

Thats true unless they get pissed and send in a Apache.

Remember the Iraq videos?

You really believe that the US military is just going to be cool with lighting up their fellow citizens? They wont. If it ever gets to that, you can bet the military would split in half and you'd have an all out civil war.

Besides, part of guerrilla warfare is picking and choosing your battles. You're not going to stand an fight an air element. You retreat and pick another fight.

You really don't know much about this subject, do you?

[Soul Crusher]

Thats true unless they get pissed and send in a Apache.

Remember the Iraq videos?

[Emmortal]

The whole Cars argument is absurd, I have already pointed out the obvious community benefit and Community Good VS Community Harm argument, but the other factor that needs to be noted is, you are comparing fatalities caused by ACCIDENTS, events that aren't deliberate or malicious as opposed to PRE MEDITATED MASS MURDERS using a tool created with a specific purpose of being an efficient killing tool,  cars are being used for a beneficial purpose and occasionally during their operation they cause fatalities.  Guns on the other hand, don't have any other purpose than to cause serious injury or death.  And the majority of gun deaths would be deliberate acts of violence.  The things that really gets me, is GUN Nutters argue that they need a firearm for protection, but Protection from what?  It can't be Gun Violence, because as the Gun Nuts point out, the chances of that happening, is so small as too not worry about it!  Protection from your own Government, do you really think that the American Military is going to be stopped by a bunch of red-necks with a few firearms.  If their was a coup tomorrow and a Military Dictator took charge, do you really think with the Military's advanced armoury that armed civilians would stand a chance against such powerful Military Weapons.

 It just seems strange to me this argument, that their is nothing to worry about, that statistics show that the chances of being killed by a gun are remote, but then people arm themselves and say, Why take the chance?  Personally, if you own a gun for protection, you are being unnecessarily AFRAID, and if you own one for recreation and sporting purposes, well, you're just a DOUCHE! If your a farmer and you use them for preserving livestock etc, that's an appropriate use of a gun, if your a hunter, and you hunt and eat what you kill, that's an appropriate use of a gun.  other than that, what purpose is served by ordinary citizens owning a GUN OTHER THAN PROPPING UP an Individuals DEFICIENT PERSONALITY or a desperate insecurity, fear and anxiety!

Please explain this to my dear friend who's home was invaded by scumbags set to maim, rape and murder his family during Katrina.  The only thing that stopped them from committing these acts: his mosberg shotgun which used to protect the lives of his wife and children.

Your arguments would be valid if we lived in a world where violence was non-existent and individuals were not set out to harm our loved ones, but we do.

Like the old saying goes, I'd rather have a gun and not need it, than need one and not have it.

We can talk about societal and culture issues until we are blue in the face, but even in places like the UK where guns are completely banned, they have seen violent crimes SKYROCKET.  There is ZERO logical retort to the issue of defense.

We don't have a gun problem, we have a people problem.

[whork]

You really believe that the US military is just going to be cool with lighting up their fellow citizens? They wont. If it ever gets to that, you can bet the military would split in half and you'd have an all out civil war.

Besides, part of guerrilla warfare is picking and choosing your battles. You're not going to stand an fight an air element. You retreat and pick another fight.

You really don't know much about this subject, do you?

I thought we were talking a hypo scenario where people fought the government?

Wasnt that your argument for guns?

[Primemuscle]

maybe more thought than you think.

the proposition certainly would put one at a tremendous disadvantage against multiple enemies or an enemy with an illegal semi- or fully automatic weapon.

however really take into account the idea that no matter where you draw the legal line, the law abiding citizens are always at a tremendous disadvantage
to those individuals who break the law.

for me, when i take that into account, i first consider the need for the freedom to arm oneself. it is essential to liberty i think, being able to defend oneself. and i realize that firearms are probably an integral part of that ability to defend oneself. especially if the government is going to have them. but i do not think that the citizens should be able to keep all the same kinds of firearms that the government should be able to keep. and i think i draw the line at single-shot firearms because the ability to shoot a single bullet is probably the most significant benchmark a person can meet in terms of physical defense. they are now almost assured of success if they ever need to kill anyone. no government official is safe.  

idealistically i am an anarchist but i find it difficult to see the argument for liberalization of the laws concerning weapons. i consider it the top priority of the government, as keeping dangerous weapons out of the hands out of those who would use them for harm is the single most powerful tool in protecting national security.

(as for what if you miss your shot and what if you are confronted by multiple assailants..  well, sorry joe, looks like the forces against you trumped the forces with you.. government cant pretend to be able to stop that from ever happening)

Life isn't like the movies is it? A short while back in a neighboring suburb, a man was killed by a crazed intruder armed with two machetes. The homeowner and his wife had just returned home from walking their dogs, only to be surprised in their kitchen my this nut job. The couple may have owned a gun or guns, but this not being the "wild, wild west" when men went around with their guns in holsters 24-7, if they had guns they were probably put away somewhere and were therefore useless to them. As I said, the husband died of knife wounds and fortunately the wife survived. The intruder was caught and it seems this wasn't his first act of violence.

Needless to say this event, like other similar ones has shook up our local communities. Fortunately, we are a lot safer than we think sometimes according to statistics. I don't own a gun and these kinds of horrors don't make me want to run out and purchase one either. It may be wishful thinking, but when our big dog barks, he sounds like he is going to eat whoever is on the other side of the front door. One day, not long ago, what I suspect was a magazine salesman knocked on our door. Danny barked and the young man literally turned and ran down our driveway to get away before I could answer the door. I would like to believe that Danny and Lucy, (the little feisty dog) are like burglar alarms. If they don't scare off a potential intruder, my mean "I will kill you look" is sure to do the trick. LOL!

Here's an interesting statistic, in 68 years of life, I have never had to test my theories on how to defend myself or my loved ones from harm.  However, I cannot find the Nook I bought my wife a couple of years ago (which she never used). Do you suppose someone broke into the house and sole it?

[Radical Plato]

Life isn't like the movies is it? A short while back in a neighboring suburb, a man was killed by a crazed intruder armed with two machetes. The homeowner and his wife had just returned home from walking their dogs, only to be surprised in their kitchen my this nut job. The couple may have owned a gun or guns, but this not being the "wild, wild west" when men went around with their guns in holsters 24-7, if they had guns they were probably put away somewhere and were therefore useless to them. As I said, the husband died of knife wounds and fortunately the wife survived. The intruder was caught and it seems this wasn't his first act of violence.

Needless to say this event, like other similar ones has shook up our local communities. Fortunately, we are a lot safer than we think sometimes according to statistics. I don't own a gun and these kinds of horrors don't make me want to run out and purchase one either. It may be wishful thinking, but when our big dog barks, he sounds like he is going to eat whoever is on the other side of the front door. One day, not long ago, what I suspect was a magazine salesman knocked on our door. Danny barked and the young man literally turned and ran down our driveway to get away before I could answer the door. I would like to believe that Danny and Lucy, (the little feisty dog) are like burglar alarms. If they don't scare off a potential intruder, my mean "I will kill you look" is sure to do the trick. LOL!

Here's an interesting statistic, in 68 years of life, I have never had to test my theories on how to defend myself or my loved ones from harm.  However, I cannot find the Nook I bought my wife a couple of years ago (which she never used). Do you suppose someone broke into the house and sole it?

Every time a gun in the home was used in a self-defense or legally justifiable shooting, there were four accidental shootings, seven criminal assaults or homicides, and 11 attempted or completed suicides.  Every time a gun is used in self-defense, it is 43 times more likely to be used in a homicide, suicide, or accidental shooting.  People of all age groups are significantly more likely to die from unintentional firearm injuries when they live in states with more guns, relative to states with fewer guns.  Of the 13,636 Americans who were murdered in 2009, only 215 were killed by firearms (165 by handguns) in homicides by private citizens that law enforcement determined were justifiable.

People with a gun were 4.5 times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not possessing a gun.

Conclusion: You are MORE at RISK if you choose to own a gun than if you don't.  people think they are increasing their survival rate when in fact you are more vulnerable and exposing yourself to greater risk.  if you care about your family, you WOULDN'T OWN A GUN!

[headhuntersix]

YOu want to link this drivel.........cause I bet I can link the exact opposite.

[Soul Crusher]

Ridiculous.

Every time a gun in the home was used in a self-defense or legally justifiable shooting, there were four accidental shootings, seven criminal assaults or homicides, and 11 attempted or completed suicides.  Every time a gun is used in self-defense, it is 43 times more likely to be used in a homicide, suicide, or accidental shooting.  People of all age groups are significantly more likely to die from unintentional firearm injuries when they live in states with more guns, relative to states with fewer guns.  Of the 13,636 Americans who were murdered in 2009, only 215 were killed by firearms (165 by handguns) in homicides by private citizens that law enforcement determined were justifiable.

People with a gun were 4.5 times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not possessing a gun.

Conclusion: You are MORE at RISK if you choose to own a gun than if you don't.  people think they are increasing their survival rate when in fact you are more vulnerable and exposing yourself to greater risk.  if you care about your family, you WOULDN'T OWN A GUN!

[whork]

I dont know E-kul but look at you 2 guys posts (33 and HH) and compare them to his.

He is way above you guys sorry.