How many of you still..............
05-19-2004, 12:51 PM
#41
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Coralville, IA. USA
Posts: 3,802
RE: How many of you still..............
I just love being called a radical or revolutionary for standing firm in support of our constitutional right to keep and bear arms, which is the one and only right that ensures we remain citizens who control our government rather than subject controlled by that same government. You must not have read "A Nation of Cowards" very closely, because the author was taking about people like you. People who put even the slightest hope of personal safety above personal liberty. But as history has proven the pursuit of the former rarely leads to the latter. The difference between us is that I would rather live free and take my chances that someday I might become the victim of someone who abuses their freedom and breaks the law, than to live with the false promise of government provided safety in the police state that you seem to be so fond of.
Don't think that it can happen here? Just look to some of our fellow "democracies" and how their governments did to them exactly what you don't think ours will do to us if given the opportunity, which is ban and confiscate guns. Citizens of Austrailia, Canada, the UK all once enjoyed similar levels of firearms freedoms that we currently do, and all of them Went down the all too common path of regulation, registration, then confiscation. All in the name of "sensible" or "reasonable" gun control. And every one of these countries has seen an unprecidented jump in firearms crime. Why? Because when the government banned and confiscated the "bad" guns, the only people disarmed were the lawful citizens who complied with the law. The criminals, of course, didn't bother to comply and certainly didn't line up to turn in the weapons they use to commit violent crimes. They just sat back a watched while the government, in the name of reducing crime, turned their once potentially armed victims into helpless victims. Not long after the UK banned centerfire handguns, the rate of violent crime involving handguns went through the roof, and the once relatively rare crime of home invasion (breaking into and robbing an occupied dwelling) became commonplace. Why? Because the bad guys knew that the homeowners, who more than likely (grudgingly) complied with the law, were unarmed and helpless against an armed intruder.
It's also inportant to note that virtually every genocidal atrocity in recent history has been preceeded by "sensible" gun control resulting in the disarming of the population that later became the victim of that genocide.
Hitler disarmed the Jewish people, and later slaughtered 6+ million of them because they were helpless against the armed oppressors.
Stalin disarmed the Soviet people and later had over 10 million systematically killed because they were helpless against the armed oppressors.
Pol Pot and his fellow Communists disarmed and later slaughtered at least 1 million "educated" people because they were helpless against the armed oppressors.
Saddam Hussein disarmed the general Iraqi populace, and over the course of his reign had countless Iraqis tortured and killed, because they were helpless against the armed oppressors.
But it can't happen here...well if you get your wish we'll find out, won't we?
I've said it before, and I'll say it again. If desiring freedom and liberty over oppression and subjection on the promise that the government will protect me makes me a radical or revolutionary in your eyes, then I am proud to wear your label. At least I'm philosophically in the same company of other "radicals" and "revolutionaries" like Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, Ben Franklin, Patrick Henry, and so many other people willing to give up their safety completely if necessary to have but one taste of liberty. I don't desire civil war any more than you do, but unlike you I realize that if we wish to preserve our freedom it may well come to that, and if it does I will be on the front line with my personal firearms just like the Minutemen of the Revolutionary war, fighting for the cause of freedom. A also believe that if the 2nd Amendment were preserved as it was intended by the founders it would never come to that, because simply the threat of armed insurrection is enough to keep the government in check.
I think that you should re-read the Gun Facts PDF, if you even read it in the first place. It has quite a lot of data that supports my position. Also re-read the "Nation of Cowards" essay...I think it sums you up nicely.
Mike
Don't think that it can happen here? Just look to some of our fellow "democracies" and how their governments did to them exactly what you don't think ours will do to us if given the opportunity, which is ban and confiscate guns. Citizens of Austrailia, Canada, the UK all once enjoyed similar levels of firearms freedoms that we currently do, and all of them Went down the all too common path of regulation, registration, then confiscation. All in the name of "sensible" or "reasonable" gun control. And every one of these countries has seen an unprecidented jump in firearms crime. Why? Because when the government banned and confiscated the "bad" guns, the only people disarmed were the lawful citizens who complied with the law. The criminals, of course, didn't bother to comply and certainly didn't line up to turn in the weapons they use to commit violent crimes. They just sat back a watched while the government, in the name of reducing crime, turned their once potentially armed victims into helpless victims. Not long after the UK banned centerfire handguns, the rate of violent crime involving handguns went through the roof, and the once relatively rare crime of home invasion (breaking into and robbing an occupied dwelling) became commonplace. Why? Because the bad guys knew that the homeowners, who more than likely (grudgingly) complied with the law, were unarmed and helpless against an armed intruder.
It's also inportant to note that virtually every genocidal atrocity in recent history has been preceeded by "sensible" gun control resulting in the disarming of the population that later became the victim of that genocide.
Hitler disarmed the Jewish people, and later slaughtered 6+ million of them because they were helpless against the armed oppressors.
Stalin disarmed the Soviet people and later had over 10 million systematically killed because they were helpless against the armed oppressors.
Pol Pot and his fellow Communists disarmed and later slaughtered at least 1 million "educated" people because they were helpless against the armed oppressors.
Saddam Hussein disarmed the general Iraqi populace, and over the course of his reign had countless Iraqis tortured and killed, because they were helpless against the armed oppressors.
But it can't happen here...well if you get your wish we'll find out, won't we?
I've said it before, and I'll say it again. If desiring freedom and liberty over oppression and subjection on the promise that the government will protect me makes me a radical or revolutionary in your eyes, then I am proud to wear your label. At least I'm philosophically in the same company of other "radicals" and "revolutionaries" like Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, Ben Franklin, Patrick Henry, and so many other people willing to give up their safety completely if necessary to have but one taste of liberty. I don't desire civil war any more than you do, but unlike you I realize that if we wish to preserve our freedom it may well come to that, and if it does I will be on the front line with my personal firearms just like the Minutemen of the Revolutionary war, fighting for the cause of freedom. A also believe that if the 2nd Amendment were preserved as it was intended by the founders it would never come to that, because simply the threat of armed insurrection is enough to keep the government in check.
I think that you should re-read the Gun Facts PDF, if you even read it in the first place. It has quite a lot of data that supports my position. Also re-read the "Nation of Cowards" essay...I think it sums you up nicely.
Mike
05-19-2004, 01:24 PM
#42
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 52
RE: How many of you still..............
As I alluded to in my previous post, we evidently must agree to disagree. That is fine. I never
really had any allusions that I'd change your minds, anyway. As I also said, I have my doubts as
to reasoning with you.... I think this now is a waste of time. Continue to rant and rave all you wish,
with my blessing.
By the way, as to other nations that practice gun control.... when you say that they have experienced an increase in gun violence... you clearly don't have any idea of the facts. I stated
before, that it cannot be proven that gun control directly leads to a lower crime rate (just as in-
creasing the number of police on the streets does not automatically reduce the crime rate). But,
for you to categorically state that all of these nations have had an INCREASE in gun violence,
after enacting gun control legislation is the high pinnacle of b******t. When you don't know, you
just make it up, eh?
In any case, I now consider the matter closed.
really had any allusions that I'd change your minds, anyway. As I also said, I have my doubts as
to reasoning with you.... I think this now is a waste of time. Continue to rant and rave all you wish,
with my blessing.
By the way, as to other nations that practice gun control.... when you say that they have experienced an increase in gun violence... you clearly don't have any idea of the facts. I stated
before, that it cannot be proven that gun control directly leads to a lower crime rate (just as in-
creasing the number of police on the streets does not automatically reduce the crime rate). But,
for you to categorically state that all of these nations have had an INCREASE in gun violence,
after enacting gun control legislation is the high pinnacle of b******t. When you don't know, you
just make it up, eh?
In any case, I now consider the matter closed.
05-19-2004, 02:39 PM
#43
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Coralville, IA. USA
Posts: 3,802
RE: How many of you still..............
Apparently you didn't read the Gun Facts PDF, or you simply are determined to ignore the information compiled within.
Here's page 25 & part of :
There are 78 pages of information in that PDF, and I'm not going to post it all here. But it is obvious that you didn't bother to read it like I asked you to. Therein lies another difference between us. You present your opinion as fact, but can't back it up, but you THINK you're right so you must be. I, on the other hand, base my writing here on facts derived from sources that you are too either lazy or too stubborn to read.
You think of yourself as being the reasonable one here, but what you can't grasp is that compromise is not always a good thing. Sometimes one must take a defined position and stand their ground. I also question why you want to abandon this thread so quickly. Are you afraid to stick around and argue your position? Are you afraid that if you do continue you'll be convinced that your position is false, or are you just afraid that you might be made a fool of?
I'm not as concerned about what you believe, but I want to know WHY you believe it. I want you to atriculate the foundation on which you base your opinions, other than just the irrational belief that you are right because you think you are.
Mike
Here's page 25 & part of :
GOVERNMENT, GUN LAWS, AND SOCIAL COSTS
MMyyt tthh: :: GGuunn ccoonnt ttr rrool ll r rreedduucceess ccr rri iimmee
Fact: Violent crime
appears to be
encouraged by gun
control. Most gun
control laws in the
United States have been
written since 1968, yet
the murder rate has risen
during that time.116
Fact: In 1976,
Washington, D.C.
enacted one of the most
restrictive gun control
laws in the nation. Since
then, the city's murder
rate has risen 134
percent while the
national murder rate has
dropped 2 percent.117
Fact: Among the 15 states with the highest homicide rates, 10 have restrictive or very restrictive
gun laws.118
Fact: Maryland claims to have the toughest gun control laws in the nation and ranks #1 in
robberies and #3 in both violent crime and murder.119
Fact: 20% of U.S. homicides occur in four cities with just six percent of the population – New
York, Chicago, Detroit, and Washington, D.C. – and each has a virtual prohibition on private
handguns.120
Fact: The landmark federal Gun Control Act of 1968, banning most interstate gun sales, had no
discernible impact on the criminal acquisition of guns from other states.121
116 National Center for Health Statistics, Vital Statistics, Revised July, 1999
117 Dr. Gary Kleck, University of Florida using FBI Uniform Crime Statistics, 1997
118 Ibid.
119 FBI Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) for 2000, p. 79, Table 5, "Index of Crime by State"
120 Ibid.
121 “Under the Gun”, Wright, Rossi, Daly, University of Massachusetts, 1981
US Per Capita Murder Rate
Fact: Washington, D.C.'s 1977 ban on the ownership of handguns (except those already
registered in the District) was not linked to any reduction in gun crime in the nation's capital.122
Fact: New York has one of the most restrictive gun laws in the nation -- and 20% of the armed
robberies.123
Fact: Maryland has some of the strictest gun control laws and has the highest robbery rate in the
country, and is 4th in violent crime and homicide. The robbery rate is 70% than the national
average.124 These numbers are likely low because one of their more violent cities, Baltimore,
failed to report their crime levels.
Fact: There are more than 22,000 (125) gun laws at the city, county, state, and federal level. If gun
control worked, then we should be free of crime.
Myth: Guns should be registered and licensed like cars.
Fact: You do not need a license to buy a car. You can buy as many as you want and drive them
all you like on your own property without a license.
Fact: Cars are registered because they are (a) a source of tax revenue, (b) the object of fraud in
some transactions, and (c) a high theft object. Thus we ask the government to track these.
Fact: There is no constitutionally guaranteed right to keep and bear automobiles, and thus they
are subject to greater regulation than guns.
Fact: There are more guns in the U.S. than cars (228,000,000 guns according to 1998 FBI
statistics, and 207,754,000 automobiles according to 1998 Federal Highway Administration
registrations). Yet you are 31 times more likely to be accidentally killed by a car than a gun
according to the National Safety Council126 . . . despite cars having been registered and licensed
for almost 100 years.
Myth: The Brady Bill caused gun homicides to decrease.
Fact: Both gun and non-gun murder rates fell during the same period, 1992 to 1997. In 1992,
68% of U.S. murders were committed with guns; in 1997, it was still 68%.127 Thus, the
decreased gun homicide rate was part of an overall declining crime rate, not an effect of the
Brady Bill.
122 Ibid
123 Ibid.
124 FBI Uniform Crime Reports, September 15, 2000
125 Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms estimate and reported via James Wright, Peter H. Rossi, Kathleen
Daly, “Under the Gun: Weapons, Crime, and Violence in America”, 1983
126 207,754,000 automobiles according to Federal Highway Administration, October 1998. 240,000,000 guns
according to 1996 FBI Uniform Crime Statistics
127 FBI Uniform Crime Reports for 1992 and 1997
MMyyt tthh: :: GGuunn ccoonnt ttr rrool ll r rreedduucceess ccr rri iimmee
Fact: Violent crime
appears to be
encouraged by gun
control. Most gun
control laws in the
United States have been
written since 1968, yet
the murder rate has risen
during that time.116
Fact: In 1976,
Washington, D.C.
enacted one of the most
restrictive gun control
laws in the nation. Since
then, the city's murder
rate has risen 134
percent while the
national murder rate has
dropped 2 percent.117
Fact: Among the 15 states with the highest homicide rates, 10 have restrictive or very restrictive
gun laws.118
Fact: Maryland claims to have the toughest gun control laws in the nation and ranks #1 in
robberies and #3 in both violent crime and murder.119
Fact: 20% of U.S. homicides occur in four cities with just six percent of the population – New
York, Chicago, Detroit, and Washington, D.C. – and each has a virtual prohibition on private
handguns.120
Fact: The landmark federal Gun Control Act of 1968, banning most interstate gun sales, had no
discernible impact on the criminal acquisition of guns from other states.121
116 National Center for Health Statistics, Vital Statistics, Revised July, 1999
117 Dr. Gary Kleck, University of Florida using FBI Uniform Crime Statistics, 1997
118 Ibid.
119 FBI Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) for 2000, p. 79, Table 5, "Index of Crime by State"
120 Ibid.
121 “Under the Gun”, Wright, Rossi, Daly, University of Massachusetts, 1981
US Per Capita Murder Rate
Fact: Washington, D.C.'s 1977 ban on the ownership of handguns (except those already
registered in the District) was not linked to any reduction in gun crime in the nation's capital.122
Fact: New York has one of the most restrictive gun laws in the nation -- and 20% of the armed
robberies.123
Fact: Maryland has some of the strictest gun control laws and has the highest robbery rate in the
country, and is 4th in violent crime and homicide. The robbery rate is 70% than the national
average.124 These numbers are likely low because one of their more violent cities, Baltimore,
failed to report their crime levels.
Fact: There are more than 22,000 (125) gun laws at the city, county, state, and federal level. If gun
control worked, then we should be free of crime.
Myth: Guns should be registered and licensed like cars.
Fact: You do not need a license to buy a car. You can buy as many as you want and drive them
all you like on your own property without a license.
Fact: Cars are registered because they are (a) a source of tax revenue, (b) the object of fraud in
some transactions, and (c) a high theft object. Thus we ask the government to track these.
Fact: There is no constitutionally guaranteed right to keep and bear automobiles, and thus they
are subject to greater regulation than guns.
Fact: There are more guns in the U.S. than cars (228,000,000 guns according to 1998 FBI
statistics, and 207,754,000 automobiles according to 1998 Federal Highway Administration
registrations). Yet you are 31 times more likely to be accidentally killed by a car than a gun
according to the National Safety Council126 . . . despite cars having been registered and licensed
for almost 100 years.
Myth: The Brady Bill caused gun homicides to decrease.
Fact: Both gun and non-gun murder rates fell during the same period, 1992 to 1997. In 1992,
68% of U.S. murders were committed with guns; in 1997, it was still 68%.127 Thus, the
decreased gun homicide rate was part of an overall declining crime rate, not an effect of the
Brady Bill.
122 Ibid
123 Ibid.
124 FBI Uniform Crime Reports, September 15, 2000
125 Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms estimate and reported via James Wright, Peter H. Rossi, Kathleen
Daly, “Under the Gun: Weapons, Crime, and Violence in America”, 1983
126 207,754,000 automobiles according to Federal Highway Administration, October 1998. 240,000,000 guns
according to 1996 FBI Uniform Crime Statistics
127 FBI Uniform Crime Reports for 1992 and 1997
You think of yourself as being the reasonable one here, but what you can't grasp is that compromise is not always a good thing. Sometimes one must take a defined position and stand their ground. I also question why you want to abandon this thread so quickly. Are you afraid to stick around and argue your position? Are you afraid that if you do continue you'll be convinced that your position is false, or are you just afraid that you might be made a fool of?
I'm not as concerned about what you believe, but I want to know WHY you believe it. I want you to atriculate the foundation on which you base your opinions, other than just the irrational belief that you are right because you think you are.
Mike
05-20-2004, 03:10 PM
#45
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Coralville, IA. USA
Posts: 3,802
RE: How many of you still..............
You're probably right bigcountry, but I guess I feel compelled to fight the good fight not necessarily for targetpuncher's benefit, but rather for anyone who may happen upon this topic and even partially agree with him. I believe that the only reason rampant liberalism exists in the country is because people who oppose it don't step up to the mike and make as much noise as the liberals do.
Mike
Mike
