Thread: Potential Ban/Brady Bill part deux?

Originally Posted by redrover66

Part of the issue with low gun violence is that in a country of people that has existed for thousands of years the population make up is 99.5% Sweeds(sp) or Finn's. Much the same as Japan( with very low gun violence) in being nearly 100% of the original people. You have thousands of years to work for a low violence country. The US is a melting pot, less than 500 years from the beginning, with only a few thousand years more to reach a less violent state.

That's ridiculous.

Go to any country in Europe with homogeneous populations and you will find the folks there divide themselves up by regions or dialects or the way they speak or dress or a hundred other reasons and have very strong feelings about who is better than another. Humans need no real reason to kill each other. It's the one constant through history.

If I understand Sailor correctly, the murder and persecution of the people was the result of those who resisted being murdered and persecuted.

So, next time a captive of a sex slavery ring sees a chance to escape, they had best not do it, because those left behind might be punished for it.
Because after all, its so much better to not rise against overwhelming odds and superior forces, because, you know, somebody might get hurt.

Fear of reprisal.... what a sad reason to not do what is right. That is exactly the kind of thought process that despots have instilled in their subjects (because I cant use the word citizen and not twitch) to keep them in line, and to get them to become informants. Fourth Reich anyone?

Sailor, if this is NOT what you are saying I apologize, but it sure looks that way to me.

Originally Posted by thebigspendur

That's ridiculous.

Go to any country in Europe with homogeneous populations and you will find the folks there divide themselves up by regions or dialects or the way they speak or dress or a hundred other reasons and have very strong feelings about who is better than another. Humans need no real reason to kill each other. It's the one constant through history.

IN Japan there was no looting after the tsunami and nuclear meltdown.

In the US there was rampant looting after Katrina and some more looting after the storm hit the East coast.

What's the big difference?

Japan has no "entitlement" class.

Originally Posted by Wullie

IN Japan there was no looting after the tsunami and nuclear meltdown.

In the US there was rampant looting after Katrina and some more looting after the storm hit the East coast.

What's the big difference?

Japan has no "entitlement" class.

Don't underestimate the importance of honor in Japanese culture.

We have a younger generation that is running around without morals or honor, anymore, here in America.

Originally Posted by scap99

Don't underestimate the importance of honor in Japanese culture.

We have a younger generation that is running around without morals or honor, anymore, here in America.

All part of the "BIG PLAN". Sad part is that the plan seems to be working.

Originally Posted by scap99

Don't underestimate the importance of honor in Japanese culture.

We have a younger generation that is running around without morals or honor, anymore, here in America.

not to mention most cant think on there own to even make the right decision , and work ethic ??? what is that anymore ?? and younger generation dont take to much offense , im not much older but when ive been with a company who cant find an 18-25 yr old to work a road construction job for $30.00 an hour because the hours are at night , cant show up on time , has random drug test , or its actually labor and will settle for a $8.00 job something is wrong ...

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people except for a few politicians."
George Mason

"What, sir is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty. Whenever governments mean to invade the rights andf liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon their ruins."

Elbridge Gerry

Evidently the militia is different than the governments army and it is composed of the free people. Our fore fathers never intended for us to maintain a large standing army such as we have since WWII. They saw such such a thing as a threat, they also saw an armed populace as a solution to that threat. Historically militias payed their own way, bought their own weapons, powder and ball, uniforms as well if they had the money to do so, and were not a government entity. The ultimate commander of these militias were the governors of their respective states.

Originally Posted by Magpie

If I understand Sailor correctly, the murder and persecution of the people was the result of those who resisted being murdered and persecuted.

So, next time a captive of a sex slavery ring sees a chance to escape, they had best not do it, because those left behind might be punished for it.
Because after all, its so much better to not rise against overwhelming odds and superior forces, because, you know, somebody might get hurt.

Fear of reprisal.... what a sad reason to not do what is right. That is exactly the kind of thought process that despots have instilled in their subjects (because I cant use the word citizen and not twitch) to keep them in line, and to get them to become informants. Fourth Reich anyone?

Sailor, if this is NOT what you are saying I apologize, but it sure looks that way to me.

Originally Posted by nun2sharp

"What, sir is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty. Whenever governments mean to invade the rights andf liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon their ruins."

Elbridge Gerry

Evidently the militia is different than the governments army and it is composed of the free people. Our fore fathers never intended for us to maintain a large standing army such as we have since WWII. They saw such such a thing as a threat, they also saw an armed populace as a solution to that threat. Historically militias payed their own way, bought their own weapons, powder and ball, uniforms as well if they had the money to do so, and were not a government entity. The ultimate commander of these militias were the governors of their respective states.

That is not what i tried to say. I'm sorry if i put my words unclear. (Would be easier to go on this conversation in Finnish lol).
Howevers, what i tried to say that we have no positive examples of 'civil/militia uprising against tyrannic governmert'. Even in Arab springs those freedom fighters/terrorists (pick the one of your choice) couldn't carry on without external help. No fly zones and all.
We've had several civil wars, last one was 1918. To put it very simplified, it was the working class/militia uprising against tyrannic government/army, as they tried to say. Howevers, pretty soon the other part of the nation decided that such mob rioting against leaders elected by a vote wouldn't be ok. So it became wife against husband and mother against son. The battles were over within few months but the real killing, revenge, terror with concentration camps started only after war, causing bigger death toll and loss of civil rights that hadn't been during the war. And the victims were mostly family members of those who had been fighting on a 'wrong' side. Innocent people.
I had family members fighting in both sides. The father of my mother who died in WW2 had no right to vote in elections because his father had been on the 'wrong' side. 20 years after the civil war.
I'd say that the 'right' side won, but what they did after the war was and is the black page in our history. We do not want to use violence easily but when we so decide, we are very good in it. All rules will be forgotten.
It wasn't the first of our civil wars/uprisings but there seems to be a concensus it was the last. Probably our leaders have learned the lesson not to ignore those who voted against them. First known civil uprising (since northern crusades) here was 1596-7, called 'cudgel war' or 'ceremony of the wolves'.
Your civil war was an exception. It was two organized armies fighting. Not civilians.
Of course this has nothing to do with the idea of people owning guns. What i tried to say that the idea of 'people' uprising against tyrannic government is bs. I didn't work here and it didn't work in Warsaw either.

Of course, causes for civil wars and uprisings have nothing to do with sex slavery or any everyday peace time criminality.

Now, we've had several conversations about guns and maybe i really should shut up because they are mostly only throwing opinions, nothing more. All i can do i to base my opinions on what happens here. I'm sure that if i lived in US i would maybe think different but i still believe your country isn't that dangerous than someone try to say. It's safe to live there, even without owning a gun.

We have violence here but about 95% of gun related (and all) violence happens by the legal owners or their family members against people they already know. Against family members and friends. Good guys against good guys.

Street violence is almost zero. The idea of someone entering my house, armed is ridiculous. I do not need to lock my doors. Of course you might get robbed, specially if you go out drunk and keep shouting about how much money you have in your purse but you do not have to be afraid for your life. Getting robbed also gets you to front page for days. Doesn't happen here very often. Last time a cop was shot was 1997 and even then the killer was foreigner. Last time police used his/her gun to shoot someone, heck i do not even know. Have to ask mates who work in police.

We have plenty of high waged 'experts' thinking about what to do with violence and every now and then their work really helps to reduce violence, but usually not.
School shootings, both here and there are exception caused by mental issues, imho. As horrible as they are, they are still only a drop in an ocean when you think about the total gun violence. Madman always finds his/her way but what to do about regular citizen who sees a gun as a first option to resolve his worries? What to do about a kid who think that robbing someone with a gun for just 20 bucks is ok? Or when seeing someone stealing your bicycle and shooting him in the back?
I've no answer.

So I had tickets for UFC fights at the Prudential Center in Newark a while back. I figured I should bring a pistol since the Center was in a bad neighborhood and there would be many young adults who after watching the fights may be inclined to fight or cause trouble.
I went and retrieved my .357 Cal Pistol and holster. Threaded the belt through the holster and tightened up the belt. Took the pistol grabbed a magazine and started to look for bullets. I guess the last time I qualified I forgot to bring some home. Oh well....off with the holster and pistol and out to the fights. I was with my buddy who was a police as well. I had mentioned I may wear a gun so he asked. I told him i didn't have any bullets and if the crap hit the fan I'd be cowering behind the nearest cover. He laughed really well at me......what can you do.

I went the next day to buy some .357 rounds........damn they are expensive. I guess it will get worse.

Oh yea....I made it home alive.

Originally Posted by Wullie

And I will go further to say that anyone who is not an American citizen has no dog in this fight.

I disagree with your statement. The more they erode your constitutional rights, the more they'll erode our "concessions to those gun-toting wackoids". While nothing will happen while we have the hard right in power (funny thing is that they swing left of the Democrats), our gun rights won't be put in jeopardy, but we were hoping for a few more concessions like unneutering mags, castle doctrine, reclassifying AR's to be non-restricted (treated as hunting rifles) and decriminalizing certain storage and transport legislation. When the hard right gets kicked out of Ottawa, we'll either be ruled by the moderate right or the moderate left and they're both anti-gun. I don't want them to say "look how the Americans saw the light due to all those poor babies being killed!" and clamp down on us even harder than before. That's why I donated to the NRA - while I recognize the fact that they haven't always properly represented the rights of American gun owners, they're the big dog and the loudest voice for your constitutional rights. Your laws affect ours!

Originally Posted by Jimbo

Right and left are the same here as in the US as far as I can tell.

The "2 party" system south of the border is a joke. Both will pursue same general policies, benefiting the same small group of people, with very minor cosmetic differences, mostly meant to extract maximum support from their support bases.

Originally Posted by Double0757

It's all feel good legislation! That doesn't do much of anything, but a peace the masses. About the only thing I'm in favor of restricting, is the straw hats sales (private citizen sales of guns), we need back grounds checks on those.

I disagree.. As long as someone is a licensed gun owner, he should have the right to purchase arms without involving the government or the business community.

Originally Posted by Wullie

I agree and ONLY the Po-LEESE and the military would have guns.

Appears to me that SOME ex-police types think that should be the natural order of things. I disagree.

Didn't the po-leese run security for Slobodan Milosevic's thugs while they were tampering with the ballots in unsupervised rural ridings? I also remember a couple of ridings where licensed gun owners got together and kept them away until elections officials came and picked up the ballot boxes. Those were the only unsupervised rural ridings where the opposition to Milosevic's party won.

Originally Posted by Wullie

Use your imagination a bit on the BATF proposal I posted earlier.

The calibers that come to mind first are .223 (5.56x49), 308 (7.62X51), 9MM (9X19), 7.62X39, 5.45X39. Then they'll reach out and touch every other obsolete ex military caliber that was ever used anywhere on the planet.

I still shoot some NORMA ammo in my 6.5X55. It's imported. 7.62X54, 30-06, 30 M1 Carbine, 8X57, 7X57, 6.5Jap, 7.7Jap, 7.5SWISS, 6.5 Carcano are a few that come to mind that are still fairly popular calibers here in the US. There are several ammo companies in Russia, and Eastern Europe that are making quality ammo at much lower prices than the BIG companies here in the US.

The BATF ruling, if enforced, would dry up everything but commercially manufactured stuff here in the US and shut off any importation of surplus or commercially made ammo.

The way I see it is a "back door" way to get at our guns.

That would be the only positive for Canada.. A lot of that milsurp ammo would just make it our way and lower the prices. We already benefit a lot from some of your ammo restrictions (especially the 7.62x25 ammo) and gun restrictions (Norinco ftw). With that being said, that's a short-sighted benefit. Your market shrinks and the supply will also dry up, turning our market into something like Chile, where a Mk II G costs $600