Discussion USA and gun

I would think more women would be pro guns. It's a big equalizer of the genders.

 

Actually you can rest assured in the US the moment you stepped into it's border it make irrelevance whether you're hanging out with guy or associated with gun owner/active shooter. The police were armed with live rounds, gun owner is everywhere sometimes on open carry in plain sight. The whole place actually already have risk of shooters that
the idea of selective measures like against certain religion could even work escape my logical thinking. Guns basically everywhere and hardly unreachable to the ill wishers.

Calm down they know they can't escape the surveillance States anyhow. Just make sure to be well padded just in case.

 

They should have ID trigger groups/bolt groups lock system. And for the police to locate the gun in proximity and to alerts them of it's presence.

Having a gun is no longer about protecting their own against the establishment or the government but to protect themselves in the absence of immediate law enforcers. Who the rednecks kidding when they thought getting a gun they could reject the government idea of what is sovereignty for it's civilians.

 

Eh, I don't think that would fly in the US. The reason we have the Second Amendment is because fighting against a government we didn't like was kinda where we came from, and the Second Amendment embodies that feeling. America was a country formed such that the powers would be in the hands of the people, not the government. We were meant more as a congregation of states, rather than a nation under one governmental body. The federal government is more meant to be a sort of peacemaker between the states.

I'm not entirely sure what the ID trigger groups/bolt groups lock system is, but I'm assuming that it's a method by which guns can be made inoperable due to the interference of the government. That goes back to the reason we have the Second Amendment, so I doubt that such a system will be popular.
Additionally, another problem in the United States is that not everyone can trust the police so thoroughly now. Not all police officers are bad, but there exists corruption within the police force in the US. Some police have unnecessarily shot citizens, notable black Americans. Do we want those police officers to know that we have a gun?
Allowing government to track gun locations seems like government surveillance.
I'm not sure how applicable this may be, but in the United States, the government is not allowed to have a gun registry. The ability to track such guns could be potentially creating a gun registry for the government, so I don't think that it will be viable.
(If it refers to an identification system such that only the gun owner will be able to use that gun, I'm not so sure if that technology is reliable right now.)

 

My point is your gun no longer protect you from the government whatsoever. Your gun protect you in the absence of law enforcement agent. Police and other armed agent would be way more well armed and trained against what the civilian could hope them not to.

For the second amendments to ring true you will need a functional paramilitary organization independent of the government law enforcement bodies to represent it's locals at the very least. Ideally you'd need antitank and antiaircraft measure incorporated into these organization to make them capable enough to challenge the federal government.

 

My previous response was more based on the first part of your response to my original post in this thread.

The Second Amendment is basically there to allow for the creation of such a paramilitary organization in the case of an oppressive government. It's to oppose a government that is stripping you of your rights and freedoms, rather than to oppose a government that you disagree with. I agree that guns will not be enough to actually go against the government (and that antitank and antiaircraft measures will need to be taken), and that guns do help you in absence of law enforcement. However, I do not believe that guns will be completely useless in such a rebellion.

 

15k is about suicide most of the rest is inner city gang voilence

 

Unfortunately the guns that were allowed to be on the market for the most part were useless. I agree quite numbers of them wouldn't for the sporting accuracy it could offer.

 

I just see that words

imo USA government not so fool to allow high spec arms circulated freely inside USA cuz it can lead to chaos or fast civil rebellion

hmm how I say it~
yeah we follow da law but just on minimal
citizen can carry gun?
sure~
wut it mostly trash?
deal with it~

win-win solution~

 

I always found it really stupid how we have developed and advanced weapons of mass-murders more than our armors and items of actual personal defense/protection. I always wondered what life would be like if everyone had their own personal forcefields to protect themselves. It’s also legal to buy and own bodyarmor in the US (there are some rules/exception and difference between states) yet that fact and market isn’t as well-known as it should.

I can understand why in some situations it would be better to have a gun, but the risk of accident is so much larger. Saying that “someone who wants a gun will find a way to get it even illegally” might have some sense to it, but that’s not understanding that by forcing them to have to find illegal ways to possess one, it creates an obstacle for them which would reduce the ease of access. Guns access is also correlated to suicide and accident.

There’s not much you can do to stop a person who is absolutely driven to find whatever way they can to obtain a gun. You can however filter/weed out the chances of those not as driven or capable in obtaining one. Of course, this idea doesn’t apply as well with the US. One of the big problem with the gun issues in the US is just that we have too many guns already so we aren’t as effective in stopping their use and distribution. There’s also how it’s ingrained into our culture and history. Don’t even get me started on how the 2nd Amendment was thought up based on old technology and how the Constitution was partly influenced by slavery.

 

As long as you are responsible i.e understand how a gun works and store it securely the chance of an accident happening is damn near zero. The most common issue for LEGAL gun owners is the weapon is not stored effectively and someone comes to possess the weapon that shouldn't. i.e little kids, troubled teens, etc. Then it ends up on the news and its really really sad - either as a bunch of people being killed, or the person shooting themselves because they don't check and see if a round is chambered when first picking it up. however this is probably outside of what you are talking about.

More in line with what i assume you are referencing - that would be a malfunction of the weapon while firing a round, which can easily be prevented if there is a sufficient understand of how the gun is assembled. There are critical pieces of a weapon that can fail, which are easily recognizable if you service your own weapon i.e cleaning or take it to someone to service for you.
Also to note faulty ammunition can misfire and in rare cases cause shrapnel blowback, easily avoidable if you dont buy the cheapest shit out there. Ive discharged more ammo then i care to admit and have never had ammunition fail.

If you always handle a weapon with the assumption it could go off at any moment, and dont point it anywhere you wouldnt want to shoot then you will have no problems.

 

Thanks for the info. You have my respect for being responsible and for taking the time to educate me and respectfully sharing your opinions.

I used to live in Georgia and Virginia and know a lot of gun owners. I know how careful they can be and I don’t have a problem with people owning guns. The beliefs of my stance comes into play when it concerns careless and uneducated gun owners as well as improper handling and the risk of accident. Humans will make mistakes, it’s just very worrying when they can make a mistake that can’t be reversed. I don’t own a gun because of that possibility for mistake. Even if the possibility is low, it’s not low enough especially with that degree of consquence.

It’s also worrying because of how bad a job people, organizations, and the government are doing in actually actively and swiftly pushing out effective laws. There’s just too much politics, bureaucracy, and human greed and flaw that comes into play. I just had my ALICE training and learning that Lockdown was a policy that was integrated just cause people wanted a quick solution and response to the public reaction from shootings is concerning. Instead of finding a effective method, it’s done half-assly and now takes so much effort to resolve and rectify.

As I’ve grown older, I realized that even when lives are concerned, things in this world and society are done half-assed. As an ignorant kid, I thought of adults as at least somewhat wiser and more reliable people. Now I just realized the world is just made up of people, and adults are just kids that had to grow up.

 

Because it's a cat and mouse thing. Offense > defense. Initiatives defeat reactives.
When the plate armor invented it make swords and slashing attack obsolete. But then it was learnt that piercing the bulky and stiff armoured soldiers is simple enough.

Here's some point to consider before owning a gun.
1. You can't use them in preemptive self defense. You're more likely charged with murder in the courts.
2. In the situation you are legally to use them in self defense you're in most cases at gun point unless you're bystanders looking to intervene.
3. By carrying one you're inviting mirror response to violence of action you could face both against attackers or from the police. Just seeing you holstering a gun may prompted them to use their own.
4. Many more accident and complicated situation such as gun accidental discharge or police 'misunderstanding' thingy. Many more.

So in conclusion it make ill advised self defense tools. Unless you're going to wear flak jacket as well don't try to be smart with it.

 

fyi you can discount surveys because the only people that answer them are those stupid enough to take them. a non idiot and non troll does this when it comes up.

*ring* *ring*
non dumbass: hello?
Pain in teh ass: yes hell sir I'm so and so from(most hangup here) i was wondering if you would be abel to spare a few minutes to take a survey?
non dumbass: *CLICK*

 

I approve of people owning guns but the NRA is a shitty organisation that does not encourage proper Gun Culture & Gun Safety as part of Civic Duty and Community Leadership. Every Swiss home has a gun as part of their National Defence policy and yet their gun violence and gun related deaths is ridiculously low....Oh wait, now I remember. The NRA are just glorified salesmen for Firearms Manufacturers.

 

You have to keep in mind that military thought changes as the years go by. They might have not even considered a gorilla war back in 1860. They might have considered it dishonorable. Look at the place snipers have in the military. At one point it was considered dishonorable to use them. Now they're a mainstay.

As for your faith that a revolt is impossible in the US. This is just wishful thinking. There are more guns than people in the US. Many people in the military wouldn't necessarily oppress their fellow citizens so, a mutiny in the military would be a real risk. Studies have suggested that if you can get at least 3% of a population to revolt, at the very least, you can bring a nation to its knees.

 

My problem with the NRA is that they don't stick to guns. They've become something of a republican mouthpiece and I'd rather they remain neutral.

 

Oh please, the American revolutionary war had plenty of guerrilla warfare action as George Washington even raided the country side to forage food for his soldiers and had a lot of snipers that fought against the British forces like the Sharpshooters.

So I don't see why the south didn't try that against the north when they are outmatch in almost everything with the exception of there good generals and expected Europeans to saved them just because of King Cotton. In fact, I heard somewhere that the south was planning on performing guerrilla warfare, but General Robert E. Lee stopped it because of the damage that would bring afterward in reconstruction. So guerrilla warfare is not something one desire even as one fall into civil war and would have to face harsh consequences from Reconstruction after losing the civil war.

Also I heard that there are more Guns in the US then people so many times, but Guns are not weapons with infinite ammo nor reusability and not everyone owns a Gun in the US. So unless your rebellion seize a lot of gun factory or make a gun factory of your own. You would run out of ammo eventually and once that happen your guns might as well be sticks. Plus unlike the Vietcong, ISIS, Taliban, or even your very own country revolutionary in the American Revolution, you can't hide anywhere in the US nowadays. As all places in the US should be mapped out already by the military nor get outside help to supply you with more Ammo or resources to keep your guerrilla warfare going as this won't be a war half way across the world in a foreign land. As the US defenses are layer beyond just the regular military like the national guards or police force that can sometimes number in the hundreds of thousands with military grade weaponry or a tank.

So what do your rebellion have beside spirit? The military might rebel, sure, that is always a risk, but like the first civil war, you would have to give them a great cause to rebel and help you overthrow the government. While the US Government can be said to suck, but it was made to be inept unless the situation really calls for them to act. In the end, your own chance to succeed is a rebellion in the military that is control by the government you are trying to rebel and if that is the case what is the point of so many guns being allow in the US? As your citizens won't be the deciding factor, but the military chance of siding with the rebellion.

 

INB4 Lock lol

 

USA and Guns is such a broad topic.

Well the United 50 States of America & their territories all have varying laws for firearms. I'm using the term "firearm" because there are lethal and non-lethal guns, but that's a whole 'nother topic by itself.

• Really its each to his/her own. A US citizen is afforded the right to legally own a firearm. By the countries founding principles (US Constitution). Moving the History lesson aside, if you ever decide to visit any place in the US and you feel like possessing a firearm, just google or research the info, saves you a lot of stress.

• The movie Law Abiding Citizen starring Gerard Butler. An interesting piece, for anyone who wonders about the "ifs". I'm just using this movie to portray that people should be aware of both sides of human morality. The world is not perfect, we may have laws and we may have systems in place to protect or to provide justice. But any person, can really do as they please.
  
  
  
• Having a weapon or firearm is one thing. Using it properly is another thing.

This thing isn't really political and for the most part, people in this thread are pretty civil about it. Everyone seems to go on about the historical aspect or sort of why some people are for guns and why some people are against it. It's also cool to know how things are in other countries, because in some places firearms are just banned, unless you are a person of authority.