The God Damned Gun Control Thread

[11_Panama_]

The only way the U.S. could get "invaded", is from within. We wouldn't see it coming, if it was done right.

[WD-40]

Guys, guys, I'm just having a lot of fun rattling your cages! You actually believe that I think Russia would actually attack us from any direction short of Nukes is not realistic. I know that! Heh heh heh! And I finally got Narg to lose it. Sorry Narg, but I shot the warning flag out there to tell you all that I was talking about 'a hypothetical' non nuke related situation. And 'why' you ask did I go into a tangent discussion about invasion? Re-read the posts. I was dove-tailing the Revolutionary War's British Invasion and offering one possible...that's 'possible' reason as to why our Forefathers allowed the words 'Right to bear arms' into the Constitution after what they had experienced at that point in time. That's all! Crater got his undies all wound up in a knot and lit the fuse of fun arguing. It was too good to pass up. And I couldn't read your whole post Narg, as it seemed to re-hash the same counter arguments with different wording.

Anyway, hope you all had fun with it. I know I did!

[[m'kay]]

Guys, guys, I'm just having a lot of fun rattling your cages! You actually believe that I think Russia would actually attack us from any direction short of Nukes is not realistic. I know that! Heh heh heh! And I finally got Narg to lose it. Sorry Narg, but I shot the warning flag out there to tell you all that I was talking about 'a hypothetical' non nuke related situation. And 'why' you ask did I go into a tangent discussion about invasion? Re-read the posts. I was dove-tailing the Revolutionary War's British Invasion and offering one possible...that's 'possible' reason as to why our Forefathers allowed the words 'Right to bear arms' into the Constitution after what they had experienced at that point in time. That's all! Crater got his undies all wound up in a knot and lit the fuse of fun arguing. It was too good to pass up. And I couldn't read your whole post Narg, as it seemed to re-hash the same counter arguments with different wording.

Anyway, hope you all had fun with it. I know I did!

Uh, WD, I know pretty well that you've seen me lose it on these very forums, and uh yeah I was just wondering what you were on about. The reason that parts of my post were rehashing was because your basis of argument was so out there that there wasn't really any way to argue aside from "this is the stupidest thing anyone's ever said in the world". In addition, you seem a little bit too persistent in saying this was all just a joke. I mean, when i'm joking around I don't act like people are ignorant idiots for not following my ridiculous leaps in logic and then call in my credentials to back my point up. It was fun to think of a possible situation in which the US could actually be attacked, but so far as arguing with you went it was more bewildering and confusing than fun. It's sort of like you're just hanging out in your living room when a clown comes in, punches himself in the [Richard] and rockets to outer space, and then laughs at you for being really confused and trying to make sense out of what in the living hell just happened.

[WD-40]

Well okay Narg. It is your thread and just to be fair, It wasn't 'entirely' arguing banter from me, certainly not at first arguing the Constitution. But my argument was meant to be Hypothetical. What is it about the word Hypothetical that is confusing? Crater came at me totally ignoring it was hypothetical and you argued that way too...I don't know for certain what the Forefathers were thinking regarding lessons learned from the British invasion in the 1770s, but perhaps they learned something about it, as the British tried it again in 1812.

Now, IF Russia or China for some reason decided to attack, I seriously doubt it would begin with Nukes. Yes, Putin would be stupid to attack us, I know that. Once the Nukes start flying, it's game over for everyone. I think we all can agree on that.

But let's say for the sake of avoiding more argument that Nukes were not in the equation. What direction would you attack from given modern technology/weapondry of today? Why?

Invasion of our Country is not out of the realm of possibility if, say numerous EMPs were turned loose at critical locations within our defense Network. Dirty Nukes could be set off in DC and other locations denying access to infrastructure and causing chaos. So IF, and I say IF we just happened to be 'invaded', a fully automatic assault rifle sure would feel nice in my hands, than a .40 cal glock. (Holy crap! I'm back on subject.)

[[m'kay]]

Well okay Narg. It is your thread and just to be fair, It wasn't 'entirely' arguing banter from me, certainly not at first arguing the Constitution. But my argument was meant to be Hypothetical. What is it about the word Hypothetical that is confusing? Crater came at me totally ignoring it was hypothetical and you argued that way too...I don't know for certain what the Forefathers were thinking regarding lessons learned from the British invasion in the 1770s, but perhaps they learned something about it, as the British tried it again in 1812.

Now, IF Russia or China for some reason decided to attack, I seriously doubt it would begin with Nukes. Yes, Putin would be stupid to attack us, I know that. Once the Nukes start flying, it's game over for everyone. I think we all can agree on that.

But let's say for the sake of avoiding more argument that Nukes were not in the equation. What direction would you attack from given modern technology/weapondry of today? Why?

Invasion of our Country is not out of the realm of possibility if, say numerous EMPs were turned loose at critical locations within our defense Network. Dirty Nukes could be set off in DC and other locations denying access to infrastructure and causing chaos. So IF, and I say IF we just happened to be 'invaded', a fully automatic assault rifle sure would feel nice in my hands, than a .40 cal glock. (Holy crap! I'm back on subject.)

See, this is a lot more fun to read and respond to. Just because an argument is hypothetical doesn't mean it suddenly doesn't have to make any logical sense or be interesting in any way. Unfortunately, I can't say that I know enough about modern military hardware and tactics to say much beyond Russia not being able to feasibly attack the US, so i'm going to have to bow out from here on. Although I will say that people who amass a ton of guns are the type to get way, way too gung-ho in that sort of situation. They'd be just as much of a hindrance as a help until they inevitably get killed, mostly because that type of person would be quick to pull the trigger in case the person even looked vaguely Russian.

[WD-40]

Well I did enjoy the banter for sure. Anyway, amassing a lot of guns usually involves several types of people. Whether it be anti-Government fears, Armageddon theory where the world may end up back in the stone ages or, the one I believe most are, 'gun enthusiasts'. Gun collecting is a hobby that is no different than any other collection hobby, but it obviously needs to be done by responsible people, which most are. There are a few out there that ought not be handling weapons or do a poor job keeping them secured. Even though they are not 'Felons or unstable', they can contribute to anti gun arguments to the detriment of the enthusiasts who are very responsible with weapondry.

[(SWGO)Kren]

I don't know for certain what the Forefathers were thinking regarding lessons learned from the British invasion in the 1770s, but perhaps they learned something about it, as the British tried it again in 1812.

Not entirely a full scale invasion given that Britain was engaged in the Napoleonic wars. The 1812 was related to hostilities between the US and Canada and then an attempted invasion by the US into Canada to take the British colony there. The American invasion was stopped by the British and Canadians.

Many other factors contributed to US independence and let's not forget without the help from France things could have turned-out very differently, so next 4th July it might be worth thanking the French for their help.

Anyway back on track...gun control anyone?

[[m'kay]]

I don't know for certain what the Forefathers were thinking regarding lessons learned from the British invasion in the 1770s, but perhaps they learned something about it, as the British tried it again in 1812.

Not entirely a full scale invasion given that Britain was engaged in the Napoleonic wars. The 1812 was related to hostilities between the US and Canada and then an attempted invasion by the US into Canada to take the British colony there. The American invasion was stopped by the British and Canadians.

Many other factors contributed to US independence and let's not forget without the help from France things could have turned-out very differently, so next 4th July it might be worth thanking the French for their help.

Anyway back on track...gun control anyone?

I wasn't taught that the French had anything to do with the war against the British until my sophomore year of high school. I'm still really annoyed by that, honestly.

[Dad]

The only way the U.S. could get "invaded", is from within. We wouldn't see it coming, if it was done right.

This has already begun.

[THEWULFMAN]

Despite what Crater believes, a militia using a war of attrition isn't as stupid as it sounds. Yes we have some of the best if not the best tanks in the world, yes we have the best air force in the world (or at least close to the Israeli Air Force), and yes we have the most powerful overall military of not only the world, but pretty much the entire combined militaries' of the world. China's military is bloated, low on technology and morale. Russia's is not as bloated(sorta), not quite as low on tech, but has no money to deploy their best stuff. And neither will ever invade us. Russia and the US are on... semi-okaysortaish terms right now. We'd be on a lot better terms if Putin wasn't such an [derriere orifice]. We won't have to fight China unless they decide to attack Japan. Which is quite possible.

No the only real enemy we have to worry about is our government, which as governments do, they get more corrupt over time. And we keep electing corrupt officials in rather than get them out. If we don't want to go down the slippery slope of tyranny and corruption, we'd have to erect a new government in its place.

If we did have to try and overthrow our government, a proper militia could hope for a couple things. That 1) they'd be unwilling to bring down the entire might of the military unto its own people, at least at first, or 2) That elements of the military break off and you get a coup.

Bottom line. Yes, a militia fighting a war against our military doesn't bespeak of much hope for rebellion victory. But it's a lot worse for them if all they have is single shot rifles and pistols.

I hope... with every fiber of my being it doesn't come to something like that. But I won't pretend it's not something that can happen to us. And I don't like the idea of trying to get rid of our guns. We're not ready as a culture yet.

I think it was Crater who said reducing poverty would help, and I agree. Less poverty, less crime, less death.

I'm sorry this post is so sloppy, but I am really freaking busy right now trying to get Unification done on time. Got about 2 days.