They should listen to Obama

[Essembe]

The "Looked at her funny" line was sarcasm. Sorry about that.

She has taken responsibility for her own safety? In England that means locking the doors. This is because we don't carry guns. Life is simple sometimes.

I got the sarcasm and ran with it :)

Yeah, in England we lock our doors and hope. Have you seen the burglary statistics in England. They are truly awful compared to say, Texas. In the UK, the police show up after the event, listen sympathetically, give you a crime number. Rarely is anyone is caught, rarely do posessions get returned, rarely are the homeowners not traumatized by the literal invasiveness of the crime they have suffered. They dont feel safe in their homes, they feel inadequate to defend themselves or loved ones, the list goes on.

I accept that you don't want a gun but what is sad about taking responsibility for your own safety? I doubt your Aunt lives in a sad world. She probably doesn't think twice about her gun and just goes about her daily life and enjoys it.

She probably deep down knows that when seconds count, the cops are minutes away.

 

[Damocles]

His proposals don't even do anything. Most will be thrown out as unconstitutional after he leaves office.

We have no interest in giving up guns. Guns ensure our country can never have a tyrant or be conquered.

And obviously there's the fact that absolute morons in the US believe this.

 

[Wilf Wild 1937]

And obviously there's the fact that absolute morons in the US believe this.

I think the lack of any meaningful form of gun control in the United States is ludicrous but you are wrong to dismiss Blue Haze as a crank. It would be impossible for any foreign invader to occupy the USA for any length of time, without committing mass genocide, given not just the number of guns floating about but the tens of millions of people trained to use them. Overall it's far outweighed as an argument by the number of deaths that occur each year under the current system against the minimal chance of invasion in the future but it is a legitimate argument.

 

[Damocles]

I think the lack of any meaningful form of gun control in the United States is ludicrous but you are wrong to dismiss Blue Haze as a crank. It would be impossible for any foreign invader to occupy the USA for any length of time, without committing mass genocide, given not just the number of guns floating about but the tens of millions of people trained to use them. Overall it's far outweighed as an argument by the number of deaths that occur each year under the current system against the minimal chance of invasion in the future but it is a legitimate argument.

There's about a hundreds different issues with his argument:

• The US is not under threat of invasion and won't be again.
• If it was under the threat of invasion, the invading force would take these guns into account and just carpet bomb the entire country. Their crap handguns are no match for a fuel air bomb.
• The ability to own a gun and use it at a shooting range is no match for any modern military fighting machine who have command systems, better weaponry and less hesitation in taking a shot.
• No foreign invader could occupy the UK or a variety of other countries either because resistance forces aren't dependent on the amount of guns in the populace as shown in Iraq, Afghanistan, France, Poland, and going further back into history, Spain, Portugal, the UK, China, Japan, Korea, and pretty much every African nation in existence.

It's a ridiculous argument and not one backed up by history, military tactics or even basic common sense.

 

[Blue Haze]

And obviously there's the fact that absolute morons in the US believe this.

Do you know how impossible it would be for a tyrant to avoid assassination in a country of 310m guns? Our presidents have been assassinated for much less. We are inculcated as small children to kill them. The Secret Service can often, but not always, stop a lone madman. They can't stop millions of people hellbent on killing.

It's our ultimate insurance against such a thing.

As to invasion, you think Iraq was bad? Try conquering a country of 150m gun users. All the armies of the earth combined could not subdue an American insurgency.

 

[johnny on the spot]

You might be able to stop a foreign army invading, but you don't do so well against mad hicks killing primary school kids, do you?

 

[Bluemoon115]

Do you know how impossible it would be for a tyrant to avoid assassination in a country of 310m guns? Our presidents have been assassinated for much less. We are inculcated as small children to kill them. The Secret Service can often, but not always, stop a lone madman. They can't stop millions of people hellbent on killing.

It's our ultimate insurance against such a thing.

As to invasion, you think Iraq was bad? Try conquering a country of 150m gun users. All the armies of the earth combined could not subdue an American insurgency.

Hahaha yes they could. Probably within a week.

 

[Bluemoon115]

You might be able to stop a foreign army invading, but you don't do so well against mad hicks killing primary school kids, do you?

If only those children had guns!

I mean, it's the fucking tenth of January, and they've had 3 mass shootings this year.

The tenth. Of fucking January.

 

[Blue Haze]

Hahaha yes they could. Probably within a week.

Took us 10 years to put down an insurgency in Baghdad of 50k dudes with small arms and improvised explosive devices

And you think the US would be subdued in a week with 150 million armed insurgents? lol you must be basing that on what you've seen in movies.

You might be able to stop a foreign army invading, but you don't do so well against mad hicks killing primary school kids, do you?

Those hicks all went down. And also ew, you sound celebratory of dead children.

 

[buckshot]

I don't think anyone underestimates them they own a huge chunk of congress. Brilliant strategy, you oppose our views we will put the money behind your opponent and you'll lose your job. Only way to beat it is to pump twice as much money against it but who is going to ever be brave enough to fund against gun nuts. It's simple and brilliantly effective!

Not only that but it drives business so they actually like the government taking action as in the short term it only helps .

One day technology will render guns useless (though it already is against the state) but until then it's just a money train

The irony is the people who really need guns and use them particularly in remoter parts are as Buckshot shows the people funding the lifestyle of the wealthy who make the money from it all

If the NRA had a choice they'd want another eight years of Obama. Hillary will do okay for them but people won't be as scared with a white person and a "regular" name in the White House. As it is there haven't been any laws enacted that have limited anybody's abilities to own guns and yet the dummies are flat-out convinced that a gun grab is only moments away.