Posted on 04/16/2007 3:13:13 PM PDT by rebekah7gray
if in the event you are ever the victim of a home invasion and you are alone, suddenly awaken in the middle of the night and the armed thug is SECONDS away from battering down you or your child’s bedroom door, you will wish to our good lord that you were in possession of a weapon (firearm) and the physical training and mental mindset to use it.
Where do you think they would steal the RPGs & machine guns from? Walmart? The local gun store?
How many crimes have been committed in the U.S., by criminals armed with an RPG or machine gun?
After attempting to have a discussion with this person, I have to agree with you.
She/he/it is just another anti-gun zealot, who cannot be reasoned with.
IBTZ!
Um, because they’re criminals?
The laws only make it difficult for law abiding citizens.
If strict gun control laws are passed, guns can only be obtained in the black market and if the police have a buy back program, there would be a great reduction in guns on the black market.
If we have a comprehensive informant system where informants are paid $5000 per gun and $10000 per gun which is in the possession of a felon, we would greatly reduce the availability of guns
You're not too bright, are ya, Bek? *rolls eyes*
"Looking for answers like everyone else," isn't that what you wrote? That's like going to the beach and telling folks that you're looking for the ocean. I ain't buyin' it. You're a fake.
Prohibition didn't prevent alcohol from being made and sold.
Drug laws aren't keeping drugs from being made and sold.
Laws against rape don't stop it.
Laws against bank robberies don't stop them.
So what makes yo think gun control will stop criminals from having guns?
Gun control will only result in an unarmed citizenry that will be at the mercy of thugs like this.
If you don't like guns, don't have one but keep it to yourself and don't tell the rest of us how to live.
You are right, if we are able to restrict the sale or availability of RPGs, machine guns and dynamite to criminals, surely we can also restrict the availability of guns with the right laws and with a comprehensive buy back program and informant system that pays informants $5000 per gun and $10000 per gun that is in the possession of a felon
Because we are able to restrict the sale or availability of grenades, RPGs, dynamite and machine guns, surely we can also do the same for guns, dont you think ?
Bill
VPI&SU
Class of '86
If we have comprehensive laws, comprehensive buy back programs and an extensive informant system whereby informants get paid $5000 per gun retrieved and $10000 per gun that is retrieved from a felon, then we will go a long way in preventing criminals from having guns
A lot of my fellow FReepers are concluding that you are a leftist troll.
I have not come to that opinion, as yet, so welcome to FR.
You do, alas, show a naivete concerning matters related to violence and self-defense which is quite atypical of American conservatives, and more commonly found on the American left: the loudest voices on the left at once want to give the state a monopoly on the means of violence and hobble the state in its effective use of violence, whether abroad in war, or at home in law enforcement, through ‘humanitarian’ rules of engagement and various ill-conceived ‘civil rights’ measures.
The point of an armed citizenry is not the certainty that a good-law abiding citizen will kill or incapacitate an evil doer (be it common armed robber, homocidal maniac, jihadi, or would-be tyrant) before harm is done, but the extra difficulty in carrying out evil plans presented by uncertainty as to who will return fire in defense of self and unarmed innocents.
Our troops in Iraq wear body armor and still killed by small arms fire- head-shots by snipers or shots at close-quarters with sufficient velocity to punch through the body armor. The same would apply to miscreants facing an armed citizenry. A head-shot from behind will take out a body-armored thug armed with machine gun, explosives and a grenade launcher. Those with more practical knowledge than I of small-group tactics, can doubtless provide other scenarios in which one or more persons armed with various small arms could, in extremis, successfully engage a more heavily armed opponent.
You are right, so why did the criminal not set fire to the place instead of using a gun then ?
WFTR, this person is either maliciously wicked or plainly addled. Makes me think of a sink, everything whirlpooling downward ...
I don’t think it’s going to work.
First of all, where’s all the money going to come from to pay for all this?
Then, even if you restrict it now, there’s WAY too many guns already out there.
Thirdly, the borders can’t even keep people out. No way gun running isn’t going to happen.
Last, and not least, the gun ownership is Constituionally protected. Most gun owners will give up their guns when pried from their cold, dead hands.
You’re anti-gun agenda will not work here and your proposal will not convince anyone because it’s impractical and will not work.
Thanks for the welcome and for those who want to know, I got kicked out of the DU.
I would like to see Congress do an unbiased study of gun crimes and a comparative study of countries where guns are banned and countries that do not ban guns and I will abide by whatever conclusions they come up with
And you've been kicked outta here, too.
WOO-HOO!!!! bye bye troll! big thanks to the mod!
Good thing I wasn’t drinking any coffee or you would have owed me a new keyboard.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.