Obama’s Gun Ban List Is Out

[Sentura]

You said she suggested that you not go there, not that you legally could not. This isn't restriction. You're just carping for justification to your America the lesser bit.

yeah, suggest as in i'm not legally restricted. however, if i want to stay alive or not be mugged, i would have to stay away from those areas. i think that is justification enough; whether you consider it legal or not has no bearing here.

[quote=Mr-Jigsaw"]We aren't teenagers, we know what we want, and our beliefs aren't foolish. What you're doing is justifying a government's ignoring and circumventing the will of the people, which is dangerous.[/quote]

fear of losing freedom. call it whatever you want, but any denial of this and you're lying to yourself.

for the liberal, i meant liberal as in attitude; NOT as in political party. i never implied a political association, i just picked the state in the country that is the least acting-american.

[Mr-Jigsaw]

Stop trying to act superior to us by assaulting our cognitive abilities. We are not in denial, and you have terribly subverted what I meant by my comment. The basis of the democratic system is that elections are meant to enforce the will of the people. But when the will does not matter, as in your father-teenager approach, then why do we have democracy at all? In that case, the elite can decide what is best for the people regardless of popular opinion. And for that matter, without the system, why would this 'only man trying to help' even deserve to rule? Because while the system elected him, the system would support continued gun rights as they are. Do you suppose to say that the system doesn't matter when you feel it shouldn't. This isn't democracy. This is elitism.

And how many times do I have to say that I am not afraid before you will believe?

[Sentura]

i'm not trying to act superior, but god damn it, you're trying to run from everything you do. you're trying to stay conservative in the guise of "freedom" (which, as shown before isn't free) and "democracy" (which, apparently, isn't democratic). and don't give me a speech about being liberal; even the most liberal democrats are still seen as conservative by comparison to liberal politicians from other countries.

your entire system apparently works as a democratic "elitist" system; the man in charge has full control with his congress. for a country like yours, i have a hard time picturing any other democratic solution (which is perhaps why china runs a communistic rule instead). if you voted the guy in charge in, then it means you also voted his way of doing things in (courtesy of the american democratic system). neither of the americans in this thread are confident in the president, but on the other hand, neither of you can give any good argument as to why his way of doing things is bad (i am not talking about the people he chose for different roles; that is beyond the point).

democracy isn't good; it is the lesser of many evils. it gives the common man right to help rule a country, which in itself is a kant-ish doctrine; because unless educated within the sphere of politics (whether schooled by university or by life), a common man has little to no knowledge of what works and what doesn't in politics. democracy seeks to advocate people's right to talk and disagree, even though they want to talk and disagree with things they know nothing of. come to think of it, i'm not sure why this advocacy of everyone's opinions is even used. if anything, there should by now have been established a democratic meritocracy instead.

i am not going to believe you're not afraid if you don't prove it. you can help to let changes pass that you don't know the outcome of. if you don't know the outcome, how do you assume it's going to be bad? by the same flawed argument that it will affect the wrong people? you think you or your neighbor know better about ruling a country than a man that has been versed in politics?

then prove it. show him you're right by letting it pass and seeing whether you assumptions are true or not.

[no00dylan]

HA ha ha, I love this thread, lots of nice arguments going around everywhere, keep it up guys!

[MayheM]

Man if some of our Liberals are seen as conservative in other countries I THANK GOD I live in the US... I wouls sooned buy one of those banned guns and shoot myself in the head then have to deal with people even more liberal then the people I work with.

As for talking and Disagreeing about thngs people dont know about.

Hello pot my name is kettle... Your black...

How is that people in other coutries know so much about what americans know and dont know, and how or government works and doesnt work. I may not know it all but Know this. This country dispite your obvious distain for it and its people is still one of the greatest if not the greatest country in the world. Every day people come here to make a better life for themselves. Why would that be? Why in gods name would people come here is it is so god aweful here? Why would you come and visit? I will leave it at that because I do not want to get too abrasive...

[zombie@computer]

I get the impression this discussion is way more emotional than rational...
In which case we can discuss till the cows come home.

[dissonance]

Not to mention that the last half of the thread just seems to be rehashes of prior arguments.

[Sentura]

Why in gods name would people come here is it is so god aweful here? Why would you come and visit? I will leave it at that because I do not want to get too abrasive...

imagine getting news every day from a country you've never been to. wouldn't you be interested in going there, seeing whether it's all true rather than be holed up in prejudice? i'm guessing no, since you don't seem like the guy who would willingly move outside of your house if you didn't have to work. i don't formulate opinions based on what i hear from other people. i form opinions based on what i experience first hand.

another thing i don't get is why you're staying in california. from what you say here, it seems like you don't belong in a state as liberal as it is. somehow i'd think you would find more happiness stuck with people with the same beliefs as you - may i suggest the midwest?

I get the impression this discussion is way more emotional than rational...

yeah? i get the impression that you haven't been reading the thread for the last pages.

[Kremator]

yeah? i get the impression that you haven't been reading the thread for the last pages.

I get the impression this discussion is way more emotional than rational...

[Mr-Jigsaw]

i am not going to believe you're not afraid if you don't prove it. you can help to let changes pass that you don't know the outcome of.

Well, for one, this argument could be applied to any issue. But let's remember, this is a society we are talking about, we can't play with people's lives like the entire nation is our little political experiment. Reversing decisions is not quite as easy as we might like. It took from 1919 to 1932 to finally repeal the prohibition act. And I know the outcome of this bill: these guns listed become illegal for sale to civilians. I can't say that this is the first step to greater restrictions in the future, but already rights are being abridged through this act alone. Remember that the aim of the bill is to keep 'weapons originally designed for military use' out of the hands of civilians. However, every advance in gun technology was applied to military use. So, practically every gun in existence was at one time or another revolutionary, and thus, a military weapon by necessity. When is a weapon no longer a 'weapon designed for military use?' Personally, I just feel they have no right to make semi-automatic carbines as common as the AR15 or Mini-14 illegal. So, yes, I don't know the eventual effects of this, but I do know the immediate effects, and they aren't worth it.

you think you or your neighbor know better about ruling a country than a man that has been versed in politics?

Yes, in this case I do. Being a politician does not make you an expert in all things. Either you specialize in certain areas, your strengths, or you dabble in all things, a dilettante, or are an extremely intelligent individual in which case you likely are not involved in politics. I may not know as much about finance or whatnot compared to him, but I am sure as anything that I know more than him on this issue. You speak of elitism but say we don't have the knowledge to speak out on politics, thus making it a government of the elite without a doubt.

And he's roughly inexperienced compared to many on Capitol Hill, just saying.

[Sentura]

Personally, I just feel they have no right to make semi-automatic carbines as common as the AR15 or Mini-14 illegal. So, yes, I don't know the eventual effects of this, but I do know the immediate effects, and they aren't worth it.

so there is no logic behind this argument, it's just that you feel that it isn't right? well then, we might as well shut down all electric power in the entire country because some people feel they don't want to pay their bill.

so the illegality of common weaponry will suddenly make the world a more dangerous place for civilians, keeping in mind that those people registered with those weapons will have to hand them in. furthermore, burglars and other petty criminals are not likely to have access to a so called "black market", and the few gangs that do will be far too busy with their meth labs to go around robbing a neighborhood. i think you're looking at it from a wrong angle. but then, neither of us know if this actually holds true for if the bill gets passed. i vote we wait and see.

I may not know as much about finance or whatnot compared to him, but I am sure as anything that I know more than him on this issue. You speak of elitism but say we don't have the knowledge to speak out on politics, thus making it a government of the elite without a doubt.

how would you go about proving this sentiment? how experienced are you in comparison to the people at capitol hill?

plus, i did actually agree on that the government is an elite, at least that's how things are done in your country. it may be democracy, but in a limited form towards the people.

[Mr-Jigsaw]

Let's take it from the other direction. Tell me why the semi-automatic AR15s, Mini-14s, M1 carbines, and all clones and copies should be illegal.

[MayheM]

[quote="Sentura"]furthermore, burglars and other petty criminals are not likely to have access to a so called "black market", and the few gangs that do will be far too busy with their meth labs to go around robbing a neighborhood.
[quote]

Wow you are so right all gangs do is make meth... I totally fogot. I was under the impression they did car jackings, stole, killed, etc... I guess I was wrong.

How difficult do you honestly think it would be to get in touch with a big time criminal? I for one could make about two phone calls and talk get the number of someone in a new york crime family. So dont freaking tell me that peopel do not have access to the black market. I do not commit crime, but I know people. I could only imagine the people criminals know. Your statment is an ignorant one.

My issue really comes down to two things,

1. It is a waste of time to ban weapons because the wrong people can and will still get them.
2. to have bans on specific guns is an opening in the laws and can allow the government to eventually eliminate guns all together. This will therefore distroy the second ammendment of the constitution.

Besides the point that guns do not kill people, it is the people holding them that do. So why not have stricker penalties on murders instead of banning weapons. It is just one more thing the government wants to tell us we can not handle the responsability of.

[Sorrow]

2. to have bans on specific guns is an opening in the laws and can allow the government to eventually eliminate guns all together. This will therefore distroy the second ammendment of the constitution.

You treat that constitution as a bible, something that's 100% foolproof and right. Why can't it be changed?
I hope you realise that that is not an argument.

[Khaeotixs]

lol how many cases have you heard of a person actually defending themselves in their home with a gun, as opposed to cases were said guns get stolen and used to kill other people.

It has happened in the UK, in Australia, in Europe, in China, and what they have found is that for some reason the criminals do not turn in their weapons, but will know that you did.

uh all those countries have lower murder rates then the US. strange huh?

strangely the opposite in manchester. young'uns go round shooting up the neighbourhoods with their illegal 9mm's/shotguns/uzi's and nobody other than other crims can shoot back because they have nothing to shoot back with.

i'm all for legalising guns. crime rate will decrease (in theory), because criminals are less likely to shoot at someone if they know they can get shot back at.