WHAT I DON'T UNDERSTAND ABOUT YOU GUN CONTROL FOLKS....

I hear ya, which is why I don't get it....

Why side with every dictator ever? It must just be an emotional reaction being used more than logic..

Maybe they like being victims? I don't!

Yea I hear ya. Did you see the video from the Sacramento mall yesterday?

There was a fight in the food court, signs fell and tables fell, that caused loud noises and the whole mall freaked out. They thought it was gunfire and everyone was running for their lives.

Everyone has allowed themselves to become scared helpless lambs.

That's not a gun. This is a gun...

one more for answers

Lets set aside the "NWO" crap for a moment.

Let me say that I fully support the second amendment. I don't feel that responsible gun owners, who make up the VAST majority of gun owners, should be punished for the actions of a few lunatics.

I know many so-called "left" people who don't necessarily want America to be disarmed/unarmed. I think that, although there are obviously some anti-gun people and organizations out there, generally, most people are fine with the second amendment. I think the whole "left wants America unarmed" is a bunch of bullshit that's being drilled into people by right wing talking heads.

I think the issue here is the term "assault rifles." There are those, on the left and right, who want restrictions on these "assault rifles."

What many don't seem to realize though, is the term "assault rifle" was used in the 1980s by the National Coalition to Ban Handguns, where they exploited the public's confusion and ignorance of what an assault rifle really is.

Here is a snippet from an article: (yes, I know it's associated with the NRA, but find falsehood in this article if you can)

Historically Speaking

The development of the rifle known today as the AR-15 started in 1956. The strategy to ban it was unveiled in 1988.

At that time, Josh Sugarmann, former communications director of the National Coalition to Ban Handguns, pointed out in a strategy paper that the media had grown tired of the handgun issue, but “assault weapons” would be novel to them.

Further, he added in the memo, “The semi-automatic weapons’ menacing looks, coupled with the public’s confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons—anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun—can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons” (“Assault Weapons and Accessories in America,” Education Fund to End Handgun Violence and New Right Watch, Sept. 1988).

Sugarmann was exactly right. The gun prohibition groups successfully created and then exploited public confusion. In 1989, California was the first state to ban so-called “assault rifles” or “assault weapons.” The gun-banners did not use the term “assault rifle” in the proper technical sense—that is, an intermediate power combat rifle that has a selector switch so that the gun can fire either automatically or semi-automatically. Instead, the prohibitionists tricked legislatures into banning guns that could only fire as semi-autos, but which looked like selective-fire military rifles.


[link to www.nrapublications.org]

Thank you for responding!

I agree that not all on the left want to disarm America completely. That's why although I usually am hard on libtards, I didn't bring party affilation into the OP.

I do know democrats who are gun owners. I get that.


So are you saying you are for an assault Rifle ban? Or large clips being banned?

Brainwashing. The same folks that voted a man into the world's most powerful position, without a qualifying resume. Ask any of them what part of O's resume they think most qualifies him to be president, you'll get a glossy eyed glazed look in return. Ask what statistic, or objective reason to ban guns, you get a 'cow at a new gate' look. Brainwashing at its finest.

[link to www.youtube.com (secure)]

You know, you are most likely correct. More and more it seems the answer to all these questions and problems is an uninformed ignorant public.

I agree with this.

Did every oppressor in the history of your planet, NOT, take guns away before having away?

No?

Or are you in delusional satanic hate?

Gun control certainly didn't work with that lunatic that shot the fireman a few days ago. Again, criminals with guns....

This guy gets it!

The problem with gun grabbers is the fact that they will kill people to make their point. Look at Port Arthur. There is no way a retarded boy killed all those people with perfect head shots. There is speculation that Newtown may have been the same kind of set-up. I don't know how much of our recent problems have been arranged by by Barry and Hillary, but it is looking a little too convienient.

Yea, theres another aspect we havn't looked at yet in this thread...

The possibility a lot of these incidents are staged.

Thanks Epic Beard Dude!

Have you ever thought that gun ownership could just give you an illusion of freedom or security?

And do you know what "civilian" means?

The freedom may be an illusion, but the security is absolutely real.

So many people are scared shitless HEISENBERG, it seems the first thing they look to is our twisted culture of fear which is beyond any understanding to me as well.

Your not alone in your assessment.

I try to look at most issues like a detective. There are no coincidences and nothing is convenient.

It seems you are tip toeing around the question.

So what if your right, give them up and let the tyranny begin.
That's kind of how it reads.

Well its not exactly so. Lets say we have burglars.. they may steal but they rarely shoot to kill (the same with bank robbers etc). If they know or suspect that you carry a gun they will probably kill you at site.

Probability or probably?

Im not, I just try to express my thesis on this. In my country we have seen all, a civil war and a couple of dictatorships. The civil war right after the end of WII was between two groups of people who had guns (right and left) and they were military groups, still the civilians were more or less safe.
The last dictatorship was imposed with no killings at all. Not a gun shot. Nothing. Then the revolution came by underground resistance not military comfrontation. If you look at the main event that lead to the end of this dictatorship, that is the Polytechnic uprising, we had tanks against unarmed people (students mostly but also builders and other groups that revolt).
I dont want to imagine what would happen if we had guns.. guns against tanks?
So I think you need people who are alert, who are brave and determinded.
And anyway, if there ever be a need for guns, we know where they hold (stock) them.

But while we are in peace i find it very upseting to have strangers walking around me with guns for their own protection.

This Nation has been violent since its birth. It remains that way today.

Sorry OP, not trying to step on your toes.

That is an important statement. It's fear, you shouldn't be afraid.