Repeal the 2nd Amendment

[Transhuman Proteus]

so? the american plains don't have that much population anyways, most of it is east/west coasts which do have lots of forests, i would hate having to fight an insurgent army hiding in the foothills of california or the sierra nevada.

I'd hate fighting an insugency in NYC or LA. THey can barely keep the gangs in line now, imagine how hard it would be with a massive, organized effort.

That's because it is a police problem, with legal rights and all of that. The gangs aren't fighting a war against a police force breaking out attack helicopters and missiles with the aim of killing them.

In fact, i would go so far to say that if there were armed people in the colorado theater other that the crazy gunman, ALOT less people wouldve died, cuz he wouldve been taken down, not be allowed to rampage against everyone there.

Actually that just makes me think "cross fire" and even more deaths. Exactly what you want in an enclosed space filled with panicking people - multiple shooters.

Since just having a gun doesn't mean you are a good shooter, or cool under pressure. Doesn't turn you into a Clint Estwood-esque character who would put one between the murderers eyes with ease through the smoke and running people.

Rather meaningless argument, when you think about it. Try applying the sentiment to something else...

"If we ban gay marriage, only criminals will have gay marriages".

Right, as a consequence, ALL criminals will suddenly start marrying their own agenda, and all straight people will suddenly be completely incapable of even comprehending marriage.

There's the problem. If you ban guns, criminals DON'T all suddenly acquire them. They become harder for criminals to get, too - and more expensive, and thus are likely to feature less prominently in crime across the board.

And somehow, people have historically managed to find ways to defend themselves even without guns.

You are right.. it will be more difficult to acquire.. but not impossible... so you are logic fail.. criminals will still have guns and be able to use them against a defenseless populace.. thats NOT a society i would EVER want to live in, thank you very much.

Now unless everyone has the ability to have an armed police officer on the corner at all times... i see this as a very bad idea.

Sooo, Western Nations that do have more stringent gun control laws than the US - deadly hellholes?

My point is, which do you think there are more of: civilian owned anti-tank weapons or military owned tanks in a force strong enough to have already beaten the US military and reached US soil?

Gang's. Big ones would have all manner of hardware. Mercenary groups for hire (They are making nice dough in Chicago now) And like someone said above. If someone pushed back the US military. They would be faced by every big city gang. And they don't have rules.

No rules. And presumably no actual training or experience with front line combat. I'm sure their gang enthusiasm to fight for the nation that will put them in jail will serve them well against helicopters, tanks and missiles. And snipers.

And this is incredibly funny weird. Pro-gun, living in a nation where apparently gangs are more than sufficient to turn back a trained military, I'm not sure how the US hasn't already fallen to gang rule. I guess because they are to busy fighting each other and not the US military. But oh fear the day they unite!

If you make guns illegal, most of those disarmed will be good guys. What if that maniac in the cinema had been shot quickly as soon as he started shooting by a legal gun owner?Would you still want to disarm the people?

What makes you sure a legal gun owner would have been able to shoot him quickly? What if a legal gun owner had tried and just ended up killing people in the resulting crossfire?

Legal gun owner doesn't mean good shooter.

[Chernoslavia]

North Korea would have a hard time invading itself, let alone crossing the fucking Pacific and even setting foot on US soil.

Even if he entire US military were to vanish in a puff of smoke the instant the second amendment were repealed.

like i said, it could be china or russia or canada or something

I like how you crossed out Canada

[Arkinesia]

States can't do anything covered by federal authority. They can have differing regulations but they can't, for instance, take over immigration enforcement, or outright ban firearms. Those are two powers enumerated only to the federal government.

So your argument is that the Feds can't do it because that would be stepping on state powers, and the states can't do it because it's part of the feds jurisdiction?

Seriously?

No.

The feds could theoretically ban handguns, but states cannot ban handguns. States banning handguns oversteps their authority as states, as per the Tenth Amendment.

Said amendment cuts both ways. The federal government can only enumerate certain powers to itself but the states cannot hijack those powers.

[Drekka]

They are pronounced Stinger Missiles.

So you're proposing that gangs would have sufficient stocks of Stinger missiles to fight a continued insurgency against a professional military which has occupied the US - even though they have almost no use for Stingers currently, and even though they'd have no interest in fighting a professional military?

As an occupation would harm "business"
The gangd will do anything to get it back.
If worst comes to worst, their amigoes
Down south( Mexican Cartels) will strike
with some serious black-market ordinance .

[Not Safe For Work]

So you're proposing that gangs would have sufficient stocks of Stinger missiles to fight a continued insurgency against a professional military which has occupied the US - even though they have almost no use for Stingers currently, and even though they'd have no interest in fighting a professional military?

As an occupation would harm "business"
The gangd will do anything to get it back.

All you're really arguing is that an occupying force would bribe local gangs and organized crime.

[Chernoslavia]

Yes it is dude, dont lie about something that everybody knows about.

Source?

Since you failed to provide source when I asked you, why dont you first provide source about the mafia not being an ''american city gang''. Give me a source and ill give you a source simple.

[Tubbsalot]

Since you failed to provide source when I asked you, why dont you first provide source about the mafia not being an ''american city gang''. Give me a source and ill give you a source simple.

You seriously need proof that the Mafiya, which are Russian by definition, are not American?

As an occupation would harm "business"
The gangd will do anything to get it back.
If worst comes to worst, their amigoes
Down south( Mexican Cartels) will strike
with some serious black-market ordinance .

Don't be absurd. Any gang stupid enough to take on a well-organised and entrenched military wouldn't survive a week. The higher levels of the organised gangs will still be looking to make a profit, and they can make it regardless of who's in charge.

The Mexican gangs, by the way, have no reason to care about what's happening in America. As long as they can traffic drugs in for profit, they won't do anything.

[Wikkiwallana]

It doesn't work well in a war.

Actually, I'd think if there was some 'street gang' in a place occupied by an army fighting that army and other street gangs it'd be the 2nd worst situation for the occupying force. They have to secure themselves from the gangs attacks AND protect people from it if they expect to garner any credibility as the new power in charge.

An occupying army that couldn't immediately quash street-gang violence against other street-gangs, much less themselves, would be pretty fucked in the realm of public opinion.

True, which is why I expressed such skepticism that the gangs would be able to hold their own. I was then told said gangs would somehow have access to AA weapons, with the implication that they would have enough to hold off an army for more than 5 minutes. At that point I realized logic wasn't really entering the discussion.

[Not Safe For Work]

im not even sure our own military is big enough to occupy the US lol

Yea. It would be really difficult for
Each soldier to control 400-ish people
each

Again, look at history.

Say... the Siege of Jerusalem. How did just four legions of soldiers not only win, but capture a hundred thousand prisoners - simple. Asymmetrical warfare (the massive technological advantage of.... siege towers), and the fact that most people don't fight.

In other words. yes - a military that is outnumbered four-hundred-to-one with MODERN technology, could easily occupy the US.

[Wikkiwallana]

North Korea would have a hard time invading itself, let alone crossing the fucking Pacific and even setting foot on US soil.

Even if he entire US military were to vanish in a puff of smoke the instant the second amendment were repealed.

like i said, it could be china or russia or canada France Morocco Germany or something

Not really. China has no Navy, so it's not getting to America, Russia isn't really in a good place internally to start shit with us, and Germany has absolutely no reason to do so.

[Sardine World]

like i said, it could be china or russia or canada France Morocco Germany or something

Not really. China has no Navy, so it's not getting to America, Russia isn't really in a good place internally to start shit with us, and Germany has absolutely no reason to do so.

Planes, On the quest for World Domination, Wants to and can

[Chernoslavia]

They are pronounced Stinger Missiles.

So you're proposing that gangs would have sufficient stocks of Stinger missiles to fight a continued insurgency against a professional military which has occupied the US - even though they have almost no use for Stingers currently, and even though they'd have no interest in fighting a professional military?

Yes, big time crime gangs like the Russian mafia, have obvious support and connections to Viktor Bout, Russian high ranking officers, and President Vladimir Putin.

[Wikkiwallana]

So your argument is that the Feds can't do it because that would be stepping on state powers, and the states can't do it because it's part of the feds jurisdiction?

Seriously?

No.

The feds could theoretically ban handguns, but states cannot ban handguns. States banning handguns oversteps their authority as states, as per the Tenth Amendment.

Said amendment cuts both ways. The federal government can only enumerate certain powers to itself but the states cannot hijack those powers.

Where is the power to ban handguns enumerated to the federal government?

[Not Safe For Work]

So you're proposing that gangs would have sufficient stocks of Stinger missiles to fight a continued insurgency against a professional military which has occupied the US - even though they have almost no use for Stingers currently, and even though they'd have no interest in fighting a professional military?

Yes, big time crime gangs like the Russian mafia, have obvious support and connections to Viktor Bout, Russian high ranking officers, and President Vladimir Putin.

Obvious support, you say?

Source?

[Arkinesia]

No.

The feds could theoretically ban handguns, but states cannot ban handguns. States banning handguns oversteps their authority as states, as per the Tenth Amendment.

Said amendment cuts both ways. The federal government can only enumerate certain powers to itself but the states cannot hijack those powers.

Where is the power to ban handguns enumerated to the federal government?

They could begin the amendment process to repeal the Second Amendment.

[Wikkiwallana]

Source?

Since you failed to provide source when I asked you, why dont you first provide source about the mafia not being an ''american city gang''. Give me a source and ill give you a source simple.

You said I was lying. That means I knew better and still said otherwise.

I was not lying, as I was going off of my informal knowledge. If you can prove me wrong, do so, but don't call me a liar.

[Drekka]

As an occupation would harm "business"
The gangd will do anything to get it back.

All you're really arguing is that an occupying force would bribe local gangs and organized crime.

Nope. The gangs would probably help fight off the
Occupation but their interests will still come first.
The gangs will be the one doing all the exploitation,
Trading drugs for weapons with the invaders, then
Killing them later.

[Chernoslavia]

Yes, big time crime gangs like the Russian mafia, have obvious support and connections to Viktor Bout, Russian high ranking officers, and President Vladimir Putin.

Obvious support, you say?

Source?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_mafia

[Wikkiwallana]

Not really. China has no Navy, so it's not getting to America, Russia isn't really in a good place internally to start shit with us, and Germany has absolutely no reason to do so.

Planes, On the quest for World Domination, Wants to and can

Not enough of them, not through military might, and no, respectively.

[Chernoslavia]

Since you failed to provide source when I asked you, why dont you first provide source about the mafia not being an ''american city gang''. Give me a source and ill give you a source simple.

You said I was lying. That means I knew better and still said otherwise.

I was not lying, as I was going off of my informal knowledge. If you can prove me wrong, do so, but don't call me a liar.

I'm still waiting for that source if you have it.

[Wikkiwallana]

So you're proposing that gangs would have sufficient stocks of Stinger missiles to fight a continued insurgency against a professional military which has occupied the US - even though they have almost no use for Stingers currently, and even though they'd have no interest in fighting a professional military?

Yes, big time crime gangs like the Russian mafia, have obvious support and connections to Viktor Bout, Russian high ranking officers, and President Vladimir Putin.

And they give a shit what happens to the US because?

[Tubbsalot]

So you're proposing that gangs would have sufficient stocks of Stinger missiles to fight a continued insurgency against a professional military which has occupied the US - even though they have almost no use for Stingers currently, and even though they'd have no interest in fighting a professional military?

Yes, big time crime gangs like the Russian mafia, have obvious support and connections to Viktor Bout, Russian high ranking officers, and President Vladimir Putin.

Are you on drugs.

[Chernoslavia]

Yes, big time crime gangs like the Russian mafia, have obvious support and connections to Viktor Bout, Russian high ranking officers, and President Vladimir Putin.

And they give a shit what happens to the US because?

They dont give a shit (neither do you) but if you got money, they'll give the contraband its that simple. Now, about that source...

[Wikkiwallana]

Where is the power to ban handguns enumerated to the federal government?

They could begin the amendment process to repeal the Second Amendment.

So could a state, by proposing such an amendment. Never mind that you seem to have missed the point of what he said. Let me repeat it for you.

an interesting thing that cam out of one thread is that the bill of rights was never intended to apply to states. meaning the original intent was that states could ban or limit the ownership of firearms. this fact seems to support a repeal in favour of letting the states have their own say.

[Chernoslavia]

Yes, big time crime gangs like the Russian mafia, have obvious support and connections to Viktor Bout, Russian high ranking officers, and President Vladimir Putin.

Are you on drugs.

Are you?