NATION

PASSWORD

Should Assault Weapons be banned?

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

Should Assault Weapons be banned?

Yes.
426
36%
No.
755
64%
 
Total votes : 1181

User avatar
Republica Newland
Minister
 
Posts: 2623
Founded: Oct 19, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Republica Newland » Sun Mar 03, 2013 12:26 pm

Divair wrote:
Republica Newland wrote:That actually worked wonders for the Arabs, although they've got a bit to go in Syria.

Do.. Do you even read what I post? The Libyan rebels had the backing of the entire West. They received a ton of weapons and air support from the West. Where do you plan on finding a country that's even more militaristic than the USA to supply the American rebels and to beat the USAF?


Oh I'm sure they'll find a silly,naive,weak little nation to put up with the big US of A. China,Russia,Iran,North Korea - among others - come to mind.
F Scale: 2.9(3)
Economic Left/Right: 0.12
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.10
Aloha.
I play RL-concious. That's just how I roll. Deal with it.
GOODIES IN STOCK!!! - Republica Arms™ - SEARCH FOR TFLRN IN GLOBAL ECONOMICS&TRADE!

User avatar
Jormengand
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8414
Founded: May 22, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Jormengand » Sun Mar 03, 2013 12:28 pm

Divair wrote:Death is nothing. Nothing is the absolute worst state possible.


Even beyond torture? Would you thus prefer, hypothetically, to go to Hell than die properly?
Jormengand wrote:It would be really meta if I sigged this.

User avatar
Divair
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63434
Founded: May 06, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Divair » Sun Mar 03, 2013 12:29 pm

Republica Newland wrote:Oh I'm sure they'll find a silly,naive,weak little nation to put up with the big US of A. China,Russia,Iran,North Korea - among others - come to mind.

So which of those countries is going to destroy the USAF, again?

User avatar
Cosara
Senator
 
Posts: 4339
Founded: Nov 06, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Cosara » Sun Mar 03, 2013 12:29 pm

Divair wrote:
Alekera wrote:The concentration camp survivors beg to differ...

Many of them went on to live long, happy lives with families. Why would I surrender that opportunity to die for nothing?


So you ignore the thousands that were killed.
"Do not lose hope; St. Joseph also had moments of doubt. but he never lost faith and was able to overcome them in the certainty that God never abandons us." -Pope Francis

"We are never defeated unless we give up on god." -Ronald Reagan

User avatar
Divair
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63434
Founded: May 06, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Divair » Sun Mar 03, 2013 12:29 pm

Jormengand wrote:Even beyond torture? Would you thus prefer, hypothetically, to go to Hell than die properly?

Given the literal definition of Hell according to Christianity, no. One exception.

User avatar
Divair
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63434
Founded: May 06, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Divair » Sun Mar 03, 2013 12:29 pm

Cosara wrote:
Divair wrote:Many of them went on to live long, happy lives with families. Why would I surrender that opportunity to die for nothing?


So you ignore the thousands that were killed.

How did you reach that conclusion?

User avatar
Grinning Dragon
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5581
Founded: May 16, 2011
Anarchy

Postby Grinning Dragon » Sun Mar 03, 2013 12:30 pm

Divair wrote:
Grinning Dragon wrote:So far I am with you Divair, but what if a tyrannical govt brought in outside help? Surely (and no I am not calling you Shirley :P) having the help of an armed populace would be beneficial.

Which military would offer support to the theoretical tyrannical government? And which military could beat the US military?


Why would you assume a tyrannical govt would just make a deal with one other outside force? A tyrannical govt would try its best to encourage multiple forces to join in their war. I guess I could see some sort of UN type of cooperation in aiding a tyrannical govt. Without increasing personnel a single force fighting on multiple fronts would wear it thin, yes?
I prefer Dangerous Freedom over peaceful slavery! Sic Semper Tyrannis!
Gun-Control is the belief that declawing the cat will protect it against other animals; also why are anti-gun people so violent?
Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery!
Socialism- the herpes of economic systems.
My Constitutional Rights trump your dead. Proud American infidel since the 1970's-Deus Vult
The made up term "toxic masculinity" is founded on nonsense psychologism

User avatar
Divair
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63434
Founded: May 06, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Divair » Sun Mar 03, 2013 12:31 pm

Grinning Dragon wrote:
Divair wrote:Which military would offer support to the theoretical tyrannical government? And which military could beat the US military?


Why would you assume a tyrannical govt would just make a deal with one other outside force? A tyrannical govt would try its best to encourage multiple forces to join in their war. I guess I could see some sort of UN type of cooperation in aiding a tyrannical govt. Without increasing personnel a single force fighting on multiple fronts would wear it thin, yes?

The US military spending is almost half of the entire globe's. Unless you somehow manage to convince the rest of the planet to join the war, and then someone efficiently bring them over and supply them, you cannot beat the US military on its own home territory.
Last edited by Divair on Sun Mar 03, 2013 12:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Jormengand
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8414
Founded: May 22, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Jormengand » Sun Mar 03, 2013 12:31 pm

Divair wrote:
Jormengand wrote:Even beyond torture? Would you thus prefer, hypothetically, to go to Hell than die properly?

Given the literal definition of Hell according to Christianity, no. One exception.

But you would prefer torture to death?
Jormengand wrote:It would be really meta if I sigged this.

User avatar
Divair
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63434
Founded: May 06, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Divair » Sun Mar 03, 2013 12:32 pm

Jormengand wrote:But you would prefer torture to death?

If it's inevitable death, no. But the opportunity of survival, even if very slim, is better than nothing.

User avatar
Republica Newland
Minister
 
Posts: 2623
Founded: Oct 19, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Republica Newland » Sun Mar 03, 2013 12:32 pm

Divair wrote:
Republica Newland wrote:Oh I'm sure they'll find a silly,naive,weak little nation to put up with the big US of A. China,Russia,Iran,North Korea - among others - come to mind.

So which of those countries is going to destroy the USAF, again?


Maybe they would,together. I do have to mention they would have it a lot easier for them if,say,some USAF planes got shot done before even taking off properly or the USAF had its' fuel or maintenance cut off. But then again,that would never happen,cause civilians owning guns is wrong and useless anyway.
F Scale: 2.9(3)
Economic Left/Right: 0.12
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.10
Aloha.
I play RL-concious. That's just how I roll. Deal with it.
GOODIES IN STOCK!!! - Republica Arms™ - SEARCH FOR TFLRN IN GLOBAL ECONOMICS&TRADE!

User avatar
Divair
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63434
Founded: May 06, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Divair » Sun Mar 03, 2013 12:33 pm

Republica Newland wrote:Maybe they would,together. I do have to mention they would have it a lot easier for them if,say,some USAF planes got shot done before even taking off properly or the USAF had its' fuel or maintenance cut off. But then again,that would never happen,cause civilians owning guns is wrong and useless anyway.

So a bunch of untrained civilians with rifles is going to somehow synchronize a national attack and destroy the USAF.

Seems legit.




Come to think of it, why would they support the rebels? They're tyrannical themselves. They'd support the government, if anything.
Last edited by Divair on Sun Mar 03, 2013 12:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Grinning Dragon
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5581
Founded: May 16, 2011
Anarchy

Postby Grinning Dragon » Sun Mar 03, 2013 12:41 pm

Divair wrote:
Grinning Dragon wrote:
Why would you assume a tyrannical govt would just make a deal with one other outside force? A tyrannical govt would try its best to encourage multiple forces to join in their war. I guess I could see some sort of UN type of cooperation in aiding a tyrannical govt. Without increasing personnel a single force fighting on multiple fronts would wear it thin, yes?

The US military spending is almost half of the entire globe's. Unless you somehow manage to convince the rest of the planet to join the war, and then someone efficiently bring them over and supply them, you cannot beat the US military on its own home territory.


Point taken, but you would be amiss to dismiss China, Russia and oh hell, throw in North Korea, those countries would love the opportunity to jump at the chance to take advantage of another American civil war.
I prefer Dangerous Freedom over peaceful slavery! Sic Semper Tyrannis!
Gun-Control is the belief that declawing the cat will protect it against other animals; also why are anti-gun people so violent?
Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery!
Socialism- the herpes of economic systems.
My Constitutional Rights trump your dead. Proud American infidel since the 1970's-Deus Vult
The made up term "toxic masculinity" is founded on nonsense psychologism

User avatar
Republica Newland
Minister
 
Posts: 2623
Founded: Oct 19, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Republica Newland » Sun Mar 03, 2013 12:41 pm

Divair wrote:
Republica Newland wrote:Maybe they would,together. I do have to mention they would have it a lot easier for them if,say,some USAF planes got shot done before even taking off properly or the USAF had its' fuel or maintenance cut off. But then again,that would never happen,cause civilians owning guns is wrong and useless anyway.

So a bunch of untrained civilians with rifles is going to somehow synchronize a national attack and destroy the USAF.

Seems legit.




Come to think of it, why would they support the rebels? They're tyrannical themselves. They'd support the government, if anything.


Listen,the whole defecting of the military thing only ever happened because of civilian action. Without the civilians getting involved,the Arab Spring wouldn't have happened.
F Scale: 2.9(3)
Economic Left/Right: 0.12
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.10
Aloha.
I play RL-concious. That's just how I roll. Deal with it.
GOODIES IN STOCK!!! - Republica Arms™ - SEARCH FOR TFLRN IN GLOBAL ECONOMICS&TRADE!

User avatar
Republica Newland
Minister
 
Posts: 2623
Founded: Oct 19, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Republica Newland » Sun Mar 03, 2013 12:42 pm

Grinning Dragon wrote:
Divair wrote:The US military spending is almost half of the entire globe's. Unless you somehow manage to convince the rest of the planet to join the war, and then someone efficiently bring them over and supply them, you cannot beat the US military on its own home territory.


Point taken, but you would be amiss to dismiss China, Russia and oh hell, throw in North Korea, those countries would love the opportunity to jump at the chance to take advantage of another American civil war.


They would probably fight on both sides just for the lulz.
F Scale: 2.9(3)
Economic Left/Right: 0.12
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.10
Aloha.
I play RL-concious. That's just how I roll. Deal with it.
GOODIES IN STOCK!!! - Republica Arms™ - SEARCH FOR TFLRN IN GLOBAL ECONOMICS&TRADE!

User avatar
Divair
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63434
Founded: May 06, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Divair » Sun Mar 03, 2013 12:42 pm

Grinning Dragon wrote:
Divair wrote:The US military spending is almost half of the entire globe's. Unless you somehow manage to convince the rest of the planet to join the war, and then someone efficiently bring them over and supply them, you cannot beat the US military on its own home territory.


Point taken, but you would be amiss to dismiss China, Russia and oh hell, throw in North Korea, those countries would love the opportunity to jump at the chance to take advantage of another American civil war.

Of course they would. But in both scenarios, they're irrelevant. Either they support the government so it crushes the rebels even further, or they support the government and they lose because the US military is better.


Anyway, this has been fun, but I must be going. Later, lads.

User avatar
Divair
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63434
Founded: May 06, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Divair » Sun Mar 03, 2013 12:43 pm

Republica Newland wrote:Listen,the whole defecting of the military thing only ever happened because of civilian action. Without the civilians getting involved,the Arab Spring wouldn't have happened.

Without the West, the Arab Spring would have been crushed. When there's a replacement for the West that's more powerful than the theoretical US tyrannical government, let me know, then we'll talk.



Laters.
Last edited by Divair on Sun Mar 03, 2013 12:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Republica Newland
Minister
 
Posts: 2623
Founded: Oct 19, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Republica Newland » Sun Mar 03, 2013 12:43 pm

Divair wrote:
Grinning Dragon wrote:
Point taken, but you would be amiss to dismiss China, Russia and oh hell, throw in North Korea, those countries would love the opportunity to jump at the chance to take advantage of another American civil war.

Of course they would. But in both scenarios, they're irrelevant. Either they support the government so it crushes the rebels even further, or they support the government and they lose because the US military is better.


Anyway, this has been fun, but I must be going. Later, lads.


I wouldn't bet my money on that. How is the USAF supposed to function properly if it can't land its' planes for shit?
F Scale: 2.9(3)
Economic Left/Right: 0.12
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.10
Aloha.
I play RL-concious. That's just how I roll. Deal with it.
GOODIES IN STOCK!!! - Republica Arms™ - SEARCH FOR TFLRN IN GLOBAL ECONOMICS&TRADE!

User avatar
Idaho Conservatives
Minister
 
Posts: 3066
Founded: Jul 27, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Idaho Conservatives » Sun Mar 03, 2013 12:44 pm

Haven't we had enough gun control threads over the last three months?

Grinning Dragon wrote:.A full auto firearm must be transferred through a firearms dealer that is licensed as a "Class III" dealer. You must apply to the Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. You must meet the same requirements as those to buy any other firearm (age, criminal record, etc). The application, together with a $200 tax fee, a completed fingerprint card, and approval from your local law enforcement is submitted to the BATFE. When approved the BATFE returns the paperwork to you and the dealer, and you can pick up your firearm.



You have to wait for your $50,000 check to clear as well.
"Lead me, follow me, or get out of my way" --General George S. Patton

If You're A Fellow Ham, TG me!!!
KF7LCE

User avatar
Condunum
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 26273
Founded: Apr 26, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Condunum » Sun Mar 03, 2013 12:44 pm

If we ban assault weapons it obviously means that Obama will have a third term and then become president for life.

BAN THEM ALL
password scrambled

User avatar
Republica Newland
Minister
 
Posts: 2623
Founded: Oct 19, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Republica Newland » Sun Mar 03, 2013 12:46 pm

Divair wrote:
Republica Newland wrote:Listen,the whole defecting of the military thing only ever happened because of civilian action. Without the civilians getting involved,the Arab Spring wouldn't have happened.

Without the West, the Arab Spring would have been crushed. When there's a replacement for the West that's more powerful than the theoretical US tyrannical government, let me know, then we'll talk.



Laters.


The "East" would sure give them a a run for their money. Not to mention how the entire USAF would be rapidly turned to dust if they have no place to land.
F Scale: 2.9(3)
Economic Left/Right: 0.12
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.10
Aloha.
I play RL-concious. That's just how I roll. Deal with it.
GOODIES IN STOCK!!! - Republica Arms™ - SEARCH FOR TFLRN IN GLOBAL ECONOMICS&TRADE!

User avatar
DEC-LAND
Diplomat
 
Posts: 892
Founded: Mar 02, 2013
Ex-Nation

No weapons bans period

Postby DEC-LAND » Sun Mar 03, 2013 12:47 pm

Hungry wrote:Ban Everything, Legalize Anything, Republicans 2020.

I don't think any weapons should be necessarily banned, but a Magazine Limit (Amount of Rounds) and an amount of Magazines you can purchase a year limit should be put.

May I just say that most of the ammo and fire-arm used in murders are illegally purchased
Join region: AELDORIN DEFCON=4

Any questions? TG me!

HUMAN AND FOUNDER OF THE NS PURITY ALLIANCE
Member of the Geofictional Works Society!
"My posts are like the movie The Shawshank Redemption: They're really good."
Путин - хуйло

User avatar
Republica Newland
Minister
 
Posts: 2623
Founded: Oct 19, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Republica Newland » Sun Mar 03, 2013 12:54 pm

DEC-LAND wrote:
Hungry wrote:Ban Everything, Legalize Anything, Republicans 2020.

I don't think any weapons should be necessarily banned, but a Magazine Limit (Amount of Rounds) and an amount of Magazines you can purchase a year limit should be put.

May I just say that most of the ammo and fire-arm used in murders are illegally purchased


FACTS? WE'RE AFRAID OF FACTS!!!!!!!!!!
F Scale: 2.9(3)
Economic Left/Right: 0.12
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.10
Aloha.
I play RL-concious. That's just how I roll. Deal with it.
GOODIES IN STOCK!!! - Republica Arms™ - SEARCH FOR TFLRN IN GLOBAL ECONOMICS&TRADE!

User avatar
The Andrewtopian Republic
Envoy
 
Posts: 214
Founded: Feb 05, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby The Andrewtopian Republic » Sun Mar 03, 2013 12:57 pm

Here's where I stand:
-total ban on fully automatic weapons
-tighter handgun regulations; stronger background checks, a registry system, and a pistol license similar to a drivers' license

Basically, I see no legitimate reason to own an AK-47. There are better things out there for hunting or range shooting. And I can see wanting to own a semi-automatic pistol for self-defense or hunting, but due to the high rate of pistol crime, tighter regulations are obviously needed. A registry and license system should suffice.
Fiscal/economic - left
Social - strong libertarian
Foreign policy - Libertarian
capital city weather: http://solm.me/udl/weather/img/deloera_ ... n_rep..png

User avatar
Immoren
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 62800
Founded: Mar 20, 2010
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Immoren » Sun Mar 03, 2013 1:01 pm

The Andrewtopian Republic wrote:Here's where I stand:
-total ban on fully automatic weapons
-tighter handgun regulations; stronger background checks, a registry system, and a pistol license similar to a drivers' license

Basically, I see no legitimate reason to own an AK-47. There are better things out there for hunting or range shooting. And I can see wanting to own a semi-automatic pistol for self-defense or hunting, but due to the high rate of pistol crime, tighter regulations are obviously needed. A registry and license system should suffice.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Practical_shooting
IC Flag Is a Pope Principia
I ᴛʜɪɴᴋ I'ᴠᴇ ᴊᴜsᴛ ʜᴀᴅ ᴀ ɴᴇᴀʀ Aʀᴀʀᴀɢɪ ᴇxᴘᴇʀɪᴇɴᴄᴇ.
— Death. Probably.

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ameriganastan, Chari1and, Demoness, Dresderstan, Evil Dictators Happyland, Fahran, Great New England Confederation, Greater Loegria, Grenartia, Hediacrana, Hollibourn, Ism, Kaystein, Liriena, Loben, Mr McGregors Garden, Nasc, Nickel Empire, Northwest Slobovia, Ostroeuropa, Poofer, Primorye Oblast, Risen Prussia, Shofercia, Shrillland, Tarsonis, Technocratic Uganda, The Galactic Liberal Democracy, The United Artherian Federation, Thermodolia, Tysoania, Valrifell, Yusseria

Advertisement

Remove ads