They make *what* for kids!?

[Condunum]

Getting rid of the second amendment=/=taking away every gun.

But it makes it to where I no longer have the right to have a gun, making it possible for the state to take my guns. I will never give in to that.

That is a violation of my natural rights to life, liberty and property. Two of three actually.

There is no such thing as a natural right.

[Cosara]

listen to all these moralfags in here complaining about a kid having a gun. see, this is why we have so many fags and fag enablers in this country. we need to teach kids as if they were our own and not "kids".

Boring shitty troll is boring and shitty.

[Thoricia]

This would entirely depend on what those stiffer regulations are and their effect.

Regulations meaning:

1. Must show license to purchase a gun (close the gun show loopholes) They do at my gun shows
2. Must have background checks to purchase a gun if license is not present They do with my license at the gun shows, you must have a license
3. Must have background checks and psychological profiling every X amount of years to determine gun ownership eligibility. No
4. Revoke right to own or operate a firearm if the offender has broken the law (depending on the law broken). And they already do this as well DV even misdemeanor ones preclude you from owning and buying firearms in my state which is a red as a brick

Something along those lines.

[Neo Arcad]

This would entirely depend on what those stiffer regulations are and their effect.

Regulations meaning:

1. Must show license to purchase a gun (close the gun show loopholes)
2. Must have background checks to purchase a gun if license is not present
3. Must have background checks and psychological profiling every X amount of years to determine gun ownership eligibility.
4. Revoke right to own or operate a firearm if the offender has broken the law (depending on the law broken).

Something along those lines.

I don't like #3, it's got too much of a possibility for exploitation by the state, if they ever decide to go full retard. #4 and #2 both already exist. #1... what do you mean by a "license"? Gun licenses like they've got in Britain? Again, I'm not fond of that concept, and wouldn't support it.

[Lemanrussland]

Exactly, rights can only be defended, in the end, by force. There is no such thing as a natural right, which is inviolable and to which you're entitled. Animals don't have the right to life or property, they have to fight to defend themselves, or die. That is the real natural law.

This is why the US Bill of Rights includes the right to bear arms.

You act like your average joe's hunting shotgun or rifle can protect him from drones, tanks, and cruise missiles.

Tanks were invented as a mobile form of armor for infantry so they wouldn't get cut down by machine guns during WWI. The big guns were just a bonus.

I don't want to get too bogged down in this, but if something like this actually happened in the US, it wouldn't be a conventional war, and you would probably have large parts of the military defecting to the rebel side. Small arms and determination can beat technology and conventional military strength, as we've seen again and again in the 20th and 21st centuries.

That being said, that sort of thing ever happening is quite unlikely. We could probably become a dictatorship before we'd have some kind of rebellion or civil war.

[Esparmuran]

Ban kids.

[Cosara]

This would entirely depend on what those stiffer regulations are and their effect.

Regulations meaning:

1. Must show license to purchase a gun (close the gun show loopholes)
2. Must have background checks to purchase a gun if license is not present
3. Must have background checks and psychological profiling every X amount of years to determine gun ownership eligibility.
4. Revoke right to own or operate a firearm if the offender has broken the law (depending on the law broken).

Something along those lines.

All except 3 are already done.

[Agymnum]

You act like your average joe's hunting shotgun or rifle can protect him from drones, tanks, and cruise missiles.

Tanks were invented as a mobile form of armor for infantry so they wouldn't get cut down by machine guns during WWI. The big guns were just a bonus.

I don't want to get too bogged down in this, but if something like this actually happened in the US, it wouldn't be a conventional war, and you would probably have large parts of the military defecting to the rebel side. Small arms and determination can beat technology and conventional military strength, as we've seen again and again in the 20th and 21st centuries.

That being said, that sort of thing ever happening is quite unlikely. We could probably become a dictatorship before we'd have some kind of rebellion or civil war.

You understand that when the south seceded because they claimed the north to be violating their right to slavery, the south got their asses handed to them, right?

[Reichsland]

I live in Tennessee and even I can say that I don't know of anyone who gives their 5 year old a gun, much less let him play with one. Are there some out there? Much more than likely, I just haven't met them.

[The Land Fomerly Known as Ligerplace]

Ban kids.

Finally, some common sense in here.

[Condunum]

You act like your average joe's hunting shotgun or rifle can protect him from drones, tanks, and cruise missiles.

Tanks were invented as a mobile form of armor for infantry so they wouldn't get cut down by machine guns during WWI. The big guns were just a bonus.

I don't want to get too bogged down in this, but if something like this actually happened in the US, it wouldn't be a conventional war, and you would probably have large parts of the military defecting to the rebel side.

Doubtful.

Small arms and determination can beat technology and conventional military strength, as we've seen again and again in the 20th and 21st centuries.

Entirely dependent on the environment.

[Agymnum]

Regulations meaning:

1. Must show license to purchase a gun (close the gun show loopholes)
2. Must have background checks to purchase a gun if license is not present
3. Must have background checks and psychological profiling every X amount of years to determine gun ownership eligibility.
4. Revoke right to own or operate a firearm if the offender has broken the law (depending on the law broken).

Something along those lines.

All except 3 are already done.

I feel like 3 is the most important. If someone has a license, doesn't mean they'll be mentally and psychologically fit to use firearms for the rest of their life. Circumstances change, and you need to be able to judge how able and fit someone is to own a firearm right now, and not how fit he was 30 years ago.

Much like how we renew licenses at the DMV. I'd like a similar system for gun licenses.

[Thoricia]

I don't want to get too bogged down in this, but if something like this actually happened in the US, it wouldn't be a conventional war, and you would probably have large parts of the military defecting to the rebel side. Small arms and determination can beat technology and conventional military strength, as we've seen again and again in the 20th and 21st centuries.

That being said, that sort of thing ever happening is quite unlikely. We could probably become a dictatorship before we'd have some kind of rebellion or civil war.

You understand that when the south seceded because they claimed the north to be violating their right to slavery, the south got their asses handed to them, right?

This wouldn't be a south vs north kinda thing though, more guerilla and insurgent.

[Condunum]

I don't want to get too bogged down in this, but if something like this actually happened in the US, it wouldn't be a conventional war, and you would probably have large parts of the military defecting to the rebel side. Small arms and determination can beat technology and conventional military strength, as we've seen again and again in the 20th and 21st centuries.

That being said, that sort of thing ever happening is quite unlikely. We could probably become a dictatorship before we'd have some kind of rebellion or civil war.

You understand that when the south seceded because they claimed the north to be violating their right to slavery, the south got their asses handed to them, right?

Actually, the North got their asses handed to them. They just outproduced the South in a war of economic attrition.

[Occupied Deutschland]

This would entirely depend on what those stiffer regulations are and their effect.

Regulations meaning:

1. Must show license to purchase a gun (close the gun show loopholes)
2. Must have background checks to purchase a gun if license is not present
3. Must have background checks and psychological profiling every X amount of years to determine gun ownership eligibility.
4. Revoke right to own or operate a firearm if the offender has broken the law (depending on the law broken).

Something along those lines.

Other than three it's acceptable to this gun-nut.

A regular background check is pointless if the right is revoked upon a law being broken. They'll be incapable of getting a gun because of that law they broke. Psychological profiles are both ineffective in predicting future behavior, private information to begin with, and subjective measurements of a person (there's no way a national standard could be made that was in any way useful). It's also discriminatory towards firearms owners/operators.

Keep a federal database out of it and just form 4473 that bitch upon transfer (the firearm, in this case being 'that bitch') and it sounds okay to me. Maybe loosen some import restrictions to make up for the added cost FFL routing would require.

[Lunatic Goofballs]

*** Warned for trolling ***

I'm pretty sure this is the boring shitty troll Goofballs but I could be wrong sorry for the trollnaming if it isn't

Could be. I don't have the tools at my disposal that a game moderator does, but from what I can see with the tools available, I'm not sure. There are some counter-indications.

[The Land Fomerly Known as Ligerplace]

I don't want to get too bogged down in this, but if something like this actually happened in the US, it wouldn't be a conventional war, and you would probably have large parts of the military defecting to the rebel side.

Doubtful.

Small arms and determination can beat technology and conventional military strength, as we've seen again and again in the 20th and 21st centuries.

Entirely dependent on the environment.

"Beat" is an iffy word to use.

And that "victory" has a high cost.

[Agymnum]

You understand that when the south seceded because they claimed the north to be violating their right to slavery, the south got their asses handed to them, right?

Actually, the North got their asses handed to them. They just outproduced the South in a war of economic attrition.

So...

Gun owners mostly populate rural areas.

Gun control advocates mostly populate suburbs and urban areas...

I'm seeing a pattern here. The gun control advocates have superior economic production, and the gun owners control the agribusiness that the south controlled prior to the Civil War.

So... Who's going to win again?

[Lemanrussland]

I don't want to get too bogged down in this, but if something like this actually happened in the US, it wouldn't be a conventional war, and you would probably have large parts of the military defecting to the rebel side. Small arms and determination can beat technology and conventional military strength, as we've seen again and again in the 20th and 21st centuries.

That being said, that sort of thing ever happening is quite unlikely. We could probably become a dictatorship before we'd have some kind of rebellion or civil war.

You understand that when the south seceded because they claimed the north to be violating their right to slavery, the south got their asses handed to them, right?

You understand that the North Vietnamese and Viet Cong successfully resisted the French, and then the Americans for years and years, absorbed millions of casualties, largely with small arms?

As I've said, I don't want to get into some kind of tit for tat argument, so we'll agree to disagree.

[Condunum]

Actually, the North got their asses handed to them. They just outproduced the South in a war of economic attrition.

So...

Gun owners mostly populate rural areas.

Gun control advocates mostly populate suburbs and urban areas...

I'm seeing a pattern here. The gun control advocates have superior economic production, and the gun owners control the agribusiness that the south controlled prior to the Civil War.

So... Who's going to win again?

Exactly.

[Thoricia]

I live in Tennessee and even I can say that I don't know of anyone who gives their 5 year old a gun, much less let him play with one. Are there some out there? Much more than likely, I just haven't met them.

I know a bunch of the A-holes around here will flame me but I plan on buying my daughter a cricket for her 6th birthday, I do however plan on leaving it locked in the gun safe with the bolt pulled and a cable lock ran through the action.

[Neplesia]

To be honest I don't see anything wrong with this. If there is proper supervision and the weapon is kept in a safe unless it's being used, then there shouldn't be an issue here. Parents should be able to instruct their children in how to use firearms, and any law that restricted this would restrict the freedom of the people.

[Agymnum]

I live in Tennessee and even I can say that I don't know of anyone who gives their 5 year old a gun, much less let him play with one. Are there some out there? Much more than likely, I just haven't met them.

I know a bunch of the A-holes around here will flame me but I plan on buying my daughter a cricket for her 6th birthday, I do however plan on leaving it locked in the gun safe with the bolt pulled and a cable lock ran through the action.

Bit young, no?

But I'm not a parent, so, to each his own.

[The Rich Port]

I don't want to get too bogged down in this, but if something like this actually happened in the US, it wouldn't be a conventional war, and you would probably have large parts of the military defecting to the rebel side. Small arms and determination can beat technology and conventional military strength, as we've seen again and again in the 20th and 21st centuries.

That being said, that sort of thing ever happening is quite unlikely. We could probably become a dictatorship before we'd have some kind of rebellion or civil war.

You understand that when the south seceded because they claimed the north to be violating their right to slavery, the south got their asses handed to them, right?

To be fair, that was a close call.

To be "unfair", nobody in their right mind would join this really stupid rebellion.

Are the "rebels" going to give the soldiers their paychecks?

Or will the Neo-Confederates use bullets as currency?

Besides, this is assuming it will be a large enough contingent to actually contest the U.S. Fucking Military.

[Miss Defied]

*sigh*
I suppose you're right. I shouldn't, should I?
It's just that there are plenty of posters here who actually have decent, well-thought out opinions and are able to properly support their arguments. General isn't the same as F7. The fact is that not everyone here is just typing whatever bullshit pops into their heads at any given moment. There are people who are actually sincere about their posting.

And then you have people who feel the need to talk about fake relatives.

That last part was pointless why try to aggravate the situation more?

Aggravating what situation? It isn't pointless because it specifically addresses the poster I was speaking to with my credibility comment.
What was pointless was your "why u take peeple srsly" comment. In case you missed it, I was commenting based on the following exchange:

Oh ya I've never met the guy who takes me hunting and taught me how to shoot and clean guns right?

I wonder, is all. It seems very convenient that in the middle of a discussion on guns and their uses, you suddenly have a dirt-poor uncle who feeds his family exclusively on the meat he hunts.

Oh ya I make up characters to argue my points.

A former poster, The Mongol Ilkhanate, crashed and burned here because he constantly made shit up, was called out on making shit up and then admitted to making shit up. I was letting The Broken Imperial Sector know that it probably isn't a wise course of action to take.