Should Assault Weapons be banned?

[Republica Newland]

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.

[Jormengand]

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?

[Divair]

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?

[Cosara]

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.

[Divair]

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.

[Divair]

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?

[Grinning Dragon]

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 ) 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?

[Divair]

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.

[Jormengand]

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?

[Divair]

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.

[Republica Newland]

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.

[Divair]

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.

[Grinning Dragon]

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.

[Republica Newland]

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.

[Republica Newland]

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.

[Divair]

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.

[Divair]

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.

[Republica Newland]

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?

[Idaho Conservatives]

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

.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.

[Condunum]

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

BAN THEM ALL

[Republica Newland]

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.

[DEC-LAND]

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

[Republica Newland]

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!!!!!!!!!!

[The Andrewtopian Republic]

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.

[Immoren]

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