|
|
Post by Archaix on May 30, 2007 5:47:40 GMT -5
The most interesting argument I ever heard in defence of the public owning guns was: "How will the prolateriat defend itself from the ruling class?" It had me thinking for a while. Eventually I reasoned that, in a democratic, developed country, armed revolution is unnecessary, while in undemocratic, undeveloped countries armed revolution is more feasible.
Anyway, the best quote for this whole topic is: 'Guns don't kill people, people kill people. Guns defend people from people with smaller guns.'
|
|
|
|
Post by silvado on May 30, 2007 17:32:17 GMT -5
Nice quote. Its not the gun's fault that the person using it is abit crazy.
|
|
|
|
Post by Neo Nibu on May 30, 2007 18:12:08 GMT -5
Maybe, but it makes it alot easyer.
Personally shouting 'bang' at someone has less of an affect than a bullet.
And if you don't have guns, what will people use to kill? Their are other ways, but none as easy as a gun.
|
|
|
|
Post by deutschgarten on May 30, 2007 18:28:52 GMT -5
Sure but who's to say that extremists or maybe even just plain criminals won't get there hands on guns in other places and just march into a place with none and take it over killing innocent civillians in the process?
I know it sounds very paranoid but in a world where weapons exist it is very plausible.
|
|
|
|
Post by Neo Nibu on May 30, 2007 19:08:01 GMT -5
Maybe so, but that's why you only let the police and military have them.
|
|
|
|
Post by silvado on May 30, 2007 19:19:53 GMT -5
Banning guns will be like banning drugs. You can't get rid of them.
I know of people owning AKs and M16s and stuff.
|
|
|
|
Post by Neo Nibu on May 30, 2007 19:37:06 GMT -5
Well, what about school shootings? It will be alot harder for a student to get ahold of a fire arm.
It's true you won't be able to get rid of it completey, but banning Guns would be easyer than banning drugs. Drugs are far easyer to hide, and the like.
|
|
|
|
Post by silvado on May 30, 2007 19:40:11 GMT -5
Good point.
|
|
|
|
Post by numnar on Sept 13, 2007 10:01:17 GMT -5
"side note: it is strange that everybody use the AK47 term for the gun...in fact, nobody use it nowadays. They use the AK 74. It has smaller calibre and better accuracy. 5mm, like the m16. Hm, i will make a poll bout assault rifles"
5.45 and the M16 has 5.56 (crappy gun though it is (I'm a pedantic gun nerd ;D ))
If having or not having guns becomes an issue in a revolution then you have already lost (successful revolutions happen when the armed forces either join the revolutionaries or go home (cuba is a slight anomaly but depending on who you ask it might also not be a revolution (anti imperialist/colonialist struggle really))). Also remember who makes the guns.....
I voted other due to the fact that really I don't want guns in the hands of those who would use them against me (be they criminals, soldiers or policemen) the ideal solution would be some form of militia as this is more efficient at catching criminals and defending the state (well as long as the state deserves being defended)
|
|
|
|
Post by Robespierre - P.R. of Debro on Sept 15, 2007 8:54:07 GMT -5
good point ;D
Indeed!
What do you think, was the AK47only a copy of the german StG-44, or was it an independent russian design?
|
|
|
|
Post by Kardas on Sept 15, 2007 23:59:15 GMT -5
I still don't understand why people in the US can have a gun (must be registered of course) in the house.
|
|
|
|
Post by numnar on Sept 16, 2007 14:46:47 GMT -5
good point ;D What do you think, was the AK47only a copy of the german StG-44, or was it an independent russian design? it was deeply indebted to the StG-44 however there are elements of previous russian ideas and weapons in there as well as other german weapons. However the russians stole the german intermediate round entirely (and it was a capable round so who can blame them). The CETME could claim to be the true decendent of WWII german assault riffles (its a series of rifles built and designed in Spain (helped I'm sure by some technical help from ex-Nazi techies)). Gun ownership is so deeply engrained in american culture for a couple of reasons: 1. because hunting was/is a way of providing meat for you and your household (U.S. citizens eat far more wild meat then most of the western world) and hunting is (and is able to be) a major part of their culture. 2. because of the limited powers of the federal government until relitivly recently and the american dislike of any but the most rudimentary police force (recent city exceptions noted) meant that U.S. citizens were used to looking after themselves as there was virtualy nothing central government could do even if it wanted to. |
|
" -Archaix
