Virginia Gun Dealers Taunt N.Y. Mayor

[senatorlamb]

This is outrageous. I originally wanted to title the thread: white redneck southern bastards need a Yankee whoopin'.



From Huffingtonpost (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20070319/gun-giveaway):

KRISTEN GELINEAU | AP | March 19, 2007 01:38 PM EST


MIDLOTHIAN, Va. — Amid the Confederate flags, anti-Yankee bumper stickers and Civil War relics on display at Bob Moates Sport Shop, a counterattack against the North is under way.

"Ask about the Bloomberg Gun GiveAway" reads a sign taped to the gun shop's register, beckoning customers to enter the drawing named for New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, whose federal lawsuits against gun dealers in five states have drawn the wrath of Virginia's gun enthusiasts.

Bloomberg says the dealers holding the contest are sick. The dealers call Bloomberg names that aren't fit to print.

"The truth is, if Bloomberg hadn't picked on Virginia, we wouldn't have gotten involved. But he made the mistake of stepping into Virginia with this," said Philip Van Cleave, president of the pro-gun Virginia Citizens Defense League and mastermind of the giveaway, which has boosted business for the two participating store owners.

The Republican mayor has sued 27 out-of-state gun dealers, alleging they sold firearms illegally to undercover private investigators conducting a sting for New York. City officials say the dealers have supplied hundreds of weapons used in New York City crimes. The lawsuits, which name dealers in Georgia, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina and Virginia, ask the court to require monitoring of the shops' sales.

Investigators tried to make "straw purchases," in which one person fills out the legal forms and buys a gun for someone else. The practice is prohibited by federal law and is typically used by those who cannot legally own firearms, such as convicted felons.

Nine dealers, including two in Virginia, have settled with the city, agreeing to be monitored by a court-appointed special master. The owners of two Virginia stores being sued said they were forced to close because of crushing legal fees.

But in January, two other store owners began fighting back with the gun giveaway.

Through March 31, customers who spend $100 at either of Bob Moates' stores or at Old Dominion Guns and Tackle in Danville are eligible to win a handgun or a rifle, courtesy of the Defense League. The drawing will be held April 19.

Van Cleave said he came up with the idea as a way to boost sales at the stores, which have shelled out thousands in legal fees.

The contest has only further agitated Bloomberg, who has made gun control a top priority in his second term.

"These are sick people," Bloomberg said in January at the Mayors Against Illegal Guns summit in Washington. "And if they think that this is funny, I don't think that the parents or the spouses or the children of those that get killed with illegal guns would find that very entertaining."

Dave Hancock, who has worked at Bob Moates Sport Shop for 25 years, said of the mayor: "I think he's an idiot."

Bloomberg and others say the lawsuits are aimed at reducing the flow of illegal guns into New York. Mayoral spokesman Jason Post said police statistics show that 90 percent of the guns used in crimes in New York City come from out of state.

But Hancock and other Virginia gun-rights advocates say the lawsuits are nothing more than a publicity stunt and a scheme to drive gun dealers out of business.

Richard Hill, manager of Bob Moates Sport Shop, called the lawsuits a "nice attempt by a politician just trying to get to the White House" and said his store always follows the law.

"The best way to get guns off the street and criminals off the street is to lock 'em up," Hill said. "They seem to want to pick on an old stereotype: It's so easy to get a gun in Virginia and run it up to New York. When quite honestly, you can break into a house anywhere and get anything you like."

Bloomberg's face is on a poster taped to a shotgun rack at Bob Moates, under the words "Here are our worst enemy." Sarah Brady of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence and Wisconsin Gov. Jim Doyle are also pictured, though Bloomberg's face is circled in bright pink highlighter.

The winner will receive a Para-Ordnance handgun worth around $900.

Longtime customer Scott Cashion, 31, of Chesterfield, said he has earned six or seven tickets _ and may end up with more to get back at Bloomberg.

"I bought some kind of for spite," he said while looking over a stack of ammunition. "What he's doing is wrong."

The winner of the contest at Old Dominion Guns and Tackle will get a Browning Varmint Stalker rifle, also worth about $900.

"I've been in business 27 years and I've probably had the best February I've ever had," store owner Dennis Alverson said. "Nobody's got a great likeness for Bloomberg in this area."
___

[atticus1492]

Ha. Oh, America.

[Ambulance X]

Good. Gotta love the 2nd amendment. Way to go VA for fighting for our constitutional rights.

[aminorthreat55]

Good. Gotta love the 2nd amendment. Way to go VA for fighting for our constitutional rights.
Ha.

[senatorlamb]

hmmm maybe the Virginia Tech shooter got a few guns from the Bloomberg Gun Giveaway.

[x togepi x]

hmmm maybe the Virginia Tech shooter got a few guns from the Bloomberg Gun Giveaway.

don't do this.

[cfear]

don't do this.

I think he has to.

[senatorlamb]

don't do this.

I'm not doing anything. There are people out there making comparisons to the coverage of the Iraq War, others making the cases both for and against gun control. I'm not doing that, though I'm sure those debates will be heard. I'm just simply noting the irony because I remember posting this story awhile back.

[CrenshawPunch]

Virginia Tech outlawed guns on its campus, effectively making it impossible for campus police to respond in this situation. The bottom line is that peopl who want guns can get them, no matter what nation, and we need to have the means in place to respond effectively and deal with a situation like this.

[Ambulance X]

Virginia Tech outlawed guns on its campus, effectively making it impossible for campus police to respond in this situation. The bottom line is that peopl who want guns can get them, no matter what nation, and we need to have the means in place to respond effectively and deal with a situation like this.

Bingo

[x togepi x]

I'm not doing anything. There are people out there making comparisons to the coverage of the Iraq War, others making the cases both for and against gun control. I'm not doing that, though I'm sure those debates will be heard. I'm just simply noting the irony because I remember posting this story awhile back.

I know you don't have bad intent, i'm just saying it looks shady. We know that the shootings were based on a set of very complicated motivations, we shouldn't try and boil it down to one issue, that's all i'm saying.

[senatorlamb]

Virginia Tech outlawed guns on its campus, effectively making it impossible for campus police to respond in this situation. The bottom line is that peopl who want guns can get them, no matter what nation, and we need to have the means in place to respond effectively and deal with a situation like this.

the argument some are making, that if legislation passed which permitted to students to conceal weapons, that it may have stopped the killer is a bit flawed. Imagine a shootout between the killer and other students, the death rate might have been higher with people in the crossfire. It may have also caused the police to take the wrong person if multiple people have guns. The only people that were capable of handling the situation were the police. For the record, I'm neutral on gun rights, I see the need for some people to own them and for gun ownership in some ways to be a check on the government and its power.

[x togepi x]

You obviously have never been to Britain.

I have never seen a gun in the hands of anyone who isnt a policeman in my entire life.

Its easy for Americans to say people could get a gun anyway, but it is absolutely not true. Sure hardened criminals can but they dont have whole houses full like thier american counterparts and it definately prevents this kind of thing from happening.

the presence of guns doesn't cause things like this though, it's society. I believe Canada has a higher percentage of gun owners than the US, yet doesn't see this kind of violence.

[Ambulance X]

I agree, but no guns no shooting.

People need both the will and the means.

In an ideal world we take away the will, but taking away the means is a good start.

No, because there is no reason to deprive anyone of the right to own a gun with which to defend themselves.

[IAPAI]

the presence of guns doesn't cause things like this though, it's society. I believe Canada has a higher percentage of gun owners than the US, yet doesn't see this kind of violence.

Higher percentage, not numbers. There are far less urban areas in Canada, too. Most of the gun owners are in the country or up north and have them to guard against animals.

[x togepi x]

Higher percentage, not numbers. There are far less urban areas in Canada, too. Most of the gun owners are in the country or up north and have them to guard against animals.

I realize that, but I also thought that the urban areas in Canada had lower gun crime rates than the US. Maybe I'm completely ignorant, I'm just going by what my Canadian friend told me, and he hasn't lived there in a decade.

[Ambulance X]

Yes there is. Its stops things like this happening.

Criminals will get guns either way. Things like this cannot be prevented unless the entire population is armed so that the guy knows he will be gunned down if he tries to pull something like he did at VT.

[kbauer]

Were talking about the south. If theres still people there that dont want to be a part of this country, then I wont consider them a part of this country....well by that I mean the jackasses who still believe in the confederacy. The south actaully has striking scenery and in my experiances very friendly people. What really bothers me is when I see people in Michigan waving the confederate flag, Im thinking ok...uh...why? Its scary.

As far as gun laws which unlike the Virginia Tech threads I think its valid to debate in here...Im fine with hand guns or hunting riffles but there are nut jobs getting their hands on automatics and stuff only the military should own. All guns can be dangerous and fatal even hand guns but you have to start somewhere and I think a full ban on assult riffles would be a start.
The problem with banning guns though is that its impossible, like drugs, theres going to be an underbelly market for it and the wrong people will always find their way to get their hands on them. We already have moderately strict guns laws as it is and that hasnt stopped anyone either. Unfortunately the precendent has started and it wont stop, probably ever.
Both sides of the argument while being on one side of it lol.

[thejetstolehome]

Criminals will get guns either way. Things like this cannot be prevented unless the entire population is armed so that the guy knows he will be gunned down if he tries to pull something like he did at VT.

yeah let's arm everyone so that every single dispute turns into a shootout. awesome idea.

[kbauer]

the presence of guns doesn't cause things like this though, it's society. I believe Canada has a higher percentage of gun owners than the US, yet doesn't see this kind of violence.

But...wait...uh, no but Micheal Moore said Canadians dont believe in guns or polloution...lol

[kbauer]

yeah let's arm everyone so that every single dispute turns into a shootout. awesome idea.

that reminds me of the anarchy thoery. yeah, let the people govern themselves...theres no way that could ever backfire.

[IAPAI]

Criminals will get guns either way. Things like this cannot be prevented unless the entire population is armed so that the guy knows he will be gunned down if he tries to pull something like he did at VT.

You are completely wrong.

[Lueda Alia]

Higher percentage, not numbers. There are far less urban areas in Canada, too. Most of the gun owners are in the country or up north and have them to guard against animals.
That's what I was going to say.

Plus, no one here can get a handgun just because they feel like having one.

[Ambulance X]

You are completely wrong.

You are categorically incorrect.

[Ambulance X]

yeah let's arm everyone so that every single dispute turns into a shootout. awesome idea.

That's liberal mythology. It doesn't work that way. Why would you draw a gun on someone in a dispute when you know that they are packing as well? You wouldn't.

The fact of the matter remains that if everyone at Virginia Tech was armed, that tragedy would not have occurred today. Perhaps that nut job would still have tried it, but he would not have gotten very far before he was taken out.

[thejetstolehome]

That's liberal mythology. It doesn't work that way. Why would you draw a gun on someone in a dispute when you know that they are packing as well? You wouldn't.

The fact of the matter remains that if everyone at Virginia Tech was armed, that tragedy would not have occurred today. Perhaps that nut job would still have tried it, but he would not have gotten very far before he was taken out.

i wouldn't but some people would. vigilantism is not the answer.

and like it was said before, this would just create more problems for police and law enforcement officials as it would clearly blur the lines of who the right person to shoot was.

just like outlawing guns all together won't solve this problem, neither will arming everyone.

[captainhampton]

Why wouldnt outlawing guns not solve the problem, i hate to keep flogging a dead horse but look at Britain, we do not have these shootings or countless others like them because you cannot get hold of a gun.

well genius, the UK must have things right when it comes to guns. especially since their gun crimes have increased since your ban on handguns.

"England and Wales

Both Conservative and Labour governments have introduced restrictive firearms laws over the past 20 years; all handguns were banned in 1997.

Yet in the 1990s alone, the homicide rate jumped 50 percent, going from 10 per million in 1990 to 15 per million in 2000. While not yet as high as the US, in 2002 gun crime in England and Wales increased by 35 percent. This is the fourth consecutive year that gun crime has increased.

Police statistics show that violent crime in general has increased since the late 1980s and since 1996 has been more serious than in the United States. "

[Ambulance X]

This guy was not a criminal, he was an ordinary person.

In the UK he would never of been able to get his hands on a gun.

He killed 32 people and he wasn't a criminal? That's news to me.

The only time this has ever happened in the UK was Dunblane and it was a 30 year old man shooting 5-9 year olds. I dont think you quite understand how hard it is to get a gun here. You can make blanket statements all you like but people cannot get guns here. Over half of criminal gangs use knives instead of guns, you know why? Because guns are damn expensive on the black market and even then quite difficult to procure.

You dont need a gun for home security if no one else has a gun.

Except other people do have guns. I don't know why you're pretending that guns don't exist in the UK or something. Criminals can still get guns, and the police still have guns. So how are you gonna protect yourself from the police when they go bad?

It is for the greater good that only the police are armed. Im sure America has 4000 times the shootings every year that Britain has, it's fairly obvious why.

Americans dont care about home security anyway that is just the crappy reasoning they give, in reality outsid ethe cities it is a nation of gun nuts.

I don't know why you're pretending like no civilian possesses a gun in the UK. They are readily available to anyone who wants to put the effort into getting one. The point is that your "gun control" laws would not have prevented the VT shooting.

The latest data that is available is from 2003, but yeah it seems like they really have it on lock down :-P :

Here's the chart:
http://img382.imageshack.us/img382/5313/untitledaw6.jpg

Here's the source:
http://uk.sitestat.com/homeoffice/homeoffice/s?rds.hosb0104pdf&ns_type=pdf&ns_url=%5Bhttp://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs2/hosb0104.pdf%5D

2,179 gun injuries in 2003, and steadily rising each year since 1999...yeah, utopia...

[thejetstolehome]

Why wouldnt outlawing guns not solve the problem, i hate to keep flogging a dead horse but look at Britain, we do not have these shootings or countless others like them because you cannot get hold of a gun.

as much as i'ld like for that to work, there's a huge cultural difference between Britain and the United States.

[thatwasamoment]

Why wouldnt outlawing guns not solve the problem, i hate to keep flogging a dead horse but look at Britain, we do not have these shootings or countless others like them because you cannot get hold of a gun.
You can't put the genie back in the bottle when it comes to guns in America.

[Iamhome]

Criminals will get guns either way. Things like this cannot be prevented unless the entire population is armed so that the guy knows he will be gunned down if he tries to pull something like he did at VT.
The fact of the matter remains that if everyone at Virginia Tech was armed, that tragedy would not have occurred today. Perhaps that nut job would still have tried it, but he would not have gotten very far before he was taken out.

If everyone was armed, the guy would've still started shooting people... As soon as one person hears the gunshot they run outside and shoot the first shooter. At the same time someone else is running out and see's this one guy shoot another guy so he pulls his gun and holds it up at the second guy. The second guy having killed a man feels very nervous. He thinks this third guy is with the other guy since he's holding a gun at him, so he fires... Now he is a murderer and he's killed two people. Do you see the chain reaction this could cause? People should only be able to have guns in the privacy of their homes, for protection (since there are so many guns here) or if they have been highly trained with tactics, how/when to use a weapon, and especially when NOT to use a weapon.

Don't say everyone having guns would solve it, your theory of 'not pulling a gun on someone because you know they have one' doesn't work. It changes to making sure you pull yours first.

We'd be cowboys again...

[deadstar]

You know what i meant.

Arguing over semantics is petty and pointless.

He had go links to the criminal underworld he was not involve in any criminal gangs, had no previous convictions etc..



Our police dont really turn bad. Only special forces have guns. Your average policeman walknig the streets does not carry a gun.



No true most people are very reluctant to commit a serious crime such as owning a gun. Therefore they are in very small circulation. Of course this man wouldnt be opposed to owning a gun, but the point is as they are such short supply it would be very difficult for him to obtain one.

Your a complete idiot if you dont think that Britains very strict gun control isnt the directly related to the lack of gun crime when compared with America. I never said we didnt have gun crime i said it was significantly lower to that of America.

And these school shootings are not commited by people with criminal backgrounds, it is usually students of the school or random nut cases. In the UK such people have a very hard time getting a gun. Guns ownership facilitates the urge to commit a crime, it makes it so easy for people. Additionally these crimes are often spontaneous acts and when getting hold of a gun is so hard then there will always be cooling off period while the would be gun men attempts to get hold of his weapon. This cooling off period surely leads people to rethink there plans?

But when the gun is right there or only a supermarket stop away, well there is a very short time between deciding you want to do this, and actually being able to.
As said before its two completely different cultures. What percent of your population hunts?

[captainhampton]

When have i ever said that Britain was perfect?

Sure we have gun crime but it is nothing at all ever close to America's gun crime rates.

no but you said banning all guns would solve the problem, yet when Britain banned handguns the number of gun crimes actually went up.

[unwritten]

It is truly sad to go back and read that article after what occurred yesterday.

[x togepi x]

Hunting is banned.

Small upper class groups still practice it illegally but it is detested by the majority of the populace.

fuck hunting.

[deadstar]

fuck hunting.
Haha. Schools in Pennsylvania get off from school on the first day of hunting season. Small businesses shut down. Its like a statewide holiday. As I said, its a different culture. Now I know you dont necessarily need a gun to hunt, however, it is a huge part of this culture and I dont see it changing.

[Iamhome]

I think people should start having to hunt with bow and arrow or blowdarts.

That would make things interesting.

[theguilt engine]

ironic.

[thejetstolehome]

Haha. Schools in Pennsylvania get off from school on the first day of hunting season. Small businesses shut down. Its like a statewide holiday. As I said, its a different culture. Now I know you dont necessarily need a gun to hunt, however, it is a huge part of this culture and I dont see it changing.

I think people should start having to hunt with bow and arrow or blowdarts.

That would make things interesting.

bow hunting is so much more badass than rifle and/or shotgun hunting.

[Iamhome]

bow hunting is so much more badass than rifle and/or shotgun hunting.

I'm sure it takes a lot more talent... or skill.

[deadstar]

It is a terrible practice.

Little better than blood sports.

Glad its banned here.
Its a necessity to control starvation among deer in Pennsylvania. We actual have trees and forests here.

[clace]

Milf Hunting is the only hunting that should be allowed.

[tambam]

It is a terrible practice.

Little better than blood sports.

Glad its banned here.

Amen.

[thejetstolehome]

They shouldnt be enjoying it. There are other far more humane ways of doing it.

They aren't doing it to "control deer population" they do it because they think killing things is a really fun and enjoyable past time.

We have forrests where i live to by the way.

i don't enjoy hunting at all and would get no pleasure out of shooting animals but sometimes hunting is necessary to control the population. i'd rather have the deer die a quick death via bullet or arrow than have to starve to death 'cause there's no food to go around.

[thejetstolehome]

There are far more humane ways than being shot. The deer doesnt die instantly every time, i suspect it struggles for some time before dying.

if the hunter is good, it does. what would you suggest, though? i mean, you can't poison them. maybe tranquilizers and a trip to the zoo? i don't know, haha. :shrug:

[thejetstolehome]

Tranquilizers would be good.

Although im not entirely convinced of this population control argument, sounds like a bit of conservative bullshit to me. It probably is an issue but an exagerrated one.

well, my town had an issue with deer population a few years ago. i don't know how it got solved 'cause i honestly didn't care, but, yea, those problems can exist.

[Iamhome]

A deer jumped through a bedroom window in my neigborhood. The cops came and had to shoot it with thier handguns. It took 9 shots...

[thejetstolehome]

A deer jumped through a bedroom window in my neigborhood. The cops came and had to shoot it with thier handguns. It took 9 shots...

well, to be fair, people don't hunt with handguns.

[Iamhome]

well, to be fair, people don't hunt with handguns.

Yeah, I was just telling a story... :)

[thejetstolehome]

Yeah, I was just telling a story... :)

ah, got it. i think a few years ago, a deer crashed through a store window on my town's main shopping drag. i found it amusing.

[Iamhome]

ah, got it. i think a few years ago, a deer crashed through a store window on my town's main shopping drag. i found it amusing.

I was driving down a country road once, saw a flash come from the trees about 6 ft from the road and then felt a huge bump... I slammed on the brakes and looked back to see a deer spinning in circles and trying to get up off of the road... Apparently I broke it's spine so it just flopped around until it finally got into the ditch. A few people saw it happen so they stop, one guy got out and shot it a couple of times to put it out of its missery... Maybe we should ban all cars?

[Iamhome]

Cars have advantages which outweigh the disadvantages.

The only purpose of a gun is to kill things.

Ah, good point. Guns are too prominant to ever fully get rid of. Especially with people like Nicholas Cage running around buying up leftovers from previous wars.

[thejetstolehome]

was that movie any good? all i heard was shitty reviews.

[thejetstolehome]

pussies kill with guns, real men kill with knives and their bare hands.

[Iamhome]

I like to think brains and bare hands can win a fight against an idiot with a gun most of the time. Of course not if your captured somewhere... But if you can get close enough without him shooting.

[Ambulance X]

You can get rid of them once the attitudes in your country change.

There was a time when Britain was full of hunting and guns but that is no longer, in fact the reason it is said we avoided absolutism is due to the wide spread bow ownage in the middle ages.

No-one here wants anyone to have guns and so the ban was easily brought in on handguns and on hunting.

Attitudes will change in America eventually give it time. If school shootings continue (there has been three alreeady this year) then something will eventually get done.

Lol. I think that Britain pushed through legislation to outlaw guns because they learned their lesson about what happens when their constituency is armed during the American Revolution. This way, they don't have to worry about getting their asses beat in during a revolt again, because the population is largely unarmed. Very smart by the British government, and very stupid by the British populus.

[deadstar]

They aren't doing it to "control deer population" they do it because they think killing things is a really fun and enjoyable past time.

We have forrests where i live to by the way.

You really dont know anything about hunting here. You dont just go out and shoot stuff. You need a hunting license and for every animal you kill, you need to register it with the state. It's just an all out shooting spree.

Also, contorlling the population keeps the species itself stronger. There is a limited amount of food to go around. Eventually, over the course of many years, deer would become weaker and weaker with food being dispersed among the whole of them.

[deadstar]

Surely that is the natural way of the world?
To let a species become weaker and die out? Its not their fault we took away a lot of their natural habitat. Now we are forced to compensate for it by keeping them stronger. Too many deer means more ending up dead on the side of a highway.

[x togepi x]

I dont see why. Britain has been a representative democracy since 1688. Of course the franchise wasnt really extended properly until the nineteenth century and to women in 1921. Gun laws didnt really come in until well after Britain has become a democratic nation. Handguns werent banned until 1997, we were pretty democratic by then you think?

Governments change in a democracy so there is little for our government to gain from disarming the populace. Would our policeforce and army support any kind of dictatoship? No of course not your point is ridiculous and assumes that because we arent a nation of gun nuts that we are going to be enslaved any minute.

Your point trusts the state too much. Yeah, obviously the day we get rid of all the guns, the government isn't going to turn into a complete dictatorship, but you're forgetting the weapons are a huge check on the government's power. Maybe you trust the state more than me, I don't know.

The point is, gun control is not the solution to this problem. It's just a band aid. It doesn't address the problems inherent in our society that cause these tragedies. Lots of people have brought up about how everyone feels like the shooter at VAtech feels sometimes, you know like they want to go crazy and kill people, but they happen to decide not to. Do you realize how fucked up that is? We live in a society that constructs a large group of people who at some point in their lives feel like they should commit a horrible violent crime, we're just lucky that it only happens once every few years. Why don't we work on fixing that instead of fighting a useless battle against guns?

The problem with gun control is that if we ignore these problems in society, we're just going to see these forms of violence manifest themselves in different ways. Instead of someone going on a shooting spree, they'll just make some sort of bomb out of household materials that can't be banned because of their other uses in society. That's the problem with people in this situation, they'll just adapt. We have to figure out what it is about our society that causes these sort of things and at least attempt to fix it. That's the problem with our culture is that when something like this happens, we just decide to scapegoat. After Columbine, we just complained about heavy music and video games. Now we call for gun control. We're kidding ourselves if we think that doing these things will make things better.

If anything, beefing up security at schools, especially colleges, helps create a more prison-like atmosphere, which could feed into more alienation which leads to these incidents. High school security isn't such a big deal because one doesn't spend all day there, and has a home to go home with their family. But if you take a kid away from their family, like most college does, and put them in a hyper-secure college, it's going to create some sort of tension.

We can probably come up with a million reasons why this shooting happened, yet we don't ever try to address any of them.

[atticus1492]

If Americans had no guns, we could go around dueling with swords. Think about it.

[thejetstolehome]

If Americans had no guns, we could go around dueling with swords. Think about it.

we could all be Knights and Samurais. so much cooler.

[deadstar]

So to make up for taking their land we shoot them? What kind of justice is that?

And gain there are far more humane ways of killing things than hunting.
OK. Lets hear some alternatives you know that make as much money as hunting does.

[deadstar]

Since when should it be about money??

Humane tranqualisers would be for more preferrable.

Although im not entirely convicned of the case for over population.

Its not about money. But, if you want to put them down humanely, then its going to cost more money no matter which way you look at it.

If you're not convinced, then do some research.

[_f0cker]

Good. Gotta love the 2nd amendment. Way to go VA for fighting for our constitutional rights.

The stupid amendment. Civilians shouldn't have the right to bear arms in the first place.

Having 3 pieces of ID also shouldn't be enough to buy you a damn gun.

[x togepi x]

If Americans had no guns, we could go around dueling with swords. Think about it.

best post on gun control ever!

[x togepi x]

Well i would agree that a check needs to be kept on the state. But the state has to be made up of elements of the general populace and any group within society that wishes to force its rule upon the rest has to be well supported for it to ever seize and maintain power.

Franco, Mussolini, Hitler etc.. were all popular figures within a lot of circles if not as a whole in some cases. Virtually no-one within British society would ever support these types of people and pretty much no one has the will to force Britain into a dictatorship. Therefore there is no need for us all to be armed as thier is no threat.

If anything America is far more under threat from the neo-cons than Britain is from our third way parties.


I'm sorry, but I really don't like that "it can't happen here" mindset. I would rather we have some sort of defense from a slight threat than not. I know it's a lame NRA cliche, but guns don't kill people, people do. The problems we're speaking of will not be solved by a ban on guns. It will just mean people will have to commit violence in new ways.

[x togepi x]

I know it seems naive to think it wont happen here but it really wont and like i said before if the citizenship is armed and turns towards dictatorship groups then where does that leave us. Had Nazi Germany been an armed nation would that of saved the Jews? No because they would of had 30 million armed Germans to fight off seen as half the country voted Nazi.

Do i need to point out every time resistance groups actually did something with their weapons? Of course, if the majority of Americans want a dictatorship, then a dictatorship will result in this scenario. The problem with your thinking is that it completely kills any resistance, which means that there's a 100% chance of success for a persuasive authoritarian.

Like I said, you're trusting the state way too much when you advocate a ban on weapons.

But more importantly, you completely ignore my position that gun control will not solve the social/economic/political/cultural problems that are inherent in society which cause the violent crimes that we're talking about. Why haven't you answered this? If we were to solve those problems, there'd be no need for gun control at all. Hell, if we could solve them, there might not even be a need for so many guns at all. Until someone convinces me otherwise, i'm always going to go with fixing these deep seeded problems over a band aid solution every single time.

[Nevuk]

If someone wants to kill people, they will. It doesn't matter if they don't have guns, knives, or even fucking hands to hold them with. They will still kill people when they feel like it. Thats more the root of this issue than gun control... they just make it easier to kill more people.
And I've heard some interesting thoughts about the 2nd amendment. Main one is probably similar to Togepi's, that it was put in to ensure that if the government becomes too tyrannical, it will be overthrown by its own people.