Just came across this quote, and didnt want to lose it so I'm posting it here.

"A little rebellion now and then is a good thing. …God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. …And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure."

Thomas Jefferson regarding Shay's Rebellion 1787

People today no longer have the will to fight for a cause, and make the government listen. That is the true intention of our Second Amendment, and in these times of increasing government control, we need those right more than ever. The Second Amendment is NOT a liberty granted to us by our constitution, but more importantly it is a garantee given us by the founding fathers so that we can protect our own liberty by force if it is required....I'll leave it at that to prevent a rant.

 

oh man... how I love to be the voice of miority opinion, lol. Since I'm just that... even the most restrictive gun laws do you nothing if theres so many firearms around. Just yest I was reading one post about road rage that one of KF users experienced - all of you said you never know what the other guy's packing. Now thats your problem right there. If I get in such circumstances, the odds that the other guy has a firearm are practically zip. Now I'm guessing but with that in mind it kinda makes killing me just a little bit more difficult for him. When you're saying that "guns don't kill, people do" you should also add that given the opportunity, it becomes more likely they will. I'm far from preaching, just saying that I'd rather get beaten up then shot.

Damn, I promised myself I wouldn't get into this argument again.

 

Prom, look at the date when he said that. The world has moved on since. Are you suggesting an armed uprising against the government when they decide to raise taxes?

 

the problem nik is that bad people will always be able to get guns illegally - its actually pretty easy. the laws only make it difficult for good people to be able to defend themselves. every time a country has passed major gun restrictions they have had a surge of crime because the bad guys know that their chances of getting shot have dropped dramaticly and they now have the upper hand.

 

this patch made me lol



[IMG]local://upfiles/6415/7C4155F8D16F4BEDA03454684D13F2CA.jpg[/IMG]

 

Kohburn, I can't agree with you on that one. You might give me Canada as an example, but this goes right back to your first argument - that criminals can easily get a firearm (illegally, of course). Now, this may be true in countries where guns are abound - not so, however if you consider places where this was never the case. Sure, organized crime rings will always be well supplied, I'm talking though about all those small time thugs and psychos who will be denied the opportunity to use a gun as an ultimate argument. There was a study in Germany on how likely it is that there will be an gun related accident at home - in households where there was a gun it was many times more likely.... well.... DUH! Could it come out any different?

 

there will be a difference where guns were never available and tryint o remove them from a place where there are common. Australia is actually one of the best examples of how trying to take the guns away from law abiding citizens doesn't work for crime.

if you look at the stats in america tha majority of gun crime is caused by people with unregistered or illegal guns.

heck the US citizens have less accidental gun shootings than the UK police have accidental shooting of eachother during training excersizes.

i'm not against controlling to an excent what type of people are allowed to have certain types of guns. But the government should never be able to completely disarm its citizens.

to many revolutions have proved that the government needs to fear its citizens. the citizens are who the government is supposed to work for, and if its not then there is a major issue.

 

Iwould be willing to bet that the majority of guns used in crimes today were obtained illegally. (If anyone has statistics on that I would like to see it) So if that is indeed the case and America passed a law taking everyones guns away it would do no good at all in helping deter crimes. The reason it would do no good is becasue the only guns the government could take is the guns from the citizens who went through the proper channels in getting them. Every gun I own I have filled out paper work in order to get it. Having done this itwould be easy for the goverment to look up my file and tell me exactly what I own. Now if my nextdoor neighbor bought his gun on the black market through illegal channels then the government wouldn't know he has it. So when they go door to door they would get my gun and not his. So how would that do anyone any good at all?

 

it wouldn't - its short sited beurocratic crap to appease the anti-gun lobbyists

 

Right now as we speak there are guns being sold illegally on the streets. These guns are going right to the people who we don't want them to go to. It is my opionion that if we (Americans) want a decrease in gun related crimes we need to really crack down on the illegal sale of these firearms. In order to fix the problem you have to go to the source of the problem. I am not nieve enough to believe that it will fix 100% of our gun related crimes, but it would have a huge impact on decreasing our gun related crimes.