By opting out of owning guns, you're giving us a power monopoly.

So instead of blaming the trigger-happy psycho cop who murdered that guy for no reason, you're blaming gun culture in America...

 

So?

And actually yes I can, anytime several people are shot and/or anyone is killed at a distance we can reasonably assume that some few of those murders wouldn't have happened, if only because the victims could have run away. You don't hear of a lot of drive by stabbings, do you?

 

Let me know when you convince the governments and criminals of the world (or do I repeat myself?) to give up their arms.

 

Not stabbings. But bombing are a lot more common in places with less access to guns. Can folks run faster than shrapnel?

 

By no means, I believe the possession of a firearm by a civilian should generally be a crime but that has nothing to do with self-defense.

 

Here's my breakdown by percentages of what people would do if guns were made illegal.

75% would turn them in.
25% would hide them and they'd be irrelevant.
.0001 % would take to the hills and try to overthrow the government, and they would be good practice for our SEALs

 

Yeah, only the military and the police should have guns, just like in the Soviet Union.

 

lmao. thats quite a retreat

 

The SEALS would be just as likely to join the rebellion as to suppress it.

 

How does access to guns affect whether there are bombings or not?

 

I doubt it, if the original law had been arrived at in a clearly democratic way, by majority rule. Most military people are big on things like preserving democracy and the rule of law.

Most Seals I've known are more like scholars of combat than anything else. They have to be proficient in weaponry as part of their job but it's like a surgeon with a scalpel. The actual skill is more in them than the instrument and some even look upon heavier armament as detracting from the purity of what they do, which they view as an art.

 

Who's retreating? What do you think I've been saying other than that all firearms for civilians should be illegal

 

...or the UK, or France, or most all the rest of Europe, or Japan or south Korea ETC ETC ETC....

 

The US is a federation, not a democracy, so "majority rule" doesn't enter into it.

So if you want to abolish the second amendment, then you need to amend the constitution.

Anyway, it's clear that you don't know or understand special operations culture. They are the biggest gun nuts in the country, so good luck getting them to go along with your gun confiscation fantasy.

 

And North Korea, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Iran, etc.

 

We are a federation of democratically based republics, democracy is the base of our whole system.

And we can and have amended the Constitution and that is done in a democratically based way .

And if you think most Elite Soldiery are gun nuts you've been reading too much Guns & Ammo again.

 

ah, I said you have more of a chance of being killed by a cop, showed you an example, that is just a sad fact

btw, that cop got away with it, they would not let the jury see the tape as they said it woudl taint the jury

 

Are you familiar with the legal concepts of duress and coercion?

If an individual bases their decisions and actions on the belief that they will be killed or otherwise harmed for not engaging in a particular course of action, then it is not actually a matter of choice for them but one of necessity, as they were not free to make a choice to begin with.

 

Cease with the misinterpretation and instead address the statement as it was actually presented to yourself.

Once again, name the geographical locations of the united states where violent crime simply does not occur, and where the public does not need to be concerned about such.

 

Demonstrate how such is the case.

 

So when you run errands on the weekend to Home Depot, do you have a belief you will be killed? When you drive to work in the morning, do you have a belief you will be killed? When you and your wife have date night and go out to dinner at a local restaurant, do you have a belief you will be killed?

 

How is such relevant to the discussion?

Thus demonstrating that life is not actually viewed or otherwise regarded as being sacred by yourself. You are dismissing their decision on the basis of believing these individuals made the wrong decision with regard to their own lives, when from their perspective it was the best course of action to engage in. You are holding that life is not sacred on the basis that you disagree with them and believe you know better.

 

In America, so many folks peeing their pantaloons over the prospect of being shot to death does result in so many folks being shot to death.

"When we get spooked, we start shootin'!"


​

 

A great many individuals, both in the united states and abroad, have indeed been killed when going about their daily routine. They certainly did not expect the day they were murdered would be their last day alive, and yet it ultimately was.

Does such change the fact that a choice made under duress or the threat of coercion, is not actually a choice at all?

 

What does "liking" something have to do with anything? How is it relevant?