• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Venezuelans regret gun ban, 'a declaration of war against an unarmed population'

American

Bier Meister
Bartender
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
90,151
Reaction score
28,814
Location
SE Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Communist
https://www.foxnews.com/world/venezuelans-regret-gun-prohibition-we-could-have-defended-ourselves

CUCUTA, Venezuela/Colombia border – As Venezuela continues to crumble under the socialist dictatorship of President Nicolas Maduro, some are expressing words of warning – and resentment – against a six-year-old gun control bill that stripped citizens of their weapons.

Guns would have served as a vital pillar to remaining a free people, or at least able to put up a fight,” Javier Vanegas, 28, a Venezuelan teacher of English now exiled in Ecuador, told Fox News. “The government security forces, at the beginning of this debacle, knew they had no real opposition to their force. Once things were this bad, it was a clear declaration of war against an unarmed population.”

Under the direction of then-President Hugo Chavez, the Venezuelan National Assembly in 2012 enacted the “Control of Arms, Munitions and Disarmament Law,” with the explicit aim to “disarm all citizens.” The law took effect in 2013, with only minimal pushback from some pro-democracy opposition figures, banned the legal commercial sale of guns and munitions to all - except government entities.
If ever there was a news article, that totally vindicates our founding fathers, and places the brightest spotlight squarely on the Democrats, liberals, progressives, socialists and communists in the United States, it's this one. This is what they want for the citizens of the United States. This is precisely the tyrannical regime they want for us, MAKE NO MISTAKE ABOUT IT. They would love ALL weapons to be confiscated, and protesters (read that conservatives) against their tyrannical regime would be shot like dogs in the streets. Read the article, it's frightening! They never go for our guns outright in one swoop, they start incrementally and they institute hate for American history in the schools to teach our children to hate/fear guns. Then when those generations come of age, they willing give up their guns without firing a shot for the good of all. Then the draconian communism begins in earnest. Pelosi, Feinstein and the like are working on it as we speak. The idiot citizens in Venezuela got their guns taken quickly because they've always had ****ty govts. But in the US is won't go that way in beginning, it'll start slow and ramp up.

Luis Farias, 48, from Margarita, said that gun violence was indeed bad when guns were freely available for purchase. But it became much worse after the gun ban was passed. “Now the criminal mother is unleashed,” Farias said. “Trying to ban guns didn’t take guns off the streets. Nobody cares about the law; the criminals don’t care about the law.”
 

Beaudreaux

Preserve Protect Defend
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
18,233
Reaction score
15,860
Location
veni, vidi, volo - now back in NC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
An armed people are a people that can defend their own freedom and liberty. An unarmed people are subjects, not citizens.
 

RaleBulgarian

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 20, 2018
Messages
22,434
Reaction score
10,005
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
If ever there was a news article, that totally vindicates our founding fathers, and places the brightest spotlight squarely on the Democrats, liberals, progressives, socialists and communists in the United States, it's this one. This is what they want for the citizens of the United States. This is precisely the tyrannical regime they want for us, MAKE NO MISTAKE ABOUT IT. They would love ALL weapons to be confiscated, and protesters (read that conservatives) against their tyrannical regime would be shot like dogs in the streets. Read the article, it's frightening! They never go for our guns outright in one swoop, they start incrementally and they institute hate for American history in the schools to teach our children to hate/fear guns. Then when those generations come of age, they willing give up their guns without firing a shot for the good of all. Then the draconian communism begins in earnest. Pelosi, Feinstein and the like are working on it as we speak.
^^ An extreme, disturbed, and ill informed rant.

The 2nd Amendment isn’t going anywhere and there is no conspiracy to take away all firearms from American citizens. Just plain stupid and inflammatory to think/say that protesters would be “shot like dogs in the street”, or that schools would teach children to hate our history and guns. Get a grip on yourself.
 

code1211

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 13, 2012
Messages
40,538
Reaction score
8,060
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
^^ An extreme, disturbed, and ill informed rant.

The 2nd Amendment isn’t going anywhere and there is no conspiracy to take away all firearms from American citizens. Just plain stupid and inflammatory to think/say that protesters would be “shot like dogs in the street”, or that schools would teach children to hate our history and guns. Get a grip on yourself.

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/415863-pelosi-gun-control-will-be-a-priority-in-next-house
<snip>
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who plans to return as Speaker in the next Congress, declared Thursday that gun control will be a priority under the newly elected Democratic majority.
<snip>
 

RaleBulgarian

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 20, 2018
Messages
22,434
Reaction score
10,005
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent

code1211

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 13, 2012
Messages
40,538
Reaction score
8,060
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Huge difference between gun control and gun ban/confiscation. And what makes you think Pelosi’s plan would become law?

The journey of 1000 miles is begun with but a single step.
 

RaleBulgarian

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 20, 2018
Messages
22,434
Reaction score
10,005
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
The journey of 1000 miles is begun with but a single step.
That single step (that probably won’t go anyway) is one hell of a stretch from what American said.
 

Spartacus FPV

Better You = Better World
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 19, 2006
Messages
14,870
Reaction score
7,127
Location
Your Echochamber
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
^^ An extreme, disturbed, and ill informed rant.

A dismissive Alinsky tactic of painting the mainstream position, supporting the law of the land, as "extreme" which opens with an insult, which is always ill informed in a debate. Starting with an insult just signals that you have already lost.

The 2nd Amendment isn’t going anywhere and there is no conspiracy to take away all firearms from American citizens. Just plain stupid and inflammatory to think/say that protesters would be “shot like dogs in the street”, or that schools would teach children to hate our history and guns. Get a grip on yourself.

The 2A isn't going anywhere because it is being defended from those you claim don't exist. No one claimed it was a conspiracy, Senator Diane Feinstein outright said,:

There are literally millions of Americans opposed to the 2nd Amendment. Their approach is never to go for a repeal, but to engage in incrementalism. To chip away slowly, first at the scary black rifles, then anything semi-automatic or "high" (standard) capacity. They always push for registration, which ALWAYS leads to confiscation. And if you're convinced these people don't exist, that they don't have power, or they wouldn't push it if they finally got a disarmed populace, then you are beyond ignorant of history; Or you're just one of them and a liar.
 

RaleBulgarian

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 20, 2018
Messages
22,434
Reaction score
10,005
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
A dismissive Alinsky tactic of painting the mainstream position, supporting the law of the land, as "extreme" which opens with an insult, which is always ill informed in a debate. Starting with an insult just signals that you have already lost.
First, you should invest in some reading comprehension courses because you clearly did not understand what I said, and are accusing me of things I did not say or imply. I did not call any law extreme. I also did not insult anyone, I pointed out what was very clearly an extreme exaggeration of OP’s future world scenario.
The 2A isn't going anywhere because it is being defended from those you claim don't exist. No one claimed it was a conspiracy, Senator Diane Feinstein outright said ...
I made no such claim.
There are literally millions of Americans opposed to the 2nd Amendment. Their approach is never to go for a repeal, but to engage in incrementalism. To chip away slowly, first at the scary black rifles, then anything semi-automatic or "high" (standard) capacity. They always push for registration, which ALWAYS leads to confiscation. And if you're convinced these people don't exist, that they don't have power, or they wouldn't push it if they finally got a disarmed populace, then you are beyond ignorant of history; Or you're just one of them and a liar.
And there are many more Americans that support the 2nd Amendment, so no reason to get your panties in a wad. There are more guns than there are citizens, by many accounts, and we have long history and cultural belief in the right of self protection. Only deluded zealots see the “gun bogeyman” lurking around every corner. As for your idiotic registration theory, there are a great many legal firearms that aren’t currently registered and there’s no plan to register them. Besides, you register your car and your dog. Do you think the government has a nefarious plan to take them away from you too?
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
262,496
Reaction score
80,945
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
^^ An extreme, disturbed, and ill informed rant.

The 2nd Amendment isn’t going anywhere and there is no conspiracy to take away all firearms from American citizens. Just plain stupid and inflammatory to think/say that protesters would be “shot like dogs in the street”, or that schools would teach children to hate our history and guns. Get a grip on yourself.

I love how those who support silly gun laws-like idiotic magazine limits or scary looking rifle bans, keep saying "no one wants to take all the guns" (but just some).
 

RaleBulgarian

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 20, 2018
Messages
22,434
Reaction score
10,005
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I love how those who support silly gun laws-like idiotic magazine limits or scary looking rifle bans, keep saying "no one wants to take all the guns" (but just some).
I find it fascinating, and sad, that some see any attempt at reducing gun violence as an imminent threat to their 2nd Amendment rights. Some even going so far as to spread ludicrous predictions of the future.
 

Rucker61

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
15,624
Reaction score
6,667
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
I find it fascinating, and sad, that some see any attempt at reducing gun violence as an imminent threat to their 2nd Amendment rights. Some even going so far as to spread ludicrous predictions of the future.

Any attempt at "reducing gun violence" that requires restricting the right protected by the Second Amendment is a threat to Second Amendment rights. Not all such attempts do so, but many do.
 

RaleBulgarian

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 20, 2018
Messages
22,434
Reaction score
10,005
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Any attempt at "reducing gun violence" that requires restricting the right protected by the Second Amendment is a threat to Second Amendment rights. Not all such attempts do so, but many do.
Your last sentence directly contradicts your first. Which do you believe? Arguing an absolute right under the 2nd Amendment is a fallacy. Our government does, and has so for a very long time, prescribed what firearms we can own and what firearms we cannot own.
 

Rucker61

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
15,624
Reaction score
6,667
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
Your last sentence directly contradicts your first. Which do you believe? Arguing an absolute right under the 2nd Amendment is a fallacy. Our government does, and has so for a very long time, prescribed what firearms we can own and what firearms we cannot own.

No, they haven't prescribed or proscribed what we can own for a very long time, and there is no contradiction. I'm not arguing an absolute right; you're inferring a position I'm not implying.

The devil is in the details. Rather than argue that "some see any attempt at reducing gun violence as an imminent threat to their 2nd Amendment rights", talk about specific laws, and then we can discuss the particulars. For example, in Pittsburgh bills are being presented at the city level that would outlaw all semi-automatic weapons. That's a clear violation of Heller, McDonald and Caetano and does unconstitutionally restrict the Second Amendment rights of Pittsburgh residents.
 
Last edited:

Tigerace117

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 30, 2016
Messages
39,838
Reaction score
10,320
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
An armed people are a people that can defend their own freedom and liberty. An unarmed people are subjects, not citizens.

Germany armed just about everyone who could carry a gun by 1945. That didn’t stop the Soviets from creating for decades of tyrannical rule in East Germany; hell, it didn’t even stop the Nazis from running Germany off a cliff in the first place.

The same thing happened across Eastern Europe and China. The abundance of firearms simply didn’t matter....people simply got squashed.

In Somalia just about everyone owned a firearm; that didn’t stop the country from falling into utter chaos or being ruled absolutely pathetically poorly beforehand.

The obsession with the idea of having an armed society as a counterbalance to government only works when you have a government which actually cares about the lives of its people.

When you don’t, well......all having guns means is that you and just about all your acquaintances wind up dead.
 

Rucker61

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
15,624
Reaction score
6,667
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
Germany armed just about everyone who could carry a gun by 1945. That didn’t stop the Soviets from creating for decades of tyrannical rule in East Germany; hell, it didn’t even stop the Nazis from running Germany off a cliff in the first place.

The same thing happened across Eastern Europe and China. The abundance of firearms simply didn’t matter....people simply got squashed.

In Somalia just about everyone owned a firearm; that didn’t stop the country from falling into utter chaos or being ruled absolutely pathetically poorly beforehand.

The obsession with the idea of having an armed society as a counterbalance to government only works when you have a government which actually cares about the lives of its people.

When you don’t, well......all having guns means is that you and just about all your acquaintances wind up dead.

What happens to the unarmed in a country where the government doesn't care about the lives of its people?
 

Tigerace117

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 30, 2016
Messages
39,838
Reaction score
10,320
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
What happens to the unarmed in a country where the government doesn't care about the lives of its people?

The same thing that happens to the armed.

The only difference being the armed get to experience "fun" stuff like artillery barrages and getting shot at by tanks before they get crushed.

The simple fact of the matter is that a totalitarian state is going to take whatever steps it views as necessary to crush a revolt and not give a **** about collateral damage.....which means the would be rebels are ****ed, no matter how many small arms they've managed to accumulate.
 

Rucker61

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
15,624
Reaction score
6,667
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
The same thing that happens to the armed.

The only difference being the armed get to experience "fun" stuff like artillery barrages and getting shot at by tanks before they get crushed.

The simple fact of the matter is that a totalitarian state is going to take whatever steps it views as necessary to crush a revolt and not give a **** about collateral damage.....which means the would be rebels are ****ed, no matter how many small arms they've managed to accumulate.

That would explain the long lasting British and Soviet rule in Afghanistan. Why do you think that the "rebels" won't have access to artillery or tanks in the US?
 

Tigerace117

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 30, 2016
Messages
39,838
Reaction score
10,320
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
That would explain the long lasting British and Soviet rule in Afghanistan. Why do you think that the "rebels" won't have access to artillery or tanks in the US?

Gee, you think it's legal to buy operational tanks and artillery nowadays? It's not like those get just lying around in the open waiting for anyone who wants one to stumble along. Then, of course, you actually have to know how to work the thing, which is one hell of a lot different than using a pistol or rifle.

And no, the British were not sufficiently ruthless to totally crush the civilian populace of a different country. The Soviets were, and inflicted hellacious losses on the Afghan fighters and civilians, but they were at the long end of their supply chain and not holding together very well.

By the way, trying to compare the fighting in Afghanistan to a potential American rebellion is laughable. The Afghans have been at war basically for the last thirty years. Perhaps more importantly, they have the willingness to take casualties/ suffer for their cause.

There is no evidence Americans have any such reserves of endurance and discipline.
 

RaleBulgarian

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 20, 2018
Messages
22,434
Reaction score
10,005
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
No, they haven't prescribed or proscribed what we can own for a very long time, ...
Really? So, you can go to your local FFL and buy a machine gun, a shoulder fired rocket launcher, or a mini gun?
.... and there is no contradiction. I'm not arguing an absolute right; you're inferring a position I'm not implying.
Uh huh, sure.
Any attempt at "reducing gun violence" that requires restricting the right protected by the Second Amendment is a threat to Second Amendment rights.
 

Rucker61

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
15,624
Reaction score
6,667
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
Gee, you think it's legal to buy operational tanks and artillery nowadays? It's not like those get just lying around in the open waiting for anyone who wants one to stumble along. Then, of course, you actually have to know how to work the thing, which is one hell of a lot different than using a pistol or rifle.

Gee, you think that we don't have tens of thousands of veterans who know how to operate tanks and artillery who might remember how to use them and might be opposed to a totalitarian state, especially one created by Democrats? Do you think that the National Guards of states who are of opposing viewpoints to a totalitarian federal government might not fall into line, or that the federal military just might not attack American citizens at all? How much armor and artillery do the federal law enforcement agencies have?

And no, the British were not sufficiently ruthless to totally crush the civilian populace of a different country. The Soviets were, and inflicted hellacious losses on the Afghan fighters and civilians, but they were at the long end of their supply chain and not holding together very well.

How ruthless do you think that the American military would be in fighting against their own citizens?

By the way, trying to compare the fighting in Afghanistan to a potential American rebellion is laughable. The Afghans have been at war basically for the last thirty years. Perhaps more importantly, they have the willingness to take casualties/ suffer for their cause.

There is no evidence Americans have any such reserves of endurance and discipline.

I guess if that day ever comes, and I doubt it will, we shall see. How willing to fight American citizens will the federal government be knowing that their families are basically unprotected from rebels with access to names of dependents and addresses of homes and schools?
 

jimbo

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 30, 2011
Messages
19,078
Reaction score
6,743
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
https://www.foxnews.com/world/venezuelans-regret-gun-prohibition-we-could-have-defended-ourselves


If ever there was a news article, that totally vindicates our founding fathers, and places the brightest spotlight squarely on the Democrats, liberals, progressives, socialists and communists in the United States, it's this one. This is what they want for the citizens of the United States. This is precisely the tyrannical regime they want for us, MAKE NO MISTAKE ABOUT IT. They would love ALL weapons to be confiscated, and protesters (read that conservatives) against their tyrannical regime would be shot like dogs in the streets. Read the article, it's frightening! They never go for our guns outright in one swoop, they start incrementally and they institute hate for American history in the schools to teach our children to hate/fear guns. Then when those generations come of age, they willing give up their guns without firing a shot for the good of all. Then the draconian communism begins in earnest. Pelosi, Feinstein and the like are working on it as we speak. The idiot citizens in Venezuela got their guns taken quickly because they've always had ****ty govts. But in the US is won't go that way in beginning, it'll start slow and ramp up.

I've seen it stated that the main reason that the US was not invaded in WW II was that both the Germans and Japanese were well aware that behind every tree was a civilian with his own musket.

To take over a country, you must control two things. The speech and the weapons. Both must be defended to remain free.

We free men are doing OK weapon wise. I'm not all that positive about speech.
 

jimbo

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 30, 2011
Messages
19,078
Reaction score
6,743
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
^^ An extreme, disturbed, and ill informed rant.

The 2nd Amendment isn’t going anywhere and there is no conspiracy to take away all firearms from American citizens. Just plain stupid and inflammatory to think/say that protesters would be “shot like dogs in the street”, or that schools would teach children to hate our history and guns. Get a grip on yourself.

Spoken like a true gun grabber. We've heard that argument before. As long as there is one arm available, the requirements of the 2nd have been fulfilled. Connecticut. I believe, has just such a law on the books.

One of the California Congresswomen, don't remember which one, has stated that except for that bothersome Constitution she would have gone for a total ban long ago.

The second amendment will not go anywhere only if it is strongly defended. And it will ber.
 

RaleBulgarian

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 20, 2018
Messages
22,434
Reaction score
10,005
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
One of the California Congresswomen, don't remember which one, has stated that except for that bothersome Constitution she would have gone for a total ban long ago.
Don’t worry, jimbo, that mean ol’ Congresswoman can’t take away your gun/s all by herself.
 

jimbo

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 30, 2011
Messages
19,078
Reaction score
6,743
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Don’t worry, jimbo, that mean ol’ Congresswoman can’t take away your gun/s all by herself.

I didn't say she could. At least she's smart enough not to try.

Yet.
 
Top Bottom