• 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!

Would You Give Up Your Guns?

Would you comply with a gun ban?

  • Yes, I would.

    Votes: 11 16.7%

  • No, I would not.

    Votes: 55 83.3%
  • Total voters
    66

People won't and shouldn't shoot police if they come to take away your firearms. I dare not post about the head-of-the-snake doctrine because, candidately, in this country of politics by non-violent revolutions I don't agree with it. Unfortunately, if a majority of people vote to have the government castrate the peasants and to have the government expose we-the-people to violent assault and murder - and the courts agree the government can do so - then that is what happens.

There are ELECTED powerful people doing this. People voted for them. There are consequences of how people vote. And for not voting.

That's why I have sometimes raised the ethical question of both defending and pitying people who voted (or apathetically didn't vote) for those politicians - and those who voluntarily decide it is against their ethics to defend themselves or their loved ones. To defend or pity such people if violence comes would be to violate their ethics.

Instead, we should let happen what happens, and then congratulate them for willing to take violent assault, injury, rape, or the murder of a loved one for their anti-gun beliefs, as in "I totally disagree in that I do try to be able to defend my children, but for you to let your wife be raped and child murdered for your beliefs at least shows you have integrity in your anti-gun beliefs. I respect your right to have that belief too. That's why I only dialed 911 when I saw your home under attack by those two guys with masks kick in your door."
 

NOT everyone. I do have two beltfeed full autos (30.06 and 50 cal) that I inherited, and a silencer on a .22LR 1st Series Colt target .22LR - and I have ALL the paperwork for each and myself, done by an attorney. The last item took a PD Chief and a DA to sign off on, and I'm an FWC supervising officer. I was not for the firearms, just the silencer.

And if I was ordered to surrender them I certainly would do so. Would I turn in 100% of all firearms I have? No, don't think I would. I think I would keep 1 Garand, 1 12 ga, 1 .22 rifle, 1 .22 handgun, and 1 Colt 1911, plus probably one pocket gun - selecting ones that were private puchases meaning legally no record I have them. MOST my firearms are that way. More, I would be focused on hiding away ammo as there is no inventory on that and I have LOTS. Tons. All the rest I would - unless we left the USA.

If it became that extreme in this country, we probably would and could leave - practically and economically.
 
Last edited:
Actually, Jerry...I don't have a clue what you just replied and don't really give a rat's ass. I left my curiosity get the best of me when I saw that you had quoted something that I posted, logged off to read what you said as I have you blocked.

Whatever you just replied with...is more than likely as repugnant as most all of your other post...so...
 
That's exactly my point. When comes down to it, people will play by the rules even when they hate the rules.

No one is going to shoot a cop, and so when the government decides to revoke your registration and order you to turn in your items, you will.
 
You will have to shoot a cop to keep your guns. You won't shoot a cop. You know it, I know it. I won't shoot a cop either because I don't want to live in a hole for the rest of my life. So when the time comes, we will turn in our guns. No one's going to start a civil war over this. So please, enough with all the tough-guy talk.
 
Pilot said:
To clarify, I think most people would hide them.
Click to expand...

What do you think happens after a civil war or any war? People disarm. You're just doing that. And that can be enforced in US as it is in any peacetime country.

Now hand it over.
 
Viv said:
What do you think happens after a civil war or any war? People disarm. You're just doing that. And that can be enforced in US as it is in any peacetime country.

Now hand it over.
Click to expand...
America is still at war.
 
Jerry said:
America is still at war.
Click to expand...

They're afraid to man up and face reality. You don't need guns. Face the world without one. It's a better world.
 
Viv said:
They're afraid to man up and face reality. You don't need guns. Face the world without one. It's a better world.
Click to expand...
I needed mine just last month, so I have to disagree.
 
Viv said:
They're afraid to man up and face reality. You don't need guns. Face the world without one. It's a better world.
Click to expand...

So how do you get your independence? Do you wait until other people come and help you?
 

I'm almost convinced you are a closet liberal cause you seem so damn certain you know what others will do.

Nobody can see into the hearts of man.
 

I'm pretty sure plenty of people would shot cops if they came for their guns.
 
Arbo said:
I'm almost convinced you are a closet liberal cause you seem so damn certain you know what others will do.

Nobody can see into the hearts of man.
Click to expand...
We saw what people will do in 1987. The public's response to compliance with the Hughes Amendment tells us exactly what the public will do should a gun-ban become law.
 
Removable Mind said:
Oh really, Jerry? How in the **** do you know what I did in 1987?
Click to expand...

He's Madame Cleo, didn't you know? Clairvoyant, he sees the past and the future. If only I were so lucky, then I would have known to buy fully automatic weapons and resist confiscation at the age of 10.
 
Henrin said:
I'm pretty sure plenty of people would shot cops if they came for their guns.
Click to expand...
Look to NY, they just banned a whole ****load of guns, and no cops are being shot over it. There's no civil war in NY today. Cops came for guns in 1987. Cops weren't shot. The people complied.
 
Ikari said:
He's Madame Cleo, didn't you know? Clairvoyant, he sees the past and the future. If only I were so lucky, then I would have known to buy fully automatic weapons and resist confiscation at the age of 10.
Click to expand...
Chicago is banning more guns, no cops are being shot over it. Law-abiding citizens don't shoot cops over a gun grab.
 
Jerry said:
I needed mine just last month, so I have to disagree.
Click to expand...

Why, did someone come at you with a gun?

It's all part of growing up, Jerreh lad. You may have to learn to handle dangerous situations in other ways. You know, ways where you consider other options like avoid dangerous situations. Think before you get yourself into them. Immediate and frequent first reaction is not to just be pulling a gun on people.

I know it's frightening. It involves using your brain to think instead of just taking the easy road. It might even make you more resourceful in the long run...

Henrin said:
So how do you get your independence? Do you wait until other people come and help you?
Click to expand...

Watch. It's happening now, if we want it. And not a shot fired.

Or are you talking about leaving home (it seems a bit harsh to shoot the old folks just to strike out on your own, but who knows with US gun folks)

Henrin said:
I'm pretty sure plenty of people would shot cops if they came for their guns.
Click to expand...

That would be a mistake.

I think it depends how it's managed. I would love to see a certain section of US people deprived of the guns which infect them that overbearing and brainless attitude (no offence to those of you who have a brain, plenty of you out there). It will be difficult, as with all other big projects there will be those who just can't envisage what it's going to be like and how it will improve things, no matter how many pictures are drawn for them.

But loads of other countries do it. US won't fall down if it happens.
 
Jerry said:
Chicago is banning more guns, no cops are being shot over it. Law-abiding citizens don't shoot cops over a gun grab.
Click to expand...

Yeah it's hard to met out those stats given the generalized level of violence. Plus they're not really going door to door collecting. We may see some dead cops if so, particularly on the south side. Though it may not be attributable to gun confiscation as much as it the South side is already rather violent and there are areas cops don't go to as is.
 


There would be lots of people who would hide away their 30rd magazines and, if they had to, claim their prohibited firearms were lost or stolen. Others would have them converted if they could to make them legal - such as what people did way back with Tommy guns. Others would turn them in.

But going to live in the woods in tents ready to shoot it out with the police... or barracading inside their houses? Naw, didn't happen in the past, won't happen now.

People talk about how they will go bury their firearms to hide them and I suppose they could. A buried firearm doesn't do a person much good, does it?
 
Jerry said:
We saw what people will do in 1987. The public's response to compliance with the Hughes Amendment tells us exactly what the public will do should a gun-ban become law.
Click to expand...

It's a pretty ignorant stance to take, and repeat over and over. First, most 'gun' people realize the lack of utility of a 'machine gun', second, they know what the government did then and got away with...
 

Yeah, go ahead and feel good about your ability to handle a rapist without a firearm... The rest of us can live in the real world.
 
The kind of person who get's a CCW is the kind of person who is already in the demographic with the lowest rate of ever committing any kind of crime, because the kind of person who gets a CCW places the rule of law in the highest esteem.

The rule of law is supreme, and so if the government tells you that you're going to pay a new tax for Obama'Care, you will pay it. If the government tells you that you're going to pay a new tax for a foreign war, you'll pay it. You aren't going to stand at your doorstep and refuse to pay the IRS. If the government tells you that as an employer or insurance provider you have to honor same-sex marriages, you will, regardless of any objection to SSM you have. You aren't going to keep operating your business after your license is revoked and shoot any official who comes to close your doors. If the government tells you not to block a woman from getting an abortion, you won't, regardless of how pro-life you may be. You aren't going to form an armed blockade, nor will you shoot an abortion doc or bomb a clinic.

The "rule of law" comes first, and so if the law says you can't have a gun, you will bitch about it, but you will turn in your gun.
 
Arbo said:
It's a pretty ignorant stance to take, and repeat over and over. First, most 'gun' people realize the lack of utility of a 'machine gun', second, they know what the government did then and got away with...
Click to expand...
The whole point of having one, is so that you never need it.

 
Arbo said:
Yeah, go ahead and feel good about your ability to handle a rapist without a firearm... The rest of us can live in the real world.
Click to expand...

In what world would you be carrying a firearm everywhere you go and in what world would you want to?

The most effective way to avoid rape as with all potentially dangerous situations, is to avoid being in a situation where it can occur and if you suspect danger, remove yourself from the area.

Awareness...better than assault weapons.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…