the #1 sign the USA is becoming totalitarian.

[inconvertible]

when both democrats and republicans call for gun control.........that is when you better start arming yourself to the teeth.

[ChumpDumper]

Yeah, the gubment is really after me.

[inconvertible]

the cons ution has the second amendment for one reason, at it was not so you could go rabbit hunting when ever you want.

dumbass.

[ChumpDumper]

They haven't taken my muzzle-loading musket yet.

[inconvertible]

[inconvertible]

[boutons_]

Since dubya occupied Iran,
4000 US military deaths, and
4000 US accidental gun deaths.

[smeagol]

Ahhh . . . guns . . . what an important issue!

[MaNuMaNiAc]

Since dubya occupied Iran,
4000 US military deaths, and
4000 US accidental gun deaths.

Iraq

[Heath Ledger]

If you think things with guns are bad now, imagaine a world where only the criminals and military have them. Violent crime has gone up drasticly since Australia, Uk took away their guns. Canada for some strange reason has a very low gun related incident percentage per capita. Oh that's right they are yellow up there...

[DarkReign]

Ahhh . . . guns . . . what an important issue!

It most certainly is. I would predict it will the most important issue very, very soon.

[101A]

Ahhh . . . guns . . . what an important issue!

You hate your government more than any person on this board hates their own. Yours is the most corrupt and totalitarian (relatively speaking). Think about it.

[101A]

Since dubya occupied Iran,
4000 US military deaths, and
4000 US accidental gun deaths.

So the war's not that bad.

Thanks.

[peewee's lovechild]

I want a missile launcher and a grenade launcher.

It's my right under the 2nd amendment.
I have the right to bear arms.

I'll take a tank too.

Maybe a flame thrower . . .

[smeagol]

It most certainly is. I would predict it will the most important issue very, very soon.

I trust the government to ensure my well-being and safety

You hate your government more than any person on this board hates their own. Yours is the most corrupt and totalitarian (relatively speaking). Think about it.

Nice to see there is an issue that unites liberals and conservatives . . .

[smeagol]

I want a missile launcher and a grenade launcher.

It's my right under the 2nd amendment.
I have the right to bear arms.

I'll take a tank too.

Maybe a flame thrower . . .

The crazy thing is I find myself agreeing with peewee

[smeagol]

You hate your government more than any person on this board hates their own. Yours is the most corrupt and totalitarian (relatively speaking). Think about it.

So owning a gun is the solution . . . ?

Okie dokie

[peewee's lovechild]

This issue is beyond re ed.

Pro-gunners say that the 2nd Amendment gaurantees them the right to bear arms. This obviously covers, according to them, weapons not used for hunting. You know, assault rifles, uzis, gernade launchers, nukes . . . etc.

When asked why they would need this they say:

That was put in the Cons ution to make sure the government won't take advantage of it's people. (or some re ed like that)

Now, let's say that the government is taking advantage of us. Like let's say . . . raping our civil liberties by tapping our phones, illegal searches and seizures, suspending habeas corpus, fighting a war that Americans (the people) don't want to fight, etc.

So, by using the pro-gunners rationale . . . we should be able to overthrow our government if it in fact ceases from acting the way we see it fit.

But, doing so would be considered treasonous by these very same people.

So, exactly why the do we need access to these weapons? And just how the does it makes any safer?

[BonnerDynasty]

Come and take them.

anyone who thinks they can tell me what I should drive and what I should and should not have for my own protection.

I laugh at you.

[Yonivore]

This issue is beyond re ed.

Pro-gunners say that the 2nd Amendment gaurantees them the right to bear arms. This obviously covers, according to them, weapons not used for hunting. You know, assault rifles, uzis, gernade launchers, nukes . . . etc.

When asked why they would need this they say:

That was put in the Cons ution to make sure the government won't take advantage of it's people. (or some re ed like that)

Now, let's say that the government is taking advantage of us. Like let's say . . . raping our civil liberties by tapping our phones, illegal searches and seizures, suspending habeas corpus, fighting a war that Americans (the people) don't want to fight, etc.

So, by using the pro-gunners rationale . . . we should be able to overthrow our government if it in fact ceases from acting the way we see it fit.

I think you mischaracterize the rationale.

All Americans have the right to be free from government interference and oppression. If, in order to do so, an American feels he must take up arms and take on the government, that is his right -- and some would say his duty. The cons ution, including the 2nd amendment, guarantees our right to do so.

It does not, however, guarantee we're right or that we'll succeed in our endeavor. It also doesn't guarantee we won't be held accountable (by the standards imposed by the government we attempted to overthrow) or that other Americans will agree with our choice of action and not call us treasonous.

But, doing so would be considered treasonous by these very same people.

Especially if I don't agree with you. You see, I just conveyed my belief that you have a cons utional right to bear arms to both protect yourself and to engage in armed rebellion without saying you have a cons utional right to be right.

So, exactly why the do we need access to these weapons? And just how the does it makes any safer?

It probably wouldn't make you any safer.

[inconvertible]

you have a right to bear arms to deter a tyrannical govt.

[smeagol]

you have a right to bear arms to deter a tyrannical govt.

And that is the one and only reason why the gun-nuts own weapons

Wake me up when ya'll have to take your 45 milimiters and Uzis to overthough a Democrat or Republican governement (or Nader's or Perot's governemnt, for that matter).

[Yonivore]

And that is the one and only reason why the gun-nuts own weapons

It doesn't have to be the one and only reason.

[smeagol]

It doesn't have to be the one and only reason.

I know . . . you have to be prepared to shoot down that pesky mugger because the police does a ty job at it.

Ohh . . . and you also hage to blow up some squirrells.

[peewee's lovechild]

I think you mischaracterize the rationale.

All Americans have the right to be free from government interference and oppression. If, in order to do so, an American feels he must take up arms and take on the government, that is his right -- and some would say his duty. The cons ution, including the 2nd amendment, guarantees our right to do so.

So, why is it considered treason to do so if all we're doing is exercising our right as described in the Cons ution?

It does not, however, guarantee we're right or that we'll succeed in our endeavor. It also doesn't guarantee we won't be held accountable (by the standards imposed by the government we attempted to overthrow) or that other Americans will agree with our choice of action and not call us treasonous.

So, if over 50% of the American (a majority) population agrees that our government has become so corrupt so as validate an overthrow, it will cease to be treason and become our "duty" to overthrow said government?

It probably wouldn't make you any safer.

It doesn't.

And that's why we should regulate what weapons people can buy.