Controlling firearms

[the last yatto]

No they actually hollowed out the mountain a bit... its not what one expects from a bunker.

[the last yatto]

But today, if you wanted to really wage a war against, say, a corrupt US government from the continental US, you'd need a lot more than rifleman.  You need some way to counter ballistic missiles, stealth bombers, battleships, and chemical warfare.  If the government is determined, you'd need to break their military infrastructure to make them leave you alone for good...

I agree you need more then a riflemen but the other stuff not so much, IRA and the weathermen didn't rely on those. I don't know enough about fifth generation warfare but today id take a PR firm over a nuke. A cause is the factor in both your examples but the later one you seem to ignore that fact. Irish had their hate of british to unite em, wm had the treatment of soldiers who refused to fight.

Cameras are often treated as weapons on the battlefield...

Dok/charley,
Would membership requirement in say NRA be really considered bad?

[Doktor Howl]

Dok/charley,
Would membership requirement in say NRA be really considered bad?

Yes. 

Why do you keep trying to put limitations or qualifiers on individual liberty?  We have politicians for that.

[the last yatto]

Live together or die alone?

[Doktor Howl]

Live together or die alone?

Out here, we ALL have guns.  Way too many guns.  And only some of us get shot and tossed in dumpsters.  Your argument is invalid.

Also, nobody promised "safe".  In fact, "safe" is the enemy of both fun and freedom.

[Aucoq]

Also, nobody promised "safe".  In fact, "safe" is the enemy of both fun and freedom.

Thats how I see it.

[Adios]

But today, if you wanted to really wage a war against, say, a corrupt US government from the continental US, you'd need a lot more than rifleman.  You need some way to counter ballistic missiles, stealth bombers, battleships, and chemical warfare.  If the government is determined, you'd need to break their military infrastructure to make them leave you alone for good...

I agree you need more then a riflemen but the other stuff not so much, IRA and the weathermen didn't rely on those. I don't know enough about fifth generation warfare but today id take a PR firm over a nuke. A cause is the factor in both your examples but the later one you seem to ignore that fact. Irish had their hate of british to unite em, wm had the treatment of soldiers who refused to fight.

Cameras are often treated as weapons on the battlefield...

Dok/charley,
Would membership requirement in say NRA be really considered bad?

NO. SERSLY. PAINT A BIG TARGET ON YOUR ASS.

[Nawaxo]

Just my two eurocents: gun limitations actually means that more often than not people will not expect to find guns and won't feel a need to possess one to keep the egde. Most robbers bring a knife if anything, except in places bad enough to have everyone bring some kind of weapon. Beside, you're not going to fight an army of trained people with ultralight plasic assault weapons using a common rifle. Some people get shot with their own weapons actually.

Anyway! I guess if someone tried to do that in the U.S. right now you would have a lot of people feel deprived of any right to defend oneself and get an AK trough the black market.

BUT THERE IS STILL HOPE: the Swiss way!

Everyone gets his assault rifle, everyone is trained to use it efficiently.

[Doktor Howl]

Some people get shot with their own weapons actually.

Darwin says "Hi!"

BUT THERE IS STILL HOPE: the Swiss way!

Everyone gets his assault rifle, everyone is trained to use it efficiently.

This.  But I want a bazooka.

[Adios]

Just my two eurocents: gun limitations actually means that more often than not people will not expect to find guns LEGALLY and won't feel a need to possess one to keep the egde. Most robbers bring a knife if anything, ARE ALREADY BREAKING THE LAW SO GUN CONTROL MEANS NOTHING TO THEM except in places bad enough to have everyone bring some kind of weapon. Beside, you're not going to fight an army of trained people with ultralight plasic assault weapons using a common rifle. Some people get shot with their own weapons actually.

Anyway! I guess if someone tried to do that in the U.S. right now you would have a lot of people feel deprived of any right to defend oneself and get an AK trough the black market.

BUT THERE IS STILL HOPE: the Swiss way!

Everyone gets his assault rifle, everyone is trained to use it efficiently.

[Adios]

Some people get shot with their own weapons actually.

Darwin says "Hi!"

BUT THERE IS STILL HOPE: the Swiss way!

Everyone gets his assault rifle, everyone is trained to use it efficiently.

This.  But I want a bazooka.

[Elder Iptuous]

It is my understanding that the Swiss are required to serve in their military (where they receive their rifle proficiency).  i can't get behind that.
It is also my understanding that, while they are each issued a rifle to keep at their house, they are also issued a certain limited quantity of ammunition, and they are not able to purchase ammunition freely, as we are here.  i couldn't get behind that either.  I like having the problem of wondering whether the foundation of my house is rated for the amount of lead in my closet....

Also, nobody promised "safe".  In fact, "safe" is the enemy of both fun and freedom.

simply wonderful. 

[Nawaxo]

Just my two eurocents: gun limitations actually means that more often than not people will not expect to find guns LEGALLY and won't feel a need to possess one to keep the egde. Most robbers bring a knife if anything, ARE ALREADY BREAKING THE LAW SO GUN CONTROL MEANS NOTHING TO THEM except in places bad enough to have everyone bring some kind of weapon. Beside, you're not going to fight an army of trained people with ultralight plasic assault weapons using a common rifle. Some people get shot with their own weapons actually.

Anyway! I guess if someone tried to do that in the U.S. right now you would have a lot of people feel deprived of any right to defend oneself and get an AK trough the black market.

BUT THERE IS STILL HOPE: the Swiss way!

Everyone gets his assault rifle, everyone is trained to use it efficiently.

Not really, it doesn't work like that. Stealing something here is a way less serious offense than doing the same thing with a gun, it's not either breaking the law or not doing so, there's a lot of stuff between "storming someone's house with assault rifles" and "a law abiding citizen". If people don't feel threatened to find armed resistance then they're just less likely to bring weapons themselves. Even with more restrictive policies here most murders are still performed with legally registered weapons, while many burglars just run for it if you surprise them in your house, or grab wathever comes in handy (like your gun). Your argument only applies to people that would really find no difference in 10 or 20 more years of jail: organized crime, mafia and such. You're still not going to do anything about that by yourself with a gun anyway .

It is my understanding that the Swiss are required to serve in their military (where they receive their rifle proficiency).  i can't get behind that.
It is also my understanding that, while they are each issued a rifle to keep at their house, they are also issued a certain limited quantity of ammunition, and they are not able to purchase ammunition freely, as we are here.  i couldn't get behind that either.  I like having the problem of wondering whether the foundation of my house is rated for the amount of lead in my closet....

Also, nobody promised "safe".  In fact, "safe" is the enemy of both fun and freedom.

simply wonderful. 

Well, you aren't going to learn how to use an assault rifle to check on your governement by practicing in your backyard. You don't get a driver license on simple trust, why not make sure you actually know what you are doing? Proper use of a weapon may actually require some commitment, having a gun doesn't make a warrior. For me it's either a strict regulation or "everyone handles the biggest gun a single man can handle". The latter would probably be better.

I actually think that people in the U.S. just like to shoot each other and feel powerful handling big, hevy and hard guns ready to OH FREUD WHERE ARE YOU?

[Doktor Howl]

I actually think that people in the U.S. just like to shoot each other and feel powerful handling big, hevy and hard guns ready to OH FREUD WHERE ARE YOU?

Fuck off, you arrogant little shit.

Thanks in advance.

Dok,
Erased the rest of his response when he got to that ignorant drivel.

[Adios]

Just my two eurocents: gun limitations actually means that more often than not people will not expect to find guns LEGALLY and won't feel a need to possess one to keep the egde. Most robbers bring a knife if anything, ARE ALREADY BREAKING THE LAW SO GUN CONTROL MEANS NOTHING TO THEM except in places bad enough to have everyone bring some kind of weapon. Beside, you're not going to fight an army of trained people with ultralight plasic assault weapons using a common rifle. Some people get shot with their own weapons actually.

Anyway! I guess if someone tried to do that in the U.S. right now you would have a lot of people feel deprived of any right to defend oneself and get an AK trough the black market.

BUT THERE IS STILL HOPE: the Swiss way!

Everyone gets his assault rifle, everyone is trained to use it efficiently.

Not really, it doesn't work like that. Stealing something here is a way less serious offense than doing the same thing with a gun, it's not either breaking the law or not doing so, there's a lot of stuff between "storming someone's house with assault rifles" and "a law abiding citizen". If people don't feel threatened to find armed resistance then they're just less likely to bring weapons themselves. Even with more restrictive policies here most murders are still performed with legally registered weapons, while many burglars just run for it if you surprise them in your house, or grab wathever comes in handy (like your gun). Your argument only applies to people that would really find no difference in 10 or 20 more years of jail: organized crime, mafia and such. You're still not going to do anything about that by yourself with a gun anyway .

It is my understanding that the Swiss are required to serve in their military (where they receive their rifle proficiency).  i can't get behind that.
It is also my understanding that, while they are each issued a rifle to keep at their house, they are also issued a certain limited quantity of ammunition, and they are not able to purchase ammunition freely, as we are here.  i couldn't get behind that either.  I like having the problem of wondering whether the foundation of my house is rated for the amount of lead in my closet....

Also, nobody promised "safe".  In fact, "safe" is the enemy of both fun and freedom.

simply wonderful. 

Well, you aren't going to learn how to use an assault rifle to check on your governement by practicing in your backyard. You don't get a driver license on simple trust, why not make sure you actually know what you are doing? Proper use of a weapon may actually require some commitment, having a gun doesn't make a warrior. For me it's either a strict regulation or "everyone handles the biggest gun a single man can handle". The latter would probably be better.

I actually think that people in the U.S. just like to shoot each other and feel powerful handling big, hevy and hard guns ready to OH FREUD WHERE ARE YOU?

You have just managed to reach the 'Fucking Idiot' level. Now go away.