Is the USA a mini Somalia?
- Thread starter Highgate
- Start date
- Status
JustinJ
Member
In regards to the original post, i do see his point. The Somali reference was obviously tongue in cheek but i see what he is saying. Many threads, ecspecially in ST&T could certainly give that impression as many come off as though they expect an attack around every corner. Stashing guns in the bathroom and driving around the block instead before pulling into one's driveway if any other cars are on the street sound paranoid to me too.
Personally, i like discussing things like balistics and own so many firearms because i find them to be interesting topics and enjoy collecting and shooting them. If i didn't have a passion for guns i'd probably do what the majority of gun owners do. Buy one or two, load it with what the guy at the gun store says and practice a couple times a year. As was said earlier, this is a gun forum about with a subculture of gun enthusiasts. We are not representative of the average american in regards to firearms.
Personally, i like discussing things like balistics and own so many firearms because i find them to be interesting topics and enjoy collecting and shooting them. If i didn't have a passion for guns i'd probably do what the majority of gun owners do. Buy one or two, load it with what the guy at the gun store says and practice a couple times a year. As was said earlier, this is a gun forum about with a subculture of gun enthusiasts. We are not representative of the average american in regards to firearms.
hogshead
Member
You certainly struck a nerve comparing us to Somalia. Made my blood boil didn't even read all the post.We lost some good men down there trying to help them. Personaly I think we should have leveled the place. Then you have the nerve to compare us to them. I'm am proud to be an American and even prouder that we whipped the Red Coats and sent them home crying in their tea. I think if you care to study our crime rates as compared to yours you will see who has the war zone. Now I'm gonna go throw some tea in the river.
MagnumDweeb
Member
No America is not a mini Somalia. The comparison seems completely lacking in intelligent thought. Our country is far more massive and more productive. Plus in Somalia, roving gangs and tribal sects run amok killing people as they please. We don't quite have that here in the U.S. and if some of the more "European" thinkers in our government would abandon their misplaced ideals and allow for more American ideas to take root, crime again would sharply decrease as well. States with more American beliefs have seen far sharper drops in crime or never really had crime problems to begin. European thinking locations like Washington D.C. have only seen their crimes rates shoot up.
Now do we have crime in this country, yes. But lets look at the cause of that. The war on drugs is a large part of it, so if we were to act like Portugal and basically decriminalize it we would see a sharp drop in crime after about ten years. Then the next big cause is poverty, well self-inflicted poverty actually. The explanation of which I shall skip for it is not exactly high road material.
A simple fact is the USA is not Europe, we will never be Europe. Think of the Atlantic like a great Pan, in the terms of panning for gold so to speak. Those who can make it over here from Europe have typically brought great ideas, devotion, loyalty, and innovation (thank you Tesla).
Now to our English thread starter. I have had the privilege of teaching close to two-dozen English immigrants how to shoot. Each of whom was happy with our laws and way of life. And had chosen America over your former country, as a place to spend the rest of their careers and subsequent retirement. So don't think for a second I dislike all English people, I just dislike certain kinds of European thinking.
Most Americans will never consider Europe important, and that's just how it is. Our entire country is larger than Western Europe. Since 1990 the U.S.'s population has grown by more than 64 million immigrants. More people have immigrated to the U.S. then there is the entire population of France. And we've largely absorbed them well and hospitably. Oh are we perfect, nope, but we're not Somalia, or even Germany, France, or dare say England with its troubles over the minor trickles of immigrants into their countries. So do pardon some of the members venom(couldn't remember how to spell vitruole) in their responses, equality breeds respect, potshots from those who bear not our Atlas-like burden or ability breeds indignation.
Oh I typed out a nice articulate and large speech but I doubt it would be very high road. To capture simply many a Southerner's opinion of certain kinds of thinking, much like our thread starters. "We don't really care what you have to say, but I'd like to see you try and take this here gun out of my hand."
Posts further on this thread should only act to solidify our resolve and ostracize the thinking presented by our thread starter.
Now do we have crime in this country, yes. But lets look at the cause of that. The war on drugs is a large part of it, so if we were to act like Portugal and basically decriminalize it we would see a sharp drop in crime after about ten years. Then the next big cause is poverty, well self-inflicted poverty actually. The explanation of which I shall skip for it is not exactly high road material.
A simple fact is the USA is not Europe, we will never be Europe. Think of the Atlantic like a great Pan, in the terms of panning for gold so to speak. Those who can make it over here from Europe have typically brought great ideas, devotion, loyalty, and innovation (thank you Tesla).
Now to our English thread starter. I have had the privilege of teaching close to two-dozen English immigrants how to shoot. Each of whom was happy with our laws and way of life. And had chosen America over your former country, as a place to spend the rest of their careers and subsequent retirement. So don't think for a second I dislike all English people, I just dislike certain kinds of European thinking.
Most Americans will never consider Europe important, and that's just how it is. Our entire country is larger than Western Europe. Since 1990 the U.S.'s population has grown by more than 64 million immigrants. More people have immigrated to the U.S. then there is the entire population of France. And we've largely absorbed them well and hospitably. Oh are we perfect, nope, but we're not Somalia, or even Germany, France, or dare say England with its troubles over the minor trickles of immigrants into their countries. So do pardon some of the members venom(couldn't remember how to spell vitruole) in their responses, equality breeds respect, potshots from those who bear not our Atlas-like burden or ability breeds indignation.
Oh I typed out a nice articulate and large speech but I doubt it would be very high road. To capture simply many a Southerner's opinion of certain kinds of thinking, much like our thread starters. "We don't really care what you have to say, but I'd like to see you try and take this here gun out of my hand."
Posts further on this thread should only act to solidify our resolve and ostracize the thinking presented by our thread starter.
NoirFan
Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2006
- Messages
- 671
A lot of that talk here is about people attempting to justify to themselves their large gun collections. So there a lot of talk about what rifle is best if MS-13 busts down the door, what if there is a grizzly in my daughter's bedroom, that kind of thing. These same people will then get upset if you openly ask them why they need all these guns, usually the terms "liberal" and "anti-gun" will get thrown around. In the end it's just a bunch of harmless hot air with the occasional bit of useful information, just like the other 99% of the internet.
Small arms would be useful in a crackpot evil government scenario because they are still pretty good at the kind of fighting useful in insurgency warfare: killing soft targets like collaborators and the families of soldiers, police, and politicians. Look at why the Iraqi soldiers and police are so ineffective; even if a bomb or drive-by shooting doesn't kill you at work, what's to stop the insurgents from paying your family a little visit when you're on duty? I wish the 2nd amendment fantasists would think hard about the kind of dirty war they would be bringing to our shores if they really did decide to overthrow the government.
Small arms would be useful in a crackpot evil government scenario because they are still pretty good at the kind of fighting useful in insurgency warfare: killing soft targets like collaborators and the families of soldiers, police, and politicians. Look at why the Iraqi soldiers and police are so ineffective; even if a bomb or drive-by shooting doesn't kill you at work, what's to stop the insurgents from paying your family a little visit when you're on duty? I wish the 2nd amendment fantasists would think hard about the kind of dirty war they would be bringing to our shores if they really did decide to overthrow the government.
While I think his question has been answered in volume let's try to be civil in our discussion. After all this is a place of knowledge and learning, anyone and everyone should feel welcome to come and ask questions (even poorly worded ones).
Highgate
Member
Thank you.
I wanted to kick of the discussion with a bit of zing ... and it seems to have worked ... maybe a bit too well.
blarby
Member
Well highgate, you certainly got some varied responses, eh ?
Quite a feisty cross-section of the gun owning population we've got here, dontcha think? You managed to pick quite a sore-spot for some of the current and prior service members we have, and the general ire of a portion of the rest.
If the comment was designed to stoke some lively discussion...you certainly got it.
We're a warlike , gun toting people...always have been, always will be. At 26 or so conflicts ( 6 before we were independent ) involving sons of our soil in 229 years we actually average a major combat more than once a decade. Every generation knows multiple wars. Every gradeschool has a lesson about our current gunfight. Its not surprising that this culture of violence begets a continuing culture of it....but we kinda like it that way, it keeps us sharp....so to speak.
Its also not surprising that such a culture would have a set of individuals ( armchair or no, depending on your forum choice) who preach, tacticize, and romanticize all of the aspects of gun ownership.
I'd hope you'd realize that this subset isn't reflective of the populace as a whole, we're just frequently the part that gets noticed...especially by foreigners and those intending to take our hard earned right to keep and bear arms away. To both these parties, we are " the rifle behind every blade of grass" and we like it that way. It helps to have a fringe element that scares the dickens out of both....makes 'em consider what taking our land OR our rights away would entail.
*passes the spf5000 flame retardant around*
With that said, I'll send this one adrift AGAIN on things that bring us closer, not farther, apart ....as gun owners discussing guns !
We do have some similarities on shot prices, believe it or not.
We're forced to use non-toxic steel shot when hunting waterfowl, and decent BB or comparable #4 in Hevishot configurations cost north of $1 US a shot !
I purchased 50 cartridges of a hybrid hevishot/steel shot mix in BB for goose this season and it cost me $54 at the height of the season.
Of course lead shot can be had for sporting purposes like trap and skeet for far less...but don't get caught shooting real birds with them !
So you would need all that "permitting" to add a rifled barrel eh ? Well, thats a shame. I guess its rifled slugs, not sabots for you !
Quite a feisty cross-section of the gun owning population we've got here, dontcha think? You managed to pick quite a sore-spot for some of the current and prior service members we have, and the general ire of a portion of the rest.
If the comment was designed to stoke some lively discussion...you certainly got it.
We're a warlike , gun toting people...always have been, always will be. At 26 or so conflicts ( 6 before we were independent ) involving sons of our soil in 229 years we actually average a major combat more than once a decade. Every generation knows multiple wars. Every gradeschool has a lesson about our current gunfight. Its not surprising that this culture of violence begets a continuing culture of it....but we kinda like it that way, it keeps us sharp....so to speak.
Its also not surprising that such a culture would have a set of individuals ( armchair or no, depending on your forum choice) who preach, tacticize, and romanticize all of the aspects of gun ownership.
I'd hope you'd realize that this subset isn't reflective of the populace as a whole, we're just frequently the part that gets noticed...especially by foreigners and those intending to take our hard earned right to keep and bear arms away. To both these parties, we are " the rifle behind every blade of grass" and we like it that way. It helps to have a fringe element that scares the dickens out of both....makes 'em consider what taking our land OR our rights away would entail.
*passes the spf5000 flame retardant around*
With that said, I'll send this one adrift AGAIN on things that bring us closer, not farther, apart ....as gun owners discussing guns !
We do have some similarities on shot prices, believe it or not.
We're forced to use non-toxic steel shot when hunting waterfowl, and decent BB or comparable #4 in Hevishot configurations cost north of $1 US a shot !
I purchased 50 cartridges of a hybrid hevishot/steel shot mix in BB for goose this season and it cost me $54 at the height of the season.
Of course lead shot can be had for sporting purposes like trap and skeet for far less...but don't get caught shooting real birds with them !
So you would need all that "permitting" to add a rifled barrel eh ? Well, thats a shame. I guess its rifled slugs, not sabots for you !
JohnBT
Member
"These same people will then get upset if you openly ask them why they need all these guns"
We do? I never noticed. Maybe I'm too new around here.
We do? I never noticed. Maybe I'm too new around here.
Highgate
Member
Nope.
Our law says:
Minimum of 6 pellets per cartridge. Max pellet size around US 00.
Max 3 shots in a shotgun.
Min barrel length 26".
Min weapon length for autos and pumps: 40".
Not that many in the UK ever shoot such heavy shotgun ammunition.
Highgate
Member
The Brits too.
... Boer War, WW1, WW2, Korea, Malaysia, Borneo, Falklands, Balkans, Iraq #1, Iraq #2, Libya, Afghanistan - more than once.
We just don't encourage bringing the war toys back to our homes.
mcdonl
Member
Highgate, I have to ask you. Dont you wish you could just buy whatever you want to buy and not have the government telling you what is safe and not safe? I want YOUR opinion on this not your nations.
Highgate
Member
Too true!
Thank you everyone for all your comment - they WERE useful & interesting.
Art Eatman
Moderator In Memoriam
The firearms violence problem is primarily associated with facets of the world of illegal drugs. That is, there are turf wars over who gets to sell what drugs where. There are armed robberies which are done to get money to buy drugs. And much of our gang warfare, if not racial in nature, is allied to drug sales.
People who do not live in or move through areas where gangs are prevalent and drug sales are a regular activity generally only know about gun violence via their television news.
As far as all the posting in discussions of strategy and tactics, it seems to me that the general attitude is tied to the concept of a form of insurance against disaster. Similar to having an insurance policy against fire, flood or civil liability--but not just a paper thing. "The odds are low, but the stakes are high."
All in all, our system--warts and all--gives us more individual sovereignty than in any other country. Nobody can guarantee safety except the individual himself. We at least have the means.
People who do not live in or move through areas where gangs are prevalent and drug sales are a regular activity generally only know about gun violence via their television news.
As far as all the posting in discussions of strategy and tactics, it seems to me that the general attitude is tied to the concept of a form of insurance against disaster. Similar to having an insurance policy against fire, flood or civil liability--but not just a paper thing. "The odds are low, but the stakes are high."
All in all, our system--warts and all--gives us more individual sovereignty than in any other country. Nobody can guarantee safety except the individual himself. We at least have the means.
steelerdude99
Member
Highgate,
A better comparison is comparing how much government a place has would be Somalia vs. U.K. U.K. with a government everywhere approach and Somalia where government is hardly anywhere. U.K. streets are ripe for the pickings for criminals who manage to get a firearm. The police are mostly unarmed and potential victims are unarmed as well. IF they are armed with a handgun, then per UK law, they themselves are criminals. The U.K. Government does not have a constitution saying that they “cannot pass a law” that infringes on a right. On the Somalia side, you have warlords who are so brazen that they kidnap, take over villages, rape, loot, pillage …. and thus become extremely wealthy. All the while, not much fear of being stopped by government. In either U.K. or Somalia, the law abiding person on the street (or in the village) is left defenseless.
In the USA, we are in the middle and have the Constitution that limits government from passing laws which are unconstitutional. One amendment to the Constitution is the right to bear arms. Would it stop a tyrannical government with tanks and other modern military weapons? Not likely. Will the right to bear arms allow the person on the street to defend their selves? Yes (as long as the locality has not taken away that constitutional right). If laws are broken while defending themselves (such as hunting down the perpetrator), then the person faces prosecution. Every firearm IF MISUSED will enable its owner to attempt to do something illegal. In the much of the USA, it’s not the ability to attempt to commit a crime that’s a crime, it the action of actually doing so.
chuck
A better comparison is comparing how much government a place has would be Somalia vs. U.K. U.K. with a government everywhere approach and Somalia where government is hardly anywhere. U.K. streets are ripe for the pickings for criminals who manage to get a firearm. The police are mostly unarmed and potential victims are unarmed as well. IF they are armed with a handgun, then per UK law, they themselves are criminals. The U.K. Government does not have a constitution saying that they “cannot pass a law” that infringes on a right. On the Somalia side, you have warlords who are so brazen that they kidnap, take over villages, rape, loot, pillage …. and thus become extremely wealthy. All the while, not much fear of being stopped by government. In either U.K. or Somalia, the law abiding person on the street (or in the village) is left defenseless.
In the USA, we are in the middle and have the Constitution that limits government from passing laws which are unconstitutional. One amendment to the Constitution is the right to bear arms. Would it stop a tyrannical government with tanks and other modern military weapons? Not likely. Will the right to bear arms allow the person on the street to defend their selves? Yes (as long as the locality has not taken away that constitutional right). If laws are broken while defending themselves (such as hunting down the perpetrator), then the person faces prosecution. Every firearm IF MISUSED will enable its owner to attempt to do something illegal. In the much of the USA, it’s not the ability to attempt to commit a crime that’s a crime, it the action of actually doing so.
chuck
Highgate
Member
Very good question.
I would indeed like to buy what I want.
But do I really need an AR-15 'just for fun'?
And more importantly do I want the local unemployed dope dealers to have easier access to firearms? (UK crooks can currently get access to guns - but usually imitations or blank-firers modified to fire bullets. A wider retail gun market would improve their chances of obtaining decent weapons)
And do I really want to see armed police in the UK?
Hmmm ... not too sure.
Maybe our current level of gun control is a tad overbearing ... but I suspect that it's better than a free-for-all.
leadcounsel
member
I've lived in and been to the UK (Scotland and England) many times since 1995. I was there when you had 'sorta' gun ownership. I have actually been shotgun clay shooting to a range in 2007 with a friend. A round of clays was bloody pricey, about 3 times what we'd pay in the states. But now, gun ownership is much too difficult for an average person and your self defense laws are non-existent.
Anyway, if you think the US and Somalia are on par then you need to get out more. The answer is no.
With my experiences in the UK, you folks are about as Non-free as I could imagine for a nation. Social welfare nanny craddle to grave police state where the people are subjects with no real rights. It is truly a shame. You need to fix it, but I don't know how.
I think the real trick that the Government did on the UK citizens is that you are still oppressed, but you have a lot of entitlements and pleasant lifestyles so you don't realize it. And you're brainwashed to think that you don't need rights.
Anyway, if you think the US and Somalia are on par then you need to get out more. The answer is no.
With my experiences in the UK, you folks are about as Non-free as I could imagine for a nation. Social welfare nanny craddle to grave police state where the people are subjects with no real rights. It is truly a shame. You need to fix it, but I don't know how.
I think the real trick that the Government did on the UK citizens is that you are still oppressed, but you have a lot of entitlements and pleasant lifestyles so you don't realize it. And you're brainwashed to think that you don't need rights.
evan price
Member
Um, let's see..about 200 or so years ago, your King told us we couldn't have guns and tried to take ours away. We wound up starting a war and kicking his troops' behinds back to Merrye Ye Olde Englande.
Then in 1987 and 1997 your government did the same thing to you subjects of the Crown, and y'all decided to meekly turn them in. Soon thereafter y'all introduced the ban on air guns, the ban on things that look scary, the ban on knives, and forced a special dispensation to be required to hold the Olympics including shooting events. Then you came out with the stab-proof steak knife and the shatterproof pint glass. Soon I'm sure they will wrap the entire island in foam and outlaw acute angles entirely.
Then in 1987 and 1997 your government did the same thing to you subjects of the Crown, and y'all decided to meekly turn them in. Soon thereafter y'all introduced the ban on air guns, the ban on things that look scary, the ban on knives, and forced a special dispensation to be required to hold the Olympics including shooting events. Then you came out with the stab-proof steak knife and the shatterproof pint glass. Soon I'm sure they will wrap the entire island in foam and outlaw acute angles entirely.
Tommygunn
Member
Wanderling said:
Unfortunatly, the militia system, as idealized by our founders, fell out of common use a long time ago. With regards to those motley groups who call themselves "militia," I regard them as nothing other than John Q. Public who gather in groups and wear camo and shoot empty bearcans off logs on weekends.
Not to really disparage all militias. Some of them do have ex military types and these (few) probably would be somewhat effective in skirmishes.
But others contain dangerous nutcase extremists and need monitoring by the Fibbies.
That's one of the problems; there's a wide range of types ensconced in what we call "militias" (which really aren't) today.
If we were to be faced with a true situation in which we had a tyranny that we needed to overthrow, what I think might happen is:
In the initial stages it would be the police who would be the initial responders to deal with the militia. I actually think the militia might have some chance of doing well against a police force, as they are not military and are hogtied by "miranda" concerns and not primarily tasked to "kill people and break their things."
But I think that soon the military would be brought in. Here the only advantage a militia would have would be (A.) guerrilla warfare, and (B.) the size of our country. To me it's doubtfull a ragtag bunch of weekend warriors would, however, have the smarts and savvy to use these to their advantage. A few with those ex military guys might.
Long and short of it: Preserving our liberty as we know it and have it (even restoring what's been lost) through peaceful measures (voting, and participation in politics) is a far better, and more efficacious manner of obtaining our goal than violence.
For those who are too enamored of the weekend warriors, I'd advise to study the Revolutionary War.
It was never written in granite we would win.
We COULD HAVE LOST.
It would have been easy. Even small instances might have turned the tide at some points. General Washington had his "butt" kicked out of New York City by the British. He led his defeated, ragtag Continentals to Trenton and achieved victory -- a necessary one -- there.
But, if one British officer had actually read one note he'd been given, rather than stuffing it in his pocket, the British would have known about Washington, and Trenton would have been lost.
Then what? Washington's army, either dead, or POWs, or at best dissolved....the British would have had the momentum....and we'd now be sipping tea at 4:00PM and be using poundsterling notes rather than dollar bills.
We honor and admire Washington, and others who fought and gave us our freedom today -- and well we should; it so easily could have gone the other way for them.
Some of the Revolutionaries had better weapons than the British. The rifled musket, for example, gave its user greater range and accuracy. The British hated and feared the colonists who used them because they could and did pick off individual commanders. The downside of the rifled musket was it took longer to load, as the rifling had to be engaged. In the then typical volleyfire warfare, the rifle was actually a detriment as the muskets reloaded much faster.
The technology though, is sso much different today .........
Really want to face off against an AH - 64 Apache gunship or an M1A1 Abrahms tank armed with your M4orgery? Naaaaaahhh, didn't think so ....
Last edited:
hardluk1
member
Highgate If you had total freedom to hunt or shoot freely at different gun ranges would you, if you had them? Travel 500 or 2000 miles with out jumping through hoops at the border crossing or state lines with your forearm, would you? Just to be able to travel freely with in your borders with a firearm or to own and shoot a handgun freely and legaly would you.
There are allways people that will go over the top no matter what or where. We also do go through federal back ground checks and if you carry a handgun, there are class's and range time plus finger prints and federal background checks . In your country it is possible for the BG to find a way to acquire a firearm if they work at it,right?
Remember when times were not so fine with the irish ? That sort a sounds like Somalia over there to us. People screw'n with another "states" way of life and policical controls. Are there areas that a brit would not go to for lunch or even care to travel around in certain areas of britsh controled countries freely and comfortably. Just figure some of bigger cities here can be like that.
Concedering the size and population difference of our two counties it might sound worse here with our very slanted news but we all know what a straight up fine job the news does by both sides of the ocean ,right. All ways the real truth!!!
Many of us also shoot in matchs of different types like you use to have the right to do.
Highgate , Maybe your problem is that you have not had the freedoms we do to really have any idea of what you want.
Is waisting all that money on a queen really worth it ? Would be nice to read reply about that as some other brits will see it and read it. Glad I am here even as crappy as some things can be at times.
There are allways people that will go over the top no matter what or where. We also do go through federal back ground checks and if you carry a handgun, there are class's and range time plus finger prints and federal background checks . In your country it is possible for the BG to find a way to acquire a firearm if they work at it,right?
Remember when times were not so fine with the irish ? That sort a sounds like Somalia over there to us. People screw'n with another "states" way of life and policical controls. Are there areas that a brit would not go to for lunch or even care to travel around in certain areas of britsh controled countries freely and comfortably. Just figure some of bigger cities here can be like that.
Concedering the size and population difference of our two counties it might sound worse here with our very slanted news but we all know what a straight up fine job the news does by both sides of the ocean ,right. All ways the real truth!!!
Many of us also shoot in matchs of different types like you use to have the right to do.
Highgate , Maybe your problem is that you have not had the freedoms we do to really have any idea of what you want.
Is waisting all that money on a queen really worth it ? Would be nice to read reply about that as some other brits will see it and read it. Glad I am here even as crappy as some things can be at times.
Last edited:
Does anyone need a Corvette to drive back and forth to work?
Do recreational golfers need a titanium head golf clubs?
Your government expects you to leave your protection up to them.
Our government provides us protection, as well as respecting our right to protect ourselves. Unfortunately there are plenty of people in our government who are trying to deny us that right.
Do you not find it odd that you are allowed firearms to protect the life of your chickens, but not to protect the life of yourself and your family? I'd say those are some backward priorities.
steelerdude99
Member
...
For those who are too enamored of the weekend warriors, I'd advise to study the Revolutionary War.
It was never written in granite we would win.
We COULD HAVE LOST.
It would have been easy. Even small instances might have turned the tide at some points. General Washington had his "butt" kicked out of New York City by the British. He led his defeated, ragtag Continentals to Trenton and achieved victory -- a necessary one -- there.
But, if one British officer had actually read one note he'd been given, rather than stuffing it in his pocket, the British would have known about Washington, and Trenton would have been lost.
Then what? Washington's army, either dead, or POWs, or at best dissolved....the British would have had the momentum....and we'd now be sipping tea at 4:00PM and be using poundsterling notes rather than dollar bills.
We honor and admire Washington, and others who fought and gave us our freedom today -- and well we should; it so easily could have gone the other way for them.
Not trying to take away from the David vs. Goliath fight of the colonist, the French were also fighting England at the time of the US Revolutionary War. They kept the most well equipped military of its time from giving the colonist’s rebellions their full attention. However, why England lost the colonies is now irrelevant. The founders of the new nation recognized that having guns allowed citizens to gain freedom from tyranny. It must have been important as it was the second amendment to be written.
chuck
David E
Member
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2008
- Messages
- 7,459
If you ever shot one, you wouldn't even ask that question. Instead, you'd post pictures of your AR collection.
Neverwinter
Member
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2008
- Messages
- 1,049
LawScholar
Member
I've read every post in this thread, and will observe only this, highgate:
A government powerful enough to give you all you want, or regulate every facet of what you can own, is powerful enough to take everything you have. In a heartbeat.
I find the massive list of regulations on length, barrel, rifling, and ammo, for a freakin' SHOTGUN (a very uncontroversial weapon here) frankly terrifying.
My high-cap handgun, AR-15, and 18" shotgun, all bought with a simple 5 minute NICS check, stand ready against a massive and overreaching incursion by my own government.
Britain was the bulwark of freedom, once. I'll never understand how you fight so nobly for it abroad but allowed your government to steal so much of it at home.
Better my Somalia than your Brave New World.
A government powerful enough to give you all you want, or regulate every facet of what you can own, is powerful enough to take everything you have. In a heartbeat.
I find the massive list of regulations on length, barrel, rifling, and ammo, for a freakin' SHOTGUN (a very uncontroversial weapon here) frankly terrifying.
My high-cap handgun, AR-15, and 18" shotgun, all bought with a simple 5 minute NICS check, stand ready against a massive and overreaching incursion by my own government.
Britain was the bulwark of freedom, once. I'll never understand how you fight so nobly for it abroad but allowed your government to steal so much of it at home.
Better my Somalia than your Brave New World.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
