Gun Control

[tdans]

HAHHHAHAHA i want one

[isaiah40]

Why was the USA never invaded?

Sorry phatscotty, but you are wrong here. Remember the war of 1812? Those Canadians (AKA British troops) came down and burned the White House (although not called the White House at that time) down. Remember that?

[jefjef]

Why was the USA never invaded?

Sorry phatscotty, but you are wrong here. Remember the war of 1812? Those Canadians (AKA British troops) came down and burned the White House (although not called the White House at that time) down. Remember that?

Yep. And when thousands of red coats tangled with a few backwoods militia in New Orleans what happened? It was NOT a successful invasion.

[Phatscotty]

Why was the USA never invaded?

Sorry phatscotty, but you are wrong here. Remember the war of 1812? Those Canadians (AKA British troops) came down and burned the White House (although not called the White House at that time) down. Remember that?

I am well aware of the invasion of 1812. Sorry Isiah, but I was talking specifically about Japan not invading USA mainland in WW2. but yay for England 200 years ago! and....after the invasion....? lets finish the subject.

[Phatscotty]

Why was the USA never invaded?

Sorry phatscotty, but you are wrong here. Remember the war of 1812? Those Canadians (AKA British troops) came down and burned the White House (although not called the White House at that time) down. Remember that?

Yep. And when thousands of red coats tangled with a few backwoods militia in New Orleans what happened? It was NOT a successful invasion.

then what happened? how about the best thing ever! AJAX the great

[Baron Von PWN]

Why was the USA never invaded?

Sorry phatscotty, but you are wrong here. Remember the war of 1812? Those Canadians (AKA British troops) came down and burned the White House (although not called the White House at that time) down. Remember that?

I am well aware of the invasion of 1812. Sorry Isiah, but I was talking specifically about Japan not invading USA mainland in WW2.

Which is best explained by their other military endeavours, and the presence of a powerfull US navy. Not fear of possible US partisan groups.

[Phatscotty]

Why was the USA never invaded?

Sorry phatscotty, but you are wrong here. Remember the war of 1812? Those Canadians (AKA British troops) came down and burned the White House (although not called the White House at that time) down. Remember that?

I am well aware of the invasion of 1812. Sorry Isiah, but I was talking specifically about Japan not invading USA mainland in WW2.

Which is best explained by their other military endeavours, and the presence of a powerfull US navy. Not fear of possible US partisan groups.

Baron, I can only quote the would-be invading army's commander. you may choose to believe otherwise. It's from the horses mouth, so, the argument was over before it started.

[jefjef]

[Phantom Lord]

True Gun Control - not discharging your weapon until you intend to fire it, and hitting the target you were aiming at.

Gun Control for cowering wimps - I fear guns so I will do my best to make them illegal.

Gun Control for criminals - I don't want my victims to be able to fight back, so I will support the banning of all guns.

To those who think a well armed population of civilians with hunting rifles would not be something for an invading army to fear, keep this in mind. The civilians with hunting rifles know the land and where to set up for the best shots. They have practiced on live moving animals. They have experience with shot placement at reasonably long distances and how to compensate for bullet drop at long range. Most hunters have appropriate scopes to enhance their ability at long range. They know how to blend into the terrain well enough to fool the native animals into coming too close. The invading army would be facing small groups of individuals randomly dispersed throughout the land. The invaders would either have to move very slowly and cautiously or suffer severe casualties before they found and killed all of the defenders. This one is important. THE CIVILIANS DO NOT HAVE TO FOLLOW THE RULES OF ENGAGEMENT THAT THE MILITARY USES. They follow a simple rule: You kill the enemy first, or the enemy will kill you. The civilians may not defeat the invading army by themselves, but they would definitely be a force to be reckoned with.

[Army of GOD]

How about, a compromise?

The Second Amendment (symbol for owning guns) is A reason (no matter how big or small, truly, we'll never know) of why no country in the Modern Era (20th century to present) has invaded the U.S., not THE reason.

[Phatscotty]

How about, a compromise?

The Second Amendment (symbol for owning guns) is A reason (no matter how big or small, truly, we'll never know) of why no country in the Modern Era (20th century to present) has invaded the U.S., not THE reason.

well, to be specific, since it was my quote, i will define it, again. it was in the context of japan not invading the US in WW2. this is the result of Baron chopping out and quoting fragments of sentences or paragraphs.

[Baron Von PWN]

Why was the USA never invaded?

Sorry phatscotty, but you are wrong here. Remember the war of 1812? Those Canadians (AKA British troops) came down and burned the White House (although not called the White House at that time) down. Remember that?

I am well aware of the invasion of 1812. Sorry Isiah, but I was talking specifically about Japan not invading USA mainland in WW2.

Which is best explained by their other military endeavours, and the presence of a powerfull US navy. Not fear of possible US partisan groups.

Baron, I can only quote the would-be invading army's commander. you may choose to believe otherwise. It's from the horses mouth, so, the argument was over before it started.

Or you can think about it criticaly and realise such an attack would be completly unrealistic. What with most of their army commited in a brutal land war in china. As well as the high priority they placed on controling the Pacific islands. Of course you can feel free to beleive a single quote can explain the entierty of japanese military strategy.

Yamoto didin't decide the Japanese strategic military planning, if he did japan would have never attacked the US in the first place, and for more reasons than an armed citizenry. The reason Japan went to war was to try and force the US to drop its oil embargo.

[Baron Von PWN]

True Gun Control - not discharging your weapon until you intend to fire it, and hitting the target you were aiming at.

Gun Control for cowering wimps - I fear guns so I will do my best to make them illegal.

Gun Control for criminals - I don't want my victims to be able to fight back, so I will support the banning of all guns.

To those who think a well armed population of civilians with hunting rifles would not be something for an invading army to fear, keep this in mind. The civilians with hunting rifles know the land and where to set up for the best shots. They have practiced on live moving animals. They have experience with shot placement at reasonably long distances and how to compensate for bullet drop at long range. Most hunters have appropriate scopes to enhance their ability at long range. They know how to blend into the terrain well enough to fool the native animals into coming too close. The invading army would be facing small groups of individuals randomly dispersed throughout the land. The invaders would either have to move very slowly and cautiously or suffer severe casualties before they found and killed all of the defenders. This one is important. THE CIVILIANS DO NOT HAVE TO FOLLOW THE RULES OF ENGAGEMENT THAT THE MILITARY USES. They follow a simple rule: You kill the enemy first, or the enemy will kill you. The civilians may not defeat the invading army by themselves, but they would definitely be a force to be reckoned with.

Technicly there is nothing stoping an invading army from from using unrestricted force. Geneva conventions are all well and good, but what if they choose to ingore them?

[Phatscotty]

True Gun Control - not discharging your weapon until you intend to fire it, and hitting the target you were aiming at.

Gun Control for cowering wimps - I fear guns so I will do my best to make them illegal.

Gun Control for criminals - I don't want my victims to be able to fight back, so I will support the banning of all guns.

To those who think a well armed population of civilians with hunting rifles would not be something for an invading army to fear, keep this in mind. The civilians with hunting rifles know the land and where to set up for the best shots. They have practiced on live moving animals. They have experience with shot placement at reasonably long distances and how to compensate for bullet drop at long range. Most hunters have appropriate scopes to enhance their ability at long range. They know how to blend into the terrain well enough to fool the native animals into coming too close. The invading army would be facing small groups of individuals randomly dispersed throughout the land. The invaders would either have to move very slowly and cautiously or suffer severe casualties before they found and killed all of the defenders. This one is important. THE CIVILIANS DO NOT HAVE TO FOLLOW THE RULES OF ENGAGEMENT THAT THE MILITARY USES. They follow a simple rule: You kill the enemy first, or the enemy will kill you. The civilians may not defeat the invading army by themselves, but they would definitely be a force to be reckoned with.

Technicly there is nothing stoping an invading army from from using unrestricted force. Geneva conventions are all well and good, but what if they choose to ingore them?

Unless it's the US army....right?

[Baron Von PWN]

Unless it's the US army....right?

I would hope any liberal democracy would follow the Geneva convention. However I assume a country willing to invade a liberal democracy won't hold itself to similar standards.

[BigBallinStalin]

What's with this retarded mental masturbation about macho UHmerica half-partisan half-AHNOLD Schwarzenegger scenarios?

Get real. If there was a war declared on the US by a strong enough country, it would involve nuclear weapons. Nearly all of you would be dead or almost dead, so quite cumming all over the fora walls--it's disgusting.

"BUt but but but, we're talking about ww2 scenarios11!!" None of those countries were even close to invading the US--unless of course you want to reinvent history, then please resume your journey to climax at full throttle. Just don't forget to add some alien spaceships and mabye a few Giants and Elves in there too.

[BigBallinStalin]

Gun control laws would hurt the business interests of arms manucturers, and their lobbyists make sure their interests are maintained. Gun control laws would be hard to enforce in a country of such massive size, and the black market would thrive from it--hah, it would do as well as that market of illicit drugs. Guns would still get in, and knowing America, gun control laws wouldn't make the country more safe because the guns would still be available but harder for the average Joe to obtain.

In other countries (especially islands like Taiwan and the UK), it's doable. Here? At this time, no, it isn't because the main factor blocking this from ever happening to begin with is the overwhelming majority of Americans who don't support gun control laws. At the time, this country's attitude is not at all favorable towards effective gun control laws. I say effective because in order for such laws to be effective enough to get the desired result of reducing deaths by guns, many types of guns (handguns especially) would have to be totally banned from production and importation, and that is definitely not a favorable approach to most Americans and the manufacturers.

[jefjef]

What's with this retarded mental masturbation about macho UHmerica half-partisan half-AHNOLD Schwarzenegger scenarios?

Get real. If there was a war declared on the US by a strong enough country, it would involve nuclear weapons. Nearly all of you would be dead or almost dead, so quite cumming all over the fora walls--it's disgusting.

"BUt but but but, we're talking about ww2 scenarios11!!" None of those countries were even close to invading the US--unless of course you want to reinvent history, then please resume your journey to climax at full throttle. Just don't forget to add some alien spaceships and mabye a few Giants and Elves in there too.

A declared nuclear war? REALLY ball? Suicidal world destruction. That's not even feasible. A terrorist nuclear attack maybe. But an attack from another nuclear power as long as we aren't nuclear dis-armed? Invasion is more realistic after economic upheaval and an internal civil war.

[Phatscotty]

What's with this retarded mental masturbation about macho UHmerica half-partisan half-AHNOLD Schwarzenegger scenarios?

Get real. If there was a war declared on the US by a strong enough country, it would involve nuclear weapons. Nearly all of you would be dead or almost dead, so quite cumming all over the fora walls--it's disgusting.

"BUt but but but, we're talking about ww2 scenarios11!!" None of those countries were even close to invading the US--unless of course you want to reinvent history, then please resume your journey to climax at full throttle. Just don't forget to add some alien spaceships and mabye a few Giants and Elves in there too.

the fact remains this conversation sprouted from the topic of the 2nd amendment during WW2. then some random dude walks in talking a bunch of crap about the invasion of 1812. now stalin jumping to US getting nuked, when nobody at that time even had nukes. Baron, look what you've done! Dont chop fragments anymore. quote the dang thing and bold it or something

[Baron Von PWN]

What's with this retarded mental masturbation about macho UHmerica half-partisan half-AHNOLD Schwarzenegger scenarios?

Get real. If there was a war declared on the US by a strong enough country, it would involve nuclear weapons. Nearly all of you would be dead or almost dead, so quite cumming all over the fora walls--it's disgusting.

"BUt but but but, we're talking about ww2 scenarios11!!" None of those countries were even close to invading the US--unless of course you want to reinvent history, then please resume your journey to climax at full throttle. Just don't forget to add some alien spaceships and mabye a few Giants and Elves in there too.

the fact remains this conversation sprouted from the topic of the 2nd amendment during WW2. then some random dude walks in talking a bunch of crap about the invasion of 1812. now stalin jumping to US getting nuked, when nobody at that time even had nukes. Baron, look what you've done! Dont chop fragments anymore. quote the dang thing and bold it or something

I just hate those damn quote boxes, so ugly. Also sometimes it isin't necesary to quote the last 8 or so quotes.

I maintain that the USA was not invaded during ww2 due to the logistical problems in doing so, as well as the prescence of a powerfull US navy. So far your argument has rested on a signle quote from a single admiral. While Yamoto was an important figure he was by no means the guy deciding Japanese strategic moves, his quotations are actualy evidence of that. He argued that Japan should not go to war with the US period because it was a war he thought Japan couldn't hope to win in the long run. Yet Japan went ahead and attacked the USA thinking it would somehow force them to back down on oil embargoes.

The reason Japan didin't invade the US is because it was never realy in the cards, what they wanted was carve out a pacific empire and they hopped to scare the US into droping the embargo. It was a massive strategic blunder, but that's why they did it.

[BigBallinStalin]

What's with this retarded mental masturbation about macho UHmerica half-partisan half-AHNOLD Schwarzenegger scenarios?

Get real. If there was a war declared on the US by a strong enough country, it would involve nuclear weapons. Nearly all of you would be dead or almost dead, so quite cumming all over the fora walls--it's disgusting.

"BUt but but but, we're talking about ww2 scenarios11!!" None of those countries were even close to invading the US--unless of course you want to reinvent history, then please resume your journey to climax at full throttle. Just don't forget to add some alien spaceships and mabye a few Giants and Elves in there too.

the fact remains this conversation sprouted from the topic of the 2nd amendment during WW2. then some random dude walks in talking a bunch of crap about the invasion of 1812. now stalin jumping to US getting nuked, when nobody at that time even had nukes. Baron, look what you've done! Dont chop fragments anymore. quote the dang thing and bold it or something

OH HOH! But how close was den Vaterland from developing a nuclear bomb???

[BigBallinStalin]

What's with this retarded mental masturbation about macho UHmerica half-partisan half-AHNOLD Schwarzenegger scenarios?

Get real. If there was a war declared on the US by a strong enough country, it would involve nuclear weapons. Nearly all of you would be dead or almost dead, so quite cumming all over the fora walls--it's disgusting.

"BUt but but but, we're talking about ww2 scenarios11!!" None of those countries were even close to invading the US--unless of course you want to reinvent history, then please resume your journey to climax at full throttle. Just don't forget to add some alien spaceships and mabye a few Giants and Elves in there too.

A declared nuclear war? REALLY ball? Suicidal world destruction. That's not even feasible. A terrorist nuclear attack maybe. But an attack from another nuclear power as long as we aren't nuclear dis-armed? Invasion is more realistic after economic upheaval and an internal civil war.

I'll disarm your face, heave some economy-sized cars up your bum, and electronically headbutt you so bad that your white blood cells start a civil war and destroy you from the inside.




OH!!

[Koesen]

And I quote

The Second Amendment

Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto - “You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind each blade of grass.”

Check and mate. you follow that?

sharpen up your facts before you go on commenting on certain subjects and making fools of yourselves.

Not that anybody is going to change his mind as a result of this discussion, but Yamamoto's quote is a myth: http://factcheck.org/2009/05/misquoting-yamamoto/

Look, it's very simple.

The US have relaxed gun laws because most Americans want guns and they are the ones who make American laws.

Certain other countries have strict laws because their people want strict laws and they are the ones who make those.

That's it. Everything else is irrelevant.

[THORNHEART]

thornheart and PhatScotty:

i love this...can i be bush?

[THORNHEART]

And I quote

The Second Amendment

Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto - “You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind each blade of grass.”

Check and mate. you follow that?

sharpen up your facts before you go on commenting on certain subjects and making fools of yourselves.

Not that anybody is going to change his mind as a result of this discussion, but Yamamoto's quote is a myth: http://factcheck.org/2009/05/misquoting-yamamoto/

Look, it's very simple.

The US have relaxed gun laws because most Americans want guns and they are the ones who make American laws.

Certain other countries have strict laws because their people want strict laws and they are the ones who make those.

That's it. Everything else is irrelevant.

haha no slight correction certian countries with no guns couldnt have them if they wanted to cause the government has sll the power and the gun and they say no one but them can have guns...and their always right....cause they have the guns