Quantcast
Do you think it is normal having firearms?

Forums - General Discussion - Do you think it is normal having firearms?

Mummelmann said:
^
Yes, there really was hell in France for a while with billions worth of property destroyed and hundreds of serious injuries.
There were similar conditions in Gothenburg in Sweden a few years back too, one of the only Swedish protests that required police armed with live ammunition in a long while.
The biggest issue here in Norway are foreign "gangs" or mafia starting or continuing turf wars in the major cities. The most prominent being the "A gang" and the "B gang" which are tearing up the streets in Oslo and having shootouts on huge public arenas with big numbers of people on them.
There was also an incident with some Tamil invovling severed limbs, machine pistols and a genuine samurai sword (!).

As an American, I have to admit that I'm found some of the situations in Europe over the past decade comical in a rather morbid way. To hear Europeans up in arms over immigration troubles, to see the rioting, discontent, etc. just made me say "Well shit, now you know what it's like to be in America. People of different cultures just don't magically get along with each other. Took you guys long enough to realize that."




Or check out my new webcomic: http://selfcentent.com/

Around the Network

were i come from, not having a gun is not normal!!



YNWA

You know, that's one of the reasons I'm against taking in large numbers of refuges, but that's for another topic.

This pretty much sums up my opinion on the whole thing:

"Guns don't kill people, people kill people. Therefore, if murder is a bad thing, and guns are used to commit them, we should eliminate all people who would ever use a gun.”

I like it when you can twist an argument both ways (and yes I know it’s not perfect, neither is the original).



It's against the constitution to ban firearms. There's an act passed right now which gives Bush the power to declare martial law dictatorship in the event of any major economic, political, security or social event, regardless of which country it's in. What this means is that Bush can't declare his martial law until the guns are taken away from US citizens.

 

If you want the right to defend yourself from SWAT teams turning up on your doorstep, I suggest you fight with everything you have to keep the right to own a gun. They're exploiting school shootings on TV, and even the smallest of shootings, just to push down anti-gun rhetorics into the public mindset.

 

And for God's sake, if you want to join a gun group, don't join the NRA - that group, believe it or not, is actually against guns.



Nop, I don't find it normal, but there is some really dangerous places all over the world...

 

@mr-money 

"If you want the right to defend yourself from SWAT teams turning up on your doorstep, I suggest you fight with everything you have to keep the right to own a gun. "

 

What????

So, if the police comes to my house I could have the rigth to shoot them???



By me:

Made with Blender + LuxRender
"Since you can´t understand ... there is no point to taking you seriously."
Around the Network

mr-money - That's a strange conclusion to reach; the government have the power to declare a martial law dictatorship that could lead to heavily armed policemen using violence against its citizens and you want guns to defend against them rather than taking other measures to prevent this? Other than having guns as a preventative measure that is.

Whatever side of the gun debate someone is on that just seems like an odd take on the need for guns and possible abuses of power by a government.