killerzX said:
a national gun ban wouldnt work because we have hundreds of millions a guns in this country, it would be impossible to get rid of all of them. criminals would still have them they would still be sold illegally. so as thomas jefferson said, a gun ban would only disarm the innocent, and empower the criminal making it easier for them to do crime. and even if we somehow erradicated guns from civilians, that doesnt erradicate crime. so until you can do that, i want to defend myself. guns are the great equalizer. furthermore a gun ban would still leave guns in the hands of the government, what i fear most, and the whole point of the 2nd ammendment. that empowers our ever increasing government to become even more of a totalitarian statist dictatorship. |
You don't need guns to stop the government. The Soviets didn't need them. Hell, guns were what got them the Soviet Union in the first place, because the majority of Russians sure as hell didn't want Communism, but the Bolsheviks were well-armed and better-organized than the gun-toting Whites. Guns got them Communism, peaceful protest got them freedom. Generally countries that win their freedom with guns don't end up being very nice places afterwards (the US being an exception, largely because our "Revolution" was executed by democratically-elected officials at the colonial level fighting higher-level British institutions), but you can look at Eritrea, Algeria, pretty much all of Latin America, or former Portuguese Africa or Indonesia.
It would be easy to impose: a no-questions-asked grace period where anyone can turn in a firearm for destruction, preserve hunting so long as the guns are kept locked up when not being used for hunting, and allowances for antiques and collectables. After that, any gun that's found is a $25,000 fine (or 1 year in jail for every thousand dollars that you can't afford to pay on the fine), plus $100 per round of ammunition.

Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.







