A "No gun" world
- Thread starter 8MM Mauser
- Start date
That's really an apples/oranges comparison that ignores differences in culture, philosophy, and supply. For a country in which civilian gun ownership has been banned or heavily curtailed for six of more decades, the situation is different than banning them in a country like ours.
Many people point to "successful" gun bans in other countries, never noticing (or, at least never mentioning) how gun ownership was NOT a cultural norm in that country, and in many cases NEVER was.
Even England, the home and origin of many of our laws and cultural practices never had the wide spread common ownership of guns the US did, and mostly still does. And, the British have been reducing legal firearms ownership constantly and consistently for the majority of the past century.
The horrors of WW I so affected the British that during the 20s a very powerful movement against war, guns, and even anything even remotely martial grew to power and has been generally in control of policy there ever since. They managed so well that by 1940, with Nazi troops on the other side of the Channel, at looking like they were about to invade, England was begging for arms of any kind, from any source.
Their anti gun movement was smart enough to take a vacation when England was actually at war, and went right back to work as soon as the war was over.
Japan has essentially been as "gun free" as the rulers could make it since the time of the Shoguns.
There is no place on earth that ever had the cultural tradition of ordinary citizens legally owning guns that the US has. No other nation has that right boldly and bluntly stated in its founding documents the way the US does.
Of course their bans and restrictions are going to be successful (to a point, the criminal element doesn't care, and so, are never counted by those with the ban agenda), in places where people don't commonly own guns culturally.
A ban or restrictions on aluminum, siding, in a nation where the majority lives in grass or mud huts is going to be very "effective" as well. Likewise a law against eating pine cones in Fiji would be very "effective". If the people aren't doing it already, making it illegal usually works "effectively" to end or curtail the practice.
On the other hand, if its something the people are doing, and have been doing for generations, and something the people want to keep doing, making it against the law usually doesn't stop the practice (no matter what it is).
The only way the "whatever" that is newly banned gets stopped is by force, sometimes brutal force. Over enough time, constant enforcement can change the culture. This has been proven often enough in the real world.
The anti gunners know this, too.
Even England, the home and origin of many of our laws and cultural practices never had the wide spread common ownership of guns the US did, and mostly still does. And, the British have been reducing legal firearms ownership constantly and consistently for the majority of the past century.
The horrors of WW I so affected the British that during the 20s a very powerful movement against war, guns, and even anything even remotely martial grew to power and has been generally in control of policy there ever since. They managed so well that by 1940, with Nazi troops on the other side of the Channel, at looking like they were about to invade, England was begging for arms of any kind, from any source.
Their anti gun movement was smart enough to take a vacation when England was actually at war, and went right back to work as soon as the war was over.
Japan has essentially been as "gun free" as the rulers could make it since the time of the Shoguns.
There is no place on earth that ever had the cultural tradition of ordinary citizens legally owning guns that the US has. No other nation has that right boldly and bluntly stated in its founding documents the way the US does.
Of course their bans and restrictions are going to be successful (to a point, the criminal element doesn't care, and so, are never counted by those with the ban agenda), in places where people don't commonly own guns culturally.
A ban or restrictions on aluminum, siding, in a nation where the majority lives in grass or mud huts is going to be very "effective" as well. Likewise a law against eating pine cones in Fiji would be very "effective". If the people aren't doing it already, making it illegal usually works "effectively" to end or curtail the practice.
On the other hand, if its something the people are doing, and have been doing for generations, and something the people want to keep doing, making it against the law usually doesn't stop the practice (no matter what it is).
The only way the "whatever" that is newly banned gets stopped is by force, sometimes brutal force. Over enough time, constant enforcement can change the culture. This has been proven often enough in the real world.
The anti gunners know this, too.
So long as a Government says it's OK, on a case by case basis, this time ....with nothing preventing any Government official from saying it's not OK, at any time ..... that's not freedom, or even a priveledge- that's setting yourself up for becoming a criminal at any Government Official's whim, at any time...... I'd prefer Anarchy, to such selective enforcement.
True enough .... but England went to the other extreme, with the bow and arrow .... not only requiring ownership of a bow and arrows of all free men, but mandating practice and outlawing things like football and golf, which detracted from archery practice time .... it was this mindset that gave rise to the Founders' concept of the Militia.
The longbowman was a decisive weapon which England could produce, and because of that mandated ownership and training. A similar idea can be found in Nordic culture where the householders, from large to small were each required to have a spear or an ax or sword, etc., and to come with it when the Jarl summoned the war levy.
And, note how quickly the English turned away from "every yeoman is a bowman" when technology gave them weapons that did nearly as well without years of practice (crossbows, guns, etc.,)
THey kept the principle of every man having arms, but seriously slipped in the practice of it, until today where the legal principle still exists, but in practice it's virtually non-existent.
And, note how quickly the English turned away from "every yeoman is a bowman" when technology gave them weapons that did nearly as well without years of practice (crossbows, guns, etc.,)
THey kept the principle of every man having arms, but seriously slipped in the practice of it, until today where the legal principle still exists, but in practice it's virtually non-existent.
8MM Mauser
New member
Exactly!
That is what these people are fighting for, the freaking stone age where 50% of the male population died from homicide.
8MM Mauser
New member
That's not to mention that Japan is the perfect example of why NOT to have gun control.
Tokugawa banned guns and gun ownership because it was a challenge to the truly horrible (but much romanticized) Samurai class. At best the Samurai were oppressive feudal overlords; at worst they were bloodthirsty thugs who murdered their serfs for relatively minor offenses.
If the fine muskets produced at Tanegashima had continued to be produced and distributed among the populace it's hard to imagine they would have put up with having their friends and family members heads chopped off for offending a samurai.
Typical of anti-gunner hypocrisy though; the Shoguns had no qualms about using firearms to destroy their rival warlords or to prosecute their unsuccessful invasions of the Korean peninsula.
I think "no gun world" is just a catchy phrase that means very little. First, we don't have control of the world, just the USA. Do they really think that all the millions of AK's all over the world will just disappear when we pass a law? No, they know better. Second, they don't even literally mean no guns at all in this country. Those that are of ordinary means still want to call for an armed policeman when they are threatened, and the well off "no-gunners" still want their armed security guards that they pay for. And last, if it were as simple as passing a law that said no guns for the law abiding people, then the laws we already have that strictly forbid taking a gun to school would have prevented every school shooting.
A no gun world
This woman is probably getting funds from someone to carry on to this extent with illogical or crazy thoughts.
All those demonstrations and organized campaigns in legislatures by the anti gunners is being fueled with Bloomberg and others.
I'm now the oldest in our family and kinda out of shape. I may loose the use of my left hand and arm or both.
I can no longer fell in charge of my world in a hostile environment and take down some predator within 20 ft or so with hands and body.
I find a handgun nearby comforting now.
With thee increased immigration and economic problems and more criminals we are all probably going to face being victimized.
We all have firearms within reach and know how to use them.
Those running Britain and France and other Socialist or Communist or Fascist governments are not concerned with individual rights and ability to defend oneself. Witness Homeowners prosecuted for shooting or stabbing or harming Burglars, or Trades People with screwdrivers in their coveralls. \
They are illogical and quite insane.
This woman is probably getting funds from someone to carry on to this extent with illogical or crazy thoughts.
All those demonstrations and organized campaigns in legislatures by the anti gunners is being fueled with Bloomberg and others.
I'm now the oldest in our family and kinda out of shape. I may loose the use of my left hand and arm or both.
I can no longer fell in charge of my world in a hostile environment and take down some predator within 20 ft or so with hands and body.
I find a handgun nearby comforting now.
With thee increased immigration and economic problems and more criminals we are all probably going to face being victimized.
We all have firearms within reach and know how to use them.
Those running Britain and France and other Socialist or Communist or Fascist governments are not concerned with individual rights and ability to defend oneself. Witness Homeowners prosecuted for shooting or stabbing or harming Burglars, or Trades People with screwdrivers in their coveralls. \
They are illogical and quite insane.
8MM Mauser
New member
Dang Ricky; I hope that you are able to recover from whatever it is that happened to you!
Many of the things I do in my life prohibit carry, so I usually only do it on the weekends or if I go out at night; or anytime I meet someone for a transaction that originated online (craigslist, armslist). I have always thought it would be a horrible irony if something happened to me and my only means of defense was locked up at home.
Many of the things I do in my life prohibit carry, so I usually only do it on the weekends or if I go out at night; or anytime I meet someone for a transaction that originated online (craigslist, armslist). I have always thought it would be a horrible irony if something happened to me and my only means of defense was locked up at home.
People have been slaughtering each other quite efficiently LONG before guns came along. It always came down to the strongest mading the rules or killing those who disagreed. I do not think women or kids were exempt from rape, murder and torture in the violent history of the world.
I always liked the Sam Colt reference that "God made man, but Sam Colt made them equal". Kids have died throughout history and continue to die simply because they are young and dumb. Only age and experience generally changes that. More die from drunk driving than anything else put together. Perhaps a world without booze or cars?
I always liked the Sam Colt reference that "God made man, but Sam Colt made them equal". Kids have died throughout history and continue to die simply because they are young and dumb. Only age and experience generally changes that. More die from drunk driving than anything else put together. Perhaps a world without booze or cars?