[QUOTE=MegaChalupa;32435919]How is that going to solve anything? Like always criminals will get their hands on firearms, they'll just as easily get their hands on magazines. All that would be doing is keeping magazines out of the hands of law abiding citizens.[/QUOTE]
I'd have to say you're right there. I'd just made the same argument about the firearms themselves in the same post. But, this being the UK, there would be restrictions on mag capacity at least.
The weapons may not have been G36s, but they had a very similar appearance to them. They could've been H&K R8s, since 5 round magazines ARE manufactured for them (I see no reason why they wouldn't be compatible with G36s either) and according to wikipedia they were intended for export to the UK and Australia.
The reason they have such limited capacity is to reduce the chances of collateral damage, I'd guess. That said, all the police with MP5s had 30 round mags, but that's probably because 9mm rounds rarely over-penetrate.
H&K R8
[img]http://cdn5.thefirearmsblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/r8_specs_1-tfb.jpg[/img]
[editline]23rd September 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=SpaceGhost;32436012]No, just no, i'm comforted to know if some major shit goes down, my neighbor has a fuckton of ammo and guns to keep about 5 dozen people armed and safe, fuck pussy 5-round mags. I like being safe and knowing people can properly defend themselves.[/QUOTE]
In such a situation, I doubt the individual magazine capacities would matter.
Also, I'm not suggesting that limiting the mag cap. would be GOOD, I'm saying it'd be probable if firearms were legalized here. I'd love nothing more than to up-fuck some poor paper man targets with a machine-gun.
I live in the deep south where everyone and their goldfish has a gun yet I've never heard of a homicide involving guns in my life around here.
Not to say I haven't heard about some gunpoint robberies but no shots were fired.
And people make the argument "Why do we need guns?". Well why do we NEED almost anything that's legalized? Just because it's not a necessity doesn't mean it should be illegal. These people who live in countries in favor of gun control have been brainswashed into believing that guns are evil things that are constantly slaughtering schools, but I think if these people actually knew what it was like to live with guns legalized, they would have a change of heart.
[QUOTE=Meller Yeller;32441481]I live in the deep south where everyone and their goldfish has a gun yet I've never heard of a homicide involving guns in my life around here.
Not to say I haven't heard about some gunpoint robberies but no shots were fired.[/QUOTE]Yep, but politicians are failing to see statistic.
[QUOTE=Meller Yeller;32441481]These people who live in countries in favor of gun control have been brainswashed into believing that guns are evil things [/QUOTE]Can you provide any examples of how we're being brainwashed?
[QUOTE=TropicalV2;32401602]"what does it matter if the country was founded on it"
you's ignorant[/QUOTE]
ignorant of what.
ignorant of the apparent reasoning behind keeping laws that could be antiquated or ineffective, based on the fact that someone in the past wrote them? or based on the fact you have an almost disturbing reverance?
amazing.
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;32442619]ignorant of what.
ignorant of the apparent reasoning behind keeping laws that could be antiquated or ineffective, based on the fact that someone in the past wrote them?
amazing.[/QUOTE]You obviously don't understand the American culture then.
[QUOTE=faze;32442631]You obviously don't understand the American culture then.[/QUOTE]
Give me your reasoning for following the constitution. Go on.
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;32442685]Give me your reasoning for following the constitution. Go on.[/QUOTE]American culture follows the constitution. We are allowed to have weapons to protect ourselves in the event of a government or military uprising. Just because it was written a couple hundred years ago, doesn't make it null and void today.
Mindsets like yours are why this country sucks ass.
[QUOTE=faze;32442699]American culture follows the constitution. We are allowed to have weapons to protect ourselves in the event of a government or military uprising. Just because it was written a couple hundred years ago, doesn't make it null and void today.
Mindsets like yours are why this country sucks ass.[/QUOTE]
Answer the question. Why do YOU believe in the constitution.
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;32442715]Answer the question. Why do YOU believe in the constitution.[/QUOTE]Because this country was founded on freedom, and the constitution gives us those freedoms.
[QUOTE=faze;32442724]Because this country was founded on freedom, and the constitution gives us those freedoms.[/QUOTE]
The constitution doesn't give you freedom. The people that form your country and the people that form your presumably democratically elected government give you freedoms. The constitution is a document. Sure it might be one that you deem important, but it doesn't guarantee you freedom.
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;32442753]The constitution doesn't give you freedom. The people that form your country and the people that form your presumably democratically elected government give you freedoms. The constitution is a document. Sure it might be one that you deem important, but it doesn't guarantee you freedom.[/QUOTE]It's written law. Do you not understand that?
[QUOTE=faze;32442768]It's written law. Do you not understand that?[/QUOTE]
It's written law. Do you not understand that?
You're holding in high esteem, in reverance, WRITTEN LAW.
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;32442778]It's written law. Do you not understand that?
You're holding in high esteem, in reverance, WRITTEN LAW.[/QUOTE]Yeah, and people that give us the freedoms, enforce that law. The freedoms were established when this was written.
I honestly don't know why you don't understand this. Maybe because you're not from the states.
[QUOTE=faze;32442806]Yeah, and people that give us the freedoms, enforce that law. The freedoms were established when this was written.
I honestly don't know why you don't understand this. Maybe because you're not from the states.[/QUOTE]
I was kind of waiting for that. I have to be from the states to talk about this? So I have to be brought up in a society that educates children to believe that the constitution is this wonderful thing before I can understand it?
This is the point. The constitution is no different from any law ever written in any country ever. The only thing that perhaps differentiates it from others is the esteem that it is held in, and the origin of it. The constitution guarantees you nothing, and your government if they so wished (and do) simply ignore parts of it.
Thus, the original point, the idea of having a court process that determines whether or not a law is in line with the constitution, rather than if the law is RIGHT seems entirely strange.
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;32442778]It's written law. Do you not understand that?
You're holding in high esteem, in reverance, WRITTEN LAW.[/QUOTE]
Wait a second, Cloak Raider why are you even having this discussion?
You're never going to change your view on weapons and you're butting horns with someone who doesn't understand yours.
Every law technically is WRITTEN LAW. People hold the constitution in high regard because it's a remarkable foundation that gives them power and a means of resistance against an absolutely out of control government.
The Bill of Rights are incredibly important for this. We're going into an incredibly deep subject which people study and dissect on an incredible level which far surpasses mine.
[QUOTE=Gubbinz96;32443033]Wait a second, Cloak Raider why are you even having this discussion?
You're never going to change your view on weapons and you're butting horns with someone who doesn't understand yours.
Every law technically is WRITTEN LAW. People hold the constitution in high regard because it's a remarkable foundation that gives them power and a means of resistance against an absolutely out of control government.
The Bill of Rights are incredibly important for this. We're going into an incredibly deep subject which people study and dissect on an incredible level which far surpasses mine.[/QUOTE]
Because it's incredibly important to the subject at hand. A tendancy in the gun argument is for the pro-gun side to say "The constitution says that I have a right to bear arms". In my mind, this isn't even an argument. That is not a reason for someone to own guns.
And I may perhaps change my view on weapons as I am very much in the middle ground on the subject thanks. So before you say that I'm stuck in my own mindset, I'm not.
And the constitution, arguably perhaps a remarkable foundation, does not give a means of resistance at all.
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;32443080]Because it's incredibly important to the subject at hand. A tendancy in the gun argument is for the pro-gun side to say "The constitution says that I have a right to bear arms". In my mind, this isn't even an argument. That is not a reason for someone to own guns.
And I may perhaps change my view on weapons as I am very much in the middle ground on the subject thanks. So before you say that I'm stuck in my own mindset, I'm not.
And the constitution, arguably perhaps a remarkable foundation, does not give a means of resistance at all.[/QUOTE]Why do I have the right to own guns? Because people have them illegally, and use them to kill/rob people. I am protecting myself.
Plus, shooting is fun.
[QUOTE=faze;32443101]Why do I have the right to own guns? Because people have them illegally, and use them to kill/rob people. I am protecting myself.
Plus, shooting is fun.[/QUOTE]
That's all fair points. I just do not believe that "The constitution says I can" is not a moral or rational point in the argument.
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;32443115]That's all fair points. I just do not believe that "The constitution says I can" is not a moral or rational point in the argument.[/QUOTE]Sure it is, the law says I can, I use them for fun/protection, so I'm fully justified. This bullshit we have now in the states called "illegal guns" is against the constitution.
[QUOTE=faze;32443129]Sure it is, the law says I can, I use them for fun/protection, so I'm fully justified. This bullshit we have now in the states called "illegal guns" is against the constitution.[/QUOTE]
You've just proved my point. Sure the constitution says you can, your local government then says you can't own said howitzer or whatever, and now you can't.
It isn't a reason, it's a document that holds no weight in giving a reason for possession of weaponry. "I have feral bears that will maul my face off if I don't have a shotgun", that's a reason, "The constitution says that I can" is not.
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;32443167]You've just proved my point. Sure the constitution says you can, your local government then says you can't own said howitzer or whatever, and now you can't.
It isn't a reason, it's a document that holds no weight in giving a reason for possession of weaponry. "I have feral bears that will maul my face off if I don't have a shotgun", that's a reason, "The constitution says that I can" is not.[/QUOTE]They passed the Patriot Act, and that was unconstitutional, but they said it could pass. Just because "people" pass it doesn't mean it's right or true.
[QUOTE=faze;32443187]They passed the Patriot Act, and that was unconstitutional, but they said it could pass. Just because "people" pass it doesn't mean it's right or true.[/QUOTE]
Now this is interesting.
So democracy is vitally flawed then? The majority are not always right. Laws passed in the name of the majority can be harmful, morally wrong etc. So then how do we decide what to do with laws?
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;32443167]You've just proved my point. Sure the constitution says you can, your local government then says you can't own said howitzer or whatever, and now you can't.
It isn't a reason, it's a document that holds no weight in giving a reason for possession of weaponry. "I have feral bears that will maul my face off if I don't have a shotgun", that's a reason, "The constitution says that I can" is not.[/QUOTE]
Are you saying a constitution and [B]Bill of Rights[/B] don't guarantee anything? It's a bill of RIGHTS, those are inalienable guarantees, inalienable entitlements of a person as decided by a government. In America, firearm possession is not just a privilege, it's a right, defined as such hundreds of years ago, and a right, as decided by a government, is an inalienable guarantee to the people of that thing. That is why Americans use the "constitution says I can" argument, because it's not just that it says you can, it says you have a guarantee that you will be able to get a firearm should you so desire. a lot of Americans buy them as defence against crime, and some still keep them because they say "well if the government gets bad I'll use it to overthrow the evil dictatorial government," and while that and defence of the nation against British invasion were the main principles for the second amendment right, Britain is now one of the US' closest allies and there are so many Goddamn things wrong with America at this point that if ANYONE were to invoke the "oppressive government" clause, it would have been done around the time of the introduction of the Patriot Act.
To say a constitution holds no weight on an issue is to say a legal system does not help keep a country together, safe, and orderly. It is still up to the individual if they want a firearm, however their ability to get it is protected as a right in the constitution, a foundation for a nation and [B]the most important[/B] legal document of any given nation.
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;32443304]Are you saying a constitution and [B]Bill of Rights[/B] don't guarantee anything? It's a bill of RIGHTS, those are inalienable guarantees, inalienable entitlements of a person as decided by a government. In America, firearm possession is not just a privilege, it's a right, defined as such hundreds of years ago, and a right, as decided by a government, is an inalienable guarantee to the people of that thing. That is why Americans use the "constitution says I can" argument, because it's not just that it says you can, it says you have a guarantee that you will be able to get a firearm should you so desire. a lot of Americans buy them as defence against crime, and some still keep them because they say "well if the government gets bad I'll use it to overthrow the evil dictatorial government," and while that and defence of the nation against British invasion were the main principles for the second amendment right, Britain is now one of the US' closest allies and there are so many Goddamn things wrong with America at this point that if ANYONE were to invoke the "oppressive government" clause, it would have been done around the time of the introduction of the Patriot Act.
To say a constitution holds no weight on an issue is to say a legal system does not help keep a country together, safe, and orderly. It is still up to the individual if they want a firearm, however their ability to get it is protected as a right in the constitution, a foundation for a nation and [B]the most important[/B] legal document of any given nation.[/QUOTE]Well said. I don't think he understands what this country was founded on.
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;32443304]Are you saying a constitution and [B]Bill of Rights[/B] don't guarantee anything? It's a bill of RIGHTS, those are inalienable guarantees, inalienable entitlements of a person as decided by a government. In America, firearm possession is not just a privilege, it's a right, defined as such hundreds of years ago, and a right, as decided by a government, is an inalienable guarantee to the people of that thing. That is why Americans use the "constitution says I can" argument, because it's not just that it says you can, it says you have a guarantee that you will be able to get a firearm should you so desire. a lot of Americans buy them as defence against crime, and some still keep them because they say "well if the government gets bad I'll use it to overthrow the evil dictatorial government," and while that and defence of the nation against British invasion were the main principles for the second amendment right, Britain is now one of the US' closest allies and there are so many Goddamn things wrong with America at this point that if ANYONE were to invoke the "oppressive government" clause, it would have been done around the time of the introduction of the Patriot Act.
To say a constitution holds no weight on an issue is to say a legal system does not help keep a country together, safe, and orderly. It is still up to the individual if they want a firearm, however their ability to get it is protected as a right in the constitution, a foundation for a nation and [B]the most important[/B] legal document of any given nation.[/QUOTE]
Oh. So if I was to give you an example of where said rights were suddenly taken away, say...the internment of japanese-americans in World War 2, your argument would fall apart right? As they're no longer rights, they are privileges.
Ooh ooh! How about free speech zones! Where people are allowed to speak their mind in these places and only in these places! What about them!
[editline]23rd September 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=faze;32443311]Well said. I don't think he understands what this country was founded on.[/QUOTE]
I'm still waiting for a new system from you where laws aren't decided by democratic process because that doesn't work as you pointed out.
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;32443205]Now this is interesting.
So democracy is vitally flawed then? The majority are not always right. Laws passed in the name of the majority can be harmful, morally wrong etc. So then how do we decide what to do with laws?[/QUOTE]
That's an entire other debate than firearms ownership, and deserves its own thread if you really want to discuss it further, because questions like that are what keep political analysts up all night arguing.
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;32443325]Oh. So if I was to give you an example of where said rights were suddenly taken away, say...the internment of japanese-americans in World War 2, your argument would fall apart right? As they're no longer rights, they are priviledges.
[editline]23rd September 2011[/editline]
I'm still waiting for a new system from you where laws aren't decided by democratic process because that doesn't work as you pointed out.[/QUOTE]I'm not a lawmaker, sorry.
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;32443332]That's an entire other debate than firearms ownership, and deserves its own thread if you really want to discuss it further, because questions like that are what keep political analysts up all night arguing.[/QUOTE]
Don't try and wriggle out of this. That's a fucking clear as day, fucking enormous example of where the American government has said FUCK THE CONSTITUTION, and violated the rights of thousands.
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;32443362]Don't try and wriggle out of this. That's a fucking clear as day, fucking enormous example of where the American government has said FUCK THE CONSTITUTION, and violated the rights of thousands.[/QUOTE]You sort of contradicted yourself.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
