NationStates Jolt Archive

Add your name to the Million Faces Demand a Global Arms Trade Treaty.
They are getting closer to their goal they have reached 550 thousand.
http://www.controlarms.org/downloads/video1.htm just one of the reasons why we need less violence in this world.

bump

So, you're basically going to allow any country with a miltary manufacturing capacity to hold any of it's neighbours without one hostage to it's whims? Prevent honest-to-god liberation movements from getting the weapons to overthrow dictatorships?

Not to mention putting an awful lot of arms techs out of work - and therefore on the market for anyone to snap up?

Not to mention making the illegal arms trade that much more lucrative?

Someone hasn't thought this through...

The security certificate for the site has expired, security software here at work won't let me access it.

It's over a year out of date...

I like my Milsup rifles... No thanks.

Gee, that's one way to get rid of violence in the world. Make EVERY gun illegal.

That sure showed drug dealers!
That sure showed bootleggers during prohibition!
That sure showed....well, you get the picture.

All you'll get are a lot of people in jail when a natural/war-related disaster occurs and fathers try to protect their families.

Or et cetera, et cetera. I'm quite busy working on my documentary.

Not to sound cliche but...

If you outlaw guns, only outlaws have guns.

What you do by making gun ownership illegal is that you punish people for mere possession of a weapon, rather than a crime using a weapon. This is pure idiocy philosophically first off. Furthermore, the law would NOT decrease crime, but only make crime more prevalent. If crooks find that people don't have the ability to obtain weapons as easily (or at all) they will be more daring with their crimes. Rapes, murders, theft, etc. would all go up. On the other hand, if gun ownership were MORE prevalent, the opposite would occur. One does not even have to use a weapon to thwart criminals--just showing a weapon will scare most away. Criminals may be immoral, but they aren't irrational--they value their lives too.

Besides, anti-gun legislation is both sexist and racist. It is sexist in that it hurts women more than men, not because women are weaker (which quite frankly isn't true), but that women are often targeted more than men (especially in the case of rape). By making guns hard to obtain, and perpetuating a media-distorted paranoia when it comes to gun related crime, women are hurt disproportionately. Same thing with many minorities, especially african americans. Since poorer areas have more crime, and a disproportionate amount of minorities live in these poor areas, gun legislation only hurts their ability to ward away criminals.

Just as an example pertaining to the effectiveness of guns in preventing crime is during the LA riots in the U.S. Mobs of people were looting and breaking into stores and people were getting hurt and their property rights were being violated. However, the people using AK-47s and AR-40s to defend their property were unharmed. Coincidence? I think not. Interestingly enough, a lot of people caught on to this phenomenon and raided gun shops only to find that they were prohibited from purchasing arms in desperate need by the government-enacted "waiting periods" and background checks. So, they weren't able to get weapons at all.

So, in conclusion....

Bad idea. :)

Add your name to the Million Faces Demand a Global Arms Trade Treaty.
They are getting closer to their goal they have reached 550 thousand.
http://www.controlarms.org/downloads/video1.htm just one of the reasons why we need less violence in this world.
Tosh. I'll just start making my own. I can make a one-off 9mm submachine gun in roughly 36 hours without machine tools. If I do several at a time I can produce somthing like 10-15 a week.

Go ahead - Ban my guns. I'll make more. :rolleyes:

I can make them faster than that.

If I'm reproducing the M3 submachinegun, or the Madsen, all I need is some sheet metal fabrication equipment (stamping and cutting), and some minor machining for the barrels. I can investment cast the bolts.

It's the kind of thing that doesn't require a huge factory, and only one or two of the people involved have to really know anything about firearms. The rest can be people who know how to make tin cans and golf clubs.

It's a better idea to address the reasons that people want to rise up, fight civil wars, engage in insurrection, and commit violent crime.

Guns are only the tools, not the reasons.

Take the American Revolution as an example. When they wrote the Declaration of Independence, they didn't say, "We discovered that we all had some guns, so we decided to shoot British troops". No, they had a list of grievances and were so pissed off that they wanted their own country and their own government.

This sort of thing happens, you know. If you fail to address the root causes, the problems will not go away.

Sure, you can take away their guns. But they'll still revolt.

Gee, that's one way to get rid of violence in the world. Make EVERY gun illegal.

Gee, that's one way to hold a debate. I suppose actually reading what the Arms Trade Treaty is concerned with would take just too much time and effort? Hint: it has fuck all to do with making every gun illegal, instead it is pushing for regulation of international trade in weaponry and licensing systems for weapons held by individuals.

Arm yourself with the facts.

Gee, that's one way to hold a debate. I suppose actually reading what the Arms Trade Treaty is concerned with would take just too much time and effort? Hint: it has fuck all to do with making every gun illegal, instead it is pushing for regulation of international trade in weaponry and licensing systems for weapons held by individuals.

Arm yourself with the facts.

Licensing and registration ALWAYS precedes confiscation. Arm yourself with history.

Licensing and registration ALWAYS precedes confiscation. Arm yourself with history.


So let me unpack your argument here to see if I understand it: obviously these people want to take everybody's guns away because that is what happened in Germany in the 30s?

Yeah. Banning guns always works. I live in New Jersey, one of the states with the harshest anti-gun laws. They sort of work. I've never owned a legal gun. Doesn't mean I've never owned guns though.

Licensing and registration ALWAYS precedes confiscation. Arm yourself with history.
Laws that forbid the carrying of arms... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man
-Thomas Jefferson

So let me unpack your argument here to see if I understand it: obviously these people want to take everybody's guns away because that is what happened in Germany in the 30s?
It's happened in quite a few places.

It happened in Britain. In Australia. And it's about to happen in Canada (they enacted registration, promising that they wouldn't use it to confiscate, and now they're passing a handgun ban).

Actually, the people who pass these sorts of registration schemes are usually quite open about what their final intentions are.

I can make them faster than that.

If I'm reproducing the M3 submachinegun, or the Madsen, all I need is some sheet metal fabrication equipment (stamping and cutting), and some minor machining for the barrels. I can investment cast the bolts.

It's the kind of thing that doesn't require a huge factory, and only one or two of the people involved have to really know anything about firearms. The rest can be people who know how to make tin cans and golf clubs.
Well, my point is that with even less skill, anyone with a copy of Phil' Luty's Expedient 9mm Submachine Gun and access to Tubing Stock and a Sears can make one with a hacksaw, hand drill and bench grinder. - Bolt, Springs, Trigger, Magazine, suppressor, ... everything.

Gee, that's one way to hold a debate. I suppose actually reading what the Arms Trade Treaty is concerned with would take just too much time and effort? Hint: it has fuck all to do with making every gun illegal, instead it is pushing for regulation of international trade in weaponry and licensing systems for weapons held by individuals.

Arm yourself with the facts.
Did that. Try watching the debate between Rebecca Peters of IANSA and Wayne LaPierre of the NRA sometime (Neutral Debate, moderated and held in London at King's College) It is the INTENT of the treaty to put all firearms possession under UN regulatory control, leaading to cmplete denial of non-state possession.