"Don H" wrote in message
news:d8QVh.16531$M.1833@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> "War Office" <911falseflag@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1177006890.169337.235070@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>> On 19 abr, 14:32, PJ O'Donovan wrote:
>> > <<<<<...There are nearly 200 million firearms in private hands in the
>> > U.S...
>> >
>> > John Rennie>>>>>
>> >
>> > <<<
>> > never will be.
>> >
>> > PJ>>>>
>> >
>> > <<
>> > far away..
>> >
>> > John Rennie>>>
>> >
>> > <
>> >
>> > PJ>>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > John Rennie>
>> >
>> > Rennie the quintessential wiggler wiggles. He can't answer because he
>> > knows Switzerland has never been invaded because virtually every
>> > household has an inhabitant in the citizens' army and therefore
>> > virtually every household has a firearm
>>
>>
>> Oh how .ing predictable. Like a good little robotpath arn't you?
>> One guy kills 35 people or whatever and you want the whole country to
>> disarm. Well get .ed. Those guns is what we will use to storm the
>> government and take back our country.
>>
> # The USA hasn't been invaded because it is too far away - there's
> something valid about that. Switzerland, likewise, but due to being
> enclosed behind all those big mountains.
> As to firearms? To have, or have not? The average citizen doesn't
> need
> them for normal daily life, and registration and background checks seem
> essential for those who do.
> Why are folk scared of the Gun Lobby? Because if you say something
> they
> don't like, they'll come and shoot you? QED.
> "The right to bear arms" was Constitutionally established to fight off
> the British redcoats, not slaughter fellow citizens. Thus the National
> Guard should be armed - but others?
> To overthrow your own government? Yes, could be a valid reason, as
> the
> US Declaration of Independence used the overthrow of tyranny as
> justification for war with imperial Britain.
> But guns don't kill; it is people who kill. Yes, true enough, but
> possession of guns makes killing so much easier, and a trigger-happy
> populace leads to a higher homicide rate.
> No, gun possession can't really be justified. We have the Defence
> Forces to protect us, and a democratic government shouldn't need forcible
> removal.
> But don't worry; Virginia Tech won't be the last mass killing. Some
> other snivelling male student will emerge in due course, full of
> self-pity,
> and imagine it is heroic to blaze away at the defenceless. If all had
> guns,
> then the death toll is likely to be more, and on a daily basis, as
> neurotic
> youths sort out their differences.
> The solution? A Referendum (coinciding with next Presidential
> election?) to remove, or modify, Article II of the USA Constitution.
It is to late for the US the place is awash with guns and they don't even
know who 1/2 the law abiding citizens with guns are.
and this is the extent to arms in the US aknowledging that Popeye on
rec.scuba posted this " Legal w/ appropriate license in 50 states.
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ba4_1172300448"
I assume what he posted is true
>
>
|