[nellybell]

He asks a interesting question..He doesn't put down gun-owners or gun
enthusiasts..Anyone feel like tackling this ?? I'm no good at this
type thing. I VERY seldon ever win the ole traffic ticket argument..
Ck it out..

www.slate.msn.com/id/2080201

 

[WLB]

bg's, you are never going to win an argument with anyone from SLATE. Their staff seems to be composed of radical left wing elements. I believe that they have a self-described communist on their staff. They have no interest in yours or anyone one else's opinion unless it parrots their own. Their only goal is the destruction of America as we know it. They just cannot stand it that we still get to make some decisions that effect our lives.
Bill

 

[WLB]

bg's, the short answer to the question posed though is that Saddam Hussein, for all his stupidity in military matters, is much smarter than the average antigun Democrat. He has survived over 20 assassination attempts yet he does not waste his energy with gun control. He is smart enough to realize that murder comes from the heart and a weapon can always be bought on the black market, stolen, or simply made--something that the average antigun Democrat seems to be oblivious to. Guns are old technology. They can be easily made with hand tools. Gunpowder--either black or smokeless--is easier to make than many of the designer drugs that flood the market. Saddam has probably seen, or is well aware of, the handmade weapons that Afghanistan is famous for. Their "gun factories" often consist of a few hand tools and some crude machinery--frequently human powered--and they turn out fully functional copies of a variety of weapons. Saddam is smart enough to know that for a price some of his own soldiers would probably steal and sell "restricted to military and police" weapons. Who guards the guards. Saddam realizes that gun control is not the path to survival. He spends his energy on layers of isolation, secrecy, underground tunnels for travel, never staying in the same place twice, doubles, and absolute brutality. Would the antigun Democrats be any different if we are all disarmed?

 

[Guest]

The author ignores that Saddam does not control his whole country. The kurd's resistance movement proves that.

The ability to own a firearm does not gaurantee a democracy, in and of itself. The lack of the ability to own firearms can make it much easier to lose a democracy, though. Besides a means to resist, you have to have enough of the population willing to make a move, and a method of coordinating so you can't be singled out and picked off. If you cannot gather together, if you cannot trust your fellows enough to effectively plan, if you cannot get accurate information, you cannot provide enough of an uprising to overthrow an actual military that is used ruthlessly and without regard for "innocents" in the area. Do any of you here think your neighborhood could hold out against a battalion of the US Army told to destroy the whole area with no restraints? Small arms don't stack against armor, chemical weapons, air support, and artillery.

The author is also begging the question, "Why have guns if you can't overthrow your government on a whim?" Obviously that isn't the reason most people own firearms. While it is conceivable to many of us that you will face the need to fire due to government sanctioned events I don't think that's the primary concern for owning a weapon in most people's mind. The prevention of violent criminal attack and sporting purposes are my primary motiviation.

I wonder if we could give the author of the article, Rosie O'Commie, the members of Handgun Control Inc., and the Brady center folks 48 hours to leave the country and take their sons with them.

 

[Kalifornia Citizen]

Thanks bg's for the link. This is what I emailed to [email protected]

"…Most Iraqi households own at least one gun…"
OK, I'll bite. What guns are allowed by the dictator?

The only specific firearm type mentioned was: "12 gauge pump-action shotgun". In the picture of the guns on the wall, all of the guns were shotguns. Shotguns are generally not considered a threat, as gun-banners in England, Canada, and the United States generally consider them "OK for hunting".

In answer to your question,
If there are so many guns in Iraq, why is it still a dictatorship?

First of all, they've only got bird guns. Translated: Iraqi's don't have the freedom to own firearms.

They also don't have freedom of speech, as required in our Bill of Rights. If any Iraqi citizen speaks out against dictator Saddam, the punishment is cruel and unusual. Cruel and unusual punishment is also prohibited by our Bill Of Rights.

They don't have freedom of religion! They are Muslim or else they suffer economically and socially. Talk about intolerance! Religion is also protected in our Bill Of Rights, in spite of the ACLU lawyers.

The freedom to own firearms is only ONE Civil Right necessary to protect America. Take away ANY of the Bill Of Rights, and all are forfeited.

About Red Dawn, that was just a movie. It was not real. The renegade kids would've been tracked down and taken out. If the Ruskies could paratroop in, en masse, as portrayed in the movie, the USA would've lost all military capability. That's a fantasy for Russia's and China's leaders; that's not the real world.

Poor Iraqi citizens, they don't have even one of the rights of a human being. It's truly a tragedy of history that one person like Saddam Hussein can cause so much pain and suffering. It is truly a tragedy of history that one person like Saddam Hussein can cause so much pain and suffering to the level of a holocaust.

God Bless America and God Bless George Bush

 

[Guest]

Kalifornia - you reminded me of something I read in the early 90s. I think it was called "On the Wings of Eagles." I definitely remember the author as Ken Follet, and it was about Ross Perot's retrieval of his employees who were being held hostage in Iran. They could buy shotguns in country, but #8 shot was as big as you can buy there. They had one employee with a cast on his arm take in a bean bag full of buck shot. He kept it in his hand the whole time, and when customs asked about it, he said it was a bag his doctor had given him to squeeze to strengthen his broken arm. When he got in country, they opened the bag and reloaded shells with buckshot.

Only vaguely related, but I thought it was interesting.

 

[Kalifornia Citizen]

Thanks Doc for that story. I couldn't help but wonder what he used the shells for. That's a heck a lot of #8 shot!

KC