UN small arms treaty?

[spartan239]

http://scpatriotsclub.com/blog/?p=82

I have just heard about this, and the above link pretty much sums it up for you. Pretty much, any civilian can not own a semi automatic weapon of any kind. This is said to be talked about the 17th of July by the UN, and if passed, the government would have to confiscate any weapons that are semi automatic.


I do not know if this would affect bolt action rifles and such that are modern and could still be as problematic as other guns.

I myself am against the bill, because the gangsters and such are going to get guns no matter what. You can not stop the bad guys from getting guns. However, you can only stop the law abiding citizens from protecting themselves.

I know that this bill will most likely be shot down, but just think about what would happen if it is not.

Thoughts?

[MrBill]

What backwater region of the U.S. are you from, where "I myself is" is acceptable English?

-My thoughts

[spartan239]

What backwater region of the U.S. are you from, where "I myself is" is acceptable English?

-My thoughts

sorry for one word within my multi-paragraph post was wrong. It is because I changed my course of thought mid sentence and forgot to come back and change the word. Now, I thought this thread was about the UN small arms treaty, and not about grammar school. You can find much worse mistakes about the web.

[MrBill]

I worry more about the profound lack of intelligence displayed by some people than the UN trying to take away our firearms.

On a side note, you made a few more mistakes with your response.

[Beolex]

Does this treaty affect just America, all UN member states, or is it an "international law"?

[Fat-Alfie]

I myself am against the bill, because the gangsters and such are going to get guns no matter what.

The sentence is grammatically correct.

With regard to the change in law, I hardly think the current situation in the USA is working well

[Steve Ror Fan]

The sentence is grammatically correct.

That's only because he went back and corrected it.

[RedHorizon]

With regard to the change in law, I hardly think the current situation in the USA is working well

What situation might that be?

[Fat-Alfie]

The fact that the USA has approximately 2232% more gun related deaths per capita than the UK, with its strict gun laws.

I know where I'd rather live

(source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ted_death_rate)

[darkfang776]

Bull fricking crap. ( Crap means sh&* just didn't want to use sh*&) The U.S. as had AT LEAST one self defense death per year.

[RedHorizon]

The fact that the USA has approximately 2232% more gun related deaths per capita than the UK, with its strict gun laws.I know where I'd rather live (source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ted_death_rate)

Fair enough, you can live where you want. Although the U.K. has a violent crime rate five times that of the U.S., and most gun related deaths are accidents caused by people who are generaly uneducated about firearms. Guns are not something to be feared, and with proper education, neither are the people behind them. America does not have a "situation" concerning guns, unless they try to take them from us. It is our right to own and use these weapons, given to us by the ones who freed our country, the effects of taking them will be devistating for both sides of the issue. Small revolts will be the very least of the U.N.'s problems, I for one will not simply bend over and "take it".

[kbizz]

My Ruger .22 is semi-auto. That's my zombie apocalypse gun! I ain't gunna stand fir no treaty.

On a serious note: here in the US of A, if bad guys have guns, I ought to have them too. Police response time where I am is 4-7 minutes, and believe me, a lot can go down with a gun in four minutes. If some dumbass invades my home, they will die. They should hope I get to a gun before I get to a baseball bat.

[spartan239]

My Ruger .22 is semi-auto. That's my zombie apocalypse gun! I ain't gunna stand fir no treaty.

On a serious note: here in the US of A, if bad guys have guns, I ought to have them too. Police response time where I am is 4-7 minutes, and believe me, a lot can go down with a gun in four minutes. If some dumbass invades my home, they will die. They should hope I get to a gun before I get to a baseball bat.

I agree with you. HOWEVER, here in MASS, a guy was getting jumped in HIS DRIVEWAY. He saw a man with a knife out, and guess what he did. He took out his fists and started whaling on the guy. The cops then showed up and charged the man with assault! Forget it if he had any guns.

You can take the guns from legit people, but not from criminals. Think about it.

Anyways, I highly doubt that I would tell the cop that I have a gun in my house if they come around and ask. Just say "no," and slam the door shut...

[Jeepster]

You are allowed to own a gun in America, but you are not allowed to shoot to kill. If a man invades your home with a knife, and you shoot him in the head, you are going away for manslaughter. You are the not the judge and jury, and you are not the law on your property. Federal and States laws still apply. If a gun is to be used in self defence, it is to be used to the minimal possible amount to take down, subdue or disarm your attacker without killing them. You do not have the right to end another human beings life, as you right wingers are so eager to point out in abortion debates. The fate of another human being to be decided in court by judge and jury. You must also make clear verbal warnings as to your possession of a firearm and your willingness to use it before firing it.


You want to talk about uneducated? Most Americans don't even know the laws surrounding the very amendment of the constitution they are protecting. The second ammendment was made at a time when laws barely existed in the USA, where in large parts of the country it really was every man for himself. But this is not that time; welcome to the twenty-first century. There is no reason for any civilian in North America to posess an automatic or semi-automatic weapon outside of firing ranges.


The UK does have a higher violent crime rate, but the UK also has much more urban areas in comparison to the USA. If you look at crime rates in urban areas alone, America is much, much higher than any Western country. In regards to most gun deaths being "accidents", that is a crock. Most gun deaths are murders. In Canada, where we are unfortunate enough to recieve huge amounts of handguns illegally from the USA, a staggering amount (almost all) of gun deaths are violent crimes, and not accidents. We are talking about a nation where hunting is a huge sport, but from our few hundred murders that occur, almost all are crimes, and not the result of accidents.



But hey, if you kids with apparently little to no knowledge on the subject want to play cowboys and indians, go ahead. Have fun in prison, where you belong, I might add, as you clearly can't function normally and are a hazard to the public if you are so eager to pull the trigger.

[Sparkie77]

You are allowed to own a gun in America, but you are not allowed to shoot to kill. If a man invades your home with a knife, and you shoot him in the head, you are going away for manslaughter. You are the not the judge and jury, and you are not the law on your property. Federal and States laws still apply. If a gun is to be used in self defence, it is to be used to the minimal possible amount to take down, subdue or disarm your attacker without killing them. You do not have the right to end another human beings life, as you right wingers are so eager to point out in abortion debates. The fate of another human being to be decided in court by judge and jury. You must also make clear verbal warnings as to your possession of a firearm and your willingness to use it before firing it.


You want to talk about uneducated? Most Americans don't even know the laws surrounding the very amendment of the constitution they are protecting. The second ammendment was made at a time when laws barely existed in the USA, where in large parts of the country it really was every man for himself. But this is not that time; welcome to the twenty-first century. There is no reason for any civilian in North America to posess an automatic or semi-automatic weapon outside of firing ranges.


The UK does have a higher violent crime rate, but the UK also has much more urban areas in comparison to the USA. If you look at crime rates in urban areas alone, America is much, much higher than any Western country. In regards to most gun deaths being "accidents", that is a crock. Most gun deaths are murders. In Canada, where we are unfortunate enough to recieve huge amounts of handguns illegally from the USA, a staggering amount (almost all) of gun deaths are violent crimes, and not accidents. We are talking about a nation where hunting is a huge sport, but from our few hundred murders that occur, almost all are crimes, and not the result of accidents.



But hey, if you kids with apparently little to no knowledge on the subject want to play cowboys and indians, go ahead. Have fun in prison, where you belong, I might add, as you clearly can't function normally and are a hazard to the public if you are so eager to pull the trigger.

This all said... I own a semi automatic 30 caliber SKS that I use for deer hunting. And the occasionaly coyote. I have no intention to use it in any other purpose except for hunting. I keep my 12 guage pump shotgun in my closet incase someone was to intrude my house. But it is unloaded and cased. My first choice would be to intimidate the intruder with it and not harm them, but if an attempt to harm me or my family, it would be used for the purpose to avoid that harm. Now that doesnt mean I'm going to blow his damn head off. And in fact I'd rather not use a shotgun at all as it would be almost far deadlier than my SKS... All in all I think I'll just stay out in the country. People usually leave us alone in this area.

[donoteat]

The US, as a dues-paying card-carrying member of the UN, will of course enforce such a treaty, if passed.


Don't believe me? I mean, we've followed all the other ones; look at our success with the Convention on the Rights of the Child, and how the US has since prevented parents from physically punishing children. And if that doesn't convince you, look at all our 100% Geneva Convention-compliant POW camps at Guantanamo Bay! Thanks to our ratification of the Kyoto Protocol, soon pollution will be a thing of the past. Yes, it's all thanks to these wonderful UN treaties and proclamations that the US takes entirely seriously!

So I remain confident that if this is passed by the UN, we will immediately see mass confiscation of weaponry without any serious outcry from politicians and with the full cooperation of state governments.

[Fat-Alfie]

</sarcasm>

[gabester]

The fact that the USA has approximately 2232% more gun related deaths per capita than the UK, with its strict gun laws.

I know where I'd rather live

(source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ted_death_rate)

The US has too many guns for any gun control legislation to really do anything at this point. UK is much easier to regulate because it's a (relatively) small island with few firearms to start with.

Australia is a pretty decent example - they implemented some harsh gun control after a shooting and it didn't do anything to the gun crime rate (which had been steadily decreasing for decades)

I'm not against reducing/limiting access to guns as obviously that's somewhat of a deterrent to gun crime. The problem is that it's just not possible in the US. There are hundreds of millions of guns, and you can't retroactively ban them and take them all out of the hands of law-abiding citizens. Limiting certain features also doesn't really accomplish much - the California Assault Weapons Ban has had zero impact on crime. It's a stupid law written by people who don't know anything about guns. It's completely arbitrary and nonsensical, and any criminal could violate the assault weapons ban just by installing certain legally purchasable parts, or by modifying them. It bans certain types of grips (in combination with other "scary features"). It just irritates gun owners without affecting criminals. Limiting magazine capacity to 10 is okay, but again, criminals can pretty easily modify magazines to be higher capacity, or just order high capacity ones from out of state.

People propose requiring a license to own a gun: sure, but who's to say most criminals couldn't still get a gun license? James Holmes knew exactly what he was doing, had no prior record, and could've easily passed any background checks required to purchase a gun. People do illegal things with legally obtained and operated cars. People will do illegal things with legally obtained and operated guns.

[Jeepster]

To clarify my stance, I don't care about long guns; its the pistols and SMGs that are primarily found in the hands of thugs and gangsters that I find most disturbing.

[JD3020]

To clarify my stance, I don't care about long guns; its the pistols and SMGs that are primarily found in the hands of thugs and gangsters that I find most disturbing.

And most of them are illegal so making laws won't do shit about it. Only thing it will do is take away more freedoms from law-abiding citizens.

Personally, i don't agree with the laws. I feel that if somebody is breaking into your home you have the right If you break into my house in the middle of the night, you can beat your ass you won't be walking. Don't want to get shot, then DON'T BREAK INTO MY HOUSE. Go get a job and keep your slimy hands off my stuff.

Another thing, if they make semi-auto guns illegal, i guess i'll become an outlaw. In the next couple years i want to build my own AR-15. If they make it illegal, so be it, i'll have an illegal gun. They are just so much fun in fairly small package.

Its a shame that normal law-abiding gun owners are lumped into the same group as mass murders, and are treated the same way.

I just hope people remember, guns don't kill people, people kill people.