Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 41

Thread: With friends like this, who needs enemies? Gun folks on gun bans and SD, AWB

  1. #11
    So, if ARs are banned - and then next kid uses a fixed stock Beretta 1301 - are they going to go after semiauto shotguns - which some would argue is way more lethal at these distances. My guess is yes...so first the AR...then the semiauto shotgun...No one has any reason to have a semiauto shotgun, an O/U will do just fine...

    The "you don't need an AR" argument doesn't sway me. You don't need a Kawasaki Ninja to go 200MPH - but there you have it. You don't need ANY car to go over 80MPH except for law enforcement, so, everyone gets a Prius. And that doesn't even get to the point that NONE of the definitions of an "assault" weapon relate to functionality, but pure cosmetics. And thus, it brings us back to the point that an AR ban does not actually reduce school shootings/mass shootings, ONLY that it will stop these events with THIS weapon.

  2. #12
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Fort Worth, TX
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe in PNG View Post
    Here's an interesting mental exercise.
    List 10 countries who, since 1900:
    -were not invaded by a foreign power
    -were not threatened by imminent foreign invasion
    -did not have a civil war
    -did not have a dictatorial government
    ... behind every blade of grass....
    "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." - Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Constitution, Draft 1, 1776

  3. #13
    Revolvers Revolvers 1911s Stephanie B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    East 860 by South 413
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe in PNG View Post
    Here's an interesting mental exercise.
    List 10 countries who, since 1900:
    -were not invaded by a foreign power
    -were not threatened by imminent foreign invasion
    -did not have a civil war
    -did not have a dictatorial government
    Problem is, points 1 and 2 have more to do with having seacoasts than anything else. And that's overlooking the Battle of Columbus, NM in 1916.

    (Back it out to 1800 and things look different.)
    If we have to march off into the next world, let us walk there on the bodies of our enemies.

  4. #14
    Four String Fumbler Joe in PNG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Papua New Guinea; formerly Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by Stephanie B View Post
    Problem is, points 1 and 2 have more to do with having seacoasts than anything else. And that's overlooking the Battle of Columbus, NM in 1916.

    (Back it out to 1800 and things look different.)
    If we open it up to include naval battles, the potential list decreases considerably.
    And yes, Pancho Villa was considered.
    "You win 100% of the fights you avoid. If you're not there when it happens, you don't lose." - William Aprill
    "I've owned a guitar for 31 years and that sure hasn't made me a musician, let alone an expert. It's made me a guy who owns a guitar."- BBI

  5. #15
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Erie County, NY
    If we are discussing WW II and the USA, there was no immediate plans for the Japanese or the Germans to contemplate 'invasions' of the Continental USA. The gun beyond every corn stalk mantra is mythological if you look the scholarly record of Japanese plans. Their plan was to intimidate the USA by sinking a substantial part of the Navy such that we would negotiate a settlement with them to allow conquest of SE Asia. The Philippines was not really of interest except to protect their flanks on the way to the Dutch East Indies. Germany might have contemplated war with the USA in the the distant future but there was some boasting BS before WW II. In Berlin Diary: The Journal of a Foreign Correspondent, 1934-1941 by Shirer, he mentions a pre-war conversation with a Nazi who boasted they would attack from Africa to Brazil and then up the continents to us. Now that would have been an exciting logistic enterprise. No real indications of any long term planning. Even the Nazi naval plans for 1948 ish (when their Navy wanted to fight) could match the US build up.

    Anyway, I don't think having ARs for defense against organized foreign military will be a useful argument. Defense against border crossing bad people or terrorists - perhaps. I once got into an argument and banned somewhere for telling a guy who said there were 50,000 Chinese on the TX border or in the port of Los Angeles planning to march to TX and take our guns, that he was full of it. Nasty interchange. The question of the logistic train for 50,000 Chinese troops down I-10 to TX stumped him. Not enough take out in Van Horn, I suppose.

  6. #16
    The R in F.A.R.T RevolverRob's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Gotham Adjacent
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe in PNG View Post
    Here's an interesting mental exercise.
    List 10 countries who, since 1900:
    -were not invaded by a foreign power
    -were not threatened by imminent foreign invasion
    -did not have a civil war
    -did not have a dictatorial government
    Did the country have to be established prior to 1900?

    If yes:

    Canada
    United States
    Switzerland
    Andorra
    Vatican City
    Australia
    Iceland
    Sweden*
    New Zealand
    South Africa**

    *If you don't count "Nazi-leaning neutrality" as a dictatorial government.

    **But only if you take a strict definition of "dictatorial" government and say that Apartheid was not "dictatorial".

  7. #17
    Four String Fumbler Joe in PNG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Papua New Guinea; formerly Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by RevolverRob View Post
    Did the country have to be established prior to 1900?

    If yes:

    Canada
    United States
    Switzerland
    Andorra
    Vatican City
    Australia
    Iceland
    Sweden*
    New Zealand
    South Africa**

    *If you don't count "Nazi-leaning neutrality" as a dictatorial government.

    **But only if you take a strict definition of "dictatorial" government and say that Apartheid was not "dictatorial".
    Well, we can knock a few countries off that list:
    Australia was under threat from Japanese invasion via PNG.
    South Africa fought the Second Boer War against England, which ended in 1902.
    Iceland was "invaded" by England during WWII
    Andorra was occupied by the French in 1933
    "You win 100% of the fights you avoid. If you're not there when it happens, you don't lose." - William Aprill
    "I've owned a guitar for 31 years and that sure hasn't made me a musician, let alone an expert. It's made me a guy who owns a guitar."- BBI

  8. #18
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Location
    Central OH
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe in PNG View Post
    Well, we can knock a few countries off that list:
    Australia was under threat from Japanese invasion via PNG.
    South Africa fought the Second Boer War against England, which ended in 1902.
    Iceland was "invaded" by England during WWII
    Andorra was occupied by the French in 1933
    I think the insurgency in SA in the 80s counts as civil war.
    'Nobody ever called the fire department because they did something intelligent'

  9. #19
    The R in F.A.R.T RevolverRob's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Gotham Adjacent
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe in PNG View Post
    Well, we can knock a few countries off that list:
    Australia was under threat from Japanese invasion via PNG.
    South Africa fought the Second Boer War against England, which ended in 1902.
    Iceland was "invaded" by England during WWII
    Andorra was occupied by the French in 1933
    You said "threat of imminent foreign invasion". Most scholars would not consider an invasion of Australia imminent at any point during WW2. Maybe, maybe, PNG, but that's debatable.

    Andorra's "occupation" by France can't be a foreign invasion. Andorra is an independent principality that co-principles in Spain and France. So, while technically a country, this would be the equivalent of having English troops show up to help quell some riots in Canada and calling it "an invasion by the English".

  10. #20
    Four String Fumbler Joe in PNG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Papua New Guinea; formerly Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by RevolverRob View Post
    You said "threat of imminent foreign invasion". Most scholars would not consider an invasion of Australia imminent at any point during WW2. Maybe, maybe, PNG, but that's debatable.
    The Japanese twice tried to invade Port Moresby- once by sea, which we stopped at the Battle of the Coral Sea at great cost, and once by land over the Kokoda Track- which the Aussies stopped at great cost. The whole purpose of the exercise was to have a place to invade Australia from. Because there's no point in taking POM- the place is a serious dump.

    Quote Originally Posted by RevolverRob View Post
    Andorra's "occupation" by France can't be a foreign invasion. Andorra is an independent principality that co-principles in Spain and France. So, while technically a country, this would be the equivalent of having English troops show up to help quell some riots in Canada and calling it "an invasion by the English".
    Then is it really "independent"?
    "You win 100% of the fights you avoid. If you're not there when it happens, you don't lose." - William Aprill
    "I've owned a guitar for 31 years and that sure hasn't made me a musician, let alone an expert. It's made me a guy who owns a guitar."- BBI

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •