Another libtard rebuttal on FB
what the libtard said: I don't see it. This is America. Nobody will give up their guns and it will never be made illegal to own one. Sure, a lot of people want to see gun control, but to ban..... never. Like Obama said, heavy weaponary like AK-47's and all the military gear that the Aurora shooter had is just not necessary for ordinary citizens, they belong in the hands of the military. I'm just curious why an american citizen would need $200,000 worth of armory and amnunition? Self defense is always the answer to gun control issues. Okay, fine, but do you need 11,000 rounds of amunition to keep someone out of your back door? How about deer hunting? How much lead does that take? My common sense tells me that we should be able to choose what kind of gun/guns we keep in our homes and our hunting grounds but I also believe their should be some kind of "red flag" when someone like James Holmes purchases massive quanities of weapons. I for one, would be much more comfortable going out to places knowing that the next lunatic is not hiding around the corner for another massacre. Anyway, I don't get the paranoia. I'm for the "out of control" gun control, not the banning of them.
What I said: You are mistaken. The governments of both the UN and our own have been trying feverishly to ban anything gun-related that they can lately. But what is more important here is your skewed view, which I will attempt to correct through a bit of education.
First, we need to look at why our second amendment was written. First and foremost, it was written to give our PEOPLE (not soldiers) the ability to defend ourselves from a tyrannical government. This is absolutely its most important function. Second, it was written to establish our first standing army -the US citizen- to help defend against foreign invasion. Third, for self defense. Lastly, for sports and hunting. If you think that somebody could do any good defending against a tyrannical government or invading army with his Remington 700 .243 hunting rifle and a couple boxes of 85 grain hunting ammo, you are laughably mistaken. Government operatives wear body armor, utilize night vision optics, carry AR-15's and drive armored vehicles. Should the need ever arise for the people to reclaim power over a tyrannical government, we will need every bit of help we can get. If that is one more round in your magazine, or an inexpensive ballistic vest, then so be it. The odds must be evened as much as possible.
Let's look at an example of how our second amendment can work in the real world with regards to creating a strong citizenry that is able to ward off attack. In WWII, Japan said that America could never be successfully invaded because "there would be a gun behind every blade of grass". I don't think that a massive, organized military such as Japan's and its allies would fear invading a country that was regulated and restricted to only owning 20 rounds of hunting ammo per person. "That was over 50 years ago!" You might say, so let's take a look at something a bit more modern. Switzerland has, and actually (unlike the US) utilizes, something very similar to our second amendment in its intended form. Their country's army is comprised of all of the country's able-bodied military age men. They are all ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT a fully automatic machine gun to keep in their home. Switzerland also enjoys the lowest gun crime in the world, and has never been invaded.
How about an example going the other way? I am currently in Afghanistan serving in the Army. Our forces are partially in charge of enforcing extremely stringent weapon control here. The Afghan people are basically not allowed to own any weapons. Yet somehow, we get rocketed, shot at with machine guns, mortared and bombed all the time. It is so common that most of us simply sleep through the explosions. Know what else is happening in Afghanistan? Afghan citizens are being tortured, killed, raped, robbed, kidnapped, and their homes set on fire at an astounding rate. They simply cannot defend themselves because of the gun control. One Afghan with a rifle could probably ward off Taliban insurgents trying to kidnap and rape his family, or at least even the odds.
Look at crime statistics from Australia since they confiscated private firearms.
Do you really want to allow the government to gain more and more and more power and control over the people? Do you really want agencies like TSA, ATF, DHS to outgun the country's citizens? Do you really think that the feds only have your best interest in mind? What happens when the government has removed all forms of citizen resistance? They will have free reign to do whatever the hell it is that they want. The government needs to fear its citizens. THAT is the only way to keep a country free. That is the number one reason for writing the second amendment.
There is a rider on the cybersecurity act that bans magazines over 10 rounds and makes anybody who owns one an instant felon with a 10 year prison sentence. The UN arms trade treaty bans "unauthorized weapons" and has a clause to allow for later review and revision WITHOUT a vote from our reps. Obama has verbally attacked online ammunition sales. He has also, as you said, condemned the use of "AK-47's". Tell me again about how much gun control ISN'T in the works?
