Serious question from a Scottish lass about American gun control?

There is a major difference in the relationships between the government and its people for Americans and the rest of the World, especially the Europeans. The Europeans have a 2,000 year history of doing whatever their rulers (usually kings or queens) tell them to do and in return, the rulers send off troops to foreign lands to murder and plunder and send the booty back to the homeland as reward for serves rendered. The people bow down and worship their monarchs in return.

America, once a victim of such oppression, had the nerve to stand up and overcome the tyranny of such oppression, (you know like your own William Wallace once tried), and were successful. The ensuing new nation, realizing that without the ability of the population to stand up and say NO, government will eventually return to the monarchy model (as the US government has been doing lately here) and will attempt to enslave the population once again. Arming the citizenry was the only way that those brave men who stood up against the tyrannical monarch that oppressed us was the only tool that an informed public could have to assure that in the future, any attempts to return to the feudal system could be averted.

No, Americans do not need machine guns, they only guarantee that you will run out of ammunition quickly, but they need to be armed sufficiently to deal with what is coming at them. Disarming the USA will not stop any crime, not even death by firearms, but it will certainly result in our cities turning into what London has become today. How's that working out for you guys over there anyway? Why do you still bow down to that Satanic Vampiress of Evil?

Ok so I agree that American citizens should have the right to bear arms if they wish, what I can't understand is how anybody can buy a machine gun style gun or why it's allowed? Surely the way to solve the argument is better gun control and a restriction on what type of gun' members of the public can buy? surely possessing a handgun is enough firearm to protect yourself and immediate others?

This is a genuine request for information. In the UK the argument that is projected is a straight out ban on guns or not! With not much coverage of any compromised arguments.

Thanks to GLP I have the resources to root out this info for myself.

Ok so I agree that American citizens should have the right to bear arms if they wish, what I can't understand is how anybody can buy a machine gun style gun or why it's allowed? Surely the way to solve the argument is better gun control and a restriction on what type of gun' members of the public can buy? surely possessing a handgun is enough firearm to protect yourself and immediate others?

This is a genuine request for information. In the UK the argument that is projected is a straight out ban on guns or not! With not much coverage of any compromised arguments.

Thanks to GLP I have the resources to root out this info for myself.

Why do you still bow down to that Satanic Vampiress of Evil?

Many are ok with an assault weapons ban, but others think it's a slippery slope.

Ok so I agree that American citizens should have the right to bear arms if they wish, what I can't understand is how anybody can buy a machine gun style gun or why it's allowed? Surely the way to solve the argument is better gun control and a restriction on what type of gun' members of the public can buy? surely possessing a handgun is enough firearm to protect yourself and immediate others?

This is a genuine request for information. In the UK the argument that is projected is a straight out ban on guns or not! With not much coverage of any compromised arguments.

Thanks to GLP I have the resources to root out this info for myself.

He did not have an assault weapon. You cannot buy assault weapons in this country. He had a semi automatic rifle.

First off, you can't purchase a fully automatic weapon in America unless you have a certain license that cost many thousands of dollars and has a ridiculously stringent application process. So nobody but dealers owns fully automatic weapons.
That means, most people own semi-automatic weapons, which means you have to squeeze the trigger once for every round fired. Much like a revolver used in the old west days.

The main difference is the appearance of the weapons. Semi-automatic weapon look exactly like fully automatic weapons. And they semi-automatic weapons typically hold more rounds per clip than a revolver.

And to the main point, No law abiding citizen owns weapons for evil intent. We own them because we are fearful of the future and what may come our way someday that is beyond the control of our government. They are an uncashed insurance policy and every law abiding citizen, wants them to stay uncashed. In the event that society collapses or portions of it do, say during a natural catastrophe, and we have no help from our government, we at least have some way to defend our loved ones from the evil in this world.

Ok so I agree that American citizens should have the right to bear arms if they wish, what I can't understand is how anybody can buy a machine gun style gun or why it's allowed? Surely the way to solve the argument is better gun control and a restriction on what type of gun' members of the public can buy? surely possessing a handgun is enough firearm to protect yourself and immediate others?

This is a genuine request for information. In the UK the argument that is projected is a straight out ban on guns or not! With not much coverage of any compromised arguments.

Thanks to GLP I have the resources to root out this info for myself.

Would you like to be told what size car to drive?
'Sorry, no kids so you only need a small car with two seats'
'Sorry, but you have no need for 600hp...the speed limit is 80'.
'Sorry, but you are not allowed to buy a four wheel drive ATV because you live in the city'.

Get what Im saying? In a true democracy you are allowed to buy whatever the fuck you like if you have the money.
The government is comprised of ordinary people.
They are not our gods...

It's always funny to read about the hate vs the ar-15 when really, its at the bottom of the calibers chart... All hunting rifles are more dangerous than AR-15.

Also, all countries allow citizens to have semi-auto rifles. Some limit magazine capacity to 5, 10, etc...

Handguns are the main difference here. USA must be the only country who allow citizens to carry handguns around town.

Logically they will go after your handguns 1st with something like we have in Canada. Like allow handguns fire only at gun range and frankly its a turn down for handguns owners... you cant even shot them in the wild so whats the point of having a gun you cant use outside the range. Here handguns are more like toys you go play with on your day off.

You couldn't be more wrong. The Monarchy in Britain is our equivalent of your 2nd amendment. The Queen doesn't involve herself with the political running of the country, but she can intervene if she wants to. In Britain, our Satanic Vampiress is the EU and by proxy of the Stockholm syndrome, the British government.

They are semi-auto not full auto.no compromise!

It would be funny if it wasn't so goddamn pathetic!

Learn the history of your own island dumbass.

Edward I invades Scotland: A History of Scotland.

"...When the town had been taken in this way and its citizens had submitted, Edward spared no one, whatever the age or sex, and for two days streams of blood flowed from the bodies of the slain, for in his tyrannous rage he ordered 7,500 souls of both sexes to be massacred...So that mills could be turned round by the flow of their blood.'

Account of the Massacre of Berwick, from Bower's Scotichronicon

Marching north, Edward crushed the Scots army at Dunbar before penetrating into the scottish heartland, north of the Forth. King John Balliol was forced to surrender and was humiliated at Stracathro Churchyard. There he was stripped of the crown, his insignia ripped from his coat (giving him the nickname 'toom tabard', meaning empty coat), before he and much of the Scots nobility were imprisoned in England. However, for Edward 'Longshanks', conquest and ritual humiliation were not enough.

He set about stripping Scotland of its lodestones of identity, just as he had done to the Welsh in 1282. The Stone of Destiny, on which the Scottish Kings were inaugurated, the crown, and one of the Scots' holiest relics, the Black Rood of St Margaret (believed to be a piece of the True Cross), were all taken south. His aim was nothing less than the destruction of the Scots nation and its total incorporation into his kingdom. As he left Scotland, Edward was reported to remark – 'A man does good work when he rids himself of shit.'
..." more here [link to www.bbc.co.uk]


"...Scotland Conquered, 1174-1296
On 10 July 1296 Edward forced Balliol to surrender Scotland and the homage of all its people..." more here [link to www.nationalarchives.gov.uk]

"... In the 1290's Edward I of England conquered Scotland which led to the struggle under William Wallace clearly depicted in the film "Brave Heart". Later Robert the Bruce continued the fight eventually gaining Scotland its freedom. The Stirling area has lots to see on Scotland's Wars of Independence in the 13th century.

The Declaration of Arbroath in April 1320 stated "For as long as one hundred of us shall remain alive we shall never in wise consent to submit to the rule of the English, for it is not for glory we fight, for riches, or for honours, but for freedom alone, which no good man loses but with his life." This was the first time in history where freedom is mentioned, not in terms of an individual's freedom, but that of a nation..." more here [link to www.explorescotland.net]

"...
1296 Edward I of England - the 'Hammer of the Scots' - invades and deposes Scotland's King John. William Wallace, of Braveheart fame, defeats the English forces at the Battle of Stirling Bridge.


Wallace ruled Scotland as Guardian of the Realm - but in 1305 fell into the hands of the English and was executed for treason.

1314 The Hammer's son, Edward II, attempts to break the siege of Stirling Castle and reassert control. He is defeated by Robert the Bruce at the Battle of Bannockburn - securing de facto independence for Scotland. Scottish losses number between 400 and 4,000, while the English lose 700 cavalry and between 4,000 and 11,000 infantry. Many are slaughtered by locals as they try to flee south to England

The first Parliament of Scotland meets in 1326 and in 1328 Edward III signs the Treaty of Northampton, recognising Scottish independence. He invades the following year..." more here [link to www.telegraph.co.uk]

Back a couple of years ago when Scotland held a vote for independence, I was so hopeful. I was flying The Bonnie Blue and proudly displaying my tartan and Clan Gunn crest. The no vote was a horribly embarrassing reminder of just how much of Scotland's independent soul the English have bred out of them. Thank God my kinsmen made it here to the land of the free and the home of the brave. We have certainly fallen greatly from our founding, but there are still those of us here that know our history and stand ready to defend it.

Thank you for proving you are an absolute and total idiot fuckwitt who, just as I said, has no idea whatsoever how Great Britain came to be.

Ok so I agree that American citizens should have the right to bear arms if they wish, what I can't understand is how anybody can buy a machine gun style gun or why it's allowed? Surely the way to solve the argument is better gun control and a restriction on what type of gun' members of the public can buy? surely possessing a handgun is enough firearm to protect yourself and immediate others?

This is a genuine request for information. In the UK the argument that is projected is a straight out ban on guns or not! With not much coverage of any compromised arguments.

Thanks to GLP I have the resources to root out this info for myself.

Stunning moron. Resister provides proof with impeccable sources and the moron replies with the same attack and provides nothing in defense of his assertion.

Sick, stupid, insane? Hard to tell.

They are semi-auto not full auto.no compromise!

Ok so I agree that American citizens should have the right to bear arms if they wish, what I can't understand is how anybody can buy a machine gun style gun or why it's allowed? Surely the way to solve the argument is better gun control and a restriction on what type of gun' members of the public can buy? surely possessing a handgun is enough firearm to protect yourself and immediate others?

This is a genuine request for information. In the UK the argument that is projected is a straight out ban on guns or not! With not much coverage of any compromised arguments.

Thanks to GLP I have the resources to root out this info for myself.

They are semi-auto not full auto.no compromise!