• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

The Argument for Guns

Reading through this thread is very interesting. I have never owned a gun but the reality is that if this is a serious thread (and I believe it is for the most part) then the posters who think we should seriously consider a complete or even partial ban on firearms must realize the reality of that scenario.


If the federal government issues a law that stated that he people had to relinquish their firearms then the federal government would need to be ready to shed blood (a little of theirs and a LOT of their citizens) to take those weapons. Gun owners for the most part would rather part with an appendage to their body than their right to bear arms, and I am no way using hyperbole.


There is middle ground on this issue, but the thought of a federally enforced gun ban is crazier than just about any political concept posted on these boards.


The south would secede almost immediately once again, and this time be right in doing so. As someone who has never owned a firearm I believe in the importance of the right to best arms. Annihilation of a citizenry by an oppressive government is extremely easy with modern technology. Suppression of a citizenry you want to incorporate back into society by an oppressive government is very difficult if the populace is armed. In this hypothetical The citizens goal would be to survive at all cost, the governments goal would be to bring people back into the fold, which is impossible if the populace is dead from drone attacks.

Very interesting thread though. Going to keep reading.
 
Last edited:
I’d imagine that most posters realize that a complete ban (or even effective gun control, for that matter) is never going to happen.

Deacon923 said:
I get that this is tongue in cheek, but it's a stupid argument. Once the Indians found out about guns they dropped those bows and arrows as fast as they could. Sure you can kill a coyote with a spear, but it's a shitload easier with a .243.
Click to expand...

And people!
 
PLEASE let the south secede again! PLEASE!

Taxes would drop dramatically as the rest of us wouldn't have to pay for all those southern mooches any longer.

You could have Indiana and WV too.
 
TownieDeac said:
replace firearms here with slavery, and the post reads approx. the same with the amount of "there's nothing we can do about it" you're getting in this argument
Click to expand...

Except for the fact that we aren't enslaving a race by owning a gun. There is no moral imperative to me having a gun in my possession.
 
avalon said:
I’d imagine that most posters realize that a complete ban (or even effective gun control, for that matter) is never going to happen.



And people!
Click to expand...

It's tough because a lot of gun owners/activists are scared of the premise of this thread becoming a more widely held view. So basically they don't give an inch afraid the other side might take a mile.


Such is the state of politics right now. We end up with sporadic extreme measures rather than consistent moderate leadership.
 
Deacon923 said:
I get that this is tongue in cheek, but it's a stupid argument. Once the Indians found out about guns they dropped those bows and arrows as fast as they could. Sure you can kill a coyote with a spear, but it's a shitload easier with a .243.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it would be even easier with a bazooka. Imagine how quickly the Indians would have dropped a bow for a bazooka!
 
What if they had smart bombs. Would they have given up their bows for smart bombs?
 
actually, compared to a rifle, killing a coyote would probably be pretty difficult with a bazooka. i might even take a compound bow over bazooka
 
Wrangor said:
It's tough because a lot of gun owners/activists are scared of the premise of this thread becoming a more widely held view. So basically they don't give an inch afraid the other side might take a mile.

Such is the state of politics right now. We end up with sporadic extreme measures rather than consistent moderate leadership.
Click to expand...

Throw in a (n understandable) mistrust of government in general (which will ensure that a national registry never happens), and the fact that the NRA is an incredibly effective political machine, and we’re pretty much stuck in place, shouting back and forth while nothing changes.
 
If they had flamethrowers, they skip the middlemen and do BBQ immediately.
 
ImTheCaptain said:
actually, compared to a rifle, killing a coyote would probably be pretty difficult with a bazooka. i might even take a compound bow over bazooka
Click to expand...

Plus the Native Americans used every part of the animal, wasting nothing. A bazooka would be useless to them, except for battle. Then it'd be pretty badass.
 
tsywake said:
Plus the Native Americans used every part of the animal, wasting nothing. A bazooka would be useless to them, except for battle. Then it'd be pretty badass.
Click to expand...

I'm way out of my depth on this, but it's my understanding that the Indians prized guns for protection and war against other tribes, not because they were looking for more efficient coyote extermination techniques.
 
har har.

Point is, in the vein of the purpose of this thread, there's a difference between people wanting something and people needing something. If you give someone a gun to scare away/kill a coyote, of course they're going to choose that over a bow. If you give children a choice between eating vegetables or eating donuts, they're picking the donuts. Wrangor points out that people want guns on their farms to scare away predators, but they're not necessary. They're just easy. Who cares if they have horrible yet relatively intangible side effects?
 
If the ratio of donuts eaten to vegetables eaten mirrored guns fired to arrows shot, we'd be in a lot of trouble.
 
maybe, or maybe all the fatsos would be dead and health insurance would be a lot cheaper
 
We're on that trajectory already. Fortunately with the donut analogy, it doesn't hold for the collateral damage that comes with gun use.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top