dubs, when the Bill of Rights was written by our forefathers it was to protect individual rights. The 2nd amendment, the right to bear arms, was included because, as Thomas Jefferson put it, people have the right to protect themselves from a tyrannical government.

I used to be anti-gun until I understood this. I doubt that I would ever own a gun, but there you have it.

Microchips don't stop bullets. It is more of a "watch my right hand and don't see what my left hand is doing". Meaning, everyone is focused on gun laws right now. Meanwhile, parents are being traumatized and some of the parents at the Sandy Hook school want to know how this guy got in there with the security that they already have in place - he was not supposed to be in there.

When people are traumatized by one event, and distracted by another, it is easier to pull something over on them when they are looking for any help or relief that they can get. RFID chips won't stop a student from entering the school with a gun (unless there is a metal detector also and don't be surprised if U.S. schools become like airports in that regard) but - RFID chips will stop someone from entering the school who should not be there. Which is the case in this event.

So you get people debating guns who are already traumatized or know someone who is and then you have schools implementing stronger security which most won't mind because, hey, it is only like a credit card anyway, but please don't take away our right to bear arms. I believe that it would be harder to implement the microchip system during peaceful times and prosperity. But our government does want a microchipped population and so I believe they will take advantage of distractions, and fears to get them rolled out.

As an aside, Obamacare, or Health Care for America, has been written up and proposed. There are false rumours out there that Obamacare include mandatory chipping in order to receive health care. This rumour has been debunked.

HOWEVER, it is written up so if they want to include it as part of the requirement for health care, it will be legal to do so. They've got it covered.

**

Andy, I would like to know what is the difference between Switzerland and USA. I have heard about this before, and I believe it is the same way with Canada.... just as many guns but without the violence. So why do the people in the US behave differently?

dubmeup wrote:
Tell me this...

If people in the UK could have guns would they wan't them in you opinion?

Thanks nosey and RA.

In answer to your q RA, yes I think some would want them, I'm pretty sure most wouldn't. As you've been at pains to point out though Britain doesn't have quite the same level of violence nor the fear associated with it. That may or may not be influenced by the relative lack of small arms.

I'm not sure what good a pistol in yer handbag is against a tyrannical government to be honest nosey so my gut says those pistols are more there to deal with other citizens. That implies a very real issue with the society in my view. That in this day and age there is so much fear. I'm not really explaining myself very well though am I

diamondgeezer wrote:
So then we have to consider why some people want guns when most don't, identify the motivation for owning the means to kill somebody and remove the motivation. And I am talking in a general sense, I doubt anybody who wants to own a gun would cite "in case I get the urge to go on a rampage in a school" as their reason.

.......... wrote:
so the right to bear arms.................who exactly are you wanting to bear arms against?

.......... wrote:
If you really want one you can get one.

noseymutegirl wrote:
If getting rid of guns isn't an option (it is) then this is the crux of the matter. It's relatively easy to own a gun in Greece (particularly if you live in a rural area and everyone is related to someone in a rural area) even during the riots it's not even considered an option.

I hope you never buy a gun oioioi

dawnbreak wrote:
I never would.

I ain't a violent man, just have an aggressive tongue when I get passionate.

oioioi wrote:
How would you get the manpower to swoop over the U.S. and get all the guns? I don't see it as a realistic option here especially when you have people with the "you will pry them from my cold dead hands" motto. There is huge distrust of government and gun owners would never believe that they were being confiscated for good reasons.

Rural areas have a much nicer feel to them, don't they?

I think I've sussed what I'm getting at now.

When the right to bear arms was installed, the arms available were basic. If your local militia had a few rifles you stood a chance against a tyrannical government.
Today if you were to think your rifles could stop you being droned to fuck you'd be literally insane..

So, that justification is out of date. It's meaningless. There has to be a different reason why people cling to the right as they do by collecting pistols.

oioioi wrote:
you are in the wrong thread for that kind of talk

Well I suppose my point is it requires a mindshift. I don't want/need to own a gun. My understanding from anyone who wants to own one is usually fear based, removing the fear would be the obvious step. As someone already stated just physically removing all guns wouldn't stop people killing with vehicles etc. so it's stupid to focus on the means of execution and not the motivation.

noseymutegirl wrote:
Stop that! I wasn't even in that headspace, this thread kinda does that!

dubmeup wrote:
Let me put it this way. My friend's boyfriend was hired to help build a wall around an isolated property by some skinheads. After his crew did some work, guns were put to their heads, they were given their money and told to leave. He said he saw them bringing in loads of weapons. I do not think this is an isolated case. There are all kinds of groups bunkered down and ready to go. In the US the bulk of the population lives all along the coasts and a little above. Then you have huge expanses of land and I promise you they are festered with militia, or whatever your call them, groups.

I met a lot of aggressively anti government types in AZ. I was working next door to a crystal/rock shop and the day of the Oklahoma Bombing of the fed bldg the owner came over adrenelin pumping and whooping it up and he told me some things that I don't remember now but I remember it really blew my mind.

I know oi

Couldnt help but yank your chain.

ETA thats an American expression and it doesnt mean what is could sound like.

noseymutegirl wrote:
Woah, you can't do that to us! Remember this mind blowing info pronto!

noseymutegirl wrote:
Edited just before I could add "I said stop it".

Stars would be so proud of us.

batou wrote:
As far as I know it ended up not being anything, at least they've dropped that part of the story. I am sure someone can call the police station and ask specifically, claim to be media.
diamondgeezer wrote:
And no one called that in or anything else? That's a shame, might have been able to prevent it if the cops acted on a call about someone threatening to commit suicide.
diamondgeezer wrote:
Exactly... and you can still do a lot of damage without a gun... if someone really wants to kill people, children in this case, as well as themselves they will find a way to do it.

We have a right to bear arms here, for self defense...the FBI released a statement in June (I think) of this year stating that as gun ownership has gone up the rate of crime has gone down (break-ins, robberies, etc...)...this IS because the criminals know damn well they are going to be risking facing the barrel of a gun when they go in. No guns = more crime and being overrun by the POS government.



There was also a shooting in Vegas last night, murder suicide and another one somewhere else, I forget where they said it was, this morning that is not making the news (at least not up in your face news).