The BEST Guide to POLAND
Unanswered  |  Archives 
 
 
User: Guest

Home / Law  % width posts: 1,615

The right to own guns: would you support such legislation in Poland?


Harry
27 Mar 2013 #751
drink some wine, smoke good premium cigars and teach my tall Serbian girlfriend how to properly shoot a variety of guns.

Alcohol and firearms: what a superb combination.
jasondmzk
27 Mar 2013 #752
"Chicago" is the new code for paranoid white gun-fanatics meaning: "black people".
Ironside 50 | 10,934
27 Mar 2013 #753
Here is an example of how liberals like Piers Morgan use emotion

What a arrogant prick. Calling people name from behind his armed guards. That what is wrong with those liberal tootsies with no morals and double standards. They think they are better than everybody else.

Because I don't have any reason to trust what you'll do with it.

You jason seems be one of those people who think they can control their surroundings and other people. I hate to be the one who is gonna burst your bubble - but the world ain't working that way. No gun is needed for something that could happen to people including you or anybody. Car, tram sicken, crossbow - As much as I do not wish you ill - I'm telling you that your safety is not quarantined and you can do only so much to ensure your own safety. I must stress that your fear of fellow men and guns is simply irrational.

Depends on what requirements there would be to legally own a gun.

contrary what you may believe i do not postulate for Poland to introduce American system regarding a gun ownership. They had centuries of tradition and practice behind them and they can do well with what they have.

For Poland I want to see recognition on the legal level that any citizen under certain condition can legally buy and carry gun. So far guns are for chosen few and rules are murky and discretionary.
jasondmzk
27 Mar 2013 #754
Car, tram sicken, crossbow

Tell me the last time any one of those things way used purposefully to kill more than 10 people.
Polson 5 | 1,771
27 Mar 2013 #755
Well Poison

PoLson.

those who object to Mr. Lott's facts come from the left.

Really? Prove it. The other researchers and scientists who discredited his work are all leftists?
And left means wrong, while right means truth, that is obvious.

Your sources, "Salon" and "Media Matters" can be counted on to be counter factual. as their 'progressive' agenda trumps truth. You believe them, I don't.

Of course, as they question your conservative views, they can't be good. They seem to be pretty good, reliable sources to me, shame you don't like them.

while the calm, cool researchers stick to facts.

Probably as calm and cool as the researchers who discredited Lott's work.

You should not make judgments based on emotion. Frequently, that may be difficult to do but as evolving humans we should try to make decisions based on reason and logic.
For example, anger is an emotion. Don't make a decision when you are angry, wait until your head clears. Too many people, like the gun grabbers default to emotion to make their narrow minded points. Humans have a higher calling than that.

Having in your hand the power to take anyone else's life can't leave you emotionless, or you're not human, as evolved as you pretend you are.

The fact that you want to own a gun, wherever you go, shows another emotion. It's commonly called fear. But it may also be called fright, terror, panic, anxiety, etc.

Based on what you said, you're trying to think through the prism of your emotions. Just as 'gun grabbers'.

Btw, I tried to talk about alternative solutions (like tasers), twice, but no-one dared answering. Missed it, or guns are just cooler?
Ironside 50 | 10,934
27 Mar 2013 #756
Ironside:
Car, tram sickness, crossbow

Tell me the last time any one of those things way used purposefully to kill more than 10 people.

I don't know about tram or cross bow but car few years back some maniac killed seven people and injured few more. There was poison in Japan that killed more then ten people, and can we count bombs or home made bombs - you don't need gun to make them.

Sickness few years back killed hundreds - like swine flue.
You are sidetracking,as tragic as it may be ban on guns would not made the world into a safe place for everyone.
jasondmzk
27 Mar 2013 #757
I'm single-tracking, you're the one that brought up all those other forms of potential calamity. If I was side-tracking, I'd ask you for the fourth time, DO YOU think you should be allowed your own Apache Helicopter? Polson has asked about tasers and been ignored, the same way I'm asking about Apaches. Can you just tell me?
Barney 15 | 1,477
27 Mar 2013 #758
Evidently you didn't bother to watch the video above which rationally explains that to you.

Zim a youtube video?

Youtube, Ads for books and some slave owner quotes (hypocritically) about freedom.

Please tell me that your standard of debate is higher than that.
Ironside 50 | 10,934
27 Mar 2013 #759
, DO YOU think you should be allowed your own Apache Helicopter?

It is sidetracking because I never said that I want or need one.
As the means of defense for a civilian such copter is useless.
As a matter of curiosity are you anti-military as well jason?
jasondmzk
27 Mar 2013 #760
Nope. I'm not sure what someone that's anti-military would be opposed to, but the only thing I'm against regarding the military are evil wars and wanton violence; and I'm not saying that all wars are evil nor all violence wanton. The military and the police should be the only institutions allowed the right to deadly weaponry, in my view.
Ironside 50 | 10,934
27 Mar 2013 #761
The military and the police should be the only institutions allowed the right to deadly weaponry, in my view.

soldier or policeman is no better than an average Joe. Sometimes even worse when it comes to so called professional soldiers.
newpip - | 140
27 Mar 2013 #762
The military and the police should be the only institutions allowed the right to deadly weaponry, in my view.

you are spot on. But then again, most gun owners don't trust the gov't to do their jobs so they think they have the right to take the law into their own hands. The states is too far gone with regards to gun laws or gun control. It is literally going to implode unless there is a new war to side track the issues. Maybe a war on Canada is needed. I am sure Canada has done something to **** off the Americans. Maybe the pipeline is an issue that needs a war.
Rysavy 10 | 308
27 Mar 2013 #763
quote=Barney]The slave owners revolt? [/quote]

quotes from a bunch of morally dubious slave owners

a few pointless quotes by some slave owners

Posting a bunch of quotes from the slave owners about tyranny

to quote slave owning government apparatchiks

WTF? are the mods asleep? This should get mod attention.
It is NOT FACTUAL and blanket statements. It is inflammatory and meant to derail thread.
It is over borderline insulting to any patriotic US citizen regardless of leaning to be repeated so many time WITH NO REFERENCE DATA.

Otherwise I get to say that Poland is nothing but white liberal commies that hate Jews and wish they could kill some more 5x per thread as counterbalance?<- this is sarcastic rhetoric by the way

If was mod I'd move this and remove EVERY post he made talking about slavery which is NOTHING to do with GUNS as well as all that had to respnd to it (so the quotes are gone too). But while it is here-then here is THIS.

I mean Kudos to Poland... while sovereign they were an early signer on abolition (being good catholics how could they not?) 1588: The Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth abolished slavery. Should they be held accountable for anything that happended while partitioned? Hmmm

EU was still a bigger in the slave trade... who do you think sold them all to us after they purchased them from rivals or kidnapped them? Who built their own countries on backs of slaves with PLENTY of time to reap all the benfits before "freeing them"

Way earlier was this (and a few other edicts from various regimes)........
1435: Papal Encyclical - Sicut Dudum - of Pope Eugene IV banning enslavement on pain of excommunication.
1537: Pope Paul III forbids slavery of the indigenous peoples of the Americas as well as of any other new population that would be discovered, indicating their right to freedom and property. However, only Catholic countries apply it, and state that they cannot possibly enforce what happens in the distant colonies (Sublimus Dei).

Yet it persisted. and serfdom was also considered slavery to abolishionists.Many countires had practice that is hard to pinpoint until laws for and against were enacted.

Spain tried in 1542 but had to avoid enforcing it or suffered economic disaster. Slavery was not using Africans so much at that time BTW. Many anti slave laws were made and later reversed with new regimes or needs of the nation.

1799: The 'Colliers (Scotland) Act 1799' ends the legal slavery of Scottish coal miners that had been established in 1606

And looookee here -after the US civil war... EU hypocrites (I wont include all UN superpowers-only the EU ones who are active with US bashers here on PF.

So SHUT UP about the slavery already your hands are not clean!

At least when US had it's collective "no" it applied to ALL of US and her territories..no cheating!:
1869 (February, 27th) - Portugal: King Louis signs a decree of the government, chaired by the Marquis Sá da Bandeira, abolishing slavery in all Portuguese territories.

1869: Portugal abolishes slavery in the African colonies
1874: Britain abolishes slavery in the Gold Coast (Ghana)
1896: France abolishes slavery in Madagascar
1899: France abolishes slavery in Ndzuwani

General source: Abolition_of_slavery_timeline wiki

Note that held territories were MUUUCH later than offcial country responses.And many countries freed slaves in same century as US. No bragging rights for being first to stop if you had it going on TWICE as long! most EU countries had slavery longer than US was a country! They just were not black all that time.
rozumiemnic 8 | 3,940
27 Mar 2013 #764
So SHUT UP about the slavery already your hands are not clean!

I don't think the Irish played any part in the slave trade, far from it.
Rysavy 10 | 308
27 Mar 2013 #765
I am sure Canada has done something to **** off the Americans.

<_<
That was a plain..can't think of another word.. stupid .thing to say.

The day the US attacks Canada is the day we have a presidente' por vida and are on our war to becoming Imperialist tyranny.

The average Citizen and even our government rarely thinks of Canada in any way at all. Other than knowing it is there, it is cold and has some french people. First thought is trappers, beavers, maple syrup and hockey.

The Myths of lumberjacks, potsmoking layabouts, people who say "eh" every sentence and unber free4all healthcare.

Even the rare ***** Canadian normally brings no hostility towards Canada but some derogatory comments about French

Really how much more off topic can this get? I am not going to respond after today since it also is derailing the OP question. : ( I see a future close for this thread anyway. OP? I'll make a poll..at poll monkey for you

This Thread should have title changed-I think I will even PM the mods for that.
It should be "Non-native & EXpats who think America shouldn't have gun ownership for every reason under the sun please make blanket statements here___ "
poziomka2 - | 29
27 Mar 2013 #766
poziomka2: So don't play with guns Zimny!I don't want to be cruel but your sophomoric comments suggest that you really have no idea about this subject. I enjoy target shooting , I enjoy hunting and in one instance I've even protected myself.

Wow Zimny you even protected yourself, that's fantastic, I protected myself too, didn't need a gun for it though. You hunt? Hmm, do you need to hunt, because the animals you hunt want to live too and don't want to be prey just because you want to have fun, if you want to live let others live too, you wouldn't want to become the hunted would you? How would that feel if some animal outsmarted you and knocked your little gun out of your hand? You would regret ever getting a hold of that gun, you gun at talking here but you wouldn't be smart if you faced the animal who you decided to hunt without your little weapon of death, not much of hero then huh?
newpip - | 140
27 Mar 2013 #767
That was a plain..can't think of another word.. stupid .thing to say.

The day the US attacks Canada is the day we have a presidente' por vida and are on our war to becoming Imperialist tyranny.

it was said "tongue in cheek", don't have a stroke.
Ironside 50 | 10,934
27 Mar 2013 #768
Otherwise I get to say that Poland

Barney is Irish.

It should be "Non-native & EXpats who think America shouldn't have gun ownership for every reason under the sun please make blanket statements here___ "

As a matter of fact that thread is about - The right to own guns: would you support such legislation inPoland?
Have a good day nevertheless!
By the way there is the thread about guns in the USA.

Wow Zimny you

police do not pollute this thread with off-topic rubbish.
It is not about hunting.
Barney 15 | 1,477
27 Mar 2013 #769
It is NOT FACTUAL and blanket statements. It is inflammatory and meant to derail thread.
It is over borderline insulting to any patriotic US citizen regardless of leaning to be repeated so many time WITH NO REFERENCE DATA.

They are responses to Zimmy quoting three people. Each was a slave owner, they rebelled and were employed by governments. Everything I said is factual and common knowledge for the average person. I can provide fully referenced articles for each fact you disagree with.

There in nothing inflammatory in anything I said. Do you not see the hypocrisy? When talking about personal freedom, the right to self defence and human rights in general that the last people you should be quoting are slave owners. Remember it wasn't me who introduced them into the debate.

Yet again your reading comprehension has failed you, I have not made a blanket statement about the US just 3 individuals one of whom (Paine) supported the French terror. You may describe Poland anyway you like so long as its factual, are you sure you would like to make a sweeping statement about Polish people?
poziomka2 - | 29
27 Mar 2013 #770
poziomka2: Wow Zimny youpolice do not pollute this thread with off-topic rubbish. It is not about hunting.

Please do not write rubbish, there is too much pollution as it is. It is not about hunting but Zimny made it is so, so mind your own business. Now, you want to introduce guns to Poland do so but take a hike somewhere else. We do not need more chaos in our country, it was very peaceful during communist era, now it is less so and you wan to make it even more chaotic and dangerous? Go, make a fake plastic gun and play with it, not enough for you?
jasondmzk
27 Mar 2013 #771
it was very peaceful during communist era, now it is less so and you wan to make it even more chaotic and dangerous?

Are you honestly trying to tell us you were alive during that era? If you're a day over 22, I'll eat my hat. Guns are horrendous, but if they haven't figured it out by this point, I don't think your antagonistic caterwauling is going to drive the point home any clearer.
Rysavy 10 | 308
27 Mar 2013 #772
Merged: POLL: Would you support legislature in Poland regarding less restrictive ownership?

Many questions asked here would be better served in a poll... and less room for flame wars to kindle. So I shall be the first to attempt ^_^

I had a little trouble at first getting enough questions for fair data...but I think I covered it all.
And anyone can see the percentages as they adjust each new person. And being anonymous it will eventually have more answers.
I think I might post it on the polish website too..when I am motivated enough to get it worded it in Polish.
Ironside 50 | 10,934
27 Mar 2013 #773
Please do not write rubbish, there is too much pollution as it is.

Are you for real? lol
I going to eat my hat if you can speak Polish properly.
Syzygy - | 2
28 Mar 2013 #774
Hi, this is my first post here and probably last, i don't speak English that well but i need to say something. Getting a gun in Poland is not impossible for average Joe. You can get it for various purposes, not only hunting or self defense (that one is hardest) but also for collection, sport, or recreational reasons (this is open list) There is a list of requirements you need to fulfill, and if you do you get your license. Its not easiest thing to do and it takes some time, but if you want you can.
newpip - | 140
28 Mar 2013 #775
yes, but people, the average citizens don't feel the need to own a gun. It is a different mentality. Perhaps having their country destroyed by war a few times will do that. And not everybody wants to be American- even though Americans (not all) truly believe this.
Ironside 50 | 10,934
28 Mar 2013 #776
Getting a gun in Poland is not impossible for average Joe.

it is next to impossible and then you must to keep your gun locked at home - most of the time. What good it is for anyone? Also it is not only about requirements but about discretionary powers of policy.

Let me ask you that - do you have a gun?

yes, but people, the average citizens don't feel the need to own a gun. It is a different mentality.

They have no time and money for what it takes to get a gun. It is not different mentality but different circumstances.

And not everybody wants to be American-

What are you talking about?
sledz 23 | 2,250
28 Mar 2013 #777
A person that wants guns banned calls for a war??

The states is too far gone with regards to gun laws or gun control.

If you are from Poland, why do you care about American gun laws or how we choose to live?
I dont see how its any of your business!
Carlson - | 5
28 Mar 2013 #778
The topic is supposed to be gun laws in Poland, but I can't resist. Sic simper tyrannis and romanticizing cowboys aside, I just want the means to defend myself from criminals. There are cases of legal gun-owners saving their lives and others (Charlie Blackmore, Samuel Williams, Donna Jackson, and Sarah McKinley) but U.S. media doesn't report these for days on end like it does the actions of sick people. If it could be guaranteed that firearms would not end up in the wrong hands, then I would not own one. I must be responsible for my own defense because no one else can guarantee it. I'm curious to know what guarantee the pro gun ban people have that our thriving black market, which thrives despite the fact that guns are not even banned, would not be absolutely booming after their proposed ban. How would you keep guns from criminals after they're taken from law-abiding citizens?

Jasondmzk, I think there are other factors that are missing from this debate. Since this thread has compared the homicide rates of the US and UK, I'm curious what did the UK have or not have to yield the results they have? What is the correlation between a ban on guns and the gun-related violent crime/homicide rate in the UK? I've looked and can't find anything. Is it as simple as geography? Was it relatively easy to keep guns out of the UK because it's surrounded by water? Would it be harder to keep guns out of the US because we share borders (most notably with Mexico and its drug lords with unlimited access to weapons)? Was it sociocultural? There's something beneath the numbers that I'm missing. As long we cannot keep guns out of our country, gun-related violence will be a multifaceted problem that can't be solved with one simple solution (i.e., a ban). In the places we've banned guns in this nation mass murderers have made the news or gun-related homicides have increased. Your conviction that a ban will end these tragedies scares me. Where is the proof that this will happen? I can't support a ban unless I can guarantee that it won't result in a black market explosion, criminals and sickos acting with no fear of resistance, and even more deaths.

I understand you don't trust gun owners on their words. I agree you can't do that. Likewise, I don't trust a society that has failed miserably at enforcing current gun laws which prohibit criminals from purchasing guns. I arm myself because my society has armed criminals and sick people. I have to be responsible for my own defense. Proper training keeps people from pulling guns when the situation doesn't warrant it. I had a psychological test, training on the range with an instructor and sheriff's deputy, and classroom instruction before even purchasing a gun. I think ALL gun owners should have this level of training. Also, where I live, if someone uses your gun, even if to kill him/herself, you are held responsible for their access to it (in some cases even the crime itself). I have no problem with this. More rigorous instruction would decrease accidents, theft, and instill a healthier respect so people will be less likely to act like they're in a cowboy movie. Things can be better than they are now, but while criminals and sickies easily acquire weapons, I won't be convinced the answer is to hand over my best means of defense.

Polson, my only concerns would be: A taser requires me to get closer to an armed assailant or other threat than I'd like to be and tasers are not legal in all states. If you mean to combine tasers with a ban on all guns, then I'm back to my question: How would we guarantee that criminals would not still get guns off a black market?

Rysavy, thank you for making the poll.
Syzygy - | 2
28 Mar 2013 #779
it is next to impossible and then you must to keep your gun locked at home - most of the time.

As i said it's not easiest thing in the world to do, as for keeping it locked at home, what's so wrong about that ? It's potentially deadly weapon. Discretionary powers ? i don't understand. you mean that you need to have permission from local police commandant ? That's only true for self defense license, from what i know at least.

And no i don't own a gun as i don't feel any need to own one, nor any of of my friends do for that matter. Except for one, but he's a book example of someone who never should have access to any kind of weapons ;)

@Carlson
Sure nothing is preventing anyone from buying guns form black market, and yet gun related crime is not that high in Poland.
ZIMMY 6 | 1,601
28 Mar 2013 #780
"Chicago" is the new code for paranoid white gun-fanatics meaning: "black people".

You are probably unaware that the first gun control laws were enacted in the ante-bellum south in the U.S. in order to keep Blacks in their servile status. As to those who charge "racism" at every turn, I've previously given you the facts about minority-on-minority gun murders in Chicago. It didn't seem to register.

The military and the police should be the only institutions allowed the right to deadly weaponry, in my view.

Your and Adolph Hitler agree on that one. Oh, and Joseph Stalin, Fidel Castro, Pol Pot, Mao, etc also agree with you.

most gun owners don't trust the gov't to do their jobs so they think they have the right to take the law into their own hands.

Once again, legal gun owners have the lowest crime rate. You and other liberals continue to be immune to facts It is a curious phenomena.

I'll eat my hat.....

I going to eat my hat....

Okay, I'll join in. I'll eat my top hat.......lol

How would we guarantee that criminals would not still get guns off a black market?

Oh, the anti gun people will guarantee it, otherwise what is the point of gun bans?........right? (liberals rarely take their solutions to logical conclusions)

ZIMMY: drink some wine, smoke good premium cigars and teach my tall Serbian girlfriend how to properly shoot a variety of guns.
Alcohol and firearms: what a superb combination.

Unlike you, the sane individual does that separately. Glad I can explain it to you.


Home / Law / The right to own guns: would you support such legislation in Poland?
BoldItalic [quote]
 
To post as Guest, enter a temporary username or login and post as a member.