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

Exactly, the same as with health care, but will they admit it? Ohh no. I don't understand the problem just admit it WTF.

Shattering. remorse. That's how you differentiate the old world from the new... a sense of remorse, regret and rebuilding. (Looking back as well as forward.) ;)

If you always approach a problem the same way, you'll always get the same result.

(A famous Euro-American)

wroclaw boy wrote:


guns are theoretically used for these purposes in the USA, and look at how much gun violence exists.

you can buy a gun and tell the seller anything you want but how it gets used in the end, different story.

i would never support a law that prohibits a country's citizens from owning firearms, if the government can have them, so can the people, but guns are a problem where I'm from and something needs to be done for sure.

You can own a gun in virtually every country in the World, you need a license which requires stringent criteria, you need motive, you need a clean sheet in terms of criminal or mental health history. Just turning up in a shop and walking out with an AK47 as in the States is nuts.


See above


I'm glad we have an American on board.

wroclaw boy wrote:


Aaaahhhh.....yet another guy buying into yet another USA stereotype.

This is the current process to purchase firearms in New Jersey where I'm from. Some of this is copy and paste:

-see the local Police Department

-get full set of fingerprints sent to the FBI, file all necessary paperwork whereas the PD will then run a heavy background check on you. if you have ANY convictions or complaints after the age of 18 years old, you are immediately rejected.

-provide three references who will be contacted by the police and asked for character references

-agree to release your medical records for the police to access.

After waiting probably months you will be issued a firearms id card that must reflect your current address. Move and you are out of compliance unless you get a new updated card. Now you can purchase a BBgun, which is considered a firearm in NJ, a shotgun or rifle. If you transport your firearm to a range or to hunt you must have your firearm id on you.

Want a pistol? Start the process over again and the purchasing permit is good for 30 days. In other words you have 30 days to purchase a pistol after receiving the purchasing permit. You also need to have a valid permit to buy ammunition of any kind.

So if you've been convicted of a misdemeanor, you're actually an easy target?

I was exaggerating i know its not that easy.

What about black market? how easy and costly is it to buy an unregistered gun?

wroclaw boy wrote:


i've never done it but i'd assume it's just as easy as in any other country. i'm sure either of us could have a pistol in our hands by the end of today if we really wanted to.

Some more than others in terms of first world countries your assumption would be wrong IMO. Obtaining an illegal a gun in the UK is extremely difficult. I wouldnt know where to start.

It would seem that it was "more than an annoying side effect" for the British when America fought for and won its independence. If it was merely "annoying" then why do dictators take away guns from the populace as one of their first acts?


You are referring to people who have successfully defended themselves against violence and/or robbery. Since you agree that such "stories" abound then that is reason enough to own guns.


Typical selfish liberal point-of-view.


The obvious Big Picture that your liberalism prevents you from comprehending is this:
It's the right of a free people to possess a means of self defense not only against criminal assault but also against tyrannical government when necessary. Of course, being a BigGovernment advocate, you cannot comprehend that government should be subservient to individual rights.

Yes it is.. but not just anyone should be able to buy one.. there should be criteria. This is exactly why schools get shot up (Virginia Tech), so many drive bys happen in the US. Only a neocon gun nut argue as you do.. In Florida one can literally buy multiple guns all at once and them sell them on the street no problem at all.

But don't you worry about that, moron.. You're not a (hillbilly voice) li brall.. duhh. Keep lapping up the Rush Limbaugh, boss.. just like you he's purely entertainment. Where were your conservatives when all the money was being spent on these false wars? Essentially tanking this country. Oh I know, it was for our own good.. and the weapons lobby of course.

Thats a very true statement... How many US presidents have been shot? or attempted to be shot?

Come to the SW of USA and you will see that you need guns, especially with mexico right next door. Take mexico for example, their citizens are not allowed guns as far as I know and look at how horrible of shape mexico is in. Guess what? The only people who have guns there is the government and the criminals. The government in mexico doesn't give a rats behind about their citizens and the drug cartel don't either so you are left with a land full of citizens that are not able to protect themselves. They must rely on their government to protect them and well....their government isn't doing chit about protecting them. In fact, mexican nationals and immigrants who enter their country are being slaughtered on a daily basis by drug cartel. Don't take my word for it, search so you can see for yourself.

In America, The men who wrote the declaration of independence, the constitution and the bill of rights all had citizens best interests in mind when they allowed us to have fire arms as they knew that one day it would be neccessary for us to take up those arms against a tyrannical government. That time is quickly approaching again.

If you want to be a scared little lamb that thinks that law enforcement and government will protect you from all evil then you keep on living in your delusional fantasy land but do it somewhere on an island so that those of us who want to protect ourselves can do it without your screwed up liberal views getting in the way.

Indeed they did. In the late 1700's the average American needed a gun. I think the founding fathers may be turning in their graves at the outcome of that little number.


If that was aimed at me..... You'd have to have been reading my posts for a while to have an idea of my political views. I certainly do not think governments will protect us from all evils.


Now this will hopefully lead to a good discussion.

Perhaps you could explain to us how US citizens owning guns could take up those arms against a tyrannical government. In a typical scenario please outline how this would actually work at ground level.

In your own words that time is quickly approaching, you must have made some plans. Would it be everyman for himself or is their some kind of secret military underground organisation?

If you read any of the other works by Jefferson, Franklin, Henry, and indeed, just about any of the other wise old white guys with funny hair, they had one thing in mind when they thought about an armed citizenry, to keep the Government fearful of the people. If anything, they'd be turning in their graves at what has been given up. It's important to keep in mind that at the time, there were still things like state's rights, and the majority of governing that affected people's lives was done at a local level as opposed to the current central model. Relationships with the local government were much more personal.


An armed populace makes agents of the government think twice about what they are doing, even if the people giving the orders are completely disconnected. Ownership of firearms is just one check that the citizenry has on the Government, it's one of the more black and white ones, so it's harder to erode. The original model laid out a framework by which citizens were empowered with certain rights, now you can't even manufacture things at home for private use without federal regulations governing how, what, and when to do it.

Wroclaw Boy wrote:


I would.

It's also worth mentioning that criminals know other criminals. They already have networks of drug dealers, thieves and such. If I could get one in 24 hours, they could in 24 minutes.

Non-criminals such as us, if we needed a gun, we'd do it the legal way. Guns cost more on the black market anyway.

I'm not surprised during that time, if the government was over thrown they would need them. America hadnt even 100% gained independence by then (im not an expert) had they?


Deterrent thats fine, i still want to hear examples of taking up arms against the government which two posters have mentioned.

wroclaw boy wrote:


i think this is overthinking it though.

as I see it, if the feds have the right to own something, so should the citizens of that country. if you start with taking their guns, it only progresses to other things.

also, if America was ever invaded, an army of 100,000,000 armed Americans with guns is better than a bunch of scared citizens hiding in their homes hoping the military and police force will take care of it.

of course there are consequences to this, that being there are a lot of crazy people that use guns for violence. hard to find a solution.

Would definitely make occupation interesting.

.. or downright impossible. I not a big gun nutter but something like the Holocaust would never have gotten off the ground in the US. There are complete excesses to gun ownership though. Just recently last 10 years or so , ATF finally banned buying 50 cal kits that were being sold via mail order and were easily constructed.

Yes.. a .50 cal machine gun or this:
youtube.com/watch?v=Qtzk8HNPzHY

There's still plenty around in private hands around the US.

polish construction

Surely it's not as bad as health care in Poland. My grandpa lives there and it took months for him to finally be able to take some important tests for whether he had cancer or not.

I had a harmless cyst not too long ago and I received treatment EXACTLY when I wanted to. There is nothing wrong with US health care in my perspective. There surely is in Poland though...


It's very easy to acquire guns illegally in the USA which is why banning guns would accomplish nothing. It would only hurt rightful citizens who are trying to protect themselves.


The American Revolution...

I'm English. Poland has a poor system in many respects, he didnt bribe the Doctors by the sounds of it, he could have gone private. There seems to be an epidemic of cancer in Poland lately, its friggen everywhere the hospitals cant cope.


As you have a decent insurance policy yes. Look this isnt a p1ssing contest some US companies have a turn over higher than Polands national GDP, you gettiung the picture. Compare the US to UK or Sweden still not a fair fight but a better comparison.


I'm not calling for a ban never have, its gone way to far for that.


OK, but how would this work? big words, im sure it sounds great down the Pub or sitting around with your mates "how we'll kick ass" and all that crap. But how will this people vs the government be implemented?

Whoa.....

He assumed i was Polish and tried to drag me into a p1ssing contest between Poland and Americas health care institutions, theres no "big me because im English" in that statement as youre trying to portray.

Come on turn your intelligence level up a bit (if possible) and the sarcasm down.

to at the very least decrease the level of gun violence in the USA, education needs to be improved.

young kids growing up in crap neighborhoods with no futures turn to crime to make ends meet at a very young age. poverty needs to be decreased and education needs to be better. that breeds less criminals, less gun violence.

if it were just those who are unbalanced that would get hurt after letting people at large own guns it would be not much harm in my eyes - still it is plain to see that many different people would get hurt shot and dead just because in a wrong time in a wrong place meeting a drunken rage of a gun holding bastard or having an alcohol driven crazy guy in their family

Lets ban automobiles! Too many drunks drive them.

Better an inebriated citizen with a gun than a government drunk with power.

Exactly. It's a bit disingenuous to simply lump all of the US (and gun owners) together. The areas with the highest levels of gun ownership, also happen to have the least gun violence (metro vs non metro areas). It would be idiotic to claim that more guns equals less gun violence, but, that could be taken away from reading those stats. When you delve deeper into the issues, it becomes uncomfortable for most people to continue discussing root causes. Much easier to play on simple arguements.

Robber: " Gimme your money or I'll shoot you. I'm only doing this because I was culturally and economically disadvantaged."
Victim : "But I didn't do it"

Robber: "My liberal professor told me it's all societies fault, now, gimme da money."
Victim: "I've always supported the poor."

Robber: " I came from a single parent household so I'm not responsible, now gimme da money"
Victim: " Let me help you, I'm a liberal and I feel your pain....."

Robber: "Bang" Pain this!

youtube.com/watch?v=L8oEO_MV57I