If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NewsMax)   U.N. trying to ban guns again   (newsmax.com) divider line 53
    More: Asinine  
•       •       •

1170 clicks; posted to Main » on 03 Aug 2001 at 2:06 PM (13 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



53 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2001-08-03 02:17:51 PM  
Trying to ban the illicit trade in guns does not seem all that evil to me. What is it with the US and guns anyway?
 
2001-08-03 02:18:47 PM  
When we outlaw guns, only the outlaws will have guns. Isn't that nice?
 
2001-08-03 02:22:12 PM  
Ermm...In this case, the guns already belong to outlaws...Typical of NewsMax, they fail to emphasize that the proposed resolution is aimed at stopping illegal weapons trafficking, not legal sales.

In other words, yes you can go to your favorite gun shop or gun show and buy something. No, you cannot buy a few hundred AKs and Dragunov sniper rifles to help your small revolutionary army

3Horn
 
2001-08-03 02:29:14 PM  
Yeah man, always keeping down the revolution!
 
2001-08-03 02:31:23 PM  
hell yeah, they have those in stock? I need some AK's to arm my stoner army, we are takeing over the gov. and makeing smoking legal!

Hehehe

She Who Tokes
 
2001-08-03 02:32:04 PM  
That's another international conference/treaty the U.S. has withdrawn from. Hell, they refused to participate in the conference on racisim in Durban just to appease the Jew Lobby.
 
2001-08-03 02:34:43 PM  
People actually being dumb enough to register their guns is just wishful thinking on behalf of the UN.
Slesfo is right, When we outlaw guns, only the outlaws will have guns.
Sure, people can choose other methods of "protection", but I have doubts that a Louisville Slugger is any match for a half-pound of buckshot.
P.S: Hitler's Nazi Party used gun control.
 
2001-08-03 02:36:18 PM  
Kilgore:

any more views you have on Jewish people?
 
2001-08-03 02:38:58 PM  
Look at what's happened in England - Tony and his cronies pretty much banned the private ownership of firearms, and gun-related crimes are at an all-time high.
 
2001-08-03 02:42:45 PM  
So? If we could get into an ideal world without guns. Religions aren't helping any liberal cause. About every religion is corrupt and believing fables. With Religions still around, people will still own firearms. Probably to word off JWs.
 
2001-08-03 02:42:57 PM  
take guns away from cops and you will immediately decrease the number of armed morons by 90%...
DARE TO KEEP COPS OFF DONUTS
 
2001-08-03 02:42:58 PM  
Ermmm....England has long had very strong laws against the personal ownership of firearms, and I believe handguns have been outlawed for a long time.

But then you hear more about paramilitaries in N. Ireland using long rifles and bombs more than pistols...

3Horn
 
2001-08-03 02:50:18 PM  
The belief that outlawing private ownership of guns will drastically reduce crime is one of civilization's all-time dumbest ones. Drunken driving deaths run into the tens of thousands worldwide, per year, but do you hear anyone advocating banning cars and booze? Guns have been used lawfully and responsibly for centuries (bringing them to school was routine in much of America...why no mass shootings then?), and if some baboon choose to use one unlawfully or irresponsibly, go after them, not me. I own a gun for one reason alone: If some prick breaks into my home and threatens my family, no cop will be there to protect them and no stupid law is going to save them...just me. Bang, crook dead, end of problem.
 
2001-08-03 02:53:27 PM  
And then they outlawed weapons in Japan and they turned to sarin gas.
 
2001-08-03 02:54:32 PM  
The U.S. is threatening to boycott the U.N. conference on racism because of efforts by some participants to equate Zionism with racism. We also have problems with proposals for reparations for slavery.

Story here

As far as U.N. gun control proposals, the U.S. has legitimate concerns about bannning the shipment of arms to insurrectionists battling totalitarian regimes. Plus the U.N. proposes to supercede U.S. law regarding reistration and transfer of lawfully-possessed firearms within the U.S. itself. There's little enthusiasm in the U.S. for letting outside entities establish internal policy.
 
2001-08-03 03:01:02 PM  
Slesfo & Primus

Here's quote from family guy (just from memory so it'll be slightly wrong)

[Peter is mayor of a post apocolictic town & tries to introduce guns]

Man: Guns, we don't need guns, we need food and water!
Cleavland: He's right, guns only cause trouble.
Peter: Yeah, and when that trouble comes we'll be able to blow its freakin head off.

I suppose the moral is - Two wrongs don't make a right.
 
2001-08-03 03:03:03 PM  
Jjorsett, where did you read that the UN would have ANY power to supersede US law, let alone gun laws? Or was this another NewsMax article?

3Horn
 
2001-08-03 03:08:18 PM  
Umm... what's with all these flipp'n NewsMax Stories??
It seems like there are more and more of these mindless reationary stories on here, AND I CAN'T EVEN GET ONE MOTHER FARKING ACTUALLY AMUSING AND INTERESTING STORY POSTED , BUT THESE PIECES OF SHIZNIT MAKE IT??!!

I seem to have forgotten something.
Where's my medication??
*gulp*
Ahhh, that's better....ooohhhh....pretty colors....*drool*
 
2001-08-03 03:11:22 PM  
3horn:
Handgun ban was passed in England in 97.
Confiscation was in March 98. . . .
I think. . . .
 
2001-08-03 03:11:29 PM  
I feel your pain, Kimyo. Just put the word "ass" in your description of the article line, and Drew will post it (says in his bio that he likes posting things with the word ass in it)
 
2001-08-03 03:12:38 PM  
whoops
reationary----->reactionary
 
2001-08-03 03:13:41 PM  
reactionary - (adj)- opposing progress or favoring a return to earlier conditions....Yeah, the streets of Seattle were chock full of reactionaries during WTO, weren't they? Banning guns because some are used by immoral people ain't progress, any more than banning cars because of all the farkin' idiots who down a few pints and climb into them.
 
2001-08-03 03:18:50 PM  
Freddy - I'm not sure what you're trying to say there.
 
2001-08-03 03:25:40 PM  
On the same token I had NO IDEA what that Newsmax farker was trying to say. That article was bad journalism at best.
 
2001-08-03 03:30:45 PM  
I'm not being anti-semetic, I just don't like the jewish lobbys constant spin doctering and ridicualous claims that the media is pro-palestininan (which is completly false). And yes, Zionism is racism.
 
2001-08-03 03:33:17 PM  
How can anyone read this rubbish? I become more convinced with each passing day that conservatism is fueled entirely by hatred of that which is not conservative. If you don't believe that, just scroll through some of the articles.
 
2001-08-03 03:50:27 PM  
3horn: Once agreement is reached, the U.N. seeks to put these proposals into treaty form, which would bind the signatories, including the U.S. if it signed. Of course, the U.S. could simply not ratify, but then we'd have to endure the endless whining by the other countries for all time, like we're getting with Kyoto. That and the chance that some bunch of nutlogs in our government might actually ratify this nonsense at some point. Being bad law, we'd rather head it off in the first place.
 
2001-08-03 03:52:15 PM  
Kimyo, what I'm trying to say is that appplying a word like "reactionary" to the right only is silly. There are such people on both ends of the spectrum. The ones I just mentioned were obstructing people's fundamental rights in Seattle (I live nearby.) for their own selfish reasons...and they were leftists. As far as NewsMax is concerned, their personal attitudes alter the slant of the what they report somewhat, but hell, the same can easily be said about the New York Times, which puts stories with a lefty bent on page A-1 and either doesn't run righty stories at all or buries them on page C-12.
 
2001-08-03 03:57:34 PM  
God, Primus pulled Godwin's only seven posts in, that's got to be some kind of record.

"If we don't have guns the Nazi's would run the world and every female would be raped and I couldn't go hunting and we couldn't protect ourselves and all the criminals will just shoot us anyway and guns don't kill people, people do and then civilization as we know it will end."

All your freedoms are slowly being chipped away, but this is the one people choose to focus on? Has owning a gun stopped your elected government from stripping your constitutional rights? How much use is a handgun in a revolutionary situation anyway?
 
2001-08-03 03:58:14 PM  
Aw, crap...I'm not gonna get sucked into this debate again...
 
2001-08-03 04:00:41 PM  
...but thanks to Freddy (so far).
 
2001-08-03 04:03:41 PM  
x0dicx

"Now Remember kids, guns don't kill people, religion does."
 
JW
2001-08-03 04:06:06 PM  
Wow, Goodwin's Law was invoked only 7 posts in. That must be a record.

What to go, Primus, you have lost the discussion!
 
JW
2001-08-03 04:06:41 PM  
Damn, DaveX beat me to it. Serves me right from not submitting right away! ;)
 
2001-08-03 04:07:06 PM  
Does anyone actually read the articles posted, or do most of you comment on the headline? It looks like no one reads to me.
 
2001-08-03 04:14:38 PM  
I become more convinced with each passing day that conservatism is fueled entirely by hatred of that which is not conservative.

Donna Brazile, Al Gore campaign manager, vows to :"Not let the white boys win."
ABA President George Bushnell calls Republicans "Reptilian bastards"
Bill Clinton says of Republicans, "What they want to do is make war on our children."
Dick Gephardt, house minority leader, says conservative talk show hosts, "...are the equivalent of genocidal right wing militia men in Rwanda."
Democrat Rep. Bill Clay, on the GOP welfare reform proposal: "Hitler had a minister of propaganda that said tell a lie, tell a big lie...Republicans are telling the biggest lie in the world...What's next, castration?"
Craig Kilborn, host of CBS's "Late Late Show" superimposes "Snipers Wanted" over a video of George W. Bush at the GOP convention
Spike Lee expresses his feelings regarding NRA president Charleton Heston, saying he'd like to "shoot him with a .44-caliber Bulldog" revolver
 
2001-08-03 04:28:26 PM  
QWERTY,
Some of us read the articles... thus the "farkers have clicked on the above link xxx times" under the tag.
 
2001-08-03 05:11:10 PM  
Jjorsett, did you actually understand what the article was concerning? It wasn't firearms in general, it is illicit arms. See my first explanation, and maybe you might have some comprehension.

3Horn
 
2001-08-03 05:23:29 PM  
Good post, Jjorsett. No one can hate the way the left, the heirs to those fraudulent swine, the Love Generation, can.
 
2001-08-03 05:35:04 PM  
Treaty, ban, blah, blah, blah. No one is taking my gun from me.
 
2001-08-03 05:38:17 PM  
3horn: Sure I read it. And others besides, which clearly gives me a better understanding of the issue than you. Your 'explanation' is a regurgitation of the U.N. line that they're simply trying to ban 'illicit' sales. What this particular article doesn't tell you is how they're going to define illicit, and the details of the steps they plan to take to achieve this goal. You'll note from the article that the steps are broadly defined as "strict export and import controls, strong brokering laws, and insuring the security of small arms and light weapons stockpiles." These are all feel-good terms to describe the proposals that the U.S. objects to having imposed from the outside such as registration, banning of certain now-legal weapons, extensive record-keeping on all parts and ammo manufactured in the country, etc. The U.N. also seeks to ban private ownership of 'military' weapons, which in their view is any weapon ever used by a military force or based on a military design. Few firearms would fail to be classed as military in nature under that definition.
 
2001-08-03 05:49:35 PM  
Ha! NOW who "has some comprehension" (I'm looking in your direction 3horn).
Quite right Jjorsett, quite right.
 
2001-08-03 06:25:23 PM  
All Hail the One-World Government



Fark all those UN biatches
 
2001-08-03 06:37:42 PM  
I say it's time we kicked the farking UN out this country. I tired of all of these second rate wanna-be's looking for their 15 minutes of fame. Most can't even mind their own countries, let alone the World. Why doesn't someone tell the honorable yahoo from Columbia to eradicate the heroin exports from his country. That shiat is more damaging to society and families than any illegal firearm trade could ever be.
 
2001-08-03 06:41:31 PM  
And who is supposed to enforce these 'laws'?

Oh yeah, the US.

International law is a farce...
 
2001-08-03 07:21:07 PM  
Ban THIS *makes a not-safe-for-work gesture*
 
2001-08-03 08:27:04 PM  
americans are stupid.

guns are bad, mmmkay.
 
2001-08-03 10:12:32 PM  
Okay all you people that support the U.N. are either doing it because they are like Al Gors wife, or they are flamboiant homo's. If this every happend (which i doubt it will), there WILL be riots.

Oh yeah, the U.N. SUCKS HAIRY SHE-MALE COCKS!
 
2001-08-03 10:51:49 PM  
I think this pretty much says it all:

"US delegates said they would brook no impediment to Washington's right to supply arms as it saw necessary".
 
2001-08-03 11:19:20 PM  
Shoot em all and let God sort them out. Not literally. Or maybe literally. The only opinion I have about guns is that I don't want anybody pointing one at me. Thank you, come again.
 
Displayed 50 of 53 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report