Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4
Still Waters

US guns sales soar after Obama's re-election

109 posts in this topic

Mostly large men. I'm working on getting my concealed carry so I can carry a wee little pistol in my purse.

And that gives you what? A peace of mind and added sense of security?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And that gives you what? A peace of mind and added sense of security?

Exactly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly.

Thank you lady of many faces. My thoughts are vindicated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dude, my scenario was obviously circumstantial. The police aren't an option. It's an emergency situation likely in a societal breakdown where your on your own.

if you believe in "societal breakdown" and zombies, you have bigger problems than owning a gun. Possibly too much video gaming or horror movies. Get out more.

Edited by ninjadude

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if you believe in "societal breakdown" and zombies, you have bigger problems than owning a gun. Possibly too much video gaming or horror movies. Get out more.

You're right. I talk about zombies way too much. You've got me. I'm zombie guy.

For the record though, societal breakdown is a possibility of human existence. Or is that unproven science fiction too?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Three things come to mind. A paranoid society, a society full of criminals or a paranoid society full of criminals who watch too many gangster movies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're right. I talk about zombies way too much. You've got me. I'm zombie guy.

For the record though, societal breakdown is a possibility of human existence. Or is that unproven science fiction too?

It's becoming more in the realm of sciFy all the time. That's why we watch it on TV.

Whole areas of Japan were wiped out by Tsunami. No break down. Whole areas of NJ wiped out. No break down.

Katrina, well there were some area of break down. I could blame that on the Bush admin ... :whistle:

Edited by ninjadude

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's becoming more in the realm of sciFy all the time. That's why we watch it on TV.

Whole areas of Japan were wiped out by Tsunami. No break down. Whole areas of NJ wiped out. No break down.

Katrina, well there were some area of break down. I could blame that on the Bush admin ... :whistle:

Yes civilization has come a longways but I never said it is going to happen soon but happen it could.

Edited by -Mr_Fess-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's becoming more in the realm of sciFy all the time. That's why we watch it on TV.

Whole areas of Japan were wiped out by Tsunami. No break down. Whole areas of NJ wiped out. No break down.

Katrina, well there were some area of break down. I could blame that on the Bush admin ... :whistle:

Im curious, ninja, what are your thoughts on foreign invasion? I believe the Japanese, in WW2, said something along the lines of them being unable to invade the US because behind every blade of grass will be an american with a gun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was supposed to be Isoroku Yamamoto, chief-commander of the Japanese navy, to have said that, but it is only a myth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im curious, ninja, what are your thoughts on foreign invasion? I believe the Japanese, in WW2, said something along the lines of them being unable to invade the US because behind every blade of grass will be an american with a gun.

That is just a NRA bedtime story.

"You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass." It has been declared this attribution is "unsubstantiated and almost certainly bogus, even though it has been repeated thousands of times in various Internet postings. There is no record of the commander in chief of Japan’s wartime fleet ever saying it.",

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, if it's a myth, then so be it. The sentiment, however, stands.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im curious, ninja, what are your thoughts on foreign invasion? I believe the Japanese, in WW2, said something along the lines of them being unable to invade the US because behind every blade of grass will be an american with a gun.

You're still living in the past. That was what 67 YEARS ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're still living in the past. That was what 67 YEARS ago.

City dwellers in the "Land of Lincoln" may be pushover patsies for the criminal element that flourishes there but when that type decide to break into a home in say, Montgomery Alabama....well.... lets just say they better have kevlar underwear. And in fact I don't even need to pick on Illinois, ANY big city dwellers could be accused of the same thing. Small town people just have a different take AND a different answer for thieves and thugs.
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're still living in the past. That was what 67 YEARS ago.

So you're telling me that wars dont and wont happen? It's impossible that at some point the US is invaded in a major war?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's impossible that at some point the US is invaded in a major war?

lets just say highly unlikely. You've been watching too much teevee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you're telling me that wars dont and wont happen? It's impossible that at some point the US is invaded in a major war?

Depends on who and how IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, if it's a myth, then so be it. The sentiment, however, stands.

The sentiment that there's a mistaken belief that we are secure because people are able to own weapons in order to take out better trained and equipped invasion forces?

There's a reason the Second Amendment included well regulated militia.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The sentiment that there's a mistaken belief that we are secure because people are able to own weapons in order to take out better trained and equipped invasion forces?

There's a reason the Second Amendment included well regulated militia.

Ah, but some think that well regulated means the Michigan irregulars stomping through the woods with a case of beer Saturday morning :devil:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's cool that the founders wrote the 2nd amendment into the constitution as a means of citizen defense against an oppressive government but seriously who cares what the technicalities are in that instance? What I mean is that its specific to a well regulated militia but if you're about to fight the government with guns then it doesn't matter what their rules are. It's like doing what your enemy tells you to in a fight. Does that make any sense? I think I'm having trouble articulating that thought.

Edit:

When people, usually those against guns, say well you're really not allowed to have guns unless your part of a militia I can only assume they mean a government approved militia but when the governments the bad guy then it doesn't really matter what they approve of. It's too late. A gun fight will ensue.

Edited by -Mr_Fess-
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't believe people are really serious enough to think they're going to make a difference against professional troops. Unless people believe there is danger of an invasion from the Virgin Islands, any nation in the world contemplating an invasion on US soil would have to equip their troops with highly sophisticated weaponry.

During a ground invasion, the force of their armored vehicles, helicopters, fighters, assault rifles, machine guns, missile launchers etc. etc. would scare the living daylights out of any pop gun equipped militia. It's not the 1700's anymore.

Anyway, there is no danger of this happening any soon because no country in the world has the interest, technology or equipment to carry out such an invasion, not even China. You would have to think that spending 700 billion US$ each year on national security (against China's 120 billion US$ each year which is the world's second highest nation for military expenditure) would safe guard from outside invasions, so don't worry boys and girls you can safely put away your pop guns. :gun:

Edited by BlackRedLittleDevil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why Is america or I should say the US and it`s people actually going to use the second ammendment for its intended purpose. Or are you guys all going to go gangster in the streets.

:td:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't believe people are really serious enough to think they're going to make a difference against professional troops. Unless people believe there is danger of an invasion from the Virgin Islands, any nation in the world contemplating an invasion on US soil would have to equip their troops with highly sophisticated weaponry.

During a ground invasion, the force of their armored vehicles, helicopters, fighters, assault rifles, machine guns, missile launchers etc. etc. would scare the living daylights out of any pop gun equipped militia. It's not the 1700's anymore.

Anyway, there is no danger of this happening any soon because no country in the world has the interest, technology or equipment to carry out such an invasion, not even China. You would have to think that spending 700 billion US$ each year on national security (against China's 120 billion US$ each year which is the world's second highest nation for military expenditure) would safe guard from outside invasions, so don't worry boys and girls you can safely put away your pop guns. :gun:

I dont care what anyone thinks,I am not putting anything away since they re=elected that America hating Obama.
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't believe people are really serious enough to think they're going to make a difference against professional troops. Unless people believe there is danger of an invasion from the Virgin Islands, any nation in the world contemplating an invasion on US soil would have to equip their troops with highly sophisticated weaponry.

During a ground invasion, the force of their armored vehicles, helicopters, fighters, assault rifles, machine guns, missile launchers etc. etc. would scare the living daylights out of any pop gun equipped militia. It's not the 1700's anymore.

Anyway, there is no danger of this happening any soon because no country in the world has the interest, technology or equipment to carry out such an invasion, not even China. You would have to think that spending 700 billion US$ each year on national security (against China's 120 billion US$ each year which is the world's second highest nation for military expenditure) would safe guard from outside invasions, so don't worry boys and girls you can safely put away your pop guns. :gun:

Well that doesn't mean we shouldn't have guns. More importantly, that doesn't mean we can't have guns. The issue isn't wether or not citizens can fight off the military it's about our constitutional right.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's cool that the founders wrote the 2nd amendment into the constitution as a means of citizen defense against an oppressive government but seriously who cares what the technicalities are in that instance? What I mean is that its specific to a well regulated militia but if you're about to fight the government with guns then it doesn't matter what their rules are. It's like doing what your enemy tells you to in a fight. Does that make any sense? I think I'm having trouble articulating that thought.

Edit:

When people, usually those against guns, say well you're really not allowed to have guns unless your part of a militia I can only assume they mean a government approved militia but when the governments the bad guy then it doesn't really matter what they approve of. It's too late. A gun fight will ensue.

Well isn't the big fear about the federal government? Seems to be given all the talk about how great state rights are. So wouldn't state approved militia be fine?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.