The Japanese didn't invade the west coast because they lacked - #81222320 added by arisaka at American Politics

Reply+1

(01/19/2013)[-]

Obama is now making online firearms have clips no larger than 10

#21658 to #21652 - anon id: f376547a

Reply0

(01/19/2013)[-]

In Canada, if the weapon is semi-automatic, you can't have the weapon assembled outside of your own home. You can only fire them at specific ranges.

If it is semi automatic and the round being fired is a full sized rifle cartridge, it has a limit of 5 rounds per magazine.

We have a less violent culture than you do. Considering, especially in Quebec, whose historical situation diplays much more oppression that the "Tyrannical King George" of the 'Murican revolution, and would require something like the second amendment much more, why is it that a province that LOVES to bitch about everything doesn't bitch about it's right to bear arms? I mean, shit, we're allowed to. The reasons is because we have a culture founded on civil disobedience. Fuck off with your guns.

PS Our school shootings are never as deadly as yours.

#21662 to #21658 - eight

Reply+2

(01/19/2013)[-]

You also have MUCH less people and MUCH less guns. And on top of that, less metropolitan areas with a less condense of people. If you look at the crime, especially gun crime coming from the states, it mostly comes from the big cities.
Less people, less major cities, means less deaths either by guns or other weapons.
It really isn't hard to understand.

#21664 to #21662 - arisaka

Reply-2

(01/19/2013)[-]

The ratio is still less when you equate the population to a comparable level.

There are a huge amount of people with guns in Canada. Don't try and use that excuse.

When we enforced gun laws, the murder rate with firearms dropped immensely. HURR CRIMINALS CAN STILL GET GUNS HURR

fuck

off

#21687 to #21664 - paintbucket

Reply+2

(01/19/2013)[-]

comparing the US to canada is like comparing the US to the UK
most gun crime happens in cities, and is gang-related.

#21669 to #21664 - eight

Reply+1

(01/19/2013)[-]

Ok then, you still have less metropolitan areas than the U.S and in the areas that are metropolitan in Canada, your violent crime rates go up significantly.
Not to mention, there are many places in the world where guns are heavily regulated, but crime is still higher in ratio to the United States.
And to further my argment, U.S. crime rates have gone significantly down since the early 1990's and guess what, we have a lot more guns than we did then.

Guns are used 100,000 to 2.5 million times a year by LAW ABIDING CITIZENS in the U.S. to prevent crime. Even at the lowest number, it is nearly 10 times the amount of homicides that occur each year (8-12 thousand).

Another fact - since Washington D.C banned guns, crime has gone up.
Another fact - The majority of these mass shootings occur in GUN FREE zones.
Another fact - Most of these mass shootings toxicology reports and medical records indicate that the perpetrators were taking Anti Depressant SSRI's.
Another fact - with around 80 million legal gun owning Americans, less than 1% of them are responsible for violent crime.
Another fact - Taking guns away from law abiding citizens will solve nothing. It will just make them defenseless against criminals, foreign invaders, or an oppressive Government.

#21673 to #21669 - arisaka

Reply-1

(01/19/2013)[-]

Actually they do not. Not in Canada.

Most gun violence occurs in rural areas here. Get yer facts straight, kiddo.

#21675 to #21673 - eight

Reply0

(01/19/2013)[-]

Far from being a kiddo. I would also like a source.

#21682 to #21675 - arisaka

Reply0

(01/19/2013)[-]

www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002-x/85-002-x2007003-eng.pdf

Have fun.

Rural areas have the highest homicide rates here because people get drunk and kill each other with their fucking guns. It's only in Quebec really that it gets violent in the cities, but that's because of the NATURE of the city: there's always some crazy shit happening, either with the mafia or with culture clashes.

#21693 to #21682 - eight

Reply+1

(01/19/2013)[-]

That is old for one, 2005. And two, it isn't like that in most other parts of the world. I realize you LIVE in Canada, but you simply must accept that it isn't like that everywhere. Statistically, where you find a high amount of people in a constricted environment, you find more crime.

That isn't to say there won't be exceptions.

#21699 to #21693 - arisaka

Reply-2

(01/20/2013)[-]

I was using Canada as an example. My source proves my point.

#21665 to #21664 - anon id: 8218ffc6

Reply0

(01/19/2013)[-]

"When we enforced gun laws,"

And that's exactly what America needs. More enforcement, not more laws.

#21666 to #21665 - arisaka

Reply-1

(01/19/2013)[-]

We only required gun Licensing since 1972. We've been banning & restricting guns guns since the 20's, but the most significant was also in 1972. Since then, gun violence has been decreasing significantly.

#21670 to #21666 - eight

Reply0

(01/19/2013)[-]

And what happens when a country invades you? What happens when your government eventually turns tyrannical? You will have to depend on other countries to come and save your ass in time because your people are defenseless. And don't give me that paranoia shit. History since the dawn of time proves you wrong. In the 20th century alone, 170 million people have been killed by their own governments. That is Canada's entire population multiplied by 4. That is almost a third of the U.S population. 170,000,000 people that trusted their government. That relied upon them. That would have never though for a second that their Government was up to no good. Oh and here is the kicker...before these mass killings occurred, gun restrictions and bans were passed to disarm the people.

#21672 to #21670 - arisaka

Reply-1

(01/19/2013)[-]

Canada's army is not big enough to do that.

We can find guns. Buy in bulk ex soviet if revolution were to occur. Obviously, until the world is standardized, you can buy weapons like that in bulk easy.

Cuba was overthrown with a group of no more than 300 or so revolutionaries. Canada's army as it stands won't be able to fight back a huge invading force, and good luck to our government trying to kill everyone within our own borders. We're not warmongers with this huge surplus of weaponry.

In times of revolution people can STEAL weapons. This is how many revolutionaries, against all odds, prevailed.

#21677 to #21672 - eight

Reply+2

(01/19/2013)[-]

Why is it people have a fascination with waiting for bad things to occur and THEN reacting. Why can't we prevent bad things from happening? The point is to as best as possible stop anything like that from happening in the first place.

The Japanese would have invaded the West Cost of the United States if not for the amount of civilians holding guns. If your civilians have guns and your military has guns, you can fight off an invading force. It is a deterrent in itself.

#21679 to #21677 - arisaka

Reply0

(01/19/2013)[-]

The Japanese didn't invade the west coast because they lacked the prowess to do so. They couldn't capture and hold the islands they had once the United States took them from her.

Stockpiling weapons won't prevent shit. Organizing yourselves, creating democratic councils, direct democracy... those things will prevent a tyrannical regime from sprouting. Not fully automatic weapons.

#21694 to #21679 - eight

Reply+2

(01/19/2013)[-]

You should look over your history better.

"Stockpiling weapons won't prevent shit. Organizing yourselves, creating democratic councils, direct democracy... those things will prevent a tyrannical regime from sprouting. Not fully automatic weapons. "

Number one, no one is calling for citizens to stock pile weapons.

Number two, yes, to fight tyranny you must be organized.

Number three, creating democratic councils...this was attempted before the U.S. Revolution occurred (and in many if not most other similar scenarios in world history)...notice it didn't work out to well for the U.S.
A "tyrannical regime" still sprouted and guess what? We fought them back with weapons. We had a smaller army. An army that could not have possibly won the war alone. We won because of militiamen. Citizens, armed with weapons that matched the British's own and together we took our freedom.
And from this event and history of others like it, our founding fathers crafted the Constitution giving us the right to do so again when the time comes again.

#21698 to #21694 - arisaka

Reply0

(01/20/2013)[-]

Democratic councils were not formed within the thirteen colonies because they were not yet a sovereign nation.

The french also helped. England had exhausted herself fighting against the french a few years earlier, too. There were many factors that helped in the war, not just armed civilians.

#21671 to #21670 - smorguynator**User deleted account**

Reply-2

(01/19/2013)[-]

Don't use that bs. The government will not turn Tyrannical. And if Canada is invaded, then guess what. Canada has a military too. And your statistics talk about multiple countries, most of which probably are nowhere near as large, or have nowhere near as much population as Canada or the USA. Gun restrictions have been passed in many countries without the government turning tyrannical, and the chances of a country like the US or Canada having governments turning tyrannical are extremely low.

#21676 to #21671 - eight

Reply+2

(01/19/2013)[-]

The chances are low. But eventually it will happen. I don't want my children's, children to have to live through such times if they do not have too. Less than half of 1% of the population die by gun violence, I think we live in pretty peaceful times.

#21659 to #21658 - arisaka

Reply+1

(01/19/2013)[-]

Whoops, forgot to sign in.

Anyways, that "rant" is riddled with errors, I'm sleepy, just got back from a show, and had a very interesting discussion about my Province, and then I saw that post.

If you're looking to made your red thumb count, I'd suggest you do it here.

#21656 to #21652 - paintbucket

Reply+1

(01/19/2013)[-]

>clips

#21653 to #21652 - anticitezenone

Reply-4

(01/19/2013)[-]

Phanact