2aguy
Diamond Member
- Jul 19, 2014
- 112,217
- 52,453
- 2,290
---------------------------------------------- yeah , but that was years earlier . My example still applies . A disarmed people are easy to make mincemeat of Brian . See 'pol pot' in cmbodia or cannibal 'idid amin' in Uganda . [think that it was Uganda]
Not very many years. Losing a world war is kind of a big deal.
The disarmed are going way more years without guns...
You are insulting our military and suggesting they would kill civilians?
Lol, idiot, some of them have ALREADY killed civilians; collateral damage, and most of the terrorists are not in a regular military force hence are civilians.
You're a typical self-proclaimed 'brain'; more full of irony than descriptive.
Please share examples of the US military killing US civilians.
Wounded knee, Mai Lai.......and I actually support the U.S. mIlitary.........Waco.....but that was the police..the other group you want to have weapons....
At wounded knee they were not US citizens. Waco was police and criminals.
More firearms in lawful hands... Less crime
That is funny. The US has by far the most guns. Why do so many unarmed countries have lower crime rates?
Because some of them have less thugs in their culture.......others....like Mexico and Russia also have extreme to complete gun control...and higher gun murder rates than we do....Puerto Rico....extreme gun control and part of the United States as a protectorate....one of the highest gun murder rates in the world...
Thug culture, not access to guns, is the problem.......
Britain didn't have high levels of gun crime before they confiscated their guns.....after they confiscated guns from law abiding people..their gun crime rate did not change...in fact, their violent crime rate increased.....and just last year their violent crime rate went up 27% and their gun crime rate...after confiscation...went up 4%....which shouldn't have happened...but it did, because criminals will get guns.