Nationwide airsoft handgun ban United States

[the cleaner]

We have a before care program where the children can sit and play social games like monopoly and jenga and suck, and no one plays with anyone else.  All of these kids (anywhere from 2nd to 8th grades) sit and play on their Nintendo Gameboys (what model I dont know, as I refuse to stay glued to a game machine all day).  No one bothers to talk to anyone else or play games.  Handheld videgames should be confiscated from the moment they entire the facility. This way, they are FORCED to interact and join in on the social gathering/ exercises.

 

Also, at lunches and breaks, we get constant requests fromt he children to go to the vending machines instead of them eating hte lunches their parents pack for them.  It got so bad we had to forbid them from going to the vending machines because the kid would buy 10$ worht of snacks from the machines and throw away their lunches which were much more healthy.  Kids don't like apples and peanut butter sandwhiches anymore, they want suger, sodas, candy and potatoe chips. 

 

I think parents are to blame because alot of them are too lazy to even prepare lunches for their kids. They just give them a $20 and say "buy yourself some lunch"

 

I don't however, think it's the governments job to enforce proper eating habits and proper playtime activities.  Raising a child is the job of the parent, and the parent only.  Unfortunatly, parent's seem to have lost track of the fact that they are in fact parents, and wrap their children in bubble wrap.

 

I believe it's the Govt. job now. . because the lack of parenting skills that are present in todays society. 

 

hmmm....this is so depressing i'm going to let you guys figure out my point of this rant.  This bill is supposed to protect children who pull toy guns on police, but I think that the parents of these children need a reality check, and need to keep toy guns out of the hands of thei children if they are going to be little brats.  I don't think the Government should pass legislation in order to shock the parents of the "bubble wrap" children into reality.

 

I think, the bill is to protect the city/govt/airsoft manufacturer, etc from lawsuits brought upon by tree-huggin' parents and victims' parents of those shot and killed by law enforcement. . .Because parents today. ..are so incredibly stupid and in denial. . "heaven's no. .my child would have never pulled a toy gun out on an officer. . I bought him the airsoft gun he was crying and wouldn't stop if I didn't buy it. . .bought it for him because his friend, Tommy, has one. . ". Parents have no control of their children let alone have any interets in knowing about their childrens' life. 

 

Thus. .the term "lazy Americans". . .it's a sad world we live in.

 

 

 

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[Sh0ty]

Very true. The government can't do a thing about it though. The only way to fix this if for parents to actually care. My parents would beat the hell out of me if I deserved it, and today, I'm a pretty good kid. Our neighbour on the other hand, get's whatever he wants (PS3, PS2 XBOX, XBOX 360, Gamecuce, WII, boats, you know, that ######) and he's now considered "special" by the school district. He's not "special" he just never got his *albatross* kicked.

 

-Sh0ty

 

Fake edit: The world is becoming too sensitive and afraid. Guns have been around longer than any of us and we've never had a huge problem with it.

[Skarclaw]

Plus, the NRA is no group of dummies. The UK lost a lot of their real steel a piece at a time. The NRA knows that if anything is allowed to be banned, it's much easier to tack on a few more things slowly over time. So if we were facing a ban of our toys, we'd have a powerful lobby on our side.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I supposed you missed the fact (aside from that this is from February and nothing has happened) that the NRA want nothing do with airsoft ?

[Pinkfloyd]

Fake edit:  The world is becoming too sensitive and afraid.  Guns have been around longer than any of us and we've never had a huge problem with it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

True, "sensitivity" will be the downfall of western civilization. People who are so removed from reality that they think guns arn't nessisary to own anymore. Take a look around, the world (well, mainly muslim extremists (no offense to anyone who is muslim, but I do mean to point out how backwards jihad is)) hates us because of the fact that we have civil rights, freedom and general prosperity. People, I'm trying to say that America is a very privilaged country, but we have to think practically to maintain our place as Numero Uno in the world. We have to be agressive, we have to be cutthroat because everyone else is. If we let our guard down, the rest of the world is going to kill us because they are jealous of our lifestyles. The reason we all have guns is for protection because like it or not, the majority of the world wants to kill us.

 

I don't see any problem with letting people have toy guns as long as the police are going to give NO amisty to offenders of the law. A kid points a gun, toy or real at a cop, I say the cop has every right to take him down, and that's the cold hard reality of it. Force parents into maintaining their children in a more responsable manner, because as all airsoft guns are sold with warnings that say 18 years or older.

 

Also, the NRA is gradually loosing its fight for our right to bear arms because politicians keep passing thru legislation that prevents us from purchasing automatic waeponry, weaponry with small magazine capacity, weaponry above certain calibers and bans on certain types of ammunition. The government realized that loopholes work both ways unfortunatly...

[Sh0ty]

You say we get guns for protection, but honestly, the only way that guns with civilians could be helpful is if there was some large scale invasion of foot soldiers on US soil. I still however, feel that the right to bear arms should be preserved.

 

-Sh0ty

[Pinkfloyd]

You say we get guns for protection, but honestly, the only way that guns with civilians could be helpful is if there was some large scale invasion of foot soldiers on US soil.  I still however, feel that the right to bear arms should be preserved.

 

-Sh0ty

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Well, sooner or later when we let our guard down we WILL be faced with a hostile takeover and we won't be able to do a damn thing about it. That's why I say if there was another civil war between the right wing and left wing, the right wing will win because the left wing has gun control.

[SlvrDragon50]

Agreed..

 

Without any support from parents.. then it will crash.

 

I think its just a more organized form of hte past few bans..

[Sh0ty]

Pinkfloyd, I appreciate your point about the threat of civil war, but I think we need to fast forward to 2007. Most conflict is not within America, but outside of it (as far as major conflict goes) and civilians have little or nothing to do with it.

 

-Sh0ty

[Yeager]

You say we get guns for protection, but honestly, the only way that guns with civilians could be helpful is if there was some large scale invasion of foot soldiers on US soil.  I still however, feel that the right to bear arms should be preserved.

 

-Sh0ty

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

With the current gun control in place how can we be helpful at all?

[Sh0ty]

What would we be helping with?

 

-Sh0ty

[Fuser]

A hypothetical invasion of US soil.

 

edit

Rent Red Dawn.

[Yeager]

A hypothetical invasion of US soil.

 

edit

Rent Red Dawn.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Go! Find form 4473!

[MadCat360]

What would we be helping with?

 

-Sh0ty

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

That's a really good question, because if you're looking at a gun control bill you have to know exactly what the benefits are of either side of the argument.

 

In this particular conversation, I think most people are thinking of stopping an invasion. But there are more "helpful" things that can be accomplished by abolishing gun control, such as lowered crime and the ability for civilians to fight back against it's own government if it ever came to that.

 

I think the main reason why the government is cracking down on guns is because it benefits them. Once guns are gone, only criminals have guns. Then crime will rise. Then the police force will be used more. Then the government gets more heroic in the public's eye because the public has no way of defending itself anyway. Then the government has more leeway to make more and more extreme adjustments to constitution and legislation, because there is a virtual impossibility of a coup. And within a hundred years, we have a dictatorship dystopia America.

 

Guns are one of those balancing items. Just another one of the tools the population has of keeping the government at bay. And there's plenty more, like freedom of speech (which is being swept aside by our media. Kudos, NBC! Even if he is acting like a &%$#, we can't harass the black man because that's racist! We can only beat up our own race! And now we are being hypocritical racists!).

[dookieboy]

Hey Red Dawn was just on TV the other yesterday.

[Yeager]

You will never totally disarm Yeager..

[evilliboba]

You will never totally disarm Yeager.. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yeager has got enough guns to start a war in a 3rd world country.

[Fuser]

Hey Red Dawn was just on TV the other yesterday. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That would be the reason that I thought of it

 

The scene where the kid takes on that russkie chopper with an assault rifle and gets owned is great.

[dookieboy]

Yeah but watching that movie wishes my AK was as good [AKM style] and I think there was a couple of AKMSs there. RPK for sure. He did get owned but it wasn't because of Kalashinkov's design at ALL. I like how pretty much everyone gets owned at the end.

[balberoth-the-destroyer]

MadCat360: Look at the UK, we have no public gun ownership whatsoever, and so the public are forced to rely on the police to defend them from criminals with guns.

The end result of this is most certainly *not* heroic looking police, the end result is incompetent, stupid, lazy, cowardly looking police, whom the public have little or no respect for.

 

I'm reminded of something I read the other day, a group of youths were vandalising a man's garden, he called the police, they replied "no-one available"

He phoned back 5 minutes later and told them "don't worry about it, I've shot them"

Within a further 5 mins, legions of police turned up, with an ARU, arrested the youths, and threatened to arrest the homeowner for"wasting police time" (IIRC)

 

The consensus on British police seems to be that if you are a criminal then they are too lazy/scared to deal with you, but if you are an innocent trying to defend yourself or your property, they'll make an example of you to attempt to uphold their shattered reputation.

 

ps. I'm aware that the above example was not perfect, I wanted to share it because I found it funny.

[SNOGER]

MadCat360: Look at the UK, we have no public gun ownership whatsoever, and so the public are forced to rely on the police to defend them from criminals with guns.

The end result of this is most certainly *not* heroic looking police, the end result is incompetent, stupid, lazy, cowardly looking police, whom the public have little or no respect for.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I never knew that in the UK you wernt allowed to own a gun.

[balberoth-the-destroyer]

Well, under certain circumstances you can, farmers can have shotguns for pest control, and that sort of thing, with licenses of course.

What I meant was that there is no widespread public ownership of guns like there is in the US.