Alex Jones on CNN

[Lovey80]

I can't watch him. I recon I watched 2 episodes of his show because he is simply to irate to watch.

Basically he's a really smart moron.

I'm loathe to have to say this, but i truly believe that those who "cant listen" to him and thereby miss his message are the real morons...

It's not what he's saying most of the time it's how he is saying it. He does himself a disservice because he acts like a drunk raving lunatic. It's not my problem that Alex Jones has failed to grasp the basic human skill of how to communicate with people. IMO he is mentally unstable and shows it with his inability to control himself. There is seriously something wrong in his brain and as a person who wishes he had second amendment rights like the Americans do, it is mentally unstable people like him that are ruining it for people like me..

 

[Austacker]

I still have not heard any reasonable reason for owners to have these magazines that Piers is on about. He is not trying to ban everything. he has taken task of a couple of certain weapons, certain magazine. From every interview I have seen I agree with him. NO ONE has given a good reason why you need them. Every reason just basically boils down to. We are allowed too and we just want one. Sorry that does not seem a logical reason.

I understand there is soooooo much more to this than just what is in question. However justify to me why and I may see your side. I don't think the reason because I can is good enough sorry folks.

 

[hussman]

I still have not heard any reasonable reason for owners to have these magazines that Piers is on about. He is not trying to ban everything. he has taken task of a couple of certain weapons, certain magazine. From every interview I have seen I agree with him. NO ONE has given a good reason why you need them. Every reason just basically boils down to. We are allowed too and we just want one. Sorry that does not seem a logical reason.

I understand there is soooooo much more to this than just what is in question. However justify to me why and I may see your side. I don't think the reason because I can is good enough sorry folks.

Put forward an argument of why you should not have them? They are practical. Holds more rounds of ammunition. Less reloading time. Own less cartridges.

If I were to reverse this topic on something that may affect you, It might sound abit like this. Maybe the government should restrict your car to a 10 liter tank so you dont contribute to global warming as much. I dont see why you need a bigger tank than 10 L. You can drive 100+KM on 10L these days. Give me an argument why u need a bigger tank of fuel? Just becuase you want one doesnt seem a logical reason. You see where Im getting at?

 

[hussman]

There is seriously something wrong in his brain and as a person who wishes he had second amendment rights like the Americans do, it is mentally unstable people like him that are ruining it for people like me..

You live in Australia. You dont have 2nd Amemndment rights. They were taken away before Alex Jones was even known. Its already been 'ruined for you'. How can you blame him and "mentally unstable people" (what ever that means) for the government taking away your rights??

 

[Austacker]

I still have not heard any reasonable reason for owners to have these magazines that Piers is on about. He is not trying to ban everything. he has taken task of a couple of certain weapons, certain magazine. From every interview I have seen I agree with him. NO ONE has given a good reason why you need them. Every reason just basically boils down to. We are allowed too and we just want one. Sorry that does not seem a logical reason.

I understand there is soooooo much more to this than just what is in question. However justify to me why and I may see your side. I don't think the reason because I can is good enough sorry folks.

Put forward an argument of why you should not have them? They are practical. Holds more rounds of ammunition. Less reloading time. Own less cartridges.

If I were to reverse this topic on something that may affect you, It might sound abit like this. Maybe the government should restrict your car to a 10 liter tank so you dont contribute to global warming as much. I dont see why you need a bigger tank than 10 L. You can drive 100+KM on 10L these days. Give me an argument why u need a bigger tank of fuel? Just becuase you want one doesnt seem a logical reason. You see where Im getting at?

No sorry, it still does not make a case, however I do get your point. It is not that it effects me or not. Seriously it has no effect on me if they do or don't. I just said I have not seen 1 reasonable reason why they are needed. And I still haven't.

 

[hussman]

I still have not heard any reasonable reason for owners to have these magazines that Piers is on about. He is not trying to ban everything. he has taken task of a couple of certain weapons, certain magazine. From every interview I have seen I agree with him. NO ONE has given a good reason why you need them. Every reason just basically boils down to. We are allowed too and we just want one. Sorry that does not seem a logical reason.

I understand there is soooooo much more to this than just what is in question. However justify to me why and I may see your side. I don't think the reason because I can is good enough sorry folks.

Put forward an argument of why you should not have them? They are practical. Holds more rounds of ammunition. Less reloading time. Own less cartridges.

If I were to reverse this topic on something that may affect you, It might sound abit like this. Maybe the government should restrict your car to a 10 liter tank so you dont contribute to global warming as much. I dont see why you need a bigger tank than 10 L. You can drive 100+KM on 10L these days. Give me an argument why u need a bigger tank of fuel? Just becuase you want one doesnt seem a logical reason. You see where Im getting at?

No sorry, it still does not make a case, however I do get your point. It is not that it effects me or not. Seriously it has no effect on me if they do or don't. I just said I have not seen 1 reasonable reason why they are needed. And I still haven't.

And no reasonable reason is needed that is the point.

 

[Austacker]

And no reasonable reason is needed that is the point.

Unfortunately true

 

[hussman]

And no reasonable reason is needed that is the point.

Unfortunately true

But its not unfortunate.

 

[Austacker]

And no reasonable reason is needed that is the point.

Unfortunately true

But its not unfortunate.

Your opinion there. We all know what they say on opinions (mine included) either way. One shall not agree with the other on this matter regardless, we should all be allowed to do whatever we want and who cares who gets hurt in the process. I am good with that.

Meanwhile nice Silver spike right ATM...

 

[Lovey80]

There is seriously something wrong in his brain and as a person who wishes he had second amendment rights like the Americans do, it is mentally unstable people like him that are ruining it for people like me..

You live in Australia. You dont have 2nd Amemndment rights. They were taken away before Alex Jones was even known. Its already been 'ruined for you'. How can you blame him and "mentally unstable people" (what ever that means) for the government taking away your rights??

It was a mentally unstable person like him that went nuts at Port Arthur (I'm not saying he is likely to go nuts but it wouldn't surprise me) that got my rights taken away. It is the sheep that need defending that could never defend themselves that push the emotional buttons of politicians to make bans like this because they are afraid of loose cannons like Alex Jones. When I say people "like me" I am referring to the people in the states that have 2nd Amendment rights and want to keep them and are being harmed in doing so by nut jobs like Alex Jones because he sets alarm bells ringing.

 

[Lovey80]

I still have not heard any reasonable reason for owners to have these magazines that Piers is on about. He is not trying to ban everything. he has taken task of a couple of certain weapons, certain magazine. From every interview I have seen I agree with him. NO ONE has given a good reason why you need them. Every reason just basically boils down to. We are allowed too and we just want one. Sorry that does not seem a logical reason.

I understand there is soooooo much more to this than just what is in question. However justify to me why and I may see your side. I don't think the reason because I can is good enough sorry folks.

Have a good look on youtube. Ice T of all people said it best...I think against Piers.

The 2nd Amendment isn't there for hunting. It isn't there for home defence against criminals. It isn't there so places like texas can have open carry laws to discourage violent crime (which it does undoubtedly). All of these things are supplementary to the actual reason there is a 2nd Amendment in the first place.

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

There is no doubt the Second Amendment is there for the security of a free state. It is there to protect the individual against tyranny. If the most likely form of tyranny is likely to come from the state then the individual has the right to bear arms against the state. If the state is using 30 round magazines then so shall the people if they so chose.

You have to remember the context in which the bill of rights was written. Very soon after they broke away from a tyrannical British king. The fear of an over ruling power hungry government was at their forebrains and just the attempt at curbing of those bill of rights, in many Americans eyes, is the perfect reason why the 2nd Amendment was put there in the first place.

 

[Austacker]

I have no issue with the content and the right to bear arms. That is fine they live by that and have done for 100's of years. However the original bill of rights was 10, reduced from 12. It is now 27 things have included, Slavery, Prohibition etc... Now all of those things seemed like a good idea at the time didn't they. We later worked out that certainly Slavery was not a good thing and this had to change. Prohibition they realised as much as they fought it. They couldn't win it. Bit like our current Drug Wars. They may win a battle here and there, but they will NEVER win that war.

So it does change and update to the current era's and public outcry's. I am a believer of keeping peoples rights so please don't get me wrong. When this was introduced you had a pistol and a shotgun/rifle single action. The military had Gatling guns but these were restricted there about's anyway. So keeping with that you could say. Keep a pistol and a Rifle/Shotgun even. However you do not need to have the high volumes and automatic features. That is all. If you want to have them, they are kept at your Gun club or Shooting range perhaps ?

Anyway too much talk on this GP soz.

For those that are interested this is the updated version Wiki at least. I had never read them. Now I have still hasn't changed my mind sorry.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...nited_States_Constitution#Ratified_amendments

 

[Lovey80]

I have no issue with the content and the right to bear arms. That is fine they live by that and have done for 100's of years. However the original bill of rights was 10, reduced from 12. It is now 27 things have included, Slavery, Prohibition etc... Now all of those things seemed like a good idea at the time didn't they. We later worked out that certainly Slavery was not a good thing and this had to change. Prohibition they realised as much as they fought it. They couldn't win it. Bit like our current Drug Wars. They may win a battle here and there, but they will NEVER win that war.

So it does change and update to the current era's and public outcry's. I am a believer of keeping peoples rights so please don't get me wrong. When this was introduced you had a pistol and a shotgun/rifle single action. The military had Gatling guns but these were restricted there about's anyway. So keeping with that you could say. Keep a pistol and a Rifle/Shotgun even. However you do not need to have the high volumes and automatic features. That is all. If you want to have them, they are kept at your Gun club or Shooting range perhaps ?

Anyway too much talk on this GP soz.

For those that are interested this is the updated version Wiki at least. I had never read them. Now I have still hasn't changed my mind sorry.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...nited_States_Constitution#Ratified_amendments

You missed the point again. If you are using your 2nd Amendment rights to fight against the government because they have become Fascist and want to take away any number of rights (just like Hitler did to Austria after he was overwhelmingly voted into power). Then how are you suppose to do so effectively with a pistol and a shotgun when the army is coming with M4's and Minimi machine guns? THAT is the point of the second amendment and THAT is the need for 30rd magazines.

I doubt that GP will mind with this thread as long as the subject is concerned with the American political current affairs.

 

[hussman]

^ Exactly. So many countries in the past 100 years have had their guns taken away then got their population mowed down by various governments. My own country, Bosnia, disarmed their citizens, then shortly after war happened and the same old story continues. Those who gave up their military equilivalent rifles were praying they had kept them, and those who had kept them (illegally ofcourse) were gratreful they did.

 

[Austacker]

Ok so the Government is OUR threat and we all need to be able to fight back. So based on that the fact they have Tanks, Fighter Jets, Stealth Drones, etc... etc... We need to have these guns. Yeah that makes a reasonable and fair comment. You really don't need any other weapon than a AK47 as this has been the weapon of choice for the past up risings anywhere pretty much. Vietnam, Africa, and now Afghanistan. So a Pistol, Rifle and a AK47 for backup.

If it gets that bad don't think the guns will save you anyway. Just convert to chemical and biological if they really want to get rid of us all. Who let that top secret virus out ?

 

[Austacker]

^ Exactly. So many countries in the past 100 years have had their guns taken away then got their population mowed down by various governments. My own country, Bosnia, disarmed their citizens, then shortly after war happened and the same old story continues. Those who gave up their military equilivalent rifles were praying they had kept them, and those who had kept them (illegally ofcourse) were gratreful they did.

I cannot argue this point and the atrocities in a lot of the world. Sorry for your experience. It still doesn't change my view and I certainly do not wish the harm of these examples on anyone. I don't know if the parallels are there or not and really don't wish to discuss these either.

 

[AngloSaxon]

I still have not heard any reasonable reason for owners to have these magazines that Piers is on about. He is not trying to ban everything. he has taken task of a couple of certain weapons, certain magazine. From every interview I have seen I agree with him. NO ONE has given a good reason why you need them. Every reason just basically boils down to. We are allowed too and we just want one. Sorry that does not seem a logical reason.

I understand there is soooooo much more to this than just what is in question. However justify to me why and I may see your side. I don't think the reason because I can is good enough sorry folks.

Hope I'm not skating on thin ice with the SS rules by this answer.

Have you ever had to go out shooting feral pigs destroying your property and mauling stock. They won't necessarilly go down with one round unless you have the time and range to do it cleanly. Having as many rounds as possible is preferable. The same applies in the US - they have feral pigs too. Watched a US news thing the other day by two guys who had to defend themselves against 2 cougars. 7 round magazines like Piers wants would have seen two people dead.

As far as legislation goes and the reason why you need them, Lovey80 said it pretty well. The proposal of things to ban looks at an item causing <3% of the problems the proposed legislative changes wants to change. And there is such resistance from the people who actually use those items. If I was used these things I would feel picked on by the US government.

 

[Lovey80]

Ok so the Government is OUR threat and we all need to be able to fight back. So based on that the fact they have Tanks, Fighter Jets, Stealth Drones, etc... etc... We need to have these guns. Yeah that makes a reasonable and fair comment. You really don't need any other weapon than a AK47 as this has been the weapon of choice for the past up risings anywhere pretty much. Vietnam, Africa, and now Afghanistan. So a Pistol, Rifle and a AK47 for backup.

If it gets that bad don't think the guns will save you anyway. Just convert to chemical and biological if they really want to get rid of us all. Who let that top secret virus out ?

The US government isn't necessarily a threat to the American people (up for debate)at this time but may be in the future. Not sure why you brought up the AK47 part as this is the exact type of weapon as the AR15 that is attempting to be restricted (both semiauto rifles that have 30rd magazines). The AK is used in uprisings because it is cheap and millions made. The Americans prefer the more refined and expensive AR instead. Same diff though.

If it gets that bad forget the Chem and Bio weapons because probably over half the defence force would be on the side of the dissenters, as it would be there duty to do so. Remember they signed an oath to uphold the constitution.

Who would they be chem/bio attacking anyway? The whole country? They would have to in an asymmetric guerrilla warfare scenario that this would most certainly dissolve to. I've seen first hand how hard it is for a united Military to fight guerrilla style tactics, let alone a divided one killing thier own people.

Edit: correction to the above after re-reading. The AK47 is full auto, the AR15 that is on Peirs Morgans mind is only Semi-Auto but both have 30rd magazines. Not that it is important because anyone with any level of training is not going to use one in full auto.

 

[Austacker]

Thanks guys, I know I am not the only one but probably just the one speaking ATM. As I said I don't think there is a way that we can agree, to agree. We can all point to this example and that example and they are all well justified.

As example - The 2 Cougar attack, sure you may have seen 2 people dead. Terrible but that is an act of nature, not a mass murder. 2 v's 100's I can't see the logic in that. They went into the bush, I don't think the Cougars broke into their homes ?

Pigs never shot one, again they don't break into my home. If on your home they cause a problem you need a means to eradicate them sure. Do baits, traps and firearms combined not do the job, or is the only answer an AR15 perhaps it is ?

The AK47 was mentioned in irony in the fact it is a weapon that can and does bring so much pain and suffering, so many people have them in the middle east, do you want everyone to be armed with the US equivalent ?

It is in principle an issue with the 2nd amendment, I get that. I just can't see the need for this type of weapon. That is all. I realize as individuals you may have a different reason which could well be reasonable and justifiable. However from the arguments put forward I cannot see a reason for the general public the need for such weapons.

 

[hussman]

Thanks guys, I know I am not the only one but probably just the one speaking ATM. As I said I don't think there is a way that we can agree, to agree. We can all point to this example and that example and they are all well justified.

As example - The 2 Cougar attack, sure you may have seen 2 people dead. Terrible but that is an act of nature, not a mass murder. 2 v's 100's I can't see the logic in that. They went into the bush, I don't think the Cougars broke into their homes ?

Pigs never shot one, again they don't break into my home. If on your home they cause a problem you need a means to eradicate them sure. Do baits, traps and firearms combined not do the job, or is the only answer an AR15 perhaps it is ?

The AK47 was mentioned in irony in the fact it is a weapon that can and does bring so much pain and suffering, so many people have them in the middle east, do you want everyone to be armed with the US equivalent ?

It is in principle an issue with the 2nd amendment, I get that. I just can't see the need for this type of weapon. That is all. I realize as individuals you may have a different reason which could well be reasonable and justifiable. However from the arguments put forward I cannot see a reason for the general public the need for such weapons.

Ok man, its obvious your pretty ignorant.