Assault Rifle Ban

Interesting fact:

During W.W.II the Japanese decided not to invade America because they knew most Americans were ARMED !

Note: Admiral Yamamoto who crafted the attack on Pearl Harbor had attended Harvard U 1919-1921 & was Naval Attaché to the U. S. 1925-28. Most of our Navy was destroyed at Pearl Harbor & our Army had been deprived of funding & was ill prepared to defend the country.
It was reported that when asked why Japan did not follow up the Pearl Harbor attack with an invasion of the U.S. Mainland, his reply was that he had lived in the U.S. & knew that almost all households had guns.

[TripleF]

Keck, I just starting shooting a gun after almost 28 years.

Ownership of a gun has nothing to do with the government. Problem is, we have allowed it to be so. Laws pass and we sit and piss and moan.

"All that is necessary for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing."


Get involved. Call.. Write. Fight back.

We need a organized gathering for a cup of tea.

[elderboy02]

Originally Posted by TripleF

Keck, I just starting shooting a gun after almost 28 years.

Ownership of a gun has nothing to do with the government. Problem is, we have allowed it to be so. Laws pass and we sit and piss and moan.

"All that is necessary for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing."


Get involved. Call.. Write. Fight back.

We need a organized gathering for a cup of tea.

I have been doing my part. I write to all my representatives, am a life member of the National Rifle Association, Gun Owners of America, and the Second Amendement Foundation.

I wish more people would join these organizations.

[webjunkie]

Originally Posted by Tombstone

Interesting fact:

During W.W.II the Japanese decided not to invade America because they knew most Americans were ARMED !

Note: Admiral Yamamoto who crafted the attack on Pearl Harbor had attended Harvard U 1919-1921 & was Naval Attaché to the U. S. 1925-28. Most of our Navy was destroyed at Pearl Harbor & our Army had been deprived of funding & was ill prepared to defend the country.
It was reported that when asked why Japan did not follow up the Pearl Harbor attack with an invasion of the U.S. Mainland, his reply was that he had lived in the U.S. & knew that almost all households had guns.

I'm for guns, and I've seen this bit on a lot of e-mails and it always gets my goat (mainly because this is the area of history that I study).

The quote from Yamamoto is: "You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass."

He was trying to make a point to Tojo, who was for war with the US, that the only way to win a war with the US would be to dictate terms to Washington after having defeated the US militarily and Japan would never successfully invade the mainland US. While they did invade the Aleutian Islands, Japan would never have been able to invade the mainland. Even if the attack at Pearl Harbor hadn't been a strategic failure the Japanese just didn't have the resources to maintain or defend the supply lines required to invade the mainland US. If they had, Yamamoto's point about American's being armed would have mattered very little to the Army's culture of the superiority of Japanese infantry.

Back to your regularly scheduled programming.

Originally Posted by webjunkie

I'm for guns, and I've seen this bit on a lot of e-mails and it always gets my goat (mainly because this is the area of history that I study).

The quote from Yamamoto is: "You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass."

He was trying to make a point to Tojo, who was for war with the US, that the only way to win a war with the US would be to dictate terms to Washington after having defeated the US militarily and Japan would never successfully invade the mainland US. While they did invade the Aleutian Islands, Japan would never have been able to invade the mainland. Even if the attack at Pearl Harbor hadn't been a strategic failure the Japanese just didn't have the resources to maintain or defend the supply lines required to invade the mainland US. If they had, Yamamoto's point about American's being armed would have mattered very little to the Army's culture of the superiority of Japanese infantry.

Back to your regularly scheduled programming.

I don't know there are a lot of guns in the US. Come down south and you might agree with Yamamoto.

[webjunkie]

Originally Posted by Tombstone

I don't know there are a lot of guns in the US. Come down south and you might agree with Yamamoto.

I am from the south, North Carolina to be exact. Yamamoto's point was about the amount of opposition that they would have faced in an invasion. He was trying to get the Tojo, and the other Imperial Army commanders to see reason when they were planning an attack on the US. The Navy knew that they would lose a protracted war with the US, the main reason being that they were running out of oil and scrap metal (which they had previously gotten from the US). The Army was for a war with the US because they wanted to try to break the US's support of China in the Second Sino-Japanese War (this is why the US had a trade embargo with Japan in the first place). The Army had cultivated a culture of believing that the Japanese infantry was superior to all and would be able to defeat anything because they had superior will and spirit. They would not have cared about the number of guns in the US.

[BamBam]

Originally Posted by webjunkie

I am from the south, North Carolina to be exact. Yamamoto's point was about the amount of opposition that they would have faced in an invasion. He was trying to get the Tojo, and the other Imperial Army commanders to see reason when they were planning an attack on the US. The Navy knew that they would lose a protracted war with the US, the main reason being that they were running out of oil and scrap metal (which they had previously gotten from the US). The Army was for a war with the US because they wanted to try to break the US's support of China in the Second Sino-Japanese War (this is why the US had a trade embargo with Japan in the first place). The Army had cultivated a culture of believing that the Japanese infantry was superior to all and would be able to defeat anything because they had superior will and spirit. They would not have cared about the number of guns in the US.

Until that first step onto the mainland

All I have to say is "IF YOU OUTLAW GUNS, ONLY OUTLAWS WILL HAVE GUNS"

This is more than just a cliche saying. If you start banning guns then the majority of God fearin, law abidin Americans will abide. Then the criminals know that they are the only ones who are armed. Think that might affect the crime rate a touch, and I'm talkin violent crimes here.

I also agree that Americans being free to own guns is a definite deterrent to any invasions from other countries.

An armed society is a polite society.

[webjunkie]

Originally Posted by BamBam

Until that first step onto the mainland

To be fair, they said they would whip the Russians until they ran into the Russians' tanks and artillery.

[houdini]

Two words come to mind in today's political and economic climate regarding the 2nd Amendment: STOCK UP.

[BamBam]

Originally Posted by webjunkie

To be fair, they said they would whip the Russians until they ran into the Russians' tanks and artillery.

Bro, I wish you were closer because we would have an awesome History Herf. I love History, especially war history

[DPD6030]

If it hasn't been said already...I can tell you from the LEO standpoint that no matter if it is passed or not the criminals will find a way no matter what if they really want to. The criminals have more powerful guns than the police force. A wise officer once told me, if we got it the criminals had it a year ago. I hunt and carry a firearm for work. I too agree that if there is an "assault" weapons ban then it is not fair to lawfully abiding citizens. I used to have an AR-15 but I sold it and wished I didn't.

Read the following in my local paper today.

I know it's not about assault rifles but I thought it still "fit" the thread. This has to be the only positive piece of press I have seen in print in my local papers in many years. Made my day, thought I would share.

From the Courier News 11/20/2008

There are a lot of people in New Jersey with open minds and open eyes, but the majority of us have been mentally conditioned to be afraid of guns. The media in general have done an excellent job of demonizing firearms and the law-abiding citizens who own them.

A two-year study by the Media Research Center concluded that television reporters are overwhelmingly opposed to Second Amendment rights. Broadcasts of major networks from July 1, 1995, to June 30, 1997, covering 244 gun policy stories showed the ratio of anti-gun to pro-gun bias was 16 to 1. That means for every one story of someone using a firearm in self-defense or to save the life of another, 16 stories of criminals using their guns to hurt the innocent were aired. That ratio still remains the same today. It seems one-sided and unfair, does it not?

Despite what media coverage might seem to indicate, there are more deaths related to high school football than shootings. In a recent three-year period, twice as many football players died from hits to the head, heat stroke and other bizarre injuries as compared with students who were murdered by firearms during that same time period.

Why do the majority of our lawmakers think that making it more difficult to own and carry a concealed firearm is going to help quell the rate of violent crime in New Jersey? It's been proven time and time again that criminals in New Jersey do not care about gun restrictions or gun bans. The vast majority of the illegal guns used in crimes come from a few corrupt gun dealers outside the borders of the Garden State.

It seems most of our legislators have this unfounded fear that if A1282 is enacted, everyone will rush to get their concealed carry permit and there will be millions of guns on our streets that will result in a bloodbath the likes of which we have never seen. History shows that after concealed carry legislation was passed in Florida in 1987 only an estimated 3 percent of Floridians chose to obtain a concealed carry permit.

Now, let's return to New Jersey. The latest census estimates the population of New Jersey is 8.7 million. If 2 percent of citizens are granted a concealed carry permit, that would be approximately 174,000 people. That also means there would only be two people per square mile who would have permits to legally carry weapons. There are 10 times more criminals and street gang members in our cities who are illegally carrying concealed weapons right at this very moment. So what exactly are we afraid of?

The majority of us who live in and around urbanized areas in New Jersey believe guns are the problem. We seem to believe this because the mainstream media has trained us to think that way. The truth is there is an estimated 50.6 million households having at least one gun in the United States, totaling approximately 228 million firearms. The total number of firearms that are used by criminals to commit their violent acts is approximately 450,000 nationwide.

Ninety-seven percent of people in Florida have not chosen to obtain their concealed carry permits, but they are getting a huge benefit from the 3 percent who do. Since Florida passed concealed carry legislation, crime has dropped to 4 percent below the national average from 36 percent above the national average before 1987.

Most of us in New Jersey will choose not to apply for a gun, because we have been convinced by our government and the media that guns are evil. But for those upstanding law-abiding citizens who feel differently, they should not be denied their constitutional right to defend themselves, if they feel the need to do so.

Great article. That is so true.

[elderboy02]

Originally Posted by Tombstone

Great article. That is so true.

Thank you for sharing that article.

[Da Klugs]

Originally Posted by Tombstone

Interesting fact:

During W.W.II the Japanese decided not to invade America because they knew most Americans were ARMED !

Note: Admiral Yamamoto who crafted the attack on Pearl Harbor had attended Harvard U 1919-1921 & was Naval Attaché to the U. S. 1925-28. Most of our Navy was destroyed at Pearl Harbor & our Army had been deprived of funding & was ill prepared to defend the country.
It was reported that when asked why Japan did not follow up the Pearl Harbor attack with an invasion of the U.S. Mainland, his reply was that he had lived in the U.S. & knew that almost all households had guns.

Another interesting fact.... 2 out of 3 Americans represent more than 66% of the total. Times change. What was important in one era becomes irrelevant in another. Americans having or not having guns in todays world has little impact on national security. Having guns and the types of guns do however have an impact on personal security and safety. Being safer by having a gun and less safe through the ability of the few to harm in greater numbers with "military gear" being the opposite ends of the discussion. I believe assault rifles, automatic weapons etc. fall in the category of WMPD and should not be in private hands. Like nuclear weapons, fighter aircraft, tanks, etc. One on one guns are fine. One to many, too quickly do not serve the public interest and I believe were never envisioned by our founding fathers. Unfortunately, they are not here to ask, just their work product based upon their frame of reference a couple hundred years ago. Slavery is an interesting frame of reference when citing the sanctity of the words written by our founding fathers. Last time I checked women and minorities can vote now. Those words were written on parchment, not engraved in stone. The principles they represented were, by design, adaptable to the evolving nature of the nation. Liberty must always be balanced by justice.

[tnip23]

The items in the Bill of Rights were written as a protection for the people from the Gov't. The Bill of Rights limits the gov't and what it can do to the individual citizen and that's why each one is so important. If those who support gun control viewed the 2nd amendment as they do the 1st, guns wouldn't be banned, there ownership would be mandatory. Thomas Jefferson is quoted ad infinitum by those on the left side of the political spectrum, yet even Jefferson viewed the gov't as a necessary evil, i.e. something that should be limited in scope and power and subordinate to the rights of the individual.