That is really interesting, funny, I don't think I've ever seen, or ever thought about seeing, the inside of a gun factory. The picture of the carts full of bullets is scary, look how many there are! I also like the contrast of the woman's pink handbag next to her as she sorts bullets.
Paci Fist
· 2 years ago
I wonder how many human lives those guns will take in their lifetime.
Peter G.
· 2 years ago
I'm pretty sure there are two factories here-- there's no factory in the world that manufactures both guns and ammunition, as far as I know.
. png
AAAaaa
· 2 years ago
WAH WEE WOO WHOA
G
· 2 years ago
Bullets and guns are not made in the same factorys....EVER
subcorpus
· 2 years ago
i really hope that they have quite a bit of security ... product leakage would't be good here for sure ... good pics ...
internet user
· 2 years ago
Too bad so much time money and energy is put toward making weapons.
billy
· 2 years ago
isnt america ashamed? ....
Kingster
· 2 years ago
Damn, it looks hot as hell in there, on top of that, none of them really look all that happy. Should they really be handling guns?
Who?
· 2 years ago
They're not "bullets", they're loaded cartridges, shells, whatever, not bullets. Bulletts are what's in the business end of the shells casing, completeing the loaded shell. Why is it the people who are so dead set against private ownership of firearms never know or understand anything about them?
hiltstck
· 2 years ago
How many human lives will those guns take? Those guns will take as many human lives as every other inanimate object on the face of the earth.
America should be ashamed of what? Ashamed of making M-16s/AR-15s that will later raid some meth lab in Missouri or a bomb lab in Iraq?
Or, maybe some guy in Colorado is going to put holes in a paper target. How evil is that?
Read the CONSTITUTION. We, law abiding citizens of the US, have a right to bear arms. If you disagree, move to a more secure country that doesn't allow citizens to own guns--like China.
peaceful
· 2 years ago
Paci Fist said:
"I wonder how many human lives those guns will take in their lifetime."
You don't have to wonder - the answer is none. Guns don't take lives, the people wielding them do. Firearms are inanimate objects and, contrary to popular myth, are unable to parade around firing themselves at innocent people. It takes a living, breathing criminal to do that.
It might be interesting to know how many human lives those guns may be used to save, though.
Fourth Horseman
· 2 years ago
Sheesh, you can't even post pics of a firearms factory without the whiners popping up. "Isn't America ashamed?" and "I wonder how many human lives those guns will take in their lifetime." Get a grip. Firearms are tools. Nothing more. Many of the people bitching and moaning about firearms wouldn't be alive today had their grandfathers not wielding similar weapons to put down fascism and aggression.
No, we're not Ashamed, Billy. We're not ashamed that our founders had the good sense to recognize that the state should not have the power to do disarm honest, law abiding citizens. We're not ashamed that in America we value personal freedoms more than personal security. We're not ashamed that we have, the citizens, have the power to defend ourselves without cowering in fear, waiting for officers of the state to arrive at their leisure and rescue us.
Carl
· 2 years ago
Anyone who found these interesting should watch the intro of the movie 'Lord of War' starring nicholas cage!
paci fist: There's no chance those guns might PROTECT some lives?
internet user: I totally agree. It's a shame there are so many violent people out there that make it necessary.
billy: no.
drstrangegun
· 2 years ago
"I wonder how many human lives those guns will save in their lifetime."
There, fixed it for you.
"isnt america ashamed? …."
Um, no. I have a framed photo of a WWII era factory, depicting British ladies assembling Sterling SMGs. Should they be ashamed?
"The picture of the carts full of bullets is scary,"
Nope; it's just a cart full of bullets. Actually, it's a cart full of "American" cartridges. It's far, far less scarier than the carts full of Chinese bullets that are currently murdering thousands upon thousands of Burmese monks and protestors who can't fight back at all because they've been disarmed for decades. I bet they'd love to have some of these "scary" armaments, same as all the dead refugees in Darfur.
Jay Chow
· 2 years ago
They NEVER EVER make bullets and firearms in the same factory.
Those are just brass casings (the part that gets ejected out after the hammer strikes the cartridge)
If those casings did have gun powder and the bullet put into them then it would HAVE to be another factory.
Can anyone tell what model those things are? I know their AR 15 style guns but what is the designation m4/16?
Martin
· 2 years ago
“Isn’t America ashamed?” and “I wonder how many human lives those guns will take in their lifetime.” Get a grip. Firearms are tools. Nothing more.
Well, yes, they ARE tools. Tools for killing things, actually. I'd like to see what you can BUILD with a firearm...
Tod Glenn
· 2 years ago
That's the arsenal of democracy, baby!
Free men own guns. Slaves don't.
Kevin
· 2 years ago
I'm very pleased to see some pro-firearm responses. I'm amazed I haven't seen the idiot, "If we banned firearms in America, we would have so fewer murders/crimes/etc" comments.
I have plenty of friends who were terrified of firearms. Then I introduce them to mine and EDUCATE them about proper usage, and would you believe it? Their fear and ignorance about firearms is gone. Not only that, but they are plain fun. Just like many other hobbies.
Education is key.
PC
· 2 years ago
Just plain fun? Go get a paintball gun or a pellet gun if you like shooting things so much. Sorry I don't see M-16's as either fun or a "tool" anymore. Guns are really doing a lot to "bring peace to the Middle East" too. Your ancestors or forefathers had guns for the purpose of hunting, not semi-autos whose only purpose is to take human life efficiently.
Shareware Software
· 2 years ago
I hope they make the builts and the guns in diffrent factories
me
· 2 years ago
“I wonder how many human lives those guns will save in their lifetime.”
Yep, not to mention all that oil these guns save from being consumed by its legitimate owners, err, I mean by those evil terrorists...
Libs-R-Morons
· 2 years ago
"Your ancestors or forefathers had guns for the purpose of hunting, not semi-autos whose only purpose is to take human life efficiently. "
They also had guns for the purpose of protecting themselves, against all evil... you know, criminals, wild animals, liberals....
As for not having semi autos.... they didn't have them only because they were developed yet...
grammer police
· 2 years ago
People "in a well regulated militia" have the right to keep and bear arms. Are you in a "well regulated militia"?
"How many lives will those guns take in the future"
Answer:
Not enough, there are far too many people in the world, we could do with a bit of a culling.
hiltstck
· 2 years ago
A gun (TOOL) can be used to HARVEST FOOD. If you shoot and eat a deer, that is one fewer cow that will graduate from Bovine University.
There are semi-automatic rifles for hunting. Go to the Remington website.
While AR-15s can't be used to hunt deer, they are an excellent TOOL to keep coyotes from eating your chickens.
If you start drawing rather arbitrary lines in the sand, saying that we can all own innocent hunting guns, but not evil "assault rifles", then you are going down a road that leads to no guns at all. That leads to a totalitarian state.
Look at the gun laws now. Do you think Feinstein is only interested in "assault rifles"? Do you think ignorant fear will stop at "assault rifles"?
Look at income tax. It didn't happen all at once.
Look at the Patriot Act and the TSA. All of those "security procedures" didn't happen all at once. (They did happen quickly though.)
The 2nd Amendment is the first freedom. If citizens don't own guns, then their freedom is on loan. I have never been in a physical fight of any kind, but when it comes down to it, physical force is the deciding factor. If people aren't able to defend themselves from their government, then their rights are "allowed" by the government. Rights are not given by or allowed by the government, they are endowed by our Creator. Read the Declaration of Independence.
Whoever said education is the key--you are exactly right. Fear, sensorship, and lack of personal responsibility are not the keys. (Privatized) education is the key.
(I apologize for my soap box deviating from the gun issue. If you disagree, I urge you to not have a quick emotional response. Do some research and THINK rationally. Wherever your thoughts lead you, at least YOU came up with it. You didn't let your friends, parents, or the "cool, sophisticated" media tell you what to think.)
AMERICAN VETERAN
· 2 years ago
To: hiltstck, Never ever feel that you need to apologize for listing our amendments and
AMERICAN VETERAN
· 2 years ago
Just had a blast of lightning and, my comment above just posted without being finished.
I wanted to say to NEVER EVER feel any need whatsoever to apologize for proudly announcing the amendments and THE SERIOUS REASONS FOR THEM.
I also want to acknowledge "Who" who posted one of the great truths: "Why is it the people who are so dead set against private ownership of firearms never know or understand anything about them?"
Robert
· 2 years ago
These are from at least two different factories. One is making M16s or some clone of them, the other making 50 caliber machine gun ammunition, or 50 cal BMG and assembling it into belts.
I've been in a LOT of factories photographing. These folks look about the same as factory workers baking bread, making tools, toys, air conditioners cars, medical equipment or anything else. It's repetitive work.
I'm very happy to have my AR15 which I use in NRA National Match and CMP competitive shooting. Those matches are held in nearly every state at least once a month. Somehow, I got one of the ones that isn't evil.
salman
· 2 years ago
well this is a my Content and you have taken my content and not add my source also i will take action for this
hiltstck
· 2 years ago
grammar police -
I appreciate your response--it is much more constructive than "bullets are scary", "guns kill people", and "America should be ashamed". I have heard that interpretation of the 2nd Amendment before. (The 2nd Amendment only allows "a well regulated militia" to own firearms.)
First, read the entire amendment. It ends with "...the right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms..."
Second, let's assume that our forefathers did only intend for a "well regulated militia" to own firearms. Under this assumption, a "well regulated militia" refers to the military. Therefore, the forefathers decided it was important to make sure the government did not take the guns away from the military. A government would never take the guns away from the military. I am pro-military, but a strong military only makes the federal government stronger. The Bill of Rights are written to limit the authority of the federal government, not make it stronger.
The Bill of Rights were written in response to tyranny the Colonies experienced as part of the British Empire. King George was not taking the muskets away from HIS redcoats. The forefathers recognized that an organized group of people could defy the government (or foreign invaders) if they were armed. Watch Red Dawn.
Brian T
· 2 years ago
Funny that people think that the 2nd Amendment somehow applies to States Rights, when the other amendments in the Bill of Rights applies to individuals.
Looking at the issue in a historical context, it would seem that the regulation and eventual banning of personal weapons (as a means of self defense and resistance against the applicable government), has very often been a precursor to the installation of a totalitarian state (feudal Japan, for example). What makes us so different from these examples? Some would cry out "Democracy!", but face it, our system is run by money now, not statesmen who are looking out for the best interests of their constituents. But that's a whole other issue.
Let's also not forget that one factor that kept Japan from landing troops on the US Mainland was the knowledge that the majority of homes at that time were armed! (This was quoted from a Japanese Army General after the war).
I find the whole "guns are bad because they kill people" statement somewhat banal. If you want to ban things because they have a propensity for ending human life, then you really should think about adding: tobacco alchohol automobiles marijuana and other illegal drugs (either as a primary or secondary cause of death) bows and arrows kitchen knives swords sticks (Ferdinand Magellan was killed by one, or more accurately, a Phillipino native wielding one)
Of course that's just a start. Now, many might retort with the statement "but guns are made only to kill people". Some are, some aren't, but that is beside the point, as that argument is just not logically consistent. I'm not sure on this (and feel free to correct this statement if I'm wrong), but I believe that the first steam-powered carriage was originally intended as a means to tow artillery pieces into combat. That would mean cars were designed to kill, too. Should we ban those?
What it boils down to is that people don't like the idea of killing. I agree! Killing people is bad! We should try to stop doing that! But if you really want to stop violence, perhaps the focus should shift from the guns to the people who think it's ok to hurt others for their own personal gain.
Oh, and why is it that the people I often see on the front lines of gun control are often the same people I see using guns to make violence filled movies? Oh, wait, they have a 1st Amendment right to free speech. I guess that one applies to individuals, right?
Ernst Blofeld
· 2 years ago
I feel ashamed that America can't offer these rifles to civilians in more countries.
hiltstck
· 2 years ago
Good point about the movies Brian T, I'll have to remember that.
Nice nickname Ernst--come to think of it, gravity killed Ernst Blofeld. Maybe we should outlaw that.
Medusa
· 2 years ago
chak de india!!!
Daniel Boone
· 2 years ago
To all you folks who just can't stand the thought of firearms I have just one suggestion----don't get one! Just leave my constitution alone. As I recall my ancestors used their state of the art firearms (for the time) to hunt, defend themselves and to win a revolution. Times changes, technology changes but the principles of freedom do not--or at least should not. If you kind and gentle folks who are so opposed to firearms (and who always are the most ignorant of firearms in general) ever find yourself in a situation where someone is attempting to break into your home, please just call 911, sit back, and wait for someone else to come and save your sorry asses. Maybe they'll get there in time. Maybe you'll just be another statistic. Either way you have given up your basic right of self defense and given it to the government. Now doesn't that just make you feel all warm and fuzzy and safe inside. Me? I'll defend myself and call the cops to clean up.
desertvet762
· 2 years ago
Hey "grammer police" take a look at Title 10 of the US Code. If you are a male US citizen between the ages of 17-45 you are in the militia, limp wrist or not. Its the law of the land.
The Second Amendment protects an individual right, regardless of what left-wing revisionists want to spout today. Any serious student of history knows it.
Soylent
· 2 years ago
To the person(s) asking what can be built with firearms:
A free country made up of a free people.
There you go. Deny or wring your hands about it all you want. After you are finished with your angst and garment rending, pick up a history book. You'll be amazed.
Rosenrot
· 2 years ago
Hey Paci Fist, STFU you liberal tool
ece
· 2 years ago
Regarding the "well regulated militia." Let's not forget that the militia, according to the collective rights people, means the National Guard. But don't let truth or logic get in the way of your sense of reasoning. Because the National Guard did not even exist when the Bill of Rights was drafted. And speaking of the Bill of rights, since you, grammar police, like to use wikipedia as your source of information, you should look up the 2nd Ammendment. You will soon learn that emphasis was placed on the People and not the militia. People was capitalized. Militia was not. Let's not forget, also, that the Bill of Rights was to written to protect the rights of the people in general. If the 2nd Ammendment was for a government agency, how come they didn't have an ammendment for things such as cannons or ships? There was no need to put things like that in the Bill of Rights were it to refer to a government controlled entity. I should know, I work for the government. I swore an oath to defend the Constitution, and that includes defending it against people like you who wish to subvert the very things that protect us from tyranny. You are the enemy, my friend. But you will never see it so long as your aspirations are for socialist welfare lines full of non-productive leeches who aspire to no great end.
R.C.
· 2 years ago
I.R.T. "Is America Ashamed?"
FOR WHAT? The vast majority of countries out there make weapons in mass quantity, in factories just like that. All weapons do not originate from America, so save your brainwashed drivel and EMO blithering.
Oh, and hurry up and run to the T.V., your next round of biased misinformation is about to be served, and it seems you have a healthy appetite. Enjoy!
Tacberry
· 2 years ago
That's a beautiful sight. Look at all that American Might. Look at the excellent example of U.S. manufacturing and jobs. I would love to work in a cool place like that!
To you hippies in the first dozen comments: That is why Americans are Free. That is why the Western Nations are Free!
Weapons in the hands of the Good Guys are tools for Good. Weapons in the hands of the bad guys are tools for evil. Evil grows - it's the desire for power, desire to conquer.
Good must be able to beat back the bad.
Now if we could only make you numb skulls understand good and evil. Hell, you can't even understand the fundimental difference between George Bush and Adolph Hitler - ok, try Bill Clinton and Adolph Hitler - how about any American President, live or dead, vs. Adolph Hitler. Idiots.
Flavian
· 2 years ago
It is impressive ... but it`s only o job.people must work so that their bosses , who most liklely belong to some sect , get richer ... and fund america to occupy other free countries america will domintate the world ... because the people are weak and aren`t able to confront their "chosen" leaders ... you complain about your president ... but you`re not even able to make a rally meeting that counts ... you just march sissy like around the white house ... c`mon ... learn from other countries excuse my english ... i`m 14 and from europe ( which isn`t in france)
abhinav narain
· 2 years ago
they should close it for a better tomorrow
Al-Andal Mohammed
· 1 year ago
"You don’t have to wonder - the answer is none. Guns don’t take lives, the people wielding them do. Firearms are inanimate objects and, contrary to popular myth, are unable to parade around firing themselves at innocent people. It takes a living, breathing criminal to do that."
Or a Marine. Or Blackwater personnel, who have been known to perform operations that would look like a drive-by-shooting to most observers [they're getting hammered for that, good to know Congress is doing _something_]. I say this, because, in any military operation in an urban environment, civilian casualties are immensely probable. When all your targets look like the innocent civilians, it's hard not to accidentally take out a couple guys on the way to the local mosque who "look suspicious". This is understandable. In my opinion, it's best to avoid such situations in the first place [e.g. not occupy countries w/guerilla[sp?] resistance.]
Don't get me wrong. Guns are cool. I like guns. Most guys I know like guns too. The fact is that the primary use for a weapon, say the M4 Carbine, is to incapacitate and/or kill an enemy. Bullets made for these guns are designed to pierce infantry body-armor. They are designed to tumble [5.7 x 28 mm] or fragment [hollow-points] in such a way that a man, even wearing armor, can be taken down in relatively few hits. Not a coyote or a deer. I don't think very many hunt with assault rifles. Gets expensive quick.
And to the comments concerning saving lives via military intervention. It would seem that bombs and guns in the hands of the military forces of a few countries really can save lives.655,000? That's nothing compared to the 3000 that died on 9/11. By taking down a brutal dictator, the Coalition has ensured that Millions of United States citizens [no other country in the same category really gets attacked or hated on as much, except maybe Britain.] will be able to enjoy their quality of life. They can go to the airport and not have to be intimidated and stripsearched and not allowed to carry myriad objects onto planes. All for the tiny price of little over half a million Iraqis. And they don't even really count as people either, more like chickens. Ever see an Iraqi design a breakthrough computer processor manufacturing process? Ever see a chicken do that? My point, right there.
All Comments
. png
product leakage would't be good here for sure ...
good pics ...
America should be ashamed of what? Ashamed of making M-16s/AR-15s that will later raid some meth lab in Missouri or a bomb lab in Iraq?
Or, maybe some guy in Colorado is going to put holes in a paper target. How evil is that?
Read the CONSTITUTION. We, law abiding citizens of the US, have a right to bear arms. If you disagree, move to a more secure country that doesn't allow citizens to own guns--like China.
"I wonder how many human lives those guns will take in their lifetime."
You don't have to wonder - the answer is none. Guns don't take lives, the people wielding them do. Firearms are inanimate objects and, contrary to popular myth, are unable to parade around firing themselves at innocent people. It takes a living, breathing criminal to do that.
It might be interesting to know how many human lives those guns may be used to save, though.
No, we're not Ashamed, Billy. We're not ashamed that our founders had the good sense to recognize that the state should not have the power to do disarm honest, law abiding citizens. We're not ashamed that in America we value personal freedoms more than personal security. We're not ashamed that we have, the citizens, have the power to defend ourselves without cowering in fear, waiting for officers of the state to arrive at their leisure and rescue us.
Check it out on youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vi-fQMGYyMo
There's no chance those guns might PROTECT some lives?
internet user:
I totally agree. It's a shame there are so many violent people out there that make it necessary.
billy:
no.
There, fixed it for you.
"isnt america ashamed? …."
Um, no. I have a framed photo of a WWII era factory, depicting British ladies assembling Sterling SMGs. Should they be ashamed?
"The picture of the carts full of bullets is scary,"
Nope; it's just a cart full of bullets. Actually, it's a cart full of "American" cartridges. It's far, far less scarier than the carts full of Chinese bullets that are currently murdering thousands upon thousands of Burmese monks and protestors who can't fight back at all because they've been disarmed for decades. I bet they'd love to have some of these "scary" armaments, same as all the dead refugees in Darfur.
Those are just brass casings (the part that gets ejected out after the hammer strikes the cartridge)
If those casings did have gun powder and the bullet put into them then it would HAVE to be another factory.
Can anyone tell what model those things are? I know their AR 15 style guns but what is the designation m4/16?
Well, yes, they ARE tools. Tools for killing things, actually. I'd like to see what you can BUILD with a firearm...
Free men own guns. Slaves don't.
I have plenty of friends who were terrified of firearms. Then I introduce them to mine and EDUCATE them about proper usage, and would you believe it? Their fear and ignorance about firearms is gone. Not only that, but they are plain fun. Just like many other hobbies.
Education is key.
Yep, not to mention all that oil these guns save from being consumed by its legitimate owners, err, I mean by those evil terrorists...
"
They also had guns for the purpose of protecting themselves, against all evil... you know, criminals, wild animals, liberals....
As for not having semi autos.... they didn't have them only because they were developed yet...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_t...
Answer:
Not enough, there are far too many people in the world, we could do with a bit of a culling.
There are semi-automatic rifles for hunting. Go to the Remington website.
While AR-15s can't be used to hunt deer, they are an excellent TOOL to keep coyotes from eating your chickens.
If you start drawing rather arbitrary lines in the sand, saying that we can all own innocent hunting guns, but not evil "assault rifles", then you are going down a road that leads to no guns at all. That leads to a totalitarian state.
Look at the gun laws now. Do you think Feinstein is only interested in "assault rifles"? Do you think ignorant fear will stop at "assault rifles"?
Look at income tax. It didn't happen all at once.
Look at the Patriot Act and the TSA. All of those "security procedures" didn't happen all at once. (They did happen quickly though.)
The 2nd Amendment is the first freedom. If citizens don't own guns, then their freedom is on loan. I have never been in a physical fight of any kind, but when it comes down to it, physical force is the deciding factor. If people aren't able to defend themselves from their government, then their rights are "allowed" by the government. Rights are not given by or allowed by the government, they are endowed by our Creator. Read the Declaration of Independence.
Whoever said education is the key--you are exactly right. Fear, sensorship, and lack of personal responsibility are not the keys. (Privatized) education is the key.
(I apologize for my soap box deviating from the gun issue. If you disagree, I urge you to not have a quick emotional response. Do some research and THINK rationally. Wherever your thoughts lead you, at least YOU came up with it. You didn't let your friends, parents, or the "cool, sophisticated" media tell you what to think.)
Never ever feel that you need to apologize for listing our amendments and
I wanted to say to NEVER EVER feel any need whatsoever to apologize for proudly announcing the amendments and THE SERIOUS REASONS FOR THEM.
I also want to acknowledge "Who" who posted one of the great truths:
"Why is it the people who are so dead set against private ownership of firearms never know or understand anything about them?"
I've been in a LOT of factories photographing. These folks look about the same as factory workers baking bread, making tools, toys, air conditioners cars, medical equipment or anything else. It's repetitive work.
I'm very happy to have my AR15 which I use in NRA National Match and CMP competitive shooting. Those matches are held in nearly every state at least once a month. Somehow, I got one of the ones that isn't evil.
I appreciate your response--it is much more constructive than "bullets are scary", "guns kill people", and "America should be ashamed". I have heard that interpretation of the 2nd Amendment before. (The 2nd Amendment only allows "a well regulated militia" to own firearms.)
First, read the entire amendment. It ends with "...the right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms..."
Second, let's assume that our forefathers did only intend for a "well regulated militia" to own firearms. Under this assumption, a "well regulated militia" refers to the military. Therefore, the forefathers decided it was important to make sure the government did not take the guns away from the military. A government would never take the guns away from the military. I am pro-military, but a strong military only makes the federal government stronger. The Bill of Rights are written to limit the authority of the federal government, not make it stronger.
The Bill of Rights were written in response to tyranny the Colonies experienced as part of the British Empire. King George was not taking the muskets away from HIS redcoats. The forefathers recognized that an organized group of people could defy the government (or foreign invaders) if they were armed. Watch Red Dawn.
Looking at the issue in a historical context, it would seem that the regulation and eventual banning of personal weapons (as a means of self defense and resistance against the applicable government), has very often been a precursor to the installation of a totalitarian state (feudal Japan, for example). What makes us so different from these examples? Some would cry out "Democracy!", but face it, our system is run by money now, not statesmen who are looking out for the best interests of their constituents. But that's a whole other issue.
Let's also not forget that one factor that kept Japan from landing troops on the US Mainland was the knowledge that the majority of homes at that time were armed! (This was quoted from a Japanese Army General after the war).
I find the whole "guns are bad because they kill people" statement somewhat banal. If you want to ban things because they have a propensity for ending human life, then you really should think about adding:
tobacco
alchohol
automobiles
marijuana and other illegal drugs (either as a primary or secondary cause of death)
bows and arrows
kitchen knives
swords
sticks (Ferdinand Magellan was killed by one, or more accurately, a Phillipino native wielding one)
Of course that's just a start. Now, many might retort with the statement "but guns are made only to kill people". Some are, some aren't, but that is beside the point, as that argument is just not logically consistent. I'm not sure on this (and feel free to correct this statement if I'm wrong), but I believe that the first steam-powered carriage was originally intended as a means to tow artillery pieces into combat. That would mean cars were designed to kill, too. Should we ban those?
What it boils down to is that people don't like the idea of killing. I agree! Killing people is bad! We should try to stop doing that! But if you really want to stop violence, perhaps the focus should shift from the guns to the people who think it's ok to hurt others for their own personal gain.
Oh, and why is it that the people I often see on the front lines of gun control are often the same people I see using guns to make violence filled movies? Oh, wait, they have a 1st Amendment right to free speech. I guess that one applies to individuals, right?
Nice nickname Ernst--come to think of it, gravity killed Ernst Blofeld. Maybe we should outlaw that.
The Second Amendment protects an individual right, regardless of what left-wing revisionists want to spout today. Any serious student of history knows it.
A free country made up of a free people.
There you go. Deny or wring your hands about it all you want. After you are finished with your angst and garment rending, pick up a history book. You'll be amazed.
FOR WHAT? The vast majority of countries out there make weapons in mass quantity, in factories just like that. All weapons do not originate from America, so save your brainwashed drivel and EMO blithering.
Oh, and hurry up and run to the T.V., your next round of biased misinformation is about to be served, and it seems you have a healthy appetite. Enjoy!
To you hippies in the first dozen comments: That is why Americans are Free. That is why the Western Nations are Free!
Weapons in the hands of the Good Guys are tools for Good. Weapons in the hands of the bad guys are tools for evil. Evil grows - it's the desire for power, desire to conquer.
Good must be able to beat back the bad.
Now if we could only make you numb skulls understand good and evil. Hell, you can't even understand the fundimental difference between George Bush and Adolph Hitler - ok, try Bill Clinton and Adolph Hitler - how about any American President, live or dead, vs. Adolph Hitler. Idiots.
america will domintate the world ... because the people are weak and aren`t able to confront their "chosen" leaders ...
you complain about your president ... but you`re not even able to make a rally meeting that counts ... you just march sissy like around the white house ... c`mon ... learn from other countries
excuse my english ... i`m 14 and from europe ( which isn`t in france)
Or a Marine. Or Blackwater personnel, who have been known to perform operations that would look like a drive-by-shooting to most observers [they're getting hammered for that, good to know Congress is doing _something_]. I say this, because, in any military operation in an urban environment, civilian casualties are immensely probable. When all your targets look like the innocent civilians, it's hard not to accidentally take out a couple guys on the way to the local mosque who "look suspicious". This is understandable. In my opinion, it's best to avoid such situations in the first place [e.g. not occupy countries w/guerilla[sp?] resistance.]
Don't get me wrong. Guns are cool. I like guns. Most guys I know like guns too. The fact is that the primary use for a weapon, say the M4 Carbine, is to incapacitate and/or kill an enemy. Bullets made for these guns are designed to pierce infantry body-armor. They are designed to tumble [5.7 x 28 mm] or fragment [hollow-points] in such a way that a man, even wearing armor, can be taken down in relatively few hits. Not a coyote or a deer. I don't think very many hunt with assault rifles. Gets expensive quick.
And to the comments concerning saving lives via military intervention.
It would seem that bombs and guns in the hands of the military forces of a few countries really can save lives.655,000? That's nothing compared to the 3000 that died on 9/11. By taking down a brutal dictator, the Coalition has ensured that Millions of United States citizens [no other country in the same category really gets attacked or hated on as much, except maybe Britain.] will be able to enjoy their quality of life. They can go to the airport and not have to be intimidated and stripsearched and not allowed to carry myriad objects onto planes. All for the tiny price of little over half a million Iraqis. And they don't even really count as people either, more like chickens. Ever see an Iraqi design a breakthrough computer processor manufacturing process? Ever see a chicken do that? My point, right there.
Okay, I'm done.