Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Log In

A valid email is required.
Password is required.
Posted: 1/17/2002 11:11:47 AM EST
Heard on the news that all citizens were supposed to give them up. What do you think? Mike
Link Posted: 1/17/2002 11:18:51 AM EST
Yes, we should spend our money and risk our soldier's lives making sure every Afgan is disarmed. This will make it safer, easier, and faster for Russia, Pakistan, Iran, or China to invade the country later.z
Link Posted: 1/17/2002 11:20:06 AM EST
The Afghans should do what I'm gonna do, meet them at the door.
Link Posted: 1/17/2002 11:22:39 AM EST
Link Posted: 1/17/2002 11:28:26 AM EST
Unless they have a 2nd Amendment written into their Constitution... Yes, they should give up their guns. In fact, they should send them to me for "safe keeping" [:D]
Link Posted: 1/17/2002 11:32:03 AM EST
No!
Link Posted: 1/17/2002 11:35:46 AM EST
Link Posted: 1/17/2002 11:37:53 AM EST
Am I the only one who thinks they should give up their guns? I mean... it's for the children!!!
Link Posted: 1/17/2002 11:40:09 AM EST
I don't know if they have a Constitution such as we do (supposedly), that protects the right to bear arms, but I bet most will find some way to hide their weapons for later use. From what I hear, the gun is integrated into their lives, it would be like taking cars away from Americans! Of course no one looks at the facts these days, but if their weapons are taken away, there is sure to be an increase in crime caused by the people who don't follow the law (we call these people criminals for a reason!) I hope the Afghan people don't buy into their armies protecting them, because we all know how that works out for the average citizen.
Link Posted: 1/17/2002 11:40:19 AM EST
Originally Posted By EdAvilaSr: Hell Noooo!
View Quote
What he said.
Link Posted: 1/17/2002 12:18:16 PM EST
The Taliban had strict gun control, coupled with house-to-house searches and stuff, but it looks like even they were unable to make more than a dent in the number of guns in the country. The Afghans will pretty much have their guns as long as they please. Now their government may make it difficult for them to [b][u]carry[/u][/b] them, which of course, means that only outlaws and the men of the warlords will carry guns.
Link Posted: 1/17/2002 12:24:44 PM EST
Ban all children. For the Afghans.
Link Posted: 1/17/2002 12:35:25 PM EST
Send Schumer, Feinstein and Janet Babyburner over there to enforce it, with help from Louis Freeh. We'll see how far they get.
Link Posted: 1/17/2002 12:49:26 PM EST
The Afgans have used their weapons to protect themselves and fight the Russians, Taliban, on and on for years. Why would they give them up now, what would they use to fight off the next invader (the U.N.)? Gun laws will only make the 'new world citizens' fight their new government before it gets started. If it is for the children, ban the children, keep the guns. Why is it that the FIRST thing the U.N. wants to do is disarm everyone (but the U.N.)? HELLLLL NOOOOOOOOOO !!!!
Link Posted: 1/17/2002 1:45:19 PM EST
Here is a excerpt from the below linked article regarding Afghanistan and gun control. Baryalai is a Aghan "General". Baryalai, who is overseeing disarmament in Khoja Khon and other towns in Baghlan province, laid out a comprehensive plan for disarmament. First, he is asking everyone to [u]register[/u] their guns. Then, in a lightning swoop, authorities will [u]confiscate[/u] all the weapons in a particular region in one day, so no disarmed village is left at the mercy of a still-armed neighbor. [url]www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A36560-2002Jan12.html[/url] This is the picture that accompanied the article. [img]http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20020112/capt.1010863512afghan_giving_up_guns_xel103.jpg[/img]
Link Posted: 1/17/2002 2:21:06 PM EST
now why can't we have gun shows like the one pictured above? [;D]
Link Posted: 1/17/2002 2:24:51 PM EST
Link Posted: 1/17/2002 2:30:41 PM EST
Link Posted: 1/17/2002 2:33:21 PM EST
I am completely confused on all the attention that we are giving to Afgan. We should disband the network of terrorists as much as possible, until the kernals stop popping in the microwave...... Get UBL and the other jerk if possible and get out. We have been risking our lives to feed these people even though everyone hate the US over there..... AND YET THERE HAS NOT BEEN ANY MONEY OR AID FROM ANY OIL RICH ARAB NATION TO HELP THESE POOR STARVING PEOPLE. If Saudi Arabia or any other oil rich country really gave a ####, they can help without risk because supposedly they all love each other and hate the US only. So who is on deck? (I,m for IRAQ).
Link Posted: 1/17/2002 2:33:41 PM EST
Keepem. It's for the wimenz !
Link Posted: 1/17/2002 2:36:37 PM EST
Originally Posted By Danny7: AND YET THERE HAS NOT BEEN ANY MONEY OR AID FROM ANY OIL RICH ARAB NATION TO HELP THESE POOR STARVING PEOPLE.
View Quote
Actually I believe other Arab nations have been helping.
Link Posted: 1/17/2002 2:38:39 PM EST
They should have a "waiting period" of at least 7 days. This would allow them to "cool off" before they get thier guns back. That should keep them from doing a stupid thing again by letting a bunch of nut cases overrun the country. Disarm them? Looks like they are too stupid to own guns. I say funkin ay right.
Link Posted: 1/17/2002 2:38:57 PM EST
Of course they have the right to own firearms, all persons have this inalieanable right. It isn't just an American thing guys, it is a basic human right. Much like the right to a free press and the right to worship as they please.
Link Posted: 1/17/2002 2:41:09 PM EST
Originally Posted By Danny7: I am completely confused on all the attention that we are giving to Afgan. We should disband the network of terrorists as much as possible, until the kernals stop popping in the microwave...... Get UBL and the other jerk if possible and get out.
View Quote
This is the second proxy war we've fought using the Afghans. After the first - against the Soviets - we did leave and that leaving left open the door for the Taliban which left open the door for UBL ....
Link Posted: 1/17/2002 2:44:16 PM EST
For the sake of not being a hypocrit.... Hell no! If the citizens didn't have guns, then there wouldn't have been a Northern Alliance. True, the Northern Alliance is a bunch of assholes whom I wouldn't trust as far as I could throw them. But they tried to overthrow a corrupt government. Now if the citizens are not armed, who will overthrow the Northern Alliance when their time comes?
Link Posted: 1/17/2002 3:00:44 PM EST
Originally Posted By Stealth: For the sake of not being a hypocrit.... Hell no! If the citizens didn't have guns, then there wouldn't have been a Northern Alliance. True, the Northern Alliance is a bunch of assholes whom I wouldn't trust as far as I could throw them. But they tried to overthrow a corrupt government. Now if the citizens are not armed, who will overthrow the Northern Alliance when their time comes?
View Quote
The Northern Alliance was the recognized government. The Northern Alliance was then overthrown by the Taliban. The Northern Alliance with considerable assistance from the US has now overthrown the Taliban. The idea of the new government is to be inclusive. We'll see.
Link Posted: 1/17/2002 3:06:13 PM EST
No, PHUCK NO! . Wait a minute,,, If we disarm them,,, Can we send the our very own BATF over there (as needed)?????
Link Posted: 1/17/2002 3:25:13 PM EST
Did you see all those RPG's? Looks like some kind of far-away idylic vacation-land to me. It looks to me that we will have to ship over our ENTIRE ATF to A-stan to disarm that nation of "perps." They can take all the black ski masks and boxes of matches over that they want. The only thing is, those people aren't passive, like(?) American gunowners. A-stan will then become a fascinating test case for the disarmament of noncooperative gunowners. I will be watching intently.
Top Top