Discussion in 'Legal' started by LAR-15, Oct 15, 2005.
Police, judges, firefighters and security firms will be able to buy guns for private and official use, sales that are likely to sustain local manufacturers like Forjas Taurus, whose pistols are also hugely popular in the United States. Taurus exports rose 41 percent last year.
Tyranny of the majority at its worst.
can't see the article...
Collectivist stupidity. One of the downsides of "democracy" is that it allows the ignorant majority to hurt itself, and everybody else.
Incidentally, Hitler did not take power, he was voted into power in 1933. Comes to show.
Never mind I got it.
What is this world coming to when no one knows who Hitler/Stalin/Poa Pot were. :banghead: :banghead:
Those whe forget history are doomed to repeat it..
He never got a majority...but then again neither did Klinton.
Bill Klinton's wife. Oh, that's Hitlery, never mind!
Unfortunately, those who fear for their own safety care less about rights and potential consequences than about not getting shot by criminals.
They rarely see that giving up those rights will not produce the safety they desire; in fact, they will have much less.
A market research between october 11th and 13th, with 2002 electors, showed that between 46,8% and 51,2% would vote "no" (against the gun ban), while 42,8-47,2% would vote "yes". So there is still hope.
It's sad though, because only 8 days from the referendum a lot of people still don't know exactly what they're voting for. Some people still don't know the difference between being able to own a gun and to carry one. Civilians can't carry guns since 2003 (although I believe those who already had the permit can still renew it). If approved, the referendum will allow gun sales only for those who can get the permit to carry them (police, military, etc).
Likewise, we still hear people justifying their vote in favor the gun ban with statements like "I wish guns didn't exist". Guess what? They exist, deal with it. Unfortunately the campaigns both in favor and against the gun ban lack depth and information, appealing to the emotional or showing incomplete statistics.
On a side note, I've read that Glock is waiting authorization from the Army to build a factory here. According to the article they plan to use Brazil as a production and exportation base for Latin America, Africa and part of Asia, especially China. This because the legislation of EU, which Austria is part of, do not allow the sale of armaments to countries in conflict. Unfortunately they have no interest in the civilian market here.
That and the gun ban could result with Taurus moving the whole production to Miami.
This is why the most important thing we can do to protect our gun rights is to get more people into the shooting world. If someone has never shot a gun or doesn't know anyone who owns a gun, it would be quite natural for him to vote to ban them. People are afraid of things they don't understand. That's natural.
Take your non-shooting friends out and teach them how to shoot. Make them into gun owners. Especially people from non-traditional gun owning groups: women, gays, Jews, etc.
Another part of this is CCW reform. Once a state legalizes CCW there's no going back and there will be a core of people (CCW holders) who will strongly defend their right.
If more Brazilians owned guns this wouldn't even be coming up as an issue.
As a side note, Brazil has a reputation for being quite a dangerous place. All these dangerous Third World countries would get a lot more expats and foreign investors if these new arrivals could pack. I'm waiting for some smart country to say, "Come over here and invest, we will let you defend yourself."
Conceptually one of the primary purposes of a constitution is to prevent this sort of thing....
I thought Americans were the most undereducated nation.
I wonder if she knows who Gregory Peck is
No job is more secure than the slave's.
Separate names with a comma.