Cele on guns: Amended Firearms Control Act cannot allow individuals to own more than one gun

eg2505

Honorary Master
Joined
Mar 12, 2008
Messages
16,954
It isn't difficult to understand. You can't oppress and control an armed populace. If the police have guns and you have a paintball gun, the police win.

It isn't about lethality. It is about control. I have plenty of power tools in my garage and kitchen that just about anyone can use to kill people.
so its similar to an armored vehicle or a tank, or a bulletproof Armour plate windscreen.
civilian aren't allowed to own one, in case they use it to go up against the government
 

SoldierMan

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2019
Messages
1,249
Just heard another tragic story of a farmer, his wife and daughter being brutalised on their farm, including the daughter being raped, and this turd wants to ban firearms for self defence. They are lucky to be alive.

Our constitution is pretty good the only mistake the NP made when negotiating the constitution was not inserting that access to firearms is a right and not a privilege.

And this stupid government should focus more on the illegal AK47s that are used in violent cash in transit heists rather than focusing on law abiding citizens, most of which will never own an AK47.
 

Gaz{M}

Executive Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2005
Messages
5,422
Taking into account the intelligence, competence and political beliefs of the average citizen, they shouldn't qualify to own a gun.

But for those who jump through all the hoops and get all the certs, training etc, and mental health assessments, this law is BS.
 

konfab

Honorary Master
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
22,331
so its similar to an armored vehicle or a tank, or a bulletproof Armour plate windscreen.
civilian aren't allowed to own one, in case they use it to go up against the government
That is incorrect.

You cannot control an entire country and its people with tanks, jets, battleships and drones or any of those things that you think trumps the right for citizens to own fireamrs.

A fighter jet, tank, drone, battleship or whatever cannot stand on street corners and enforce "no assembly" edicts. A fighter jet cannot kick your door down at 3AM and search your house for contraband.

None of these things can maintain the needed police state to completely subjugate the people of a country. These weapons are for demolishing large areas, killing many people at once and fighting other states. The government does not want to kill all of its people and blow up its own infrastructure. These are the very things they need to be tyrants in the first place. If they decided to turn everything outside of the capital city into glowing green glass, they would be the absolute rulers of a radioactive pile of slag.

Police are needed to maintain a police state, boots on the ground. And no matter how many police you have on the ground, they will always be vastly outnumbered by civilians. Which is why in a police state, it is vital that your police have automatic weapons, while the people have nothing.

BUT when a random pedestrian could have a firearm in their waistband and a good amount of households have an AR-15, all of that goes out the window as the police will be outnumbered.

If you want examples of this, look at every insurgency that the US has tried to destroy. These insurgencies are still kicking with nothing but AK-47s, pick up trucks and IEDs because these big scary military weapons you keep alluding to are all but useless for dealing with them.
 

konfab

Honorary Master
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
22,331
Just heard another tragic story of a farmer, his wife and daughter being brutalised on their farm, including the daughter being raped, and this turd wants to ban firearms for self defence. They are lucky to be alive.

Our constitution is pretty good the only mistake the NP made when negotiating the constitution was not inserting that access to firearms is a right and not a privilege.

And this stupid government should focus more on the illegal AK47s that are used in violent cash in transit heists rather than focusing on law abiding citizens, most of which will never own an AK47.
You would think that a revolutionary party would have been open to it. After all, if they wanted to make sure the oppression of people never happened again, putting in a right to own a weapon is the surefire way of doing it.

Can you imagine the NP rocking up to try and do forced removals of people if most of those people have guns?
 

egenis

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2010
Messages
916
Not to rattle the cage too much, but why would you ever need more than 1 gun for protection purposes?

Who here owns more than 1 firearm for protection?

I want to hunt as well.... not just protect myself and mine.
 

Gaz{M}

Executive Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2005
Messages
5,422
Can we at least agree to ban certain "types" of guns, like AK47's, R4/R5, M16 etc. for private citizens and possession of such weapons result in 25 to life, even if you don't commit a crime with it.
 

konfab

Honorary Master
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
22,331
Can we at least agree to ban certain "types" of guns, like AK47's, R4/R5, M16 etc. for private citizens and possession of such weapons result in 25 to life, even if you don't commit a crime with it.
Automatic weapons are illegal.

South Africa has really strict firearm laws. They just are not enforced. The problem isn't people buying guns legally.

Maybe I should clarify. The media does report them, but they don't generate the political outrage here.
Part and parcel:
https://www.iol.co.za/news/south-africa/gauteng/11-injured-in-second-joburg-shooting-in-early-hours-of-new-years-day-39927268
 

RaptorSA

Expert Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2008
Messages
4,035
Top communist mob boss talks about disarming tiny group of law-abiding and tax battered citizens in the most crime infested and violent country on the planet.

Let that sink in for a moment...

"He said it would be wonderful to have a country where individuals were not issued with firearms"
No, you f***ing low-IQ troglodytic rectum dwelling p0es pastry.

It would be nice to have a country where individuals only need firearms for sporting purposes.
 

Sollie

Executive Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2005
Messages
5,895
Can we at least agree to ban certain "types" of guns, like AK47's, R4/R5, M16 etc. for private citizens and possession of such weapons result in 25 to life, even if you don't commit a crime with it.
You perfectly highlight the problem. They are banned, yet AK47's, R4/R5s are commonly used in CIT etc.

The problem we are facing is that criminals couldn't care two hoots about laws and banning. Laws are for law abiding citizens, criminals ignore them. So we end up in a situation where innocent citizens are overpowered by criminals. It's supposed to be the cops that protect the citizens, but this also does not happen effectively, indeed them being the source of many of these weapons. On more than one occasions cops were the criminals.
 

MidnightWizard

Executive Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2007
Messages
5,428
Are semi-automatic handguns with selectable fire modes "banned"?
Try firing a "handgun" ( without an add on stock ) on -- full auto... you likely to shoot yourself !
Not sure anyone would ever want something like that ....
HOWEVER
IF you have a special collectors license then you may own / possess a -- Broomhandle Mauser
and
MANY other interesting things ....
 

MidnightWizard

Executive Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2007
Messages
5,428
What an utter load of twaddle. Like asking someone why they own more than one car.
You see ....
IF you have more than ONE firearm
Then
In time of need you can get your buddy to assist -- you can "arm" the MILITIA !
SOMEONE -- has thought very carefully about this -- a CLEAR indication of the thought process behind the law-making actions !
 
Top