PDA

View Full Version : Do you think getting rid of Guns will make you safe?


TheWhiteRaider
07-29-2002, 04:09 PM
Do you think that removing the right to have guns will make you safe? I will tell you my view after the poll.

Old_Ben
07-29-2002, 04:17 PM
No removing the right to have guns will not make me safe, because then criminals will stull get guns and then I will have no way to protect myself (Even though I don't have a gun anyway, but if I wanted to have one.)

greedo626
07-29-2002, 04:20 PM
if you outlaw guns only outlaws will use them. but there will always be someone out there who has a gun and is willing to use it. so my answer is no, taking away my right to have a gun will not make me safer.

TheWhiteRaider
07-29-2002, 06:21 PM
If you said NO! I agree with you.
The two that posted here explain it all.

Clem
07-29-2002, 06:23 PM
we seem to manage quite well over here in the uk

no school shootings (well not many)

less gang shootings (im sure)

Breton
07-29-2002, 06:29 PM
Yes, countries with no guns have much less killing with guns, much less armed robbery and much less massacres (school shootings). Giving everyone guns is almost like encouraging them to use it for criminal stuff. Good I don't live in US.

JandoFett1842
07-29-2002, 06:31 PM
Then if you outlaw guns, what will you do at a shooting range? Or how will you kill the little forest aminals? Or how will you perswade your teacher to give you an A?

Darth Knight
07-29-2002, 06:41 PM
there is also more fatal stabings in the uk then the us so it is not like you are more safe

Yom
07-29-2002, 06:41 PM
if u outlaw the guns then outlaws will have to u slingshots ,sowrds, boards with nails in them, kives,baseball bats, shart things, and ugly topless monkeys just like toe old days

Breton
07-29-2002, 06:55 PM
Originally posted by Darth Knight
there is also more fatal stabings in the uk then the us so it is not like you are more safe

You are much more safe in UK or another normal european country than in US. Yes, there are many reasons why Europe is much better than US. EU is not one of them.

Camus
07-29-2002, 07:10 PM
Have a gun is a right... To remove the gun breaks the law... Having a gun with a licence is fine... If you remove all the guns... Hunters will get mad... Overpopulation of deer and other game animals will ocure... You can do all you want but those that are truely endanger lives with guns can get them illigaily... My dad has a gun in his closet... If he needs it he knows where to get it... Why have a gun self diffence... Opinion is an nothing but someones word... I would rather have a gun in my closet with the bulliets somewhere else than let a robber come into my house and kill me with out being able to do anything about it... Its all amatter of how you use a gun that would make such laws passed... Its not easy getting a gun legally... But If you really wanted a gun illegaly you can stricke up a few people and get a few AK-47's easy...

obi
07-29-2002, 07:15 PM
Getting rid of guns won't make everything un-violent. AND NEITHER WILL TUCKING IN OUR FRAKIN SHIRTS AT SCHOOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!(sorry bout that)


anyways, there are more ways to hurt a person then with a gun.

Breton
07-29-2002, 07:16 PM
All these post of keeping guns and let everyone kill eachother in a gigantic bloodbath supports my theory that most people in the world are really stupid.

Camus
07-29-2002, 07:19 PM
Originally posted by obi-wan13
Getting rid of guns won't make everything un-violent. AND NEITHER WILL TUCKING IN OUR FRAKIN SHIRTS AT SCHOOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!(sorry bout that)


anyways, there are more ways to hurt a person then with a gun.


Obi is right... If someone wants to hurt they can find away... Schools take away metal silver wear... but plasic can still make somoene else bleed... ~nods~ I know... Ive seen people stab with plastic forks and draw blood...

JandoFett1842
07-29-2002, 07:22 PM
Well if you get rid of gun then we will have no way to get rid of those pesky squirls and neighborhood cats that come in our yard!!

And with Camus' thought, Pencils can kill people, does that mean that schools are going to get rid of them??? Spoons can kill people, Textbooks can kill people (if you smack somone on the head hard enough), and Binders can kill people (i will not tell you how, because it is verry bloody). Are schools going to get rid of them?

Breton
07-29-2002, 07:23 PM
Guns kill=Guns are bad

How can it be so hard to understand?

Camus
07-29-2002, 07:25 PM
Originally posted by JM Qui-Gon Jinn
Guns kill=Guns are bad

How can it be so hard to understand?


I dont mean to sound rude or flaming or any thing but... ever seen a shirt that says this

"guns dont kill people I kill people"


Its accually true... Your more likly to die in a car wreck then be killed by a gun...

JandoFett1842
07-29-2002, 07:26 PM
Originally posted by JM Qui-Gon Jinn
Guns kill=Guns are bad

How can it be so hard to understand?

Guns dont kill people!!! It is those little silvery things that come out of them that kill people!!!

Camus
07-29-2002, 07:27 PM
Originally posted by JandoFett1842


Guns dont kill people!!! It is those little silvery things that come out of them that kill people!!!


Bullets...

Breton
07-29-2002, 07:35 PM
USA is the most likely place to be shot and killed in peace time. Every year, 40 000 people get shot and killed there. Still support the guns?

Darth Knight
07-29-2002, 07:39 PM
40,000 sounds a tad high

Camus
07-29-2002, 07:42 PM
Originally posted by JM Qui-Gon Jinn
USA is the most likely place to be shot and killed in peace time. Every year, 40 000 people get shot and killed there. Still support the guns?


... Why do you have to think that guns kill people??? think about it... does the gun have the brain to kill??? No... Its the stupid person that kills any way... If the stupid person has to kill and donest have a gun what do you do they find other ways... poisons, stabbing, strangling, breaking the neck, beating them to death, running them over with a car, using bombs, using planes, and basicly any other thing that is hard... There are so many ways to kill a person... guns is just one way... if you take the gun away they still can kill...

JandoFett1842
07-29-2002, 07:42 PM
Uh . . . Yah! What else would i do out in the forrest with my Cusins in November?

Camus
07-29-2002, 07:43 PM
Originally posted by Darth Knight
40,000 sounds a tad high


It is high... Most statistics are made up... ~nods~

Breton
07-29-2002, 07:46 PM
Originally posted by Camus



... Why do you have to think that guns kill people??? think about it... does the gun have the brain to kill??? No... Its the stupid person that kills any way... If the stupid person has to kill and donest have a gun what do you do they find other ways... poisons, stabbing, strangling, breaking the neck, beating them to death, running them over with a car, using bombs, using planes, and basicly any other thing that is hard... There are so many ways to kill a person... guns is just one way... if you take the gun away they still can kill...

...but it will happen much less often. Do you think someone would rob people by yelling "Give me your money, or I will run drive over you and poison your food!"

JandoFett1842
07-29-2002, 07:46 PM
I am with Camus, most statitics are bogus

Breton
07-29-2002, 07:47 PM
Originally posted by Camus



It is high... Most statistics are made up... ~nods~

Accept it or not, it is the truth.

JandoFett1842
07-29-2002, 07:48 PM
Originally posted by JM Qui-Gon Jinn


...but it will happen much less often. Do you think someone would rob people by yelling "Give me your money, or I will run drive over you and poison your food!"

Uh . . . have you ever herd of muggers using knifes and not guns?
Knifes are just as effective!

Camus
07-29-2002, 07:50 PM
Originally posted by JM Qui-Gon Jinn


...but it will happen much less often. Do you think someone would rob people by yelling "Give me your money, or I will run drive over you and poison your food!"


If you remove the gun... they will move from the use of the gun to other weapons... and a few will still get guns... and dont forget any thing can be used as a deadly weapon if its put in the right hands...

JandoFett1842
07-29-2002, 07:53 PM
That is why do dont give a Shouu Linn Master a spoon!

Camus
07-29-2002, 07:55 PM
or chopsticks... ~nods~

Breton
07-29-2002, 07:57 PM
Originally posted by JandoFett1842


Uh . . . have you ever herd of muggers using knifes and not guns?
Knifes are just as effective!

Then why do they not use knifes? After all I know, they are much cheaper.

JrKASperov
07-29-2002, 08:00 PM
Taking away guns will make it safer, it will become harder to get guns, therefor, less people will have guns, therefor less shootings will occur. Having a gun to 'protect' oneself is plain stupit, you cant use a gun to stop other bullets, the only thing a gun will do is agitate the one pointing one at you already and make him shoot you out of agitation. BTW, is it THAT bad to lose your money once by being mugged instead of shooting to kill?

Camus
07-29-2002, 08:06 PM
Originally posted by JM Qui-Gon Jinn


Then why do they not use knifes? After all I know, they are much cheaper.


If I could ran up to someone with a knife... that person could pull out a gun and shoot me dead in my tracks... so those that shot first see it as I dont want them to have the chance... trust me... having a gun or a knife makes little diffrence when it comes to stealling mugging drive by shootings or any thing else like that...

Clem
07-29-2002, 08:10 PM
a gun can kill from a distance ... the other person doesnt have to see u ... therefore they cannot react

a knife makes u come close ... this takes more guts

cowards can use guns ... u dont even have to look the other person in the face be4 u kill em

guns are deadly ..... sure its the stupid person behind them that kills .... but theres no reason to give said stupid people ANOTHER way of killing people

edit: also its easier to kill with a gun .... than nething else ... so they should be banned

Breton
07-29-2002, 08:11 PM
JrKASperov is right, guns can not protect you, they will probably kill you instead (mugger pulls out gun, you pull out gun, mugger gets panicced and shoots).

-[MotU]-Lyger|=-
07-29-2002, 08:19 PM
i think getting rid of guns will make me safe from war, cause getting rid of ALL guns will stop war permentily, cause what will they use? we'd go back to roman times and have those giant battles

Breton
07-29-2002, 08:25 PM
Then it would be cool battles with swords and bows and such. So lets all battle LOTR style!

Camus
07-29-2002, 08:26 PM
... ehem... You people forgot about bombs... I could make a pipe bomb out of house hold things... Which I hate to say this but... a gun is easy to kill with but a bomb can kill more people even easyer...

Clem
07-29-2002, 08:27 PM
Originally posted by Camus



If I could ran up to someone with a knife... that person could pull out a gun and shoot me dead in my tracks... so those that shot first see it as I dont want them to have the chance... trust me... having a gun or a knife makes little diffrence when it comes to stealling mugging drive by shootings or any thing else like that...

camus so ur saying ... i must have a gun ... cos sum1 else might have a gun

thats a guns for guns sake argument VERY bad argument

sure criminals will get guns ... thats no reason to make it easy for em

thats like lining 1/2 ur army up on a hill to get shot .... cos theyre gonna get killed neway (1/2s a bit much but makes my point)

edit: yeah camus bombs can kill ... THATS Y WE DONT GO AROUND GIVING THEM TO PEOPLE

Breton
07-29-2002, 08:28 PM
Originally posted by Camus
... ehem... You people forgot about bombs... I could make a pipe bomb out of house hold things... Which I hate to say this but... a gun is easy to kill with but a bomb can kill more people even easyer...

Well, have you ever seen a mugger with grenade?

Camus
07-29-2002, 08:41 PM
Accualy... Im from Oklahoma what do you think??? :D

Breton
07-29-2002, 08:46 PM
Oklahoma...wasn't that a musical...."If I was a rich man....dubi dubi dubi dubi dubi dubi dubi da"...no don't think it was that one....i give up

Clem
07-29-2002, 08:48 PM
i dont know nething about oklahoma

much as u know nothing about somerset

i live in the uk

(and i have less chance of being shot cos of it)

Camus
07-29-2002, 08:49 PM
If I wanted to... Note: "if" I could walk a block and get some army weapons... I could go to a gun show and get even more weapons like that...

ToppDog
07-29-2002, 08:56 PM
It's better to have one & not need it, than to need one & not have it.

Clem
07-29-2002, 09:00 PM
if they werent so easy to get the average law abiding person would be less likely to need it

Camus
07-29-2002, 09:02 PM
Originally posted by Darth Clem
if they werent so easy to get the average law abiding person would be less likely to need it


true... I am a believer in gun liciening... I dont believe in removing all of them though... Just restriction on easy it is to get one...

Clem
07-29-2002, 09:05 PM
theyre not banned in the uk (close but not completely)

as far as i know .... u cant get a license for nething above a 0.22 calibre ... and nothing automatic

bigger guns can however be used at licensed gun clubs

correct me if im wrong

Breton
07-29-2002, 09:06 PM
Originally posted by ToppDog
It's better to have one & not need it, than to need one & not have it.

But the best is to not have one & not need it.

If you have one it is more likely that you will need it (wich is not a good thing)

Darth Slayne
07-29-2002, 09:47 PM
Locks on doors are only to keep honest people out. A determined thief will always find a way in. Likewise, strict gun laws are a godsend, but it won't in any way discourage the criminal element.
Owning a gun in itself is not a threat to society. People are a threat to society.
In my country (Australia) we too have some tough gun laws. As a result, we have less shootings than say the U.S. If you remove the gun, people will find other ways to kill. But it would be less frequent. It just seems that the true coward will always vavour the gun because he dosn't have to truly face his victim. He feels safe behind his gun. He can play god. Remove the gun and you will eliminate the majority of the cowardly crims. You'll remove the feeling of superioroty that he has.

...Eh, if you can make sense of that, then good luck. I know what I meant by it.

Clem
07-29-2002, 09:50 PM
i hear ya slayne

similar to what i was saying earlier

Darklighter
07-29-2002, 09:51 PM
'Guns don't kill people. People kill people'.....enough said.

Clem
07-29-2002, 09:54 PM
thats true

but thats no reason to make it easier for them

JandoFett1842
07-29-2002, 11:47 PM
I HAVE BEEN TRYING TO TELL EVERYONE THAT GUNS DONT KILL PEOPLE!!! LITTLE SHINNY THINGS FLIYING AT HIGH SPEEDS DO!! DUH!!!

icefox98
07-30-2002, 02:10 AM
A lot of mis-informed people here.

I know a lot of you people that live in the UK like to think that America is one huge gang war/school shooting zone, but, it's really not. All that you English people are doing, is sterotyping.

I can sterotype too, and say that England has nothing to offer, it's people have it really bad, because they can't buy a car bigger than a shoebox for a million dollars, so they all buy scooters, or the police in Britain carry large sticks instead of guns (good way to get those robbers), but I won't, because, that is just a sterotype.

Oh, and stop trying to make America sound like a cess-pool from hell. I guess people owning their own houses, cars, guns, etc is the price you have to pay for freedom. =/

There is always an occasional wacko, but, for the most part, its not as bad as you make it out to be. (Qui-Gon)

Have you guys even ever visited the US?

And, maybe our gun deaths are so high because we HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE LIVING HERE. If you want to give us statistics, give us percentages, and something to compare with (from other countries, I bet the gun/kill rate in Afghanistan is pretty high).

But, that said, I too, agree guns should be outlawed. It really isnt that huge of a problem, as some people who dont even live here try to make it out to be (infierority complex about their own country not being too great possibly?) But still, they aren't really needed. And don't give me that hunting bull#### and overpopulation. I'm sure there are a lot easier ways than to give a bunch of hicks guns to go out and shoot deer, Like trained Army people to clear out a bunch of them in a controlled area, or DNR, etc.

OnlyOneCanoli
07-30-2002, 02:30 AM
I voted a very strong No on this subject. Chalk me uo as one of them damn Yankee Republicans, but when you look at this issue logically, I can't see it any other way. Here is a paper I wrote this year in English (to be read out loud). I think it's pretty good, although I left out a few other arguments. And the closing part with the Jesus quote is a bit iffy, as not everyone believes in him (I for one, don't, but I still used it, hehehe), but I might as well post it in its entirety.

Gun Control: Preying on the Uninformed
Dan Cushing

Americans are divided over so many issues in this country. Liberal or Conservative? Is our foreign policy oppressive or is it helping other nations? Pro-life or pro-choice? Those are but three popular debates going on in society right now, and I can assure you that that’s only the tip of the iceberg. However, everybody can agree on one thing: America should a safer place.

Many people believe that this goal of epic proportions can be achieved through eliminating firearms from society. These people have the right idea, but they are simply taking the wrong approach to solve this issue. While the concept of gun control may seem very valid at first glance, the fact of the matter is that when one actually analyzes what would happen if such legislation were passed, that person would see that banning guns is not a step that we as Americans should be willing to take. There are hoards of myths that people believe about citizens owning firearms. People believe that children are exposed to unnecessary risk, that the Second Amendment is no longer valid, and that an increase in guns means an increase in violent crimes.

One such misunderstanding is that guns pose an extreme threat to children. Many gun-ban activists claim that 4000 or more children are killed by firearms each year. However, these people consider anybody that is under the age of 21 to be a child. So, in actuality, a 20-year-old drug dealer who’s shot is considered one of these 4000 dead children. Statistics show that less than two kids under the age of 14 are killed each day from gunfire. In 1998, only 121 were killed—when compared to 2048 killed in car crashes, 940 killed in swimming pools, and 565 killed from burns, that number is negligible (Poe 31). In fact, more children are killed each year from bicycle accidents than from gun accidents (Lott 261). As far as I can see, people are not proposing to ban use of bicycles by children. Clearly, anti-gun activists can manipulate the uninformed people of America by linking deaths of children to owning firearms.

As more and more Americans are persuaded by these manipulations each day, keeping our right to allow firearms in America is an uphill battle. One of the few reasons we still have this right is because of the Second Amendment to the Constitution. The amendments states, “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” Gun prohibitionists will argue that this amendment provides that only those in the militia may bear arms. However, the amendment clearly states that “the people” have a right to bear arms. “The people,” in this case, are the same people from the First, Fourth, Ninth, and Tenth Amendments—each and every free person living in the United States. There’s no reason why the Second Amendment should be treated any differently than the other are.

The Second Amendment is under more fire than just the militia issue. Many anti-gun advocates believe that the Second Amendment is obsolete and can no longer apply to today’s society. When the Constitution was written, our founding fathers implemented this law for two reasons: One, to protect settlers from threats such as wild animals, criminals, and Native Americans, and two, to protect the people from some future government that would strip the people of their weapons. Admittedly, I cannot account for the second one, as that situation has not occurred and it doesn’t seem too likely to happen in the near future. As for the first reason, guns helped settlers moving west stay alive. Today, violent threats in America have risen exponentially. If guns were allowed to protect people in the 1700s against so few threats, then why should they be banned in today’s society, where more violent threats exist? It doesn’t make sense.

Criminals, however, don’t care about the Second Amendment. They don’t care if it is lawful or if it’s unlawful to own a firearm. Laws are followed by ordinary citizens, and laws are broken by criminals. If guns were banned in the United States, criminals would still be able to acquire weapons illegally. And when criminals have weapons, and law-abiding citizens have nothing to defend themselves with, more innocent people are hurt. This is not right.

The final and most significant of the misunderstandings about firearms is that people believe that an increase in guns means an increase in violent crimes. Experts have found just the opposite to be true. It makes sense—if a would-be criminal knows the person he or she intends to hurt may be packing heat, then the criminal would be less willing to attack them. If gun laws are stricter, then the criminals are confident that the people they intend to hurt are defenseless, and as a result they become bolder and more violent. It’s logical.

In 1996, the Australian government imposed stricter gun control laws in their country after a lunatic murdered 35 people. The results of stripping over a half million law-abiding citizens of their defense weapons were disastrous. Armed robberies increased 73%, unarmed robberies went up 28%, kidnapping rose 38%, assaults went up 17%, and manslaughter increased by 29% (Poe 30). Is this really what we want for America?

The horrific increase in crime in Australia was not an isolated event. England also learned things the hard way. After a 1996 massacre of children in Scotland, the British Government cracked down on guns. A dramatic increase in crime ensued, as muggings in England passed the rate in the U.S. by 40%, and assault and burglary rates were nearly 100% higher than those in the U.S. (Kopel 27). Additionally, Australia and England are the first and second worst countries in the industrial world as far as violent crime is concerned, according to the February 2001 International Crime Victims Survey, while the United States is not even in the top ten worst (Poe 31).

But look no further than our home state of Florida for a ray of hope. In the ten years following the passage of Florida's concealed carry law in 1987, there were 478,248 people who received permits to carry firearms. FBI reports show that the homicide rate in Florida, which in 1987 was much higher than the national average, fell 39% during that 10-year period. The Florida homicide rate is now far below the national average. In fact, alligator attacks outpaced the number of crimes committed by conceal carry holders by a 146 to 88 margin (Kleck 23). The facts clearly state that because of allowing concealed firearms in Florida, gun users have been able to defend themselves and have been able to not harm others with their weapons.

It’s really quite obvious that when you look at the facts, gun control is detrimental to society, while allowing law-abiding citizens to lawfully own and use firearms is an extremely effective measure against crime. Jesus Christ said, "When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own palace, his goods are in peace." If Jesus Christ believed in one’s right to defend himself in his home, then why shouldn’t we?

Darth Groovy
07-30-2002, 03:19 AM
I wrote this poem several years ago and had it published in a local magazine.


Hand Me The Gat?

18
Legal for me
To Own a gun
to protect myself
from someone
who is
18
Legal for him
To Own a gun
To protect himself
from someone.....
who has so many guns
and all of this protection
why should anyone die
from a gunshot wound?

ToppDog
07-30-2002, 04:22 AM
Originally posted by JM Qui-Gon Jinn


But the best is to not have one & not need it.


Yes, on this I agree with you. In a perfect world this would be the case. Unfortunately our world is not perfect.

Originally posted by JM Qui-Gon Jinn


If you have one it is more likely that you will need it (wich is not a good thing)

On this one though I differ with you. You seem to be implying that gun owners are somehow looking for trouble, when that is far from the case.

I was in the Army & very familiar with firearms, yet upon getting out I never felt the need or desire to own a gun of my own. Only after I got married & was responsible for the life & wellbeing of another did I choose to finally get a firearm for our protection & defense.

I do not go out looking for trouble at all. But if trouble finds its way to me, I will do my best to protect the innocent people around me from harm.

Yes, it's true that there are too many guns in the US, but banning them only enables the criminals to do more crime as citizens are not able to defend themselves against those that would do them harm.

The ignorance lies in the fact that people simply think that passing a law makes the crime automatically go away. If you don't enforce those laws, all they amount to are worthless words on a piece of worthless paper.

Criminals don't obey the law. That's why they are called CRIMINALS. You can't legislate a person's behavior.

There is also the supply & demand problem. As long as there is a demand for guns from criminals, there will be a supplier willing to sell them, no matter how illegal it may be.

The problem in the US is not that there are too many guns, it's that the justice system is not punishing criminals enough to deter crime. Our prisoners get cable TV & conjugal visits from girlfriends they've picked up on the internet until they've served 1/3 of their sentences & are let go due to not having enough room. The saddest thing of all is that the things that actually are a deterent to going to jail are themselves crimes such as getting raped in the shower or getting shanked in the exercise yard. Pathetic!

Unfortunately, a lot of our leaders & politicians have the same views as you, & in their opinion the criminals are the helpless victims while the law abiding citizen who protects himself or his family from harm or death is himself labeled as the criminal for not standing idly by & watching as the criminal did as he pleased.

Do you know how many more Columbine shootings we didn't have because law abiding citizens used their legally owned firearms to prevent them? Do you know how many fathers got to go home to their wives & children because they were able to defend themselves while their businesses were being robbed at gunpoint? Do you know how many mothers & daughters were not raped or murdered by some sick psycho because the moms carry guns in their purses?

razorace
07-30-2002, 04:51 AM
I think while JM Qui-Gon Jinn has a good point, he's missing the main reason why we have guns, in the US, in the first place. The Founding Fathers didn't have to mess with violence crimes and school shooting. They had to deal with governmental powers taking away their liberties. Guns are dangerous weapons and that's why citizens must have them. If you don't have the tools to defend yourself and your family against governmental oppression, what can you do when your government or enemies comes to you? You die, you and your family are sent to death camps, etc. Do you think there'd been massive genocide in WWII or in Africa if common citizens had had the inferstucture to own guns?

And please don't try to feed me some bull about governments having "changed" and no longer having to fear oppression by the government. Most of the world's population lives under oppressive governments now and governments can fall suddenly and without warning. As long as people govern people, there will always be the possibility of oppression. Heck, we Americas have lost many rights in the last year in the name of Fighting Terrorism.

In closing, if you're worried about having a firearm, don't buy one. But you'll have to pry my K-Mart Special from my cold dead hands before I give mine up.

munik
07-30-2002, 06:35 AM
After reading all this, I see at the end a few posts saying what I wanted to say. The 2nd ammendment pertains to citizens protecting themselves from the government. Does no one see the irony in suggesting that the government take away the peoples means of protecting themselves from the government? That's a ludicrous idea.

While I agree that the US has much higher shooting deaths then anywhere else is in direct relation to the fact that guns are legal, I don't believe banning guns is the answer. I for one am willing to accept the price of people killing each other over silly things if that means I can have the right to protect myself and my way of life. And to those who keep bringing up school shootings, ya'll need to unplug yourselves from the T.V. and wake up to reality. Maybe 40 kids got killed from shootings in school. I believe I'm guessing high with that number as well. That's only 40. While tragic, it is by no means an epidemic or anything like that. In New York City, on average, 100 people per month are murdered with firearms. 100 per month vs. 40ish ever.


I'd say a majority of the types of firearms are illegal in the US. Most assualt weapons, and automatic weapons, and most high calliber guns or weapons of war are illegal. That leaves you with pistols, shotguns, and hunting rifles. Hardly the tools of a murderer looking to make a high body count. Yes, they can and are used in murders, but if you are looking to own a weapon in which to commit a crime, you would be a fool to shop at Wal-Mart for it. The right tool for the right job. You would get an illegal weapon. In case you haven't been following the train of thought here, these illegal weapons are illegal because it's been decided(with much debate and dissention) that their sole purpose is to kill people, and kill them quickly. The superstore weapons are most likely used in crimes of passion, because they are the easiest and quickest tools available. A knife or a 2x4 or a chair would work as well, but a decisive person will do it the quickest and easiest. A fool would do it otherwise.


And while I agree that most statistics are made up, 40,000 doesn't sound too bad at all. It's vague though. How many were self inflicted (suicide)? How many were accidental (accidental discharge while cleaning, etc)? How many were outright murders(pre-meditated, passion)? How many were the shooting of an attacker(killing someone before they kill you)?
That's like saying 40,000 people are killed a year by automobiles, and all are intentional vehicular manslaughter. It's just not true, a simple number pulled out of your ass and twisted to help justify your argument.



Munik

BlackDove
07-30-2002, 06:43 AM
We invent some kind of a virus that hurts guns and makes the die (enhanced rust O.o;;;;; ) and we all get back to the sword age.....:D

Breton
07-30-2002, 06:49 AM
My point is that guns will not protect you, bullets can't deflect bullets. Therefore, having a gun makes it more dangerous for you (mugger points at you with gun, you point at mugger with gun, mugger gets panicced and shoots), and we can all agree that having a gun cannot protect you.

The point that US is the most likely place to be shot and killed in peace time, 40 000 does get killed every year, this is not something I have made up. So we can also agree that legalisation of guns make US a quite dangerous place.

And we should all share a thought to little 3-year old Bill who found a gun in his father closet and accidentely pulled the trigger while pointing at himself.

So the thing about legal guns cannot protect you or anything, it only does that you are more likely to be shot.

Jah Warrior
07-30-2002, 10:44 AM
This is ridiculous, anyone that thinks owning a weapon to kill anyone must be a barbarian.

As somebody else in a prevoius post mentioned there are no guns for sale in the UK, I don't think anyone would want one if it were legal, the reason being, we see what guns are doing to the US on TV and the news etc, and well, It is so obvious that the free availability of guns in the US has turned it into a DANGEROUS place.

I'll give an example,

I know about half a dozen people that have been to the US on holiday recently. One of them got threatened at gun point in a miami night club for talking to some guys woman. he was potentially in a life or death situation, for talking to somebody. That is soooooo sensible.

Now say guns werent available in the US, they would have settled it with a damn good punch up like we do over here. OK a broken nose or a couple of busted knuckles may be inflicted but they will heal. the likelihood of killing anyone in a punch up is slim, don't get me wrong I certainly do not condone this action, I have been on the receiving end myself.

My point is, that if guns were available here I'm pretty sure i would be dead now as the guy i got a beating from was a local gangster type dude. I'm glad I'm here to tell the tale even if my nose is a bit crooked now.

Clem
07-30-2002, 11:16 AM
to canoli .... statistics can be made to say what u want them to

statistics are flawed in this way

so dont use them .... theyre useless ... made up or not ... if they ignore a crucial variable oreven if u only use certain stats .... they tell a misleading story

@ every1 guns cannot defend u .... they can merely kill the person thats attacking u .... in a gunfight ...most likely both people get killed... if u want to defend urselves .... body armour would be an idea

TKMaim
07-30-2002, 12:09 PM
I do believe in registration of firearms. It only makes sense to attempt to keep weapons out of the hands of criminals.
On the other hand I don't condone banning weapons (save for fully automatic models) becuase I support hunting in my state.

For those of you who don't think hunting is necessary please read the following:
In WI where I'm from last year our estimated deer population was at approx 1.4 million deer in August 2001. Our hunting season took 280,000 deer give or take a thousand. This year our estimated deer population is 1.6 million. We have an overpopulation explosion happening. Due to this some deer in our state have contracted a disease known as CWD (Chronic Wasting Disease). It resembles Mad Cow Disease but is not trasmitable to humans. This epidemic combined with dear-vehicle collisions, and crop damage has cost my state billions.

Please don't tell me that hunting doesn't help, becuase it does....just not enough.

Someone suggested earlier to bring in the National Gaurd/Army to cull the herd. Unfortunately that's not an option due to cost.
Our hunters pay a license fee each year to deer hunt. It's not alot but it does help. Now if we take away that right we lose millions in licensing fees as well as the additional cost of bringing in some from of deer control, whether it be Poisoning/Baiting/or wholesale slaughter by an outside group(Army/NG).

Personally I don't hunt, but I DO respect the rights of others to do so.

If there came a time when the herd was culled down enough to limit hunting I would wholeheartedly agree with limits on firearm ownership, but until that time we need all the help we can get....

CenturiOn
07-30-2002, 12:13 PM
ROFL

i voted NO because i thought he was talking about the guns in JO

HAHAHA LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

Mafia_Jabba
07-30-2002, 02:04 PM
U.S. a dangerous place to live...LMAO thats gotta be the biggest load of #### i ever heard in my god damn life....omg well it all depends on where you ARE in the US brother. If you are in downtown urban area, sure it'll be dangerous. If you are in a high society sub urban area it'll be quite less dangerous all because of the PEOPLE that are there.

GUNS are not the problem u smart guys. Education is the problem. Standard of living is the problem. A poor guy shoots a rich guy for money, its not because he had a gun is it? A thug shoots you in the street. Its not because he had a gun is it? Its because they dont know any better. Ok.

The US kicks ass and is not dangerous btw, I've never been threatened in my life and I live possibly the poorest area in the nation. LMAO and thats 17 years not a HOLIDAY.

Thanks

BlackDove
07-30-2002, 02:48 PM
Originally posted by Sidewinder05
ROFL

i voted NO because i thought he was talking about the guns in JO

HAHAHA LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

:rofl::rofl::lol::lol::rofl::rofl:

Darth_Lando
07-30-2002, 03:48 PM
Um. Getting rid of guns will not make me safe.

However, getting rid of guns may reduce my chances of being killed by a gun though that is not for certain.

Take for instance MURDER.

Murder is illegal, does that stop people from murdering? No. They don't obey the law they are criminals

Now in an effort to stop murder you now make guns illegal.

So, if you think someone who wants to murder someone will not get a gun because they are illegal? Come on murder is illegal! Sheeesh. Criminals don't obey the laws that is why they are criminals. Making more laws isn't going to magically make criminals the sweetest people on earth. They don't care.

razorace
07-30-2002, 03:52 PM
My point is that guns will not protect you, bullets can't deflect bullets. Therefore, having a gun makes it more dangerous for you (mugger points at you with gun, you point at mugger with gun, mugger gets panicced and shoots), and we can all agree that having a gun cannot protect you.

That's very true, but you could just a easily kill the mugger. Guns give you a more equal the chance for survival. Plus, like nukes, they are deterent against invasion, oppression, etc. Fighting against a nation with armed citizens vs. a nation without is much harder especially in urban / close range enviroments. Why do you think the US / UN forces in Afgan are taking so many casulties? Our forces are having to fight in confined, close spaces against heavy armed people.

The point that US is the most likely place to be shot and killed in peace time, 40 000 does get killed every year, this is not something I have made up. So we can also agree that legalisation of guns make US a quite dangerous place.

You gotta source for that 40,000 number? That still sounds too high. That's about the same as car accident fatalities and car accidents are less preventable than gun accidents. Does that mean we should ban cars?

And is that "highest" numberwise or per capita? Per capitawise, I'd imagine Isreal has a higher per capita rate than we do.

And we should all share a thought to little 3-year old Bill who found a gun in his father closet and accidentely pulled the trigger while pointing at himself.[/qoute]

While the death of children is always horrible, is it MY fault that that father was stupid to not teach his child gun safety AND not keep the gun where the child couldn't get to it? Should I lose the right to buy gasoline because some idiot blew himself up with it? Laws are for protecting us from unreasonable hurt, not a idiot protector.

[QUOTE]This is ridiculous, anyone that thinks owning a weapon to kill anyone must be a barbarian.

I have no desire to kill. I have a gun so that it is there when I may need it. We live in a barbaric world filled with people who desire to be your master. What do you do to prevent that?

Clem
07-30-2002, 03:53 PM
THATS NO REASON TO MAKE IT EASY FOR THEM!

Mafia_Jabba
07-30-2002, 03:56 PM
i'd rather someone kill someone with a gun than a knife, much more easier to capture i think, its not easier dude, i mean if they are going to kill they are going to kill. If a murderer will not carry a gun he will carry a knife from wal mart. thats not making it harder, thats just making the death more painful.

razorace
07-30-2002, 04:26 PM
It will always be "easy" for criminals to find guns in a "free" society. Blackmarkets exist in every society.

Qui-GONE Jinn
07-30-2002, 05:13 PM
Why would you want to kill the mugger? and live with another's life on your conscience the rest of your life? Okay, he tried to take your money, but this isn't black and white! the mugger isn't the incarnation of evil! every case has two sides.

And if a guy comes at you with a knife, run! if he comes with a gun, give him your money then call the police! no lives lost!

munik
07-30-2002, 05:43 PM
My point is that guns will not protect you, bullets can't deflect bullets. Therefore, having a gun makes it more dangerous for you (mugger points at you with gun, you point at mugger with gun, mugger gets panicced and shoots), and we can all agree that having a gun cannot protect you.

This is a clear illustration of how un-informed you are concerning firearms. Law abiding citizens who have CCW licenses carry firearms for protection. Obviously, if the sole purpose of a firearm is to kill people, then it won't deflect bullets. They carry these weapons around as a safeguard against attackers. That means, when someone attacks them, they now have the means to kill said attacker. And to further address this erroneous statement, the only reason to point the business end of a firearm at another human is to kill them. So, in your example, if a mugger pulls a gun on you, he is gonna kill you. That is why you would pull out your firearm and kill him. Of course he will get panicked and shoot, he's about 2 seconds away from getting killed by you.


Real life isn't like T.V. kids. Firearms aren't used as a threat, or a show of force. They are used to kill people.

I've lived in this country (US) for some time, been to both coasts and a few places inbetween, and this place is far from having a gun problem. I can count on one hand all the illegal firearms I have ever seen, and never once had problem with someone attacking me with a firearm. Just because your friend went to Miami for vaction (WTF?) and got accosted by some cuban in a nightclub, that in no way has any relevance to a supposed gun problem in the states. I can say, with a %100 surety, that that person has carrying illegally, and probaly very weak with the weapon he chose. How would I know such a thing you may ask? Anyone who goes through the trouble, and hassle, of obtaining a CCW license has respect for the weapon they carry. Someone who pulls out a pistol, and uses it to threaten a man who was chatting up his girl has no respect for a firearm. Firearms are a last resort, only to be used when you must kill your enemy before he kills you (my rip of the Riflemans Creed :) ). Not as some stupid macho threat.

Also, I don't go down the block to bars here in my home town and think everything is gonna be fine and dandy. People go out to bars, they drink alcohol, and fights and such are bound to happen. I go to bars knowing and expecting this to happen. Disregarding the retardness of vacationing in Miami, and the queerness of going to a nightclub there, your friend should have been expecting trouble. And apparently it found him. And he's not dead, so next time he might be a little more cautious before he tries to take something from another man. Because apparently he didn't realize how reality works.


Munik

razorace
07-30-2002, 05:49 PM
If it was me or the mugger, of course, I'd pick ME!

You make it sound like I pack a gun everywhere. I don't. I just have a rifle stored unloaded at my house. I don't live in a community where I need to carry a gun for protection. Heck, people don't even lock our cars around here. :) But that's a different issue. You're questioning the morality of shooting a mugger now, not the personal ownage of firearms.

On that issue, if he threats me with deadly force I HAVE to assume he means it and I HAVE to respond for my own safety ether by shooting the bastard or by complying with his demands.

Clem
07-30-2002, 05:54 PM
Originally posted by munik


This is a clear illustration of how un-informed you are concerning firearms. Law abiding citizens who have CCW licenses carry firearms for protection. Obviously, if the sole purpose of a firearm is to kill people, then it won't deflect bullets. They carry these weapons around as a safeguard against attackers. That means, when someone attacks them, they now have the means to kill said attacker. And to further address this erroneous statement, the only reason to point the business end of a firearm at another human is to kill them. So, in your example, if a mugger pulls a gun on you, he is gonna kill you. That is why you would pull out your firearm and kill him. Of course he will get panicked and shoot, he's about 2 seconds away from getting killed by you.


Real life isn't like T.V. kids. Firearms aren't used as a threat, or a show of force. They are used to kill people.

I've lived in this country (US) for some time, been to both coasts and a few places inbetween, and this place is far from having a gun problem. I can count on one hand all the illegal firearms I have ever seen, and never once had problem with someone attacking me with a firearm. Just because your friend went to Miami for vaction (WTF?) and got accosted by some cuban in a nightclub, that in no way has any relevance to a supposed gun problem in the states. I can say, with a %100 surety, that that person has carrying illegally, and probaly very weak with the weapon he chose. How would I know such a thing you may ask? Anyone who goes through the trouble, and hassle, of obtaining a CCW license has respect for the weapon they carry. Someone who pulls out a pistol, and uses it to threaten a man who was chatting up his girl has no respect for a firearm. Firearms are a last resort, only to be used when you must kill your enemy before he kills you (my rip of the Riflemans Creed :) ). Not as some stupid macho threat.

Also, I don't go down the block to bars here in my home town and think everything is gonna be fine and dandy. People go out to bars, they drink alcohol, and fights and such are bound to happen. I go to bars knowing and expecting this to happen. Disregarding the retardness of vacationing in Miami, and the queerness of going to a nightclub there, your friend should have been expecting trouble. And apparently it found him. And he's not dead, so next time he might be a little more cautious before he tries to take something from another man. Because apparently he didn't realize how reality works.


Munik

over here we dont have to expect fights in pubs and clubs

munik
07-30-2002, 05:55 PM
To the post two up, if someone threatens you with a firearm, they are gonna kill you. If you treat the situation any different then that, you will die regardless. And if someone carries a weapon around for protection, I think they are prepared to live with the fact that they killed a man. Not everyone in this world is a pansy.


Yes, you can run away, that is an option. If someone pulls a knife, you can run away. If someone pulls a pistol on you, yes, you can also run away. You don't know anything about firearms either, do you? If you run away from someone who is threatening you with a pistol, and he manages to shoot and kill you, he just did the world a favor by cleansing the gene pool. Or you just happened to be getting mugged by the Worlds Best Marksman™.


Munik

munik
07-30-2002, 05:56 PM
Well, over here men go to clubs and pubs.


Munik

Clem
07-30-2002, 05:58 PM
actually

u deserve to get shot

keep yer guns

razorace
07-30-2002, 06:04 PM
Well, that would be tuff without a gun. :P

No flames please!

Clem
07-30-2002, 06:08 PM
that was aimed directly at munik not americans in particular btw.

razorace
07-30-2002, 06:46 PM
What part of "No flames please!" do you not understand?

Clem
07-30-2002, 06:58 PM
i take what munik was saying as a flame

so dont have a go at me

Breton
07-30-2002, 07:02 PM
The source of the thing about 40 000 get shot and killed in US every year, wich makes it the worlds most likely place to be shot in peace time, I got from Guinness World Records (1999).

That is truly a trustful source.

razorace
07-30-2002, 07:34 PM
Well, according to the National Center for Health Stats (http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/firearms.htm) it's more like 30,000 a year. That's total, not accident based. Plus, according to,
here (http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/releases/00news/finaldeath98.htm), gun deaths have been dropping sharply since 1993.


And, here (http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/acc-inj.htm), it states there were 41,804 car fatalities each year in the US. Cars kill more people, should we ban cars as well?

Breton
07-30-2002, 08:00 PM
Originally posted by razorace
Well, according to the National Center for Health Stats (http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/firearms.htm) it's more like 30,000 a year. That's total, not accident based. Plus, according to,
here (http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/releases/00news/finaldeath98.htm), gun deaths have been dropping sharply since 1993.


And, here (http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/acc-inj.htm), it states there were 41,804 car fatalities each year in the US. Cars kill more people, should we ban cars as well?

The last 10 years gun deaths in US have been increased by 18 percent.

Cars are used and meant to transport people from A to B. Guns are used and meant to kill.

JandoFett1842
07-30-2002, 08:08 PM
Jez! Do you just not like Gunz?

Mafia_Jabba
07-30-2002, 08:17 PM
I would like to know the total number of murders in each country and not the total GUN murders and then we can talk which country is the most dangerous.

Breton
07-30-2002, 08:20 PM
Originally posted by JandoFett1842
Jez! Do you just not like Gunz?

Do you?????

Of course i don't like guns, they kill people. You might say that the bullets kill them, but the power to shoot the bullet comes from the gun, and it is that power that kill.

razorace
07-30-2002, 08:51 PM
The last 10 years gun deaths in US have been increased by 18 percent.

Source?

Of course i don't like guns, they kill people. You might say that the bullets kill them, but the power to shoot the bullet comes from the gun, and it is that power that kill.

Not really, the gun is just a delivery system. The power of the gun is in the explosives stored in the bullet. You can replace the gun but not the bullet.

Breton
07-30-2002, 08:57 PM
Still, the source is from Guinness world records (1999)

Datheus
07-30-2002, 09:09 PM
Gun control... will it make me more safe? Honestly, it depends on where I live

I was watching an interview with Howard Dean... who I believe is running for President in 2004... he said something along the lines of this:

I was talking with a man from Kentucky who told me "When you say control, it makes me think you want to take away the squirrel rifle my Father gave me when I was a kid" but when I talk to a man from New York they think that I mean I want to take the illegal uzis and hand guns off the street

Getting rid of guns... it really matters where you live... if someone really wants to kill you, they will... Are you going to get rid of all slashing and bludgeoning weapons?...

In general...no I don't believe it will make me safer... cause honestly.. it wasn't a problem where I used to live... there was about 2 murders every decade... I can only remember 2 in my life time, one wasn't even with a gun, it was a bomb from another state, and the other I believe was a stabing to death

But here? Yes...I would think, if I lived closer to the city, that it would make me safer... but again, I live in the suburbs where crime isn't as bad as 20 minutes from here, where control of guns may actually help

whitedragon
07-30-2002, 09:22 PM
no because we would use knifes instead and we cant force peace on human beings its just not posable

Goten583
07-30-2002, 11:01 PM
I dont think its fair to say that the US is more dangerous than UK or any other european country. Regardless of whether its true or not. We have problems...so do you, unfortunatley. We cant dwell in relativism. It never gets anybody anywhere. The point is that we are working on it and as said in other posts, the rates of gun related deaths are dropping in the US, and that is true. Yes, that sounds sad but thats the things we must deal with by being Americans and I accept it. At this point I much rather have it the way it is now where my countries legislation on this issue is voted on by representives and our citizens. In many other european countries these things are decided by eliteists who make all the laws and the common man has very little say. Having yourself at risk, to me, by some idiot with a gun is a very small price for the kind of freedom I have as an American. Unfortunatley the elitests in this country want gun control, because they dont think we can handle our own lives and that we all need help, which isn't true at all. Like those elitests, I can see how europeans cant understand it cause they dont like the idea of commoners helping in making the decisions.

Sure guns kill people, but a gun is a tool and has no will, intentions on the other hand can be punished, and are. If its not guns, its knives, if its not those, it's glass bottles......i could do that forever but you get the idea. It's not waepons, its people...its morals...and only punishing those criminals with a taste for violence can solve the issue.

Clem
07-30-2002, 11:45 PM
so our voting in representatives is different from yours how?!!!

we vote our representatives same as u yet ours are elitist (u like that word dont u :))

thats just bonkers mate

Jah Warrior
07-31-2002, 01:15 AM
I got one more thing to say:-

The whole concept of taking another Human life is utterly disgusting, I'd rather die than live with the burden of having ended someones life.

It's sick i tell you SICK!!!:mad:

razorace
07-31-2002, 01:41 AM
It is disgusting, but I'm willing to do it if it meant the safety of myself or my loved ones. You could choice to die if you want but you shouldn't interfere with other people right to fight for survival.

whitedragon
07-31-2002, 11:24 AM
Originally posted by Jah Warrior
It's sick i tell you SICK!!!:mad:
yes i agree but if it was his life or someone you loved would you kill him. i would i wont let some ass hole get away just because i think its sick. the burden mite be heavy but you will have to remind yourself that you did it for a good cause

<osr>beta_sigma
07-31-2002, 07:42 PM
we live in a dangerous world. outlawing guns is retarded.

"All these post of keeping guns and let everyone kill eachother in a gigantic bloodbath supports my theory that most people in the world are really stupid."


it would be stupider to remove a right that is in place in order to allow the people to rise up and overthrow a corrupt/unjust/unfunctioning (sound familiar?) government. our forefathers realized that the people needed to to be able to assemble a militia if needed, and being armed is part of that process.


however, it's too bad that the few spoil it for the many, and that
people see the results of other people's poor judgement and decide ,in their short term view, that its good to reduce the rights that we have.

the other unfortunate thing is that people in america are not more responsible about their rights and responsibilities concerning our government. our own apathy allows our exploitation.

in short, america as a whole needs to grow up.

btw....ive been to europe several times, and guess what......
people are people no matter where you live. murder exists and has existed prolly since time began independantly of projectile weapons. guns just make murder quicker and easier.

the problem is with our societal views, not with our handguns.

Poll Cat
07-31-2002, 08:36 PM
Here's some food for thought u guys.
Who is Responsible? What is Responsible?
Do guns kill people, or do people kill people?
You could kill someone with a rock but they aren't illegal.
It's the sick people that use them for wrongdoing. If guns are taken away then there will be a race to arms and criminals will commit crimes to get guns. I would much rather live in a country that supports a persons right to possess a means with which to defend themselves in any circumstance, than to live in a country where defending ourselves is considered a crime. And Hey!, u guys in Europe, go easy on the U.S. That's all you guys do is insult the U.S. and our foreign and self policies. I think that is a definite showing of an inferiority complex. We don't bitch about how the French or Norwegians run their governments. Tell me this! Why do so many people immigrate to the USA from ur countries? Think hard now. I would rather be shot in my head than to live in a country where you have to rely on the GOV.
to protect u. It's sad that there is so much hate in this world, and maybe sometime in the future, we won't need guns anymore, but for now, we do, and peace is more than a rocks throw away. When Jesus comes back on judgment, that will be the day we put down our arms, and we will all be united in him.
Anyways thats my 2 cents.
Nice posting whoever made it.

ToppDog
07-31-2002, 11:24 PM
Originally posted by Jah Warrior
I got one more thing to say:-

The whole concept of taking another Human life is utterly disgusting, I'd rather die than live with the burden of having ended someones life.

It's sick i tell you SICK!!!:mad:

OH MY GOD!!! LOL!!!

I swear, between you & Qui Gon I haven't been able to stop laughing!!!

Lemme get this straight, the thought of taking anothers life in self defense disgusts you SO MUCH that you are willing to actually be killed rather than save yourself....yet you have no problem playing a game that graphically depicts the death, mutulation, & dismemberment of humans/humanoids for your entertainment purposes.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Maybe you should give up this game for one where you walk around planting daisies. Then you could make a mod where you get to water them. Just don't program in weeds 'cause we can't hurt da wittle weeds now can we. That would be DISGUSTING!!!

Clem
07-31-2002, 11:29 PM
hmmmmm ...... shut up ... go away .... get a life .... shut up ... and go away

Jedi Legend
08-01-2002, 01:06 AM
Originally posted by Jah Warrior
I got one more thing to say:-

The whole concept of taking another Human life is utterly disgusting, I'd rather die than live with the burden of having ended someones life.

It's sick i tell you SICK!!!:mad:

I can understand that. But would you rather kill someone or have your spouse murdered/raped?

Whether you want to kill or not there will be people out there willing to kill you. Everyone in this thread who thinks gun crimes are horrible are the people who should own guns. If more law abiding citizens owned guns it would be a safer place. Take Switzerland for example. I read that every male in that country is issued an automatic rifle. There crime rate is lower than in the US and I'm talking percentage. It is also at least as low as it is in the UK.

A gun is a tool. Like a power saw. You could destroy someones life with a power saw.

Gun registration has nothing to do with stopping criminals from getting guns. An instant background check is all that is necessary for this. Nazi Germany had registration. This was convient when they were able to take guns from Jews they knew owned them because of registration. Nazi Germany did not invade Switzerland. Do you want to know why? Fear of guns.

Waiting periods do not stop crime. They prevented people during the riot in LA (when that guy was beat by a cop) from protecting their homes. They tried to get guns during this riot but they had to wait 15 days.

Many crimes are stopped simply by holding a criminal at gun point. The NRA magizine has a section called "Armed Citizen" with stories of people protecting their lives and property. You should read this if you have to opportunity.

Anybody who says "That's not what they meant" when they talk about the ratification of the 2nd amendment are wrong. The Second Amendment is there to allow citizens to protect themselves from attacks from without and within as well as from the government.

Criminals will carry concealed weapons so why should law abiding citizens not be able to?

You can't run from a knife attacker if they grab you and put the knife to your throat. Of course a gun would be useless in this situation as well. My point is, knives are dangerous too.

When someone shatters your window and comes in, you should have to right to protect your life, family, property, and dignity. You should not be forced to retreat within your own home. The police will not be able to respond quick enough.

A huge reason for gun crimes in the US is the parole system. It teaches people that it is okay to commit a crime. After all, they can plea bargin there way out. And then criminals only serve and average of a third of their sentences. They then obtain guns illegally.

I got to shoot a gun recently. I didn't harm any creature. It's called target practice and it's quite fun as a sport.

I may have neglected to mention some things because I'm tired. But you should all read Guns, Crime, and Freedom. It is a calm book that uses facts to support guns. I challenge you all to read it and to see if you still hate guns.

Jedi Legend
08-01-2002, 01:09 AM
Oh and one more thing...

Criminals need to be held responsible... not guns! This is the problem I have with liberals who even blame the victim for some crimes.

Oh and I'd rather some criminal bastard die than myself. I don't see why someone would sacrifice their life to save a scumbag.

munik
08-01-2002, 05:52 AM
Criminals are held responsible for breaking the laws regarding firearms. Most violations involving illegal firearms are felonies. Most violations regarding the illegal use of legal firearms are felonies.


There are already very strict regulations on firearms, and very serious penalties for violationg them. Why would you want to ban them entirely? That wouldn't prevent the illegal activities involving firearms. BECAUSE MOST OF THEM ARE ILLEGAL RIGHT NOW! If you ban all firearms, the crimes involving illegal weapons that happened before the ban, will still happen. They were illegal before, they are illegal after. A ban will not change anything.



And Clem, that was a half assed shot at you and a half assed attempt at proving a point. Point being that men fight, men drinking get fired up at a moments notice, and sometimes men go to bars for the sole purpose of looking for trouble. Maybe where you live now it's not like that in the pubs that you frequent, but you can't honestly say that you've never been to a pub that felt like trouble. Well, in this country that trouble may be packing heat, and that's something you have to accept. So if you if you're still mad at me for that quick jab, at a request I'll sing you the "Sorry Song". And then I'll shoot you in the ass. But you have to come here, because I'll get arrested for bringing the guns to you :)

munik
08-01-2002, 06:54 AM
Also, to put a nail in the coffin here, firearms will never be banned in America. You have to understand the whole political system. Firearms generate alot of revenue. Alot of people are for firearms, alot of people are against firearms. As a politician, which side to you choose? And by changing the status quo, will you ever get elected again?

The country as a whole will never be decided on this issue. It will take all the people in congress passing a bill, and the president not veto'ing it to make a gun ban happen. And that is one huge task.

To put it in simpler terms, play on a ffa server with 20 people in it. Now call a vote to kick the score leader because he's assfighting. Will the vote work? Never, because most people won't even vote on it, and the few who do will be divided between yes and no. It would take an admin to kick him. And what happens when an admin kicks him? The people who think assfighting is O.K. will be upset, and leave. And even if that's 1/4 of the server, it's still a big chunk. Now apply that same logic to firearms and the US. That's a big decision, not a risk a 60 year old politician is willing to take, not when he has a re-election for his last term and his 60-80k year salary at stake. Especially when whatever the decision is, it isn't gonna effect him, because he's gonna be dead in a decade or two.

This is the logic of reality, and it's damn hard to change the way things are. Even if you are right, and the way things are is wrong.

Anyways, I found a link to educate those who might not be from the States. This is the faq page for the A.T.F. (http://www.atf.treas.gov/firearms/faq/index.htm). They are the Nazi's of the U.S.A. While that link deals with the F part of the acronym, you can look around their site concerning the A and the T (Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms for those who don't know). Scum of the earth if you ask me. But banning firearms would screw them, a Department of the Treasury, and thousands of people would lose jobs, and millions in revenue would dissapear. Similiar to the D.E.A. (http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/), and why drugs will never be legal in the US. Because of lost revenue, and loss of jobs.

Kurgan
08-01-2002, 10:34 AM
Call me cynical, but taking away guns won't make me feel safe... even if I knew that no criminal would ever have a gun.

That's the main best argument against all-out banning of firearms, is that the police and military still need guns, so guns still exist, so people can smuggle them or steal them, and boom... criminals and still have guns to commit crimes with. Rich people can get guns too, they hire people to protect them, or bribe somebody to get guns. So in the end, a few poor or honest people won't have guns, and that's it. So it's a crappy solution, even if it looks good on paper (banning all firearm ownership of people to reduce crime).

Heck, maybe I'm lucky, but where I live, I'm far more likely to die in a car accident than being shot by some hoodlum or get caught in the crossfire of a gun battle between police and gang members.

In the US, there are tons of laws on the books, enforced by police all over. You need a liscense and registration to drive, you can't drive drunk, you can lose your liscense and get expensive tickets for bad driving. There are speed limits and all sorts of stuff like that, yet hundreds, thousands of people die every year from accidents.

Cars aren't "intended" to kill like guns are you can say, sure, but then cars are used to commit crimes as well. To say nothing of the fabled "getaway car" you see used on those cop shows in high speed chases, but just the other day I was watching a report on TV about how this lady allegedly ran over her husband and killed him when she caught him with another woman. Cars and other motor vehicles are more expensive, but they're probably easier to get than guns, and they cause more deaths and disabling injuries than guns could ever hope to, statistically.

And as others pointed out, guns aren't just for killing. If you're a good shot, you can wound an attacker, or hold them at bay long enough for the police to arrive and protect yourself from death/rape/robbery, etc. Self defense benefits alone should be justification enough for lawful gun ownership, I say. The police and military use guns to kill (lawfully) and citizens should be able to kill lawfully if they need to when attacked by armed criminals. But that's all part of the risk of attacking responsible gun owners... if that could deter a few crimes and save a few lives, I'm all for that too.

Having liscensing rules and safety training for gun use is a good idea. People who shoot themselves in the foot or let their kids get killed by accident from a gun lying around the house obviously are a symptom of the problem of irresponsible use. But again, you'll still have people who are careless or borderline and people will still get hurt. With proper training, you can reduce those accidental deaths or injuries, just like with responsible car ownership/use.

And if I can't pack a gun to make myself feel safe in some area where there is high crime, maybe I'll carry a nice broadsword, at least it would give me some piece of mind... ; )

Breton
08-01-2002, 11:47 AM
The lehilasation of guns kind of encourage people to use them (in other words shoot and kill)


Nazi Germany did not invade Switzerland. Do you want to know why? Fear of guns.

No, they didn't invade switzerland because Switzerland was neutral.


I must agree with jah warrior, killing someone is disgusting, even if it's a criminal.

Jedi Legend
08-01-2002, 03:00 PM
No, they didn't invade switzerland because Switzerland was neutral.

Wait... so Hitler, who wanted to have control over Europe, didn't want to take over a neutral country? It's not like Hitler cared if he was at war with a country before taking it over.

<Nazi General> Hitler, our troops are ready to invade Switzerland.
<Hitler> No! They are neutral, we have to respect that.

Only bad people want to kill, but sometimes a good person is forced to kill. I think it is sad that you would allow yourself to become a victim because you can't kill someone. Besides, it's like I said... what happens when that criminal who broke into your house sees the opportunity to rape your wife. Assuming you either are married now or will be in the future (this is a hypothetical situation, after all) would you rather watch your wife be raped and murdered or would you rather shoot the bastard who is doing it? This is a situation that could happen, has happened, and will happen but probably not to you.

Forced safety classes? What about for other dangerous tools? The government of the US does not currently have the right to do that but they do anyways. Why should a responsible, safe, gun owner be punished because a moron shoots himself in the foot? If a kid gets a gun and shoots someone both the kid and the parent need to be prosecuted. If violent crimes had stricter punishments there would be less crime.

razorace
08-01-2002, 03:12 PM
Wasn't Austria neutral when the Nazis invaded? Heck, I doubt Poland did anything ether.

razorace
08-01-2002, 03:16 PM
Switzerland probably wasn't attacked due to too much foreign interests in their banks. Quickest way to piss off other countries mess with their money, their land, or their oil. :)