Gun Control

[jackattack]

Some men look at constitutions with sanctimonious reverence, and deem them like the ark of the Covenant, too sacred to be touched. They ascribe to the men of the preceding age a wisdom more than human, and suppose what they did to be beyond amendment... laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind... as that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, institutions must advance also, to keep pace with the times.... We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain forever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors.

 

 

 

Here's a game: guess the quote, no googling.

 

 

 

I want to say John Adams.

 

 

 

"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."

 

- Thomas Jefferson

 

 

 

"No freeman shall ever be debarred the use of arms."

 

- Thomas Jefferson

 

 

 

"Arms in the hands of citizens may be used at individual discretion in private self defense."

 

- John Adams

 

 

 

"To disarm the people is the most effectual way to enslave them."

 

- George Mason

 

 

 

"(The Constitution preserves) the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation...(where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms."

 

- James Madison

 

 

 

"Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the people's liberty teeth (and) keystone"

 

- George Washington

[magekillr]

Nope.

 

 

 

It was Thomas Jefferson...who also favored progressive taxation. So any more of that malarkey that "the Bill of Rights are God given and are not able to be amended", is just that: malarkey. The "right" to wield a weapon like a gun is an ancient and barbaric traditional mind-set, nothing more.

[jackattack]

Well you think that.

[mmmcannibalism]

Nope.

 

 

 

It was Thomas Jefferson...who also favored progressive taxation. So any more of that malarkey that "the Bill of Rights are God given and are not able to be amended", is just that: malarkey. The "right" to wield a weapon like a gun is an ancient and barbaric traditional mind-set, nothing more.

 

 

 

So your argument is that all of our rights is a joke, thats interesting. Is it just me or do way to many people just say wanting self defense is barbaric.

 

 

 

Ill take a barbaric practice over an advanced death thank you very much

 

 

 

Also to deal with the whole effectiveness of mace thing. Mace would function effectively for close range self defense, provided you are also trained in martial arts to capitalize on the few seconds of the attacker being stunned. If you just spray them and run you better hope you out run them since they will be able to recover as they chase you. Mace is useless at range and pretty useless if someone is half crazy and charging with a knife. Finally, pulling a gun is pretty detering to anyone about to attack you.

[magekillr]

Nope.

 

 

 

It was Thomas Jefferson...who also favored progressive taxation. So any more of that malarkey that "the Bill of Rights are God given and are not able to be amended", is just that: malarkey. The "right" to wield a weapon like a gun is an ancient and barbaric traditional mind-set, nothing more.

 

 

 

So your argument is that all of our rights is a joke, thats interesting. Is it just me or do way to many people just say wanting self defense is barbaric.

 

 

 

Ill take a barbaric practice over an advanced death thank you very much

 

are a joke*

 

 

 

And no, way to straw man it up. Killing someone over a possession is barbaric. The chance to use a gun in self-defense to keep yourself from being harmed is few and far between, and more lives would be saved if guns were banned. The 2nd amendment is the only amendment with "well regulated" mentioned...it was for a reason. We no longer have a militia, the need for it goes away.

[Zierro]

Some men look at constitutions with sanctimonious reverence, and deem them like the ark of the Covenant, too sacred to be touched. They ascribe to the men of the preceding age a wisdom more than human, and suppose what they did to be beyond amendment... laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind... as that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, institutions must advance also, to keep pace with the times.... We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain forever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors.

 

 

 

The problem is, this can be used for both sides. In my opinion, we have not advanced into an age where self-defense is unnecessary.

[magekillr]

Some men look at constitutions with sanctimonious reverence, and deem them like the ark of the Covenant, too sacred to be touched. They ascribe to the men of the preceding age a wisdom more than human, and suppose what they did to be beyond amendment... laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind... as that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, institutions must advance also, to keep pace with the times.... We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain forever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors.

 

 

 

The problem is, this can be used for both sides. In my opinion, we have not advanced into an age where self-defense is unnecessary.

 

 

 

We have advanced to the age where GUNS are not needed for self-defense, and only make things worse.

[Zierro]

I agree. Guns do make things worse. The problem is, since they're already here and not going away anytime soon, using guns for self-defense and being up to par with the attackers is a plus.

[jackattack]

 

And no, way to straw man it up. Killing someone over a possession is barbaric. The chance to use a gun in self-defense to keep yourself from being harmed is few and far between, and more lives would be saved if guns were banned. The 2nd amendment is the only amendment with "well regulated" mentioned...it was for a reason. We no longer have a militia, the need for it goes away.

 

 

 

Why you have the impression that people who own guns would chase an unarmed robber and shoot him in the back while he's carrying away their t.v.? I can only think of one time that anything even like that has happened.

 

 

 

And saying the 2nd amendment is for keeping a militia doesn't work anymore.

[NoMoreDead]

Oh yes my bad. Humane is more fit for a sentence included with deli meats. And ties it to the slaughterhouses where baby cows, sheep, etc are kept in pens they can't stand up in for months on end and continuously prodded with electrical sticks. Then they are taken and slaughtered to make you a great deli sandwich. A good hunter usually practices humane methods even if he doesn't know it. 1 shot 1 kill.

 

 

 

 

One shot one kill? I laugh at your ignorance. To be so bold as to say that every hunter hits his target spot on 100% of the time is laughable.

 

 

 

NEITHER of the two practices are humane. Shooting something is NOT humane.

 

Humane by definition: "1 : marked by compassion, sympathy, or consideration for humans or animals"

 

 

 

You're killing an animal. No matter how painless, or how quickly it's done, it will never be humane.

 

 

 

 

A good burglar should have some sort of common sense. Even if you don't leave stuff lying around. Where do people usually keep money, jewelry, valuables. You would be surprised how common hiding places are for valuables. Its easy to smash the front door and be in and out in a matter of minutes. Its not like they house-sit the house overnight while "shopping".

 

 

 

 

So why aren't you keeping things hidden better? If a burglar tried to reach any of my valuables, he'd be crushed over the head with a baseball bat before he could even come within 20 feet of them. Oh, and don't even bother saying "What if he has a gun?" You think anyone who just shot someone is going to just hang around and search for things? If he shoots me, he's failed.

 

 

 

 

^. Mace won't help at a distance, especially against a gun. Anyone with any sort of training (or on drugs) can withstand a punch after being maced. I fail to see the argument here. Unless its a punch to the groin i seriously doubt its going to render the subject incapable of continuing the attack.

 

 

 

 

...So why not punch/kick him in the groin?

 

 

 

I'd also like to point out that most burglers don't have "training". I'd be really surprised if you could show me some sort of credible statistic that shows that a large number of criminals have military style training, or have even taken a self defence class. Unfortunatly, since this is not the case, no such statistic exists.

 

 

 

As for mace not working at a distance: Why would you walk out into the open if someone has a gun? Even if you don't know, I think I've already shown that someone shooting you is a last resort for a criminal. They don't want to do 25 to Life because they wanted to steal a couple hundred bucks in items.

 

 

 

 

Someone said earlier in this thread that guns were the easy choice, or something along those lines. Your right, so why not choose it. Work smarter not harder. Y'all can throw around your nunchucks, ninja stars, mace, and be all kungfu all you want. But when you are thrown into a sudden life and death situation, are all those really going to help? No probably not, save the kungfu and only if you were trained in some sort of martial arts. And then you still have to gain control of the subject to choke them out. Personally though, i'm gonna continue carrying a gun to ASSURE myself protection.

 

 

 

I don't know what you were trying to say here, but you jumped around so much it was hard to even say you made an argument. You moreso tried to make fun of people who support gun control and used that as an argument.

 

 

 

I think I've pretty much shown that there are countless precautions you can take to prevent yourself from falling into a life and death situation. Guns do NOT assure your protection. They aren't even close to being as effective as taking saftey precautions which stop yourself from being victimized in a violent crime ahead of time.

[scootlaboot]

Oh yes my bad. Humane is more fit for a sentence included with deli meats. And ties it to the slaughterhouses where baby cows, sheep, etc are kept in pens they can't stand up in for months on end and continuously prodded with electrical sticks. Then they are taken and slaughtered to make you a great deli sandwich. A good hunter usually practices humane methods even if he doesn't know it. 1 shot 1 kill.

 

 

 

 

One shot one kill? I laugh at your ignorance. To be so bold as to say that every hunter hits his target spot on 100% of the time is laughable.

 

 

 

NEITHER of the two practices are humane. Shooting something is NOT humane.

 

Humane by definition: "1 : marked by compassion, sympathy, or consideration for humans or animals"

 

 

 

You're killing an animal. No matter how painless, or how quickly it's done, it will never be humane.

 

 

 

I hunt and i will say that no one ever one shots 100% of the time, and I think he was refering to trying to get a kill in one shot and you took what he said out of context, and even if guns were banned hunting would still go on. 1. Rednecks giving up their guns will never happen....ever. 2. There is still archery, trapping, and the random people who knifes their prey.

 

 

 

 

 

Even though I am against the banning of guns in its entirety. I do think that it should get a little more regulation, specifically on handguns.

[chris20085]

Alex Jones on gun control:

 

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=4I7s_Y-SNDY

[llamster]

I disagree with many of your arguments, however I believe civilians should be allowed to have guns.

[l0l0lpur32]

 

Jesus freaking christ, where do YOU live? Guns HAVE to be at point blank range? Measure rooms in your house, your probably going to see an average of 10-12 feet across the room. Let me set up the scenario for you since you seem very dense. A suspect is across the room/down the hall creeping around your house, you walk into the room and he turns around....are you face to face? Nope. Multiple feet between you, not close enough for mace to do any good. This could go in a parking lot as well. You can see a guy running at you point a gun...what are you going to do spray mace and hope the wind blows in your favor?

 

 

 

No, I'm going to throw my hands up and say "Take whatever you want but please don't shoot". He''l steal my wallet and TV but those things can be replaced.

 

 

 

You watch too much TV.

[Kiriyama]

Actually, alot of gun injuries during robbings come from the owners fighting back, I think.

 

 

 

Its better to let them take what they want, rather than endanger yourself and your family.

[Range_This11]

 

I hunt and i will say that no one ever one shots 100% of the time, and I think he was refering to trying to get a kill in one shot and you took what he said out of context, and even if guns were banned hunting would still go on. 1. Rednecks giving up their guns will never happen....ever. 2. There is still archery, trapping, and the random people who knifes their prey.

 

 

 

 

 

Even though I am against the banning of guns in its entirety. I do think that it should get a little more regulation, specifically on handguns.

 

I've always been an advocate of gun control on handguns. I have tons of friends that are hunters (considering I live in rural Wisconsin) and not one of them uses a handgun to hunt. These guys and girls are the real deal. They miss every day of school when it is deer hunting season and when t-zones comes up they miss for that, and when muzzle-loader comes up they miss school as well.

 

 

 

Keep rifles and shotguns for hunting purposes but get rid of handguns. Handguns serve no point but to kill another human. They should be gone, end of story.

[Lenticular_J]

Actually, alot of gun injuries during robbings come from the owners fighting back, I think.

 

 

 

Its better to let them take what they want, rather than endanger yourself and your family.

 

If you also had a weapon, though, you'd have a much better chance. The criminal might still shoot you, whether to kill or not, just to get away from the crime - even if you don't fight back, but just stumble upon them. Happens pretty often here, failed robberies end up in a dead - or at least shot - person. It's certainly stupid to fight someone with a gun, unless either 1) It's point blank and you're surprising them, or 2) You have a gun aimed at them. Nobody will be fast enough to turn, aim, and shoot if you already have a bead on them, and tell them to put down their weapon or simply get the hell out.

 

 

 

Handguns will never be gone for the criminals, range. But I agree with at least making tighter restrictions on them. They're some of the easiest guns to get legally, and of the few legally purchased guns used to commit crimes, handguns make up the vast majority. I'm lucky enough to live in a house where a rifle or shotgun could be used to protect myself in the house.

[mmmcannibalism]

Actually, alot of gun injuries during robbings come from the owners fighting back, I think.

 

 

 

Its better to let them take what they want, rather than endanger yourself and your family.

 

 

 

thats works really well if the burgular isnt about to turn into a murderer or rapist

 

 

 

and i would imagine a lot of gun injuries occur when the owners fight back because they are taking a stand and probably shooting the guy thats breaking the law

 

 

 

plenty of criminals will just kill someone they find in the house to prevent witnesses

[Sir_Redhead]

I can't beleive some of you...you honestly believe guns are the problem?

 

 

 

Yes they can be used for killing, but so can knives and pencils for gods sake! First of all, if guns were illeagle and i wanted to kill somebody, you think just because i don't have a gun that would stop me? I'd kill them with a knife or a pointy toothbrush, or my hands!

 

 

 

Guns aren't the evil thing, the people killing are. Like i said if they want someone dead bad enough, they will find a way to, even if it doesn't involve a gun.

 

 

 

Also, contrary to popular belief..guns don't kill people, the crazy wackjob holding it does.

 

 

 

Outlawing guns won't solve the problem.

 

 

 

I meen, I am a hunter I hunt a lot and I enjoy it. I have 2 shotguns and a rifle all locked up in my bedroom, but does that mean I'm going to go kill people with them? I meen when I turn 21 my father is going to buy me a handgun so that I can get into Action Pistol shooting like him, he is the 15'th best shooter in the world! But that doesn't me an and him are going to go around and shoot people now does it?

[magekillr]

I can't beleive some of you...you honestly believe guns are the problem?

 

 

 

 

Nope. Not the guns, the gun culture that you yourself ascribe to is the problem.

[das1330]

magekillr, what is this "gun culture"? The people involved in collecting and shooting guns in various competitions are not the people killing others, its the gang members that have no interest whatsoever in guns that go around killing people. There is nothing wrong with the "gun culture" in America. There is a problem with criminals.

[Sir_Redhead]

magekillr, what is this "gun culture"? The people involved in collecting and shooting guns in various competitions are not the people killing others, its the gang members that have no interest whatsoever in guns that go around killing people. There is nothing wrong with the "gun culture" in America. There is a problem with criminals.

 

 

 

Thankyou

[magekillr]

magekillr, what is this "gun culture"? The people involved in collecting and shooting guns in various competitions are not the people killing others, its the gang members that have no interest whatsoever in guns that go around killing people. There is nothing wrong with the "gun culture" in America. There is a problem with criminals.

 

 

 

Problem with criminals eh? Then let's work towards rehabilitation rather than incarceration...let's give people more options through socialist programs, that help them have access to education, health care, and other opportunities that are more appealing than crime.

 

 

 

Oh wait, conservatives have an issue with that too, huh?

[Faux]

Lol @ people who trust the government too much

 

 

 

They can't even keep Mexicans from crossing the border, you think they can stop guns?

 

 

 

Morons

 

Of course there will always be immigrants and weapons that slip the net. Who said otherwise? Moron.

 

 

 

The aim is to remove the gun culture. I'm not saying the UK is gun-free at all. I could go out on the street now and get a gun for £50.00 (and I'm not joking, I know exactly who to talk to). Half of all youths in this country feel the same way. It doesn't mean we're gonna run out and buy ourselves one though. We've learnt, through experience, that carrying a weapon attracts unwanted attention, and this puts you in more danger than the gun compensates for.

 

 

 

The problem isn't that people have guns, it's that they feel it's acceptable to carry them out in public and even use them.

 

 

 

Wow, you're comparing a country of around 50 million people living in an ISLAND in contrast to a country of three *HUNDRED* million people with some of the most impoverished nations just south of it.

 

 

 

Here's a fun fact [wagon], there's at least TWENTY states in the United States bigger than your island. If your police state can't even control all of you with all your CCTVs around, you think the US Fed can?

[Lenticular_J]

That post made me chuckle, shadow. (In a good way)

 

 

 

EDIT: Huh, never noticed mage's post. But scoot's right, that's a horridly ignorant view. I'd try to avoid the name-calling and how personal it got, but he is right.