Gun Control

[purfishx]

Nooooooooooo! This argument is too epic to finish!

 

 

 

cooooontinueeeee.

[venomai]

Eh, at least you guys aren't a part of it. And to Venomai, I think it's time for a closing. We've argued our points well enough and I think it just got to that chapter where we keep repeating ourselves. Well, it's been like that for a bit :lol: but now I think we should probably just save our strength for other debates in different threads.

 

Heh, this has gone on a lot longer than it should have. Probably for the best that we put an end to it. :lol:

[Nowayout59]

Anyone that says there is no reason to own a gun hear this,

 

 

 

A 13 year old girl In Washington State (I believe) had been trained in gun safety and use. Her parents owned a shotgun. She knew how to use the shotgun and where it was kept. One day an illegal rapist and murderer broke into her house. He began to try and find her. Defending herself she took the shotgun and killed him. Had she not killed him she would have been raped and murdered. The shotgun saved her life.

 

 

 

I have grown up around guns and my step-dad has a permit for his .50 cal. He has a closet full of guns. I don't go around shooting people and often reprimand friends when we go shooting for fun for doing stupid [cabbage]. I am not a more violent person because I am around guns. I have a gun for my safety. IF someone breaks into my house, I don't care what they are doing. I am going to shoot them on the spot. Call me ignorant but I would rather be safe than sorry.

[War_Junky_91]

I refuse to relinquish my weapons until the world can gurantee 100% that i will never be threatened by war or terroism in my neighborhood or home. Until then i will glady exercise my right to own every damn gun i can to protect myself from what ever may come my way.

[deathdrow]

Anyone that says there is no reason to own a gun hear this,

 

 

 

A 13 year old girl In Washington State (I believe) had been trained in gun safety and use. Her parents owned a shotgun. She knew how to use the shotgun and where it was kept. One day an illegal rapist and murderer broke into her house. He began to try and find her. Defending herself she took the shotgun and killed him. Had she not killed him she would have been raped and murdered. The shotgun saved her life.

 

 

 

I have grown up around guns and my step-dad has a permit for his .50 cal. He has a closet full of guns. I don't go around shooting people and often reprimand friends when we go shooting for fun for doing stupid [cabbage]. I am not a more violent person because I am around guns. I have a gun for my safety. IF someone breaks into my house, I don't care what they are doing. I am going to shoot them on the spot. Call me ignorant but I would rather be safe than sorry.

 

Although you personally may be responsible with guns, many people would not be. That's the issue with this, a lot of people are irresponsible, and clueless that they could seriously hurt someone.

 

And also, you bumped an almost two month old thread. :-#

[Nowayout59]

Sorry, I didn't see the age. Me and my real dad just had a discussion about ti and I saw the title and thought i should go talk to TIP about it :twss:

[venomai]

Anyone that says there is no reason to own a gun hear this,

 

 

 

A 13 year old girl In Washington State (I believe) had been trained in gun safety and use. Her parents owned a shotgun. She knew how to use the shotgun and where it was kept. One day an illegal rapist and murderer broke into her house. He began to try and find her. Defending herself she took the shotgun and killed him. Had she not killed him she would have been raped and murdered. The shotgun saved her life.

 

 

 

I have grown up around guns and my step-dad has a permit for his .50 cal. He has a closet full of guns. I don't go around shooting people and often reprimand friends when we go shooting for fun for doing stupid [cabbage]. I am not a more violent person because I am around guns. I have a gun for my safety. IF someone breaks into my house, I don't care what they are doing. I am going to shoot them on the spot. Call me ignorant but I would rather be safe than sorry.

 

Self-defense is a good thing. I think we can all agree on that. A gun, however, is not the only means of self-defense. And while it may be an effective means of self-defense, that alone doesn't justify the sale and production of more firearms. This becomes particularly evident after considering the effect in the long run (i.e. higher homicide rates, more guns in the hands of criminals, etc).

[purfishx]

 

Self-defense is a good thing. I think we can all agree on that. A gun, however, is not the only means of self-defense. And while it may be an effective means of self-defense, that alone doesn't justify the sale and production of more firearms. This becomes particularly evident after considering the effect in the long run (i.e. higher homicide rates, more guns in the hands of criminals, etc).

 

 

 

So we produce guns for only those who are only going to use them for self defense or walk around with knives instead?

[venomai]

 

Self-defense is a good thing. I think we can all agree on that. A gun, however, is not the only means of self-defense. And while it may be an effective means of self-defense, that alone doesn't justify the sale and production of more firearms. This becomes particularly evident after considering the effect in the long run (i.e. higher homicide rates, more guns in the hands of criminals, etc).

 

 

 

So we produce guns for only those who are only going to use them for self defense or walk around with knives instead?

 

Err... no.

[1_man_army]

Anyone that says there is no reason to own a gun hear this,

 

 

 

A 13 year old girl In Washington State (I believe) had been trained in gun safety and use. Her parents owned a shotgun. She knew how to use the shotgun and where it was kept. One day an illegal rapist and murderer broke into her house. He began to try and find her. Defending herself she took the shotgun and killed him. Had she not killed him she would have been raped and murdered. The shotgun saved her life.

 

 

 

I have grown up around guns and my step-dad has a permit for his .50 cal. He has a closet full of guns. I don't go around shooting people and often reprimand friends when we go shooting for fun for doing stupid [cabbage]. I am not a more violent person because I am around guns. I have a gun for my safety. IF someone breaks into my house, I don't care what they are doing. I am going to shoot them on the spot. Call me ignorant but I would rather be safe than sorry.

 

 

 

 

Anyone can post up isolated incidents for either side in this argument, what about the 8 year old kid who shot his Dad and his Dad's friend in Arizona? My point is; single cases do not help either argument in this argument, what is important is the overall figures regarding gun crime.

 

 

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/11/us/11 ... ml?_r=2&hp

 

 

 

As for your 2nd point, it doesn't make you ignorant it just makes you stupid. This 'shoot first ask questions later' attitude is why so many people kill members of their family or people they know after mistaking them for intruders in their homes.

 

 

 

-----

 

 

 

I refuse to relinquish my weapons until the world can gurantee 100% that i will never be threatened by war or terroism in my neighborhood or home. Until then i will glady exercise my right to own every damn gun i can to protect myself from what ever may come my way.

 

 

 

You're not doing much to dispel the stereotype of paranoid gun-toting American are you? Seriously when was the last time Indiana was affected by war or terrorism, The Civil War?

 

 

 

Ugh, I'm bored of this topic again already but I felt the need to post for some reason.

[cryztalwing]

If you like Gun control than H.R.45 is for you, thow if you don't than it is best that you try to get your Congressman to vote no on it.

 

 

 

H.R.45 Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009. Here is what this bill would do if it pass.

 

 

 

[hide=]If passed, this bill would require that anyone wishing to purchase, own, or possess a "qualifying firearm" - that's any handgun, and any long gun capable of accepting a detachable magazine - would have to be licensed by the state or the federal government in a licensing program managed by the Attorney General. (Even the guns you all ready own.)

 

 

 

To get a license you would have to prove you're you, provide a passport-style photo, a thumbprint, and take a written exam which includes questions about firearms safety, safe storage, the risks of firearms ownership, and anything else the Attorney General deems appropriate.

 

 

 

All transfers would be required to go through a licensed dealer with the exception of occasional gifts or bequests between parents, children (18 or over), and grandparents, or loans of not more than 30 days between "persons who are personally known to one another." (It actually says that. I'm not making this up.) And all transfers would have to be recorded in a "Transfer Record" established and maintained by the Attorney General.

 

 

 

The bill also makes it a crime for a dealer to have shoddy records or fail to appropriately cooperate with any inspectors. It makes failure to report the loss or theft of a firearm within 72 hours a felony punishable by up to 2 years in prison. Failure to keep a firearm locked up in such a way as to keep it inaccessible to anyone under 18 becomes a federal felony too.

 

 

 

It will make it illegal for you to possess guns you currently legally own unless you go jump through their hoops, register yourself and obtain a license.

 

 

 

Read the bill for yourself .

 

 

 

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin ... ih.txt.pdf[/hide]

[mmmcannibalism]

Personally I believe all weapons should be in the hands of the police, and illegal for anyone else. Then rented out at gun ranges or hunting grounds for those hunters. Small firearms would be allowed for self defense purposes, but really, is a shotgun necessary?

 

 

 

all weapons? pardon the cliche, but all weapons entails almost any object of decent size or weight. The idea of renting out guns is a nice idea, but most hunting occurs on private ground. I think my family eats 5 or so deer each year, all of which are hunted on land we or relatives own. While I firmly believe we need to regulate fully automatic weapons and such, whats the difference between shooting someone with a 45 and a shotgun? Sure, a shotgun is a bit excessive, but if you are defending yourself going overboard isnt going to be your main concern.

 

 

 

Good gun laws do need to exist, no you do not have the unalienable right to an uzi in the household. If they established a liscensing measure for owning the practical weapons such as hunting rifles I think it would be a fine measure. My problem is bills that try to ban everything on technicalities, and dont adress the fact that a lot of gun crimes fall into either a. crimes by people in gangs or just criminals in general or b. crimes where if it wasnt a gun it would have been the violater grabbing a knife or nearest sharp object.

 

 

 

One final note, I realize this is a bit of a generalization but why is it that the same people that ranted about George Bush's use of the nsa to wiretap without warrants wants the government to be able to monitor what weapons you own. As said, there is a fuzzy line. We shouldnt be allowing ak's on the street but then again, when do you stop banning dangerous stuff and actually start going after crime?

[mmmcannibalism]

so a knife or katana is not a weapon? If you would have just said guns we could have avoided that misunderstanding.

[Distracted]

I share rocco's opinion. In the hands of the army too.

 

 

 

But why the f would you want a shotgun to defend your house. A shotgun is near-to-sure death from close range, but useless after a few feets, and unless you have sawn off the barrel (which I think is illegal), it's not very easy to use in a house. Imagine killing a burglar using a shotgun, or just wounding his leg so he can't run using a 45.

 

 

 

Also, automatics shouldn't be owned by individuals under any circumstances. There just isn't a reason. Unless you're in the army, but even then you should only be allowed to own the gun when you're actually at the army.

[Omar]

I'm not nearly an expert on guns, but couldn't you just use a stun gun for self defence?

[das1330]

I'm not nearly an expert on guns, but couldn't you just use a stun gun for self defence?

 

 

 

Stun guns are terrible self defense weapons. To actually be effective, you must actually touch your attacker with the probes. Aside from that, they are expensive, complicated, and unreliable, plus there is a fairly limited number of charge cycles, and if your attaacker is wearing thick clothes they are useless.

 

 

 

I share rocco's opinion. In the hands of the army too.

 

 

 

But why the f would you want a shotgun to defend your house. A shotgun is near-to-sure death from close range, but useless after a few feets, and unless you have sawn off the barrel (which I think is illegal), it's not very easy to use in a house. Imagine killing a burglar using a shotgun, or just wounding his leg so he can't run using a 45.

 

 

 

Also, automatics shouldn't be owned by individuals under any circumstances. There just isn't a reason. Unless you're in the army, but even then you should only be allowed to own the gun when you're actually at the army.

 

 

 

You should find your facts from sources other then Call of Duty - shotguns loaded with buckshot are effective weapons out to at least 75 yards, while slugs are good farther then that. Second, a shotgun is easily the best weapon available for home defense. The fact that the shot spreads out means it is possible to hit targets without precise aiming; an extremeley useful attribute in situations where you are awoken at 2AM by someone breaking in, and you are too drowsy to effectively aim. Second, shot limits over penetration making a shotgun significantly safer to use indoors then a rifle, while still having the power necessary to quickly and effectively stop an attacker. Finally, cutting down a shotgun is NOT illegal in the US, as long as the final weapon is more then 18 inches long. If it is shorter then that you need to buy a 200 dollar tax stamp to legally own a short barreled shotgun.

 

 

 

 

 

Guns do not, and never have caused crime. As shown all over the world, crime is a cultural problem. Destroying gangs would go much further in reducing crime then banning any object ever would, particularly since guns used in crimes are almost always illegal anyways.

[i_love_burritos]

Guns do not, and never have caused crime. As shown all over the world, crime is a cultural problem. Destroying gangs would go much further in reducing crime then banning any object ever would, particularly since guns used in crimes are almost always illegal anyways.

 

 

 

Thats like saying Thalidomide doesn't cause birth defects.

 

 

 

Agree to second point.

 

Disagree to first and third.

 

 

 

At first: How can you say that, ( I image you are living it up in good ol' Americatown.)

 

 

 

As a statistic, there are 98 guns for 100 Americans. Thats the highest ratio of any country. Second country is India with 2 guns for every 100 people. See the rift ?

 

 

 

I quote:

 

 

 

Guns...never have caused crime

 

So what does cause crime ? I agree, social and cultural attitudes within a community have a large part to do with it, but can you really be so naive to believe that guns are 100% safe?

 

 

 

Although crimes are not a by-product of guns, guns are a by-product of crime.

 

 

 

The main problem with guns, is their easy accesibilty. You may say, taking away guns, infringes upon your "Second Amendment".

 

 

 

To quote:

 

 

 

Our choice is not merely to support or oppose gun control but to decide who can own which guns under what conditions

 

 

 

Nearly 40,000 people die from accidental misfires.

 

Some may argue that IF you learn to respect and use your gun properly, you will be out of harms way. IF you keep guns away from children, they will be safe. IF is easy to say, the thing is, human error is far too common, and people are stupid.

 

 

 

In the right hands of a trained and educated person, guns are safe. It has been proven, statistically, that guns do lower crime. However, these fail to mention, that many people who used them, were instructed and educated about them.

 

 

 

Please dont link me to this article

 

 

 

ABC stands for American Broadcasting Corruption.

[mmmcannibalism]

So what does cause crime ? I agree, social and cultural attitudes within a community have a large part to do with it, but can you really be so naive to believe that guns are 100% safe?

 

 

 

cars arent 100% safe, we still allow people to drive them. The main point is noone(excluding maybe a true psychopath) has ever gone "dude I totally have a gun its telling me to kill you", any gun crime would have been commited with a knife or heavy rock or whatever if the guns were illegal.

[i_love_burritos]

To prove my superiority, just because I want to, I will come up with a rational argument, for whatever you guys throw at me.

 

 

 

So fire away :D

[Laura]

So what does cause crime ? I agree, social and cultural attitudes within a community have a large part to do with it, but can you really be so naive to believe that guns are 100% safe?

 

 

 

cars arent 100% safe, we still allow people to drive them. The main point is noone(excluding maybe a true psychopath) has ever gone "dude I totally have a gun its telling me to kill you", any gun crime would have been commited with a knife or heavy rock or whatever if the guns were illegal.

Yeah, but I'm sure I'd be much more inclined to kill you with a gun over a rock. As in, I'm not going to struggle with you (using a rock) only to perish myself. In all likelihood, if I never had access to a gun, I would never commit a crime; my weak frame makes me ill suited to do so. But a gun, well, that just changes everything.

[Dizzle229]

So what does cause crime ? I agree, social and cultural attitudes within a community have a large part to do with it, but can you really be so naive to believe that guns are 100% safe?

 

 

 

cars arent 100% safe, we still allow people to drive them. The main point is noone(excluding maybe a true psychopath) has ever gone "dude I totally have a gun its telling me to kill you", any gun crime would have been commited with a knife or heavy rock or whatever if the guns were illegal.

Yeah, but I'm sure I'd be much more inclined to kill you with a gun over a rock. As in, I'm not going to struggle with you (using a rock) only to perish myself. In all likelihood, if I never had access to a gun, I would never commit a crime; my weak frame makes me ill suited to do so. But a gun, well, that just changes everything.

 

 

 

 

 

So you're saying if you had a gun, you would commit a crime?

 

 

 

:?

[i_love_burritos]

She is saying, that weapons make it easier to commit crimes.

 

Moreover, guns are the best weapons, and most available to commit crimes with.

 

Also, it is easier to commit a crime with a gun, than any other weapon. (For obvious reasons)

[Wisp]

If that statistic is right, 98 guns to ever 100 americans, and there are, give or take, 300 million americans, that's 294 million guns. How would a gun ban be enforced? Not all guns are registered for one, how would the goverment know every single person that had a gun. Some guns are very expensive. If I, for some reason owned a 8000 dollar gun (barett 82A1) I wouldn't want to just hand it over to the police. Of course must guns aren't that expensive, but still. If the gvmnt gave out a tax break to the people they confiscated guns from, where the tax reduction was equal to the value of the gun (ie:300 dollar gun=300 dollar tax break), that could end up being literally hundreds of billions of dollars.

 

A black market of guns would emerge to a greater extent. If people want a gun, they would be able to get one, regardless of legality.

 

As snipersas said, a shotgun for home defense is probably the best weapon. A shotgun might be overkill, but how many people here have ever shot a .45? unless you're trained, at 2 am, after just waking up to find an armed intruder in your house, you're probably not going to be able to hit the person, much less aim for the leg in order to wound them.

[i_love_burritos]

If that statistic is right, 98 guns to ever 100 americans, and there are, give or take, 300 million americans, that's 294 million guns. How would a gun ban be enforced?

 

 

 

Who ever said anything about a BAN ? Gun restriction and control is paramount, it's a given that taking back every single firearm in the USA would be an astronomical task, never mind the logistics of it. But you can't make it so easy for every Tom, [bleep], and Harry to own a weapon.

 

 

 

Not all guns are registered for one, how would the goverment know every single person that had a gun. Some guns are very expensive. If I, for some reason owned a 8000 dollar gun (barett 82A1) I wouldn't want to just hand it over to the police. Of course must guns aren't that expensive, but still. If the gvmnt gave out a tax break to the people they confiscated guns from, where the tax reduction was equal to the value of the gun (ie:300 dollar gun=300 dollar tax break), that could end up being literally hundreds of billions of dollars.

 

 

 

Again, why would anyone do that ? Difficult to co-ordinate, labor mass is huge, and costs money. And even if you did, just take a moment and think of all the positive aspects it would achieve. For one, less money being used in public hospitals, less on gun restriction, less on advertisement, value of contraband trafficking would go down, less on insurance companies. But the shareholder of these large companies, wouldn't be too happy :lol:

 

 

 

A black market of guns would emerge to a greater extent. If people want a gun, they would be able to get one, regardless of legality.

 

 

 

Yes, true, absence makes the heart grow stronger, and that itchy trigger finger, itchier. But in essence, who would want a gun so ruthlessly that they would be willing to shell out, maybe 2 or three times the amount of money, it would normally cost? Criminals yes, ordinary citizens - no. This is why, gun ranges and gun hire exist.

 

 

 

[JIM]

Once again, gun ownership is essential if you want to keep your civil liberties intact.

 

 

 

Get rid of your guns and you'll turn into Great Britain (and worse) before you know it.

 

 

 

Can anyone say police state?