Gun control

Discussion in 'Every Day Debating' started by curunir's bane, Jun 3, 2004.

  1. curunir's bane

    curunir's bane Kwisatch Haderach

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    Messages:
    2,253
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    baton rouge
    Ratings:
    +14 / 0 / -0
    Ok i think guns should be controled. I think that people being able to buy auto-matics is just rediculous. What do you think about gun control? Do you think that guns could pose a threat to others? Or is gun control an infringement on our rights?
     
  2. quack145

    quack145 Guest

    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    im only 16 so this might not matter much but gun control in the long run i dont think would be a good thing i own 2 .22's and dont have the urge to put to someones head if thats the kind of gun control your talking bout my dad takes me out and shows me how to shoot (when he feels like it lol) its just they need a "people control" cuz you know the saying "guns don't kill people, people kill people"
     
  3. curunir's bane

    curunir's bane Kwisatch Haderach

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    Messages:
    2,253
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    baton rouge
    Ratings:
    +14 / 0 / -0
    yes that is true and i like what you say right there. I think its ok to have rifles and shot guns for hunting but we really dont need semi-automatic weapons and auto-matic weapons around. But thats true, we do need people control. Look at the first amendment for example. The First Amendment gives us the freedom of speech, but even the freedom of speech is regulated (We can't use our freedom of speech to slander and threaten) why shouldn't guns be regulated? We need tighter gun laws in this country.
     
    Last edited: Jun 3, 2004
  4. quack145

    quack145 Guest

    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    true semi-autos and autos should be restricted but to the public our military couldnt function properly without a fast acting weapon but of course gun control is for public i think im not really sure i dont catch up on the subject to much but cant control myself when i want to express my opinion i guess i need a "people control" for my own good sometimes lol
     
  5. kartaron

    kartaron Hunter / Gatherer

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2003
    Messages:
    2,287
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    USA
    Ratings:
    +20 / 0 / -0
    Ok i think guns should be controled. I think that people being able to buy auto-matics is just rediculous. What do you think about gun control? Do you think that guns could pose a threat to others? Or is gun control an infringement on our rights?

    but even the freedom of speech is regulated (We can't use our freedom of speech to slander and threaten)


    We cant use guns to threaten or harm without punishment either. Owning a firearm is one of the most regulated thing in the country. You cant carry one publically without special permission or close scrutiny. In some places it is completely illegal to own one. Manufacturers must be virtually flawless in their construction. They are overpriced due to political pressure and restrictions on dealers. Owners must be adults. It is one of the few products that manufacturers must be wary of false "harmul consumer product" lawsuits. It can be illegal to transport a firearm in your car even if you legally own the gun.

    Automatic weapons, explosives, anything (exceps black powder) over .50 calibre are all illegal except with ATF special permission (ex police / military). New regulations make certain specific semi auto weapons with pistol handgrips, muzzle adapters, magazine capacity and magazine placement illegal depending on combinations. Felons are blocked from ever owning weapons (or voting in most cases). Hmm thats a thought, which is more dangerous? A felon with a gun or a felon with a vote?

    The point of the Second Ammendment is to provide the people of the US with a means to defend ourselves from an opressive government or to support the army during an invasion. (No im not a wood bound skinhead). It may not be completely realistic for many reasons but thats the point. As a side benefit, having an armed populace keeps the crime rate down. Australia and England are examples of where banning guns created an opportunity for armed criminals.

    The Second Ammendment actually doesnt make a distinction for grade of arms. By the actual text we have a constitutional right to heavy weapons including rockets, grenades, machine guns, etc. While the idea is entertaining and there is a political party that pushes this concept (not the republicans) it is not practical.

    While semi-auto pistols are used in criminal activity commonly, semi-auto rifles or shotguns are much more rare. There a lot of stats that are twisted to make guns seem more unfriendly. The fact is that the police cannot respond fast enough to make a difference in most criminal activities. Therefore the best way to protect yourself is to have a firearm at the time, understand how to use it and understand what situations are legal for you to use it.

    Generally, for me keeping weapons is a hobby. My weapons are not dangerous to anyone unless they try to break in my place. I am looking to get an automatic at some point but it is very expensive. The non refundable fee to the ATF is a problem since they may not even approve me.

    Im sorry if this is insulting but I wonder if you know the difference between auto and semiauto? Thet to ban both leaves single action pistols, bolt and lever rifles, pump shotguns? All WWII and vietnam souveniers would be illegal. Thats not a little extreme?
     
  6. Nohmanpimp04

    Nohmanpimp04 New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2004
    Messages:
    57
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Miami
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Hey i honstly think that there shouldnt be more gun control but more knowledge about how is aquiring the weapon, and i think that the person who wants a gun should have sometype of counseling. Why, to see the mental status of the person, to know if they are responsible enough to be able to have any weapon in their care.
     
  7. Crusader

    Crusader Disturber of the Peace

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2003
    Messages:
    12,265
    Likes Received:
    91
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Englands Green and Pleasant Lands
    Ratings:
    +91 / 0 / -0
    Are you kidding me? I live in england and the crime rate is ridiculously lower than america's, even when based on proportional figures. Gun crimes cause thousands of deaths a year in america (I think it was either 16000, or 60000), In england there are less than 100 a year. And it makes things a lot simpler when the police are the ones with the guns and not the average criminal, the only ones who do actual use guns are the organised crime sydicates, and thats the same worldwide, but that does mean they are more scarce and when a policeman finds someone with a gun, its a dead givaway. There are even less household robberies that dont involve any guns whatsover. Get your facts straight.

    As for guns themselves, I have no quarrel with using them for self defence (personally i place a high value on life and would rather just beat the guy up), If there were some way of making absolute sure no gun was ever used for crime then I would fully approve.


    This reminds me of a Chris Rock sketch, gun control is stupid, what you should have is bullet control, if bullets cost $5000 each, then no one would get shot unless they really deserved it.
     
  8. Radagast

    Radagast Art House Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2003
    Messages:
    3,058
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Saskatchewan, Canada.
    Ratings:
    +18 / 0 / -0
    I 100% agree.

    I watched the documentary "Bowling for Columbine" a couple nights ago. I knew the gun problem in America was not great, but it was a real eye opener to how bad it actually is (compared to other countries). I was rather surprised, I recommend the documentary highly. A good insight on America and violence.
     
  9. kartaron

    kartaron Hunter / Gatherer

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2003
    Messages:
    2,287
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    USA
    Ratings:
    +20 / 0 / -0
    I live in england and the crime rate is ridiculously lower than america's, even when based on proportional figures. Gun crimes cause thousands of deaths a year in america (I think it was either 16000, or 60000),
    Try 6000 max. not a small amount but nowhere near 60,000. You may be mistaking the Suicide numbers.

    There are even less household robberies that dont involve any guns whatsover. Get your facts straight. Facts are that british cops didnt have to carry guns before guns were made illegal. Facts are crime rose when guns were made illegal. The video camera society that england has become makes a big difference though. The evidence is that criminal activity increases with population density. Guns are just a tool. Without it they just find another tool. Simple murder rates are not nearly as far apart.

    As for guns themselves, I have no quarrel with using them for self defence (personally i place a high value on life and would rather just beat the guy up), If there were some way of making absolute sure no gun was ever used for crime then I would fully approve.

    You cant guarantee a pocket knife wont be use in a crime, how do you make that guarantee about guns?

    I knew the gun problem in America was not great, but it was a real eye opener to how bad it actually is

    I dont bout some of the facts but listening to moore about the NRA is like asking Kruschev about Capitalism. He is too partisan to be honest.
     
  10. Crusader

    Crusader Disturber of the Peace

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2003
    Messages:
    12,265
    Likes Received:
    91
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Englands Green and Pleasant Lands
    Ratings:
    +91 / 0 / -0
    Moore is actually i lifetime member of the NRA, its gun cause fatalities he is against.

    As for video camera society, isnt that the same in america? So why are the crime rates so much higher still?



    You have to be joking here, right? So our cops could walk around unarmed when all the robbers had guns? thats just ludicrous thinking. And anyway, british cops dont even carry guns now, only special officers and Armed-Response-Units (like the SWAT) Crime is still lower.
     
  11. Tamzen

    Tamzen New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    372
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    California
    Ratings:
    +9 / 0 / -0
    America does not employ CCTV in public places as a matter of public policy. Stores, malls may use it for their own security reasons but the streets of America aren't under constant video survalence in general.
     
  12. Tamzen

    Tamzen New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    372
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    California
    Ratings:
    +9 / 0 / -0
    America does not employ CCTV in public places as a matter of public policy. Stores, malls may use it for their own security reasons but the streets of America aren't under constant video survalence in general.

    I love visiting Britain but I really hate that fact of CCTV everywhere.
     
  13. Crusader

    Crusader Disturber of the Peace

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2003
    Messages:
    12,265
    Likes Received:
    91
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Englands Green and Pleasant Lands
    Ratings:
    +91 / 0 / -0
    Its not everywhere, its mostly in major cities and in towns. And whats so bad about visiting britain for that, it means your safer, and if you like your privacy, I dont know how that applies to public streets.
     
  14. Faerlight

    Faerlight Somewhere Far Away

    Joined:
    May 20, 2004
    Messages:
    33
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Alaska
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Well, as I always like to say, "Guns don't kill people, people kill people." The simple fact is someone has to pull the trigger to make a gun go off - no, they don't just go off. A gun doesn't have a gravitational pull that simply draws people to them and makes them fire upon people at random either. Owning a gun doesn't mean you're planning on killing someone with it. I like to have one for self defense, not only against people, but animals as well. Around where I live black bears aren't uncommin and if you're planning on taking a leisure jog you're not going to be lugging a hunting rifle along - this is where a small pistol comes in handy.

    I'd also like to point out that gun control will simply be keeping guns out of the hands of the people who are law abiding citizens, therefore leaving them vulnerable to the criminals who still have guns <---- They are criminals if you recall. They'll find a way to get their hands on a gun most likely, and if they don't, they'll get something else.
     
  15. Crusader

    Crusader Disturber of the Peace

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2003
    Messages:
    12,265
    Likes Received:
    91
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Englands Green and Pleasant Lands
    Ratings:
    +91 / 0 / -0
    sure thats a good arguement (although im not sure if a small pistol would be too good against a full size bear, i hear they can take a lot of shots that just make em mad!) And even though guns dont have a gravitational force there is a large natural and psychological power that draws people to them. but that is a matter of self control.

    Like i said before, if some punk tried to raid my house i would grab the nearest blunt object and beat the him up with it, non lethal and just as effective. shooting them is a bit extreme I think.
     
  16. kartaron

    kartaron Hunter / Gatherer

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2003
    Messages:
    2,287
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    USA
    Ratings:
    +20 / 0 / -0
    Like i said before, if some punk tried to raid my house i would grab the nearest blunt object and beat the him up with it, non lethal and just as effective. shooting them is a bit extreme I think.

    Ive always had the opinion that if someone is determined to be a threat to me personally, that once I gain an advantage over them that I make sure they never want to return to threaten me again. Legally, you are at a greater advantage (assuming you obeyed the law) to kill an intruder into your house with a gun because they cant lie to the cops or sue you for mistreatment (which has happened). I believe that if someone breaks into a house they have to consider the possibility that the owner has a gun. If they understand that being shot is a possible outcome of their action I have no remorse for shooting them. (in the abstract since I havent done it). Besides, cops always say that racking a pump shotgun is the easiest way to stop a burglary with no bloodshed.

    (although im not sure if a small pistol would be too good against a full size bear,

    You got that right, deer can take 14 .45 cal .... Mostly because 9mm, .40 and .45 have flat noses and dont penetrate muscle well. .357 and 454 Casull are useful.

    And even though guns dont have a gravitational force there is a large natural and psychological power that draws people to them.

    I like that statement.

    Seriously, I wonder if simple gun education would help the situation. Most (not all certainly) of major gun control/ban supporters admit to having never touched a gun (sorta like a purity from alcohol) but I see guns like any other tool. They have a certain sexyness and allure because they are taboo in polite society and are used with god like aim in movies. Hands on experience really diminishes the allure. I mean how many people are as thrilled with the idea of driving after they have been forced to drive to work every day for a few years.

    There are a few other ideas like fingerprint ID on the trigger and things like that. Some of those MIGHT be good ideas when the technology matures. In the meantime, I would be paranoid that in a emergency you might have to wait 30 seconds or more for the chip to recognize you.

    By the way does anyone have a good reason why anything larger than .50 cal should be illegal? I still dont understand that. I mean its not like it would be artillery until it gets to about 2 inches. The largest caliber rifle I know about is the Weatherbee .600 and Im not sure I would want to shoot it. (Elephant gun might be bigger ... im not sure)
     
  17. Crusader

    Crusader Disturber of the Peace

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2003
    Messages:
    12,265
    Likes Received:
    91
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Englands Green and Pleasant Lands
    Ratings:
    +91 / 0 / -0
    I dont really see this as on topic, surely its a problem with the "sue your own grandmother" culture, which I find totally outrageous. Criminals who sure the people who theyre robbing are scum.


    I dont mean the sexyness or taboo, I mean the physcological appeal of power, death at your fingertips (not exactly an exaggeration but along the lines). I do physcology and such a sense of power can effect people (usually the highly suggestible people and the crazies).

    I totally agree, if guns are made with advanced technologies that prevent misuse then Im all for it, but thats a long way off.
     
  18. Lady Swartt Sixclaw

    Lady Swartt Sixclaw New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2004
    Messages:
    525
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Colorado
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0
    I watched it recently myself. we definately need better gun control, mainly because they can fall into the hands of children, like that six year old who shot a peer with a gun he found in his uncle's house (they showed it in the movie). It also happened to my friend's newborn cousin. She was a baby when her 5 year old sister found a gun in a baby sitter's purse, thought it was a squirt gun and fired it into the baby's head.
     
  19. Lonearcher

    Lonearcher Nocturnal

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2003
    Messages:
    415
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Texas
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    I told myself that I was going to stay out of the debate forum, I should have listened. But since I wandered in I was not at all surprised to find this topic, nor was I surprised to see the responses to it. And I was not at all surprised to see how prolific misinformation can be.

    To those of you who acquired your information and who have been influenced by the movie "Bowling for Columbine" I regret to inform you that you have been lied to. Yep, that's right, you were lied to. The "facts" presented in that film were, unfortunately, not factual. Don't believe me? That's okay, I'm a strong supporter of questioning authority and seeing the proof with your own eyes. If you have nothing to do for oh, a couple of hours or so, and you're willing to put your beliefs on the line, check out the following link. But don't just read everything there, check out all the supplied links that back up the claims. What you find just might surprise you, it did me and I already knew the film was a fake. I'm even more surprised at the amount of data manipulation and outright deception. I find it hard to believe that someone would put out something that deceptive and expect it to be accepted as truth. But he did.

    Okay, here's the link: http://www.hardylaw.net/Truth_About_Bowling.html

    Enjoy!
     
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2004
  20. Lonearcher

    Lonearcher Nocturnal

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2003
    Messages:
    415
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Texas
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    If you'd like to further research gun control (and I would highly recommend that you do!) the following link is very informative. Once again, if you don't believe what you see research it for yourself! There's nothing more terrifying to a politician than an informed voter!

    http://www.davekopel.org/index.htm

    I found the information on the U.N. small arms policy to be particularly disturbing (see "The U.N. Small Arms Conference"). I for one do not believe that foreign rulers have the right to dictate the rights and freedoms of people in other countries.