[quote]AlisaV wrote:
Never understood the anti-gun crowd.
Strict gun laws have never helped much in high-crime cities.
Precautionary principle. How do you know you won’t need a gun? How do you know nobody in your state or city will need one? Sometimes the unexpected happens. I can understand how people would feel safer knowing that, in the worst-case scenario, they would not be helpless.
(And, this probably brands me as a loon, but I think “What if someday we need protection against our own gov’t?” isn’t a totally crazy thing to ask. Yeah, it’s almost certainly not going to happen. No, I don’t have my tinfoil hat on. But if the founders thought it was worth worrying about, I don’t want to mess with the right to bear arms. Just in case. We design a lot of things, from bridges to pharmaceuticals, with precautions against unlikely catastrophes; I don’t think it’s nuts to have precautions against unlikely political catastrophes.)[/quote]
You are not a loon. This is a very real possibility. The fact that statements like this are instantly equated with “wearing a tin foil hat” is upsetting. [/quote]
The loons wearing the tin foil hats are those who’ve never studied a world history book and insist “it could never happen here.”
~6,000 years of recorded history to draw from and STILL some (tin foil hat wearing) people will insist that all will always be well.[/quote]
You don’t even have to go back 6,000 years, or in another country. It’s already happened in the US- restricting gun ownership for blacks and native americans. Much easier to harrass and oppress when they’re not armed. It’s more like - “it won’t happen because it hasn’t happened to me”.
How could guns be safer? You have to load the magazine, chamber a round, turn the safety off, pull back the hammer, point it at someone, put your finger on the trigger, and squeeze (that’s with my S&W 9mm). That’s a 7 step process. If some dumb fuck can defeat that process and successfully kill someone by accident, then I don’t think making the 7 step process into a 10 or even 20 step process is going to make much of a difference.
I am in favor of state firearms licenses like you get for driving a car. Before you can own a gun you should know how to handle one safely. There should be a written and practical exam involved, as with driving. It should be mandatory before you are allowed to buy a firearm.
As an unchecked raging rapist, I have to say I LOVE trigger locks. Makes my lifestyle much easier. I used to live in an unregulated jurisdiction, but I had to move to an area without any guns allowed. This has made raping all of those children so much easier. Please, everyone, vote Democrat in the next elections!!
If you want definitive answers to gun control, read John Lott’s books. The title of his first, “More Guns, Less Crime” quite well sums everything up. Increasing gun control has ALWAYS led to an increase in crime, not a decrease.
To keep schools safer, it would make more sense to ban football. More students die every year playing high school football than all school shootings and acidents combined, almost twice as many. There are so many things that kill more people than guns it isn’t even funny. Cars, OTC meds, and a litany of preventable stuff. It is truly a wonder why anybody would want to dedicate any time at all to restricting access to guns when that time and other resources can be spent on other things that would have a much bigger impact and save many more lives.
A free society will always be more dangerous. You will never have both freedom and safety. I will say this, however, there are plenty of countries out there that have incredibly restrictive gun laws. If you love gun control, move to one of those countries. America is free, and we have rights here. It is the last country to have such rights. Feel free to move to a country that doesn’t have those rights, but it isn’t like I have anywhere to go if you fundamentally change America to disallow something that is guaranteed by the constitution. If you value life so much, turn your attention to one of those other things, like acetaminophen, that kill more people every year. You’ll make more of a difference, and I can keep my guns. It’s win-win. In any case, don’t be making emotional arguments. Some baby got shot blah blah blah. Yeah, it is sad, but public policy cannot be dictated by anecdotal tragedies.
First of all, guns are not completely banned in most areas. DC and NYC are the most notable areas where guns are completely banned. What you are complaining about are called gun CONTROL laws for a reason, not gun bans.
The 2nd amendment has been interpreted in many ways over the years, albeit vaguely. The question of the right to arms is usually a debate of the term “militia” used in the bill of rights. But at the time of writing the constitution, “militia” included all free men who could be called upon to protect the state. There were also federal cases that ruled only military-type weapons should be allowed to be owned as this correlates with “militia.” This was thrown out because it is just not valid on so many levels. But by applying the idea of all free men back then to today’s standards, we can see that the right of an individual to own a gun is protected by the 2nd amendment. But most importantly, ALL RIGHTS ARE SUBJECT TO REGULATION and all regulations are subject to judicial review. If the state decides your record of assault doesn’t afford you the right to own a gun, that is perfectly legal. They are not impinging on your constitutional rights or are not being discriminatory. There is a compelling government interest at hand, i.e. you are a danger to the public if allowed to own/carry a handgun. If the state determines only American citizens 21 and over can own a concealed handgun license, that is also perfectly legal.
Gun laws are dictated by district and state, NOT by the federal government. If you have an issue with gun control laws in your area, contact your local government/legislator, don’t post on forums.
Owning a gun is common law that predates our constitution anyway, so don’t whine about not being able to have a gun. Go read something.
[quote]gerby wrote:
Some baby got shot blah blah blah. Yeah, it is sad, but public policy cannot be dictated by anecdotal tragedies.[/quote]
Oh, but that’s the way most public policy is based. Read freakonomics. [/quote]
I know that, but it doesn’t make it right. We need to get away from that. Everything we do is based on emotion. We’re supposed to resent the rich and the doctors and the insurance companies and the republicans. All of the bills that go through congress are written based on emotion. That’s the point. If you stop to think about it, which politicians and liberals never want you to do, gun control is fucking stupid. It does more harm than good, but makes people feel good, until they’re raped and mugged and beaten because they refuse to protect themselves and instead think that I should do it by paying huge taxes for some bullshit police force that won’t show up until hours after the fact.
Here’s one for you: Hundreds of thousands of 911 calls every year are unresponded to after AN HOUR!! Yeah, take my guns away you stupid fucking liberal douchbag. You make the country so much safer.
It also appears by your same reckoning that less guns = more assaults, kidnappings, rapes, and suicides.
Did you not get the message to get the log out of your own eye before attempting to get the splinter out of your neighbor’s?[/quote]
suicide dont have anything to do with guns. Suicide rate can be explained by socioeconomic factors you and I are not aware of.
We can also forfeit the kidnapping category
What, are you gonna give your five year old daugther a machine gun so she can defend herself from being kidnapped? 5 years old dont go around with guns so we can forfeit kidnapping which usually happens when the parent is not there also
I dont see a clear relation between assault, rape and guns.Maybe there is but personally I would rather be assaulted by someone without a gun.
–the only valable criteria left: homicide. clearly related with guns. USA has in average more than double the rate than canada.
If they try to take our guns from us here in the U.S.A, it will be the second revolution in our country. They will get my gun from my dead hand. We as a populace really have little to no control of what the rich that have bought thier seats in congress pass into law or make illegal. I am happy the founding fathers put the bill of rights and the constitution how they did. If they did not look ahead and try to stop the issues that plagued them from happening again we would be at the total mercy of our government. Especially when you factor in the technology the government has access to today vs. what we can legally get. I think every man should own a gun and be trained with it and have to show a degree of talent with thier fire arm. Not for safety or gun control but so when they try to take our guns I know everyone of you on my side of the fight can shoot and shoot well. I will by then hopefully have my assault rifle I plan on buying. I hope to get a .308 tricked out for a sniper rifle. I am not crazy, I don’t want a gun to go commit crimes, but I think it is my duty as a “free” man to be able to stay free or die trying.
P.S. If you are from some country that won’t even allow you to own guns, or you don’t own or have any guns you have no clue what you are talking about. And for the guy whose brother was shot in a gang fight that is not a accidental death they meant to kill people. And more then likely they weren’t using legally obtained guns anyway.
[quote]chalknchucks wrote:
Forgive the history lesson:
If the state decides your record of assault doesn’t afford you the right to own a gun, that is perfectly legal. They are not impinging on your constitutional rights or are not being discriminatory. There is a compelling government interest at hand, i.e. you are a danger to the public if allowed to own/carry a handgun. If the state determines only American citizens 21 and over can own a concealed handgun license, that is also perfectly legal.
Gun laws are dictated by district and state, NOT by the federal government. If you have an issue with gun control laws in your area, contact your local government/legislator, don’t post on forums.
Owning a gun is common law that predates our constitution anyway, so don’t whine about not being able to have a gun. Go read something.
–GF of chalk&chucks[/quote]
I didn’t say anything about criminals. If you’re found guilty of a crime, than any and all rights can be taken away, including your very freedom and certainly the right to own a gun. Do you know what other right you lose if you choose to engage in criminal behavior? The right to not get shot in the face with my .45. Also, whether it is legal for the law to prohibit anyone under 21 from having a concealed gun is questionable at best. Regulation is fine, but prohibition is something I have a problem with. If you want to institute training requirements and background checks, fine, but to say no just because you feel like it is bullshit.
As for guns being regulated by the state and not federal governments, I cannot believe that you made such an asinine statement. “Assault weapon ban” anyone? Wasn’t this a federal law? And to think that you had the audacity to tell me to go read something.
It also appears by your same reckoning that less guns = more assaults, kidnappings, rapes, and suicides.
Did you not get the message to get the log out of your own eye before attempting to get the splinter out of your neighbor’s?[/quote]
suicide dont have anything to do with guns. Suicide rate can be explained by socioeconomic factors you and I are not aware of.
We can also forfeit the kidnapping category
What, are you gonna give your five year old daugther a machine gun so she can defend herself from being kidnapped? 5 years old dont go around with guns so we can forfeit kidnapping which usually happens when the parent is not there also
I dont see a clear relation between assault, rape and guns.Maybe there is but personally I would rather be assaulted by someone without a gun.
–the only valable criteria left: homicide. clearly related with guns. USA has in average more than double the rate than canada.
got to interpret the statistics right[/quote]
He isnt saying it is related, he is saying you have your own problems in candy land stay the fuck out of our business until you get your shit straight.
It also appears by your same reckoning that less guns = more assaults, kidnappings, rapes, and suicides.
Did you not get the message to get the log out of your own eye before attempting to get the splinter out of your neighbor’s?[/quote]
suicide dont have anything to do with guns. Suicide rate can be explained by socioeconomic factors you and I are not aware of.
We can also forfeit the kidnapping category
What, are you gonna give your five year old daugther a machine gun so she can defend herself from being kidnapped? 5 years old dont go around with guns so we can forfeit kidnapping which usually happens when the parent is not there also
I dont see a clear relation between assault, rape and guns.Maybe there is but personally I would rather be assaulted by someone without a gun.
–the only valable criteria left: homicide. clearly related with guns. USA has in average more than double the rate than canada.
got to interpret the statistics right[/quote]
He isnt saying it is related, he is saying you have your own problems in candy land stay the fuck out of our business until you get your shit straight.[/quote]
sure it’s not my problem if your country has a lot of homicide. I dont really care too. But dont tell me owning a gun prevents anything
[quote]jasmincar wrote:
–the only valable criteria left: homicide. clearly related with guns. USA has in average more than double the rate than canada.
[/quote]
I am sure the criminals will turn in their guns the same time the law abiding citizens due. Just like in North Ireland where guns are illegal to own.
A law abiding citizen may turn into a criminal. I am not an outlaw until I break the law. If less people have guns less potential criminals can have them.
