Gun Control

[Wintermute]

As has been mentioned, outlawing bullets wouldn't help at all, because criminals don't obey the law. They are noted for it.

Gun crime is, unfortunately, on the increase here in the UK. On the increase, but not yet that high. I've never been threatened with a gun, nor has anyone I know, although I do know someone who was threatened with a knife.

Where do you draw the line? After guns, do we go after knives? What size knife? Because knives have common purpose. Especially if you a butcher. I don't know how many uses I've found for my trusty pen-knife.

I know this is a little bit of a digression, but I think youcan see my point. It's hard to know where to draw the line. Don't get me wrong, I think that guns should not be allowed, but until people feel safe enough not to need a gun, they'll keep carrying them. As long as they're carrying them, they'll not feel safe.

Catch-22.

[Heaven's Cloud]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Transtic Nerve [/i]
[B]If you shoot for sport, at targets, not animals, like Gokents, then I also really don't see a problem. It's an Olympic sport, shooting that is. But I think collecting and shooting non-living targets for sport is about the absolute only reason ever to have a gun. And I think you should have strict limitations on that alone. Shooting animals is a big no no. I don't see why this is not considered murder int he US. We shoot and kill animals it's fun, a sport whatever. An animal kills your little kid, that animal is a EVIL being who should be killed... It's absolutely ridiculous. I don't see any difference between killing any animal and killing any human. We are all animals, we all have lives, we are all living, there is no difference but we have the ability to create horrible weapons to kill those other things. [/B][/QUOTE]

[color=indigo]If I shoot an animal, then I eat it, I am providing myself with nurishment. If this is murder, then I guess it is also murder to tear a potato out of the ground, boil it and eat it...I mean both are living, right? I think it is stupid that hunting for food is considered a "no no". Someone has to kill that chicken you ate last night, I think it is kind of noble to kill your own food...

However, gun control needs to be revamped. In my opinion, all hand guns should be outlawed (except for those carried by law enforcement officers). This wouldn't help crime terribly (68% of all handgun shootings are made by unregistered or "stolen" weapons) but it would help to keep down accidental deaths (y'know the ones you here about on the news, the ones when junior grabbed daddys gun from his dresser and shot his friend playing Cowboy).

[/color]

[DuoMax]

I think the idea of outlawing bullets is a really good one :)

Personally, i think that all guns should be banned. I mean, if some psycho get shis hands on a rifle, than gets himself into some spot where he can shoot at people, a lot of people die. This has happened before. Handguns are dangerous in many ways including the on ementioned Heaven. You are safer in your house if you have a dog, than if you have a handgun. Burglars do not want to tangle with a big ball of fur with sharp teeth that is yapping its head off.

[Transtic Nerve]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Wintermute [/i]
[B]As has been mentioned, outlawing bullets wouldn't help at all, because criminals don't obey the law. They are noted for it.
[/B][/QUOTE]

Yes, but who's gonna pay that much for 1 bullet. If bullets weren't mass produced the price would go up alot. You'd be paying $10 for a bullet, which you could easily waste if you missed someone/thing. I think it'd work to some extent.

[quote][b]If I shoot an animal, then I eat it, I am providing myself with nurishment. If this is murder, then I guess it is also murder to tear a potato out of the ground, boil it and eat it...I mean both are living, right? I think it is stupid that hunting for food is considered a "no no". Someone has to kill that chicken you ate last night, I think it is kind of noble to kill your own food...[/b][/quote]

If I like the taste of humans, and I kill and eat them for nurishment, which we would give each other, would that be murder? People choose what they want for dinner. I'm craving some nice human spleen, sounds good eh?

Anyway, If animals are bred to be killed (ie: cows, chicken, etc) I tend to have a different feeling for that. I eat meat. I eat chicken. But these weren't things that were out trying to feed their children who were shot. These were born by a butcher, fed by a butcher, and killed by a butcher.... I tend to think differently of them.

[Heaven's Cloud]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Transtic Nerve [/i]
[B]Anyway, If animals are bred to be killed (ie: cows, chicken, etc) I tend to have a different feeling for that. I eat meat. I eat chicken. But these weren't things that were out trying to feed their children who were shot. These were born by a butcher, fed by a butcher, and killed by a butcher.... I tend to think differently of them. [/B][/QUOTE]

[color=indigo]Well, TN, I doubt the cow that is killed is thinking to itself "hmmm, the butcher fed me...I guess it is alright for him to eat me".

I just find your logic kind of faulty, my parents raised me, fed me, should they be allowed to sell me to others who want to eat me I guess.

I understand your opinions, personally I don't hunt...I couldn't bring myself to shoot an animal. However, if you eat meat, you are a tad bit hypocritical in saying that hunting for food is pointless.[/color]

[Kent]

I also belive that guns serve a purpose for the good of man kind.

The truth is, the world will never stop its violent ways, and with that in mind...

Guns serve to protect and liberate and will continue to do that for as long as there are people using the same weapons to oppress and murder.

As long as unregistered and illegal guns are in the hands of criminals... I will never give up my right to hold my weapon.

Thats the bottom line.

Come and take it, and I will consider you to be the aggressor... Leave me be, and you will never even see the weapon... none the less know that I have it.

Plus, taking what is legally mine is theft.

Especially when the object has never been used in any way.
(contray to drugs or other possibly illegal objects.)

[Chaos]

The only killings done by guns are accidents and murders. Let's just make sure everybody understands that.

It's also, by the way, a medical fact that you cannot die from a gun. At least, not a firearm by itself. It's not the weapons, it's the person welding it. If you took away the right for U.S. citizen to own a gun, what? You think that would stop all crimes?

Okay, hypothetical situation. All guns in the world are melted down. Production of guns can never happen. You know what? I have about four lockblades in my bedroom. If I wanted to, don't you think I could do something with them?

Not to mention that the Bill of Rights is iced and cemented.

[Vegitto4]

You have a point with that Hypo. Medra. I like it.

Personally, i like most weapons. Including firearms. Being a sharpshooter(not the best, but not the worst either), i like shooting. I would only Shoot another person if they showed some sign of physical harm to my person, or a loved one.
Totally banning them is just pointless. Regulating them( like, enforcing the rules they have in place), now that's a good idea.

[Change]

In countries where guns are far less accessable, violent crime with them is far less as are violent crimes in general.

[Kent]

I guess I should re-iterate the point that gun ownership is much higher in rural areas than in urban areas, yet gun deaths in urban areas are much higher than in rural areas.

I also want to stress that guns can be used for protection... why do you think cops carry them... because they murder people!?

I dont think so.

However, I want to stress that I believe it is a good, no a great idea to enforce our current laws concerning gun control.

And to show how I feel even further...

I believe that certain weapons shouldn't be allowed to be owned by the average law abiding citizen.

Guns the the barret M-82 should not be allowed as they have no practical use.

The barret can easily be replaced for any uses by a 30-6 or a .308 rifle.

Yet there are people who are not willing to bend on the idea that they should have the right to own a semi-automatic .50 caliber sniper rifle.

Note: I do not know of a single murder that was the result of a barret.

Discretion people... that is all I ask for.

Cant we meet in the middle where the reasonable people get to have the guns they love and the criminals get the punishments that aren't currently being enforced.

[Transtic Nerve]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Heaven's Cloud [/i]
[B][color=indigo]I understand your opinions, personally I don't hunt...I couldn't bring myself to shoot an animal. However, if you eat meat, you are a tad bit hypocritical in saying that hunting for food is pointless.[/color] [/B][/QUOTE]

And if I were a vegan this would all make perfect sense? Fine fine, if you want to eat what you kill, so be it. What is your opinion about those who kill for the fun of it. Place the little heads up on their wall. Stuff the animals and display them as tropheys and as proud objects of accomplishments....

Anyway, back to guns. They are the single cause of many deaths in this world. They not only protect, they also kill. The whole thing is a contradiction. I have never been held up by a gun and I will never own one. I don't see a reason for it. The bullet itself was the single cause of the demise of the samurai. The people who the most respected amung all Japanese peoples. One little thing took that all away. What a horrible horrible invention.

[Kent]

Not to get off subject, but the cause of the samurai's demise was not the development of the gun...

It was a combination of government pressure and peaceful times.

The Japanese culture had been divided into 4 classes...

Samurai, artisans, peasants and merchants. (sometime in the mid 1600's)

With a long period of peacful times (tokugawa dynasty *1603-1868) there were problems for the samurai...

No battles for the warrior class to fight and for that reason, the income of these warriors were almost non-existant.

Samurai had to renounce the title in order to become farmers and teachers as to bring in some sort of income.

With unemployment ruining the samurai themselves because of a lack of conflict, and a socio-economic status that was a drain on the country... it was only a natural progression for the country itself to slowly let the samurai fade into obscurity.

Education and teaching of martial arts, along with farming became the professions of these once great warriors.

Hope that was educational...:D

[OlgaTheDwarf]

I think the gun is a horrible invention, as do I think any weapon that is used to kill people is horrible. But guess what, man created a monster that is never going to go away, if we outlaw guns that is not going to stop people who really want a gun is it. There are manyways to get a gun other than legaly, such as getting them from the black market or making their own.
As for outlawing bullets or making them extremely expensive, again people who really want them can get them from the black market, or make their own. Plus you can just tell stores how much they have to sell the products for, they would lose tons of money and so would the companies that make the bullets.
Anyhoo, people die and people will die, it can't be stopped by taking away guns.

[Charles]

I wonder if anyone even read my initial post. lol

Over the course of the last two pages, I've seen people justifying the ownership of handguns via the second amendment. I'll say it again--that argument is moot.

The second amendment was drawn during a time of oppression, when the British were trying to disarm the colonists. It's purpose was to keep militias armed for the purpose of protecting democracy. None of you are members or a well regulated militia. Thus, it doesn't apply to you.

I have also addressed the fact that most deaths that result from guns aren't committed by criminals or gang members; they result from accidents or fits of rage.

[quote][b]Where do you draw the line? After guns, do we go after knives? What size knife? Because knives have common purpose. Especially if you a butcher. I don't know how many uses I've found for my trusty pen-knife.[/b][/quote]

No, knives won't be outlawed. That's ridiculous. As has been said, it isn't a tool created for the sole purpose of killing.

As I've pointed out before, an individual armed with only a knife, is less likely to rob a store than he is if he's armed with a gun. This reasoning doesn't imply that should handguns be outlawed, all crime will simply disappear. A rapist armed with a knife probably has a sufficient weapon. But, [i]some[/i] violent crime would decrease.

And, as I've said, victims have a greater chance of escaping when a criminal is assaulting them with a knife.

Also, as I've stated, hunters wouldn't be affected. Handguns are what need to be targeted--not rifles. Because handguns are not accurate beyond ten or fifteen feet, they are not the weapons of sportsmen. Their sole purpose is to kill or disable a person at close range.

That should be sufficient grounds enough to end this pointless hunting issue.

I will say, however, that animals that attack people aren't destroyed because they're evil. Animals aren't capable of being evil. They can't conceive a murder plot. They act upon instinct, bilogical impulse, or disease. If an animal bites a child, it's destroyed because it's considered dangerous.

Furthermore, hunting is necessary to regulate the population level of certain species. If it weren't for hunting, deer would overpopulate areas and spill out onto highways in high numbers--creating a greater potential for motorist fatalities. So, the reasoning behind hunting for sport isn't limited to "fun."

[quote][b]If I like the taste of humans, and I kill and eat them for nourishment, which we would give each other, would that be murder? People choose what they want for dinner. I'm craving some nice human spleen, sounds good eh?[/quote][/b]

I know that you're only providing an example--but it's rather pointless. I don't even see a need for you to justify your argument with that rubbish. Arguing that it's acceptable to hunt humans for food in our society is ridiculous--even if not meant to be taken seriously. Especially when those who are using that argument are arguing against handguns because of their potential danger towards humanity, lol. That's contradictory, no?

Cannibalism isn't even an issue here. So, I'll just drop it. I'll just say that it's against the law to kill people. It's not against the law to hunt animals of a lesser species for sport--because it serves a purpose (the aforementioned prevention of motorist fatalities, among other things). Heh, and most obviously, it's not deemed as morally deplorable by [b]society[/b].

So, here is what I suggest. Handguns should be outlawed. In addition to that, severe mandatory punishments are imposed on a person who uses one while committing a crime.

Police will still have handguns and it will be these trained professionals whom we must rely on for protection against criminals. I mean, the efforts of private citizens to try to protect themselves with handguns have chiefly taken the lives not of criminals, but of innocent people.

[Kent]

Sorry charles, but there is no way in hell I am gonna rely on cops to protect me... especially here in my wonderful state of louisiana.

Just to let you know though... the second is not moot.

It is very much an important part of our culture.

If you would take the time, you might notice that the biggest point in this thread for those of us protecting our rights, is that hand guns very much are a problem... but taking them from those of us who abide the current laws and only creating new laws is like building a house on a weak foundation.

How can you create new laws if you can not enforce the current ones?

Just as well, how can you build a house on ground that can not support the building.

With laws that aren't enforced, building up new laws will only hurt the law abiding people... all the while, criminals will be unaffected.

With a house built on horrible land, the only people affected by that land are the ones forced to live on it, not those who can just move to another place.

These criminals are just moving to a new place every time we pass laws to dis-arm them.

How about you enforce the hand gun laws already in existance.

Not just take away guns from people who never use them.

And frankly, I would like to see an objective study from a reputable source that backs your "fact" that most gun deaths are from fits of rage and accidents...

sorry, but I dont buy that.

Unless of course, fits of rage are part of the average night club shooting...

[Transtic Nerve]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by gokents [/i]
[B]Not to get off subject, but the cause of the samurai's demise was not the development of the gun...
[/B][/QUOTE]

But even you must admit it had a huge huge part in it. Swordsmen simply can't compete with bullets. The demise of samurais in government may have been different but the complete demise of the way of the samurai was due to the fact the sword cannot stand against the gun. It was unfair and many many swordsman died in the process.

Why do we have police if our own people can't rely on them to protect us. If Guns/Bullets were outlawed, I think an automatic addition to this would be the increasing in policing in the country. it's almost comon sense that is what would be needed. You can't simply just ban guns... You know damn well it doesn't work that way. There's always something else... a chain reaction of action.

Charles, my example wasn't pointless. In todays society or not... I think that if you're going to use the excuse killing animals for nurishment of us, then I can use the same thing to humans. I'm not actually gonna do it, but there's no difference. Just because we're humans doesn't give us any extra rights than animals. Sorry to burst all you people's bubbles. Humans are the most flawed species I've ever come across.

[Kent]

Ban guns and increase the invasion of our lives by police...

Hmmm, that is an idea never thought of before... oh except in those nasty facist states that we never like to think of... oh say, nazi germany.

But that is not of importance, right, because we all know that police have never, and would never abuse their power.

So I mean, with a nation void of violence due to our own willingness to lose the guns, the police would be able to walk around with the final and ultimate power of life and death... a gun.

With that, it sounds alot like the samurai...

A group of ruling class with weapons at hand.

A population of average people.

Nothing to distinguish the two besides the power to destroy and kill...

But not to worry, our police officers are benevolent, wise, administrators of the law.

Not people who shoot to kill or use several clips on immigrants from places like haiti... nothing like soddomy with broom sticks has ever occured.

Or the brutality of beating pregnant women, macing those who squirm in protest out of drunken insubordination... oh none of that ever happens.

So I say... let the police take care of us... they are far more intelligent and always on the look out for the criminals.

Never on the look out for easy speeding tickets or marijuana smokers.

btw, the agrements signed by mr. clinton banned the use of ANY gas on the battle field... yet the use of cs on the civilians in our own country is ok?! I guess thats because they know better than us, the people.

[Transtic Nerve]

Why does everything go back to the Nazi's with you.... it's VERY annoying to see the word Nazi in every post. You seem obsessed. You know damn well no one here is referring to the Nazis and the way they did something, so do us a favor and stop playing with my words. Our police is not anywhere near what it should be. If we uped it a few, it'd be better. I didn't say give police the control of our lives. You assumed that because you're obsessed with the Nazis. Get off the Nazi horse and think now-a-days. Your sarcasm doesn't help in your point either.

Our government wouldn't allow the police force to control us either. You of all people seem to doubt the government you've been praising the last.. well ever since you got here. I don't know whta to believe anymore. We simply train better police officers. We hire better police officers. Sure some police abuse thier power, but you act like every one of them do that. Which is simply a total exageration of the truth. There's no need for complete control by the police. lol That's ridiculous. No one is suggesting that. You're just assuming we are.

Just because you're to weak without your gun doesn't mean you have to take it out on the rest of us. I live without a gun. The police don't bother me. I see no problem here. You live with a gun, apparently you have some vandeta with the police.... I see a problem with you... I can't control your personal feelings, but that doesn't mean it applies to the masses.

[Braidless Baka]

Well, I know in Britain (I know this has been said before but meh) we have pretty strict gun laws. The whole "license to own one" deal, I'm not sure how it runs in the US, I assume different states have different laws and so on... But, even though we have our share of gun-crime, imagine how much we would have if everyone was [i]allowed[/i] to carry a gun on their person? I don't even want to think about it...

You see, if you collect weaponry and shoot at targets, fine. Nobody should be stopping you. It's not an insecurity thing as somebody suggested earlier on in the thread. It's just a hobby. But things like that have to be controlled. I was watching a program not long ago on TV where a guy who just drove into rural areas and shot at targets, roadsigns and such, ended up killing about seven people before he was finally caught. That simply yells "stricter control" at me...

[Justin]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Transtic Nerve [/i]
[B]And if I were a vegan this would all make perfect sense? Fine fine, if you want to eat what you kill, so be it. What is your opinion about those who kill for the fun of it. Place the little heads up on their wall. Stuff the animals and display them as tropheys and as proud objects of accomplishments.... [/B][/QUOTE]

I think people who hunt purely for the sport of it shouldn't be allowed to hunt.

-Justin

[Kent]

Wait, theres a nazi horse...:wigout:

I need it I need it I need it...

[Charles]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by gokents [/i]
[B]And frankly, I would like to see an objective study from a reputable source that backs your "fact" that most gun deaths are from fits of rage and accidents...

sorry, but I dont buy that.[/B][/QUOTE]


How is this source?

[quote][b]Guns kept in the home for self-protection are 22 times more likely to kill someone you know than they are to kill in self-defense. Kellermann, New England Journal of Medicine, 1997[/b][/quote]

Now, as I said, most burglaries are committed when no one is at home. If the householder is home, and attempts to use a gun, he or she is more likely to get killed or wounded than to kill or deter the criminal.

And, the idea I suggested isn't a perfect solution to ending criminal activity--there is no such thing. But, if handguns were more difficult to come by, and stricter laws were enforced on those who possess and use them, I'm sure that fewer criminals would have access to them. So, I'm not saying that the system we have now is perfect, but if the government were to do a nationwide crackdown, I'm sure that the results would be evident.

[Kent]

Well, sorry again...

but

That stat only relates to the possible outcome of having a gun in the house...

It has little to do with supporting your statment that the majority of gun deaths are a result of accidents or fits of rage...

Only the possibility of accidents... the POSSIBILITY, not anything that is hard data based on the results of real world events.

sorry, just had to say it.

[Break]

[size=1][color=crimson]Owning a [i]live[/i] gun in the house is.. well, just a prison sentence waiting to go through. Say a person has pissed off someone so much that they don't just want to hit them; they want to kill them. So they do, with the gun in their house. It's madness![/size][/color]

[NeoCactuar]

Man here in New Zealand we don't believe in guns, if we get angry we just beat up some traffic cones (Ask Flashy). Our average Gun murder rate is less than one a year.

And even if you destroyed all the guns in the world, the can never be gone, because the ability, and ease, to make them will always be there.