Lets talk about firearms- guns...

[Shatterhand]

The primary function of guns are to kill and mame. Any 'culture' that is built up around this is an inherently violent one. Banning guns isn't just about prohibiting the actual weapons, it's also about dealing with the sociology that exists around it. .

QFT.

The problem isn't with the guns, but with the violence that the modern society builds on all of us. Banning guns *IS* an important step on ending the violence, but it's not the only one.

And IMO it's not just a case of stop selling guns to civil people, but completely stop building weapons.

The primary function of guns are to kill and mame

I don't think any object whose primary function is to KILL should exist.

[doodude]

it's in the Bill of Rights and it isn't going to be changing anytime soon. If the government started going to peoples houses to confiscate their guns, it would probably just result in a bunch of dead police officers.

Ya its the law & it wont change in my lifetime.
But Ozy is right, no one but the uber gun haters is going to stand for house to house gun control & there would be a war of sorts over it.

I've not yet heard a good argument for allowing private citizens firearms.

Until ALL the guns are gone ( which will never happen ) people here just feel the need & in many cases have the need for protection against those unsavory types that do have guns.
Our prisons arent overcrowded just because weve been jailing potheads.
Lax laws & non enforcement of those laws & penalties give criminals the courage to be less concerned about any outcomes.
I said it before. I dont own a gun but I damn sure want any criminal who does & is thinking about using it on me to think I do & that Im willing to use it.

Hunting? Make it fair man, if you're hunting a bear, give it a shotgun, or go mano a mano. If you're hunting deer, head out with a bow and arrow but give the animal a shiv or summat.

I agree with that! Shooting an animal from a safe distance while its eating or drinking or just walking along is an assassination. Hardly a sport...

Having said that, we have encroached upon & reduced their living space to such a point that its inhumane not to thin them out cuz they just end up starving to death.

[Acid King]

Any 'culture' that is built up around this is an inherently violent one. .

When your country was founded by overthrowing a government, private gun ownership, rightly, is seen as the best defense against government itself. When the government fails to protect its people, or in some instances, seeks to actually harm its people (Rwanda, Darfur, Albania) what then should they depend on if firearms are banned?

[Ed Oscuro]

In a developing or destabilized nation firearms make more sense than in a stable one. Of course, nobody has a crystal ball to see the future in any nation, so one can't simply say that current stability obviates the need for firearms to protect from whatever.

Within nearly the last hundred years I haven't been aware of many instances where people needed to use firearms to protect against the government, however. Certainly within the last ten and twenty the high-profile standoffs against the government were all bad ideas.

[Twiddle]

Why don't you go on irc anymore

[Ed Oscuro]

Took a break for a few days is all. I'll get back on tonight :P

[MX7]

Any 'culture' that is built up around this is an inherently violent one. .

When your country was founded by overthrowing a government, private gun ownership, rightly, is seen as the best defense against government itself. When the government fails to protect its people, or in some instances, seeks to actually harm its people (Rwanda, Darfur, Albania) what then should they depend on if firearms are banned?

This is a very good point. Sometimes violence can be the only way to bring about very real social change. Taking a brief glance at many human and animal rights movements, change has only been bought about through violence.

[Twiddle]

Within the last few decades, most of those protesting were the recipients of the violence.

[Neon]

The NYPD shouldn't be allowed to carry guns.

At least until someone teaches them the difference between a pear and a hand grenade.

[gavin19]

Conclusion: It's insane to have millions upon millions of privately owned guns in a country. Proof: Just look at the number of people killed by guns in countries that do have gun control. There is no sane reason why any private citizen should be allowed to own anything more powerful than an airgun.

/END OF THREAD.

Yes, for us Europeans, or other inhabitants of countries with proper gun laws, it is pretty hard to wrap our heads around ordinary citizens being allowed to 'pack heat'. Insane.

[JoshF]

When your country was founded by overthrowing a government, private gun ownership, rightly, is seen as the best defense against government itself. When the government fails to protect its people, or in some instances, seeks to actually harm its people (Rwanda, Darfur, Albania) what then should they depend on if firearms are banned?

Woah I think I agree with you. I like the idea of a citizen's army when it's defending against a foreign state too (you know, terrorists.)

[Specineff]

And IMO it's not just a case of stop selling guns to civil people, but completely stop building weapons.

I don't think any object whose primary function is to KILL should exist.

*Punches Shatterhand in the face*

I need no weapon when it comes to hurting someone I want.

*Punches again*

See? You can ban all the guns you want. People will always find ways to hurt others. Responsability and accountability will get further than any ban.

[JoshF]

"Life will AAAHH, find a way to punch you in the face."

[BulletMagnet]

People will always find ways to hurt others.

The fact remains, however, that it's a lot tougher to kill, as opposed to hurt, someone with one's bare hands (or a knife, or most anything else) than it is with a gun.

[jp]

If we lived in a happy imaginary world where everyone was happy and crime didn't exist and everyone only had everyone else's best interest in mind and governments were out only for the people... then yes, guns getting banned could be a good (if not pointless at that time) idea.


But the problem is that we live in reality, and like Chris Rock said, if guns were illegal, then the criminals would just know that we didn't have any. Sure, you could ban them and stop selling them and get your good law abiding citizens to ship their guns away (of course, you would have to compensate them), but then there'd already be so many out there in the hands of criminals that it'd be like a shopping spree for them.

Banning guns would have been a good idea early on in this country's life (probably after the Civil War). Now it would just be retarded. It would cost the government a shit ton of money, it would honestly probably have a negative effect on our economy, it wouldn't curb crime at all, it would piss off hunters (you know, some people DO hunt for food, trust me, I've known them), and it would leave law abiding citizens at the mercy of whoever.

So... good idea once upon a time, bad idea now.

[Michaelm]

it would piss off hunters (you know, some people DO hunt for food, trust me, I've known them)

Regulation doesn't has, by definition, a negative effect on them.
I guess when people say ban they mean regulation.
It's like that in the Netherlands too.
You can even join a sport gun club and be allowed to have a gun in a safe, apart from the ammunition.
You need to get a certificate which you wont get with a criminal record.

They money thing could easily be earned back by less hospital work on shooting victims I suppose.

[Ed Oscuro]

But the problem is that we live in reality, and like Chris Rock said, if guns were illegal, then the criminals would just know that we didn't have any.

You say this outweighs the fact that people steal or buy weapons to use in crimes? I don't think so.

[jp]

it would piss off hunters (you know, some people DO hunt for food, trust me, I've known them)

Regulation doesn't has, by definition, a negative effect on them.
I guess when people say ban they mean regulation.
It's like that in the Netherlands too.
You can even join a sport gun club and be allowed to have a gun in a safe, apart from the ammunition.
You need to get a certificate which you wont get with a criminal record.

They money thing could easily be earned back by less hospital work on shooting victims I suppose.

When I say "ban" I mean "Make it illegal for any civilian to own a firearm". And thats what I understood this discussion to be about.

You do know, that it is illegal for someone with a criminal record to own a firearm in the US as well right?

[Michaelm]

You do know, that it is illegal for someone with a criminal record to own a firearm in the US as well right?

And that changes what ?

[jp]

You made mention of people in the Netherlands not being able to get a firearm if they have a criminal record. I'm pointing out to you that the US has the same exact type deal going on. So... whats your point?

[Michaelm]

You made mention of people in the Netherlands not being able to get a firearm if they have a criminal record. I'm pointing out to you that the US has the same exact type deal going on. So... whats your point?

You need a certification, which takes days if not months, and you obviously can't just buy them in a store like in the states.

[Tempest]

You need a certification, which takes days if not months, and you obviously can't just buy them in a store like in the states.

Do people honestly think that getting a legal gun in the States is as easy as walking in a store, saying "I would like to buy that gun!" and then paying and leaving? There are background checks and waiting periods.

The reason that so many criminals are able to get a hold of guns so easily is because they obtain them *gasp* illegally.

[Twiddle]

Do people honestly think that getting a legal gun in the States is as easy as walking in a store, saying "I would like to buy that gun!" and then paying and leaving? There are background checks and waiting periods.

not in arizona

[Specineff]

Yet our gun-related crimes aren't as high as other states with tougher laws.

[Twiddle]

actually it's more closely related to how stable a state's economy is

i really don't care about gun control but facts people

[jp]

You need a certification, which takes days if not months, and you obviously can't just buy them in a store like in the states.

Do people honestly think that getting a legal gun in the States is as easy as walking in a store, saying "I would like to buy that gun!" and then paying and leaving? There are background checks and waiting periods.

The reason that so many criminals are able to get a hold of guns so easily is because they obtain them *gasp* illegally.

Exactly.

It amazes me how the people who cry out the most about "gun control" rarely know the actual gun control laws that are in effect.

[BulletMagnet]

Do people honestly think that getting a legal gun in the States is as easy as walking in a store, saying "I would like to buy that gun!" and then paying and leaving? There are background checks and waiting periods.

not in arizona

Or when buying from an "independent dealer" at a gun show, IIRC.

[doodude]

Do people honestly think that getting a legal gun in the States is as easy as walking in a store, saying "I would like to buy that gun!" and then paying and leaving? There are background checks and waiting periods.

not in arizona

Or when buying from an "independent dealer" at a gun show, IIRC.

Where theres a law, theres a loophole...

Do people honestly think that getting a legal gun in the States is as easy as walking in a store, saying "I would like to buy that gun!" and then paying and leaving? There are background checks and waiting periods.

not in arizona

Really!? Theres no background check or waiting period in Arizona?
Not even for handguns?

[xorthen]

I can't imagine a society without gun rights. Guns are something to be respected, and to not use foolishly.

If guns were banned, then what would the people fight back with?

I remember in history class in high school they showed a scenario where a bunch of military type people walk into a guys house and declare that the house is theirs. They take everything in his house and basically take over the house. The man gives in and can't fight back.

In a different scenario,they showed that the man had a gun, the military types get shot, and that the man was protecting himself against intruders and his property.

So, no guns should not be banned. The entire thought that society would be better off without it is absurd. I feel safer with a gun in my home, and it's not because of criminals, it's because it is a right that our forefathers laid in the constitution and I'll be damned if someone should try to fight against it. Guns don't create criminals, society does.

I admit there are problems with people and guns, but just because one bad apple had to ruin it, doesn't mean everybody should lose their gun rights because some asshole decided to lose his mind.

[BulletMagnet]

In a different scenario,they showed that the man had a gun, the military types get shot, and that the man was protecting himself against intruders and his property.

This is going to sound really stupid, but wouldn't the military guys have their own guns?