[Discussion] The one and only big fat thread about GUNS.

[Razor Leaf]

I can see that we're going to be plastered with gun discussions for a good while now. It's no bad thing at all - people've some interesting things to say and all that but Livewire and I feel that there are starting to be a few too many individual threads for gun-related discussions now. So what's happening is this; they're going to be merged into this thread and, rather than making new threads for gun-related things, you post them in here. Feel free to do so even if it's not following the current topic of conversation, just like you would if you were making a new thread. If you feel the discussion you want to start would be best in an individual thread for whatever reason, send a PM to Livewire or myself and we'll see if we can work something out. As usual, PM us with questions and whatnot.

Thanks!

Also - original Connecticut shooting thread here.

---
[original post by AdrianD for a thread entitled "Gun Laws"]

Peoples thoughts on it

This will seem to be the hot topic going forward. People always say "we need stricter laws" Fact is Criminals dont listen to the law hence the term 'criminals'. All these people want to do is either make it impossible for law abiding citizens to own a gun or two repel the second amendment all together, which people will still own them.

I do agree with not owning assault riffles and high capacity magazines (dont understand that term for it but ok) because people dont need them.

Fun little fact: if people actually read the second amendment tho you have the right to bare arms if you are forming a militia. So technically individuals can not own guns.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitut...cond_amendment

[LilJz1234]

The 2nd amendment was also made during a time when guns had to be reloaded way more often than now. When semi automatics didn't even exist yet.

But if they get stricter laws about gun control, it WILL bring down the number of murders done. Yes not all the murders are done by guns only, but people with guns can go on a rampage and kill tons of people in a few seconds. But if a guy with a knife tried to go on a rampage, someone could easily subdue him.

And the argument about Criminals not following the law is just bad in my opinion. It's like saying, why have laws if there's people that's gonna break them anyways? Just because some criminals don't follow the law means that we shouldn't stricten the law because of them? You're actually making their life more easier to acquire guns and commit murders with that logic.

[Shiny Celebi]

I dont think ordinary civilians need automatic weapons that fire hundreds of bullets in minutes, that's just asking for trouble in my opinion. I think what needs to happen is this: Restrict the owning of semi automatc weapons with large magazines, and require strict background checks always including at gun shows and such. These background checks should include a mental health evaluation.

I also dont see why requiring a licence to have a gun is a terrible thing. You need a licence to drive, I think there could be a licnce for people to have if they want to own a gun and they could go to gun safety classes to learn about guns and how to use them safely. The licence should be renewed like a driver's licence and the person would be re- examined to prove that they are mentally sound and such.

What people need to understand is that a gun has one purpose only: killing. If you're going to have a gun, you should be prepared to use it to kill, I think this is another thing people should be sure they understand before purchasing a gun, even for protection, because proetction means obviously that you may have to shoot to protect yourself.I dont think these things are that unreasonable, under these conditions, people could still own firearms, but it won't be quite as easy for them to fall in the wrong hands.

[Rain Dancer]

In one hand, we have the civil liberties issue, and a potential intrusive and imposing government always looking out for what you can do and what you can't, and punishing you for it as if they owned you, in the name of 'security'. Tyranny becomes easier when the populations are disarmed also.

But then again, on the other hand, the government's 'parenting' approach becomes justified in a way when some of us threaten the way of life, like a child that needs to be scolded when he mis-behaves.. there's the school shooter.

Earth is a place where there's all sorts of people, from saints to demonic.. Balanced laws are needed, but I can't help but notice that lately they haven't been in most good people's favor. The US looks like a police state right now, with all the liberty killing measures they've been taking.

I think this is quite agreeable though:

Originally Posted by Shiny Celebi

I also dont see why requiring a licence to have a gun is a terrible thing. You need a licence to drive, I think there could be a licnce for people to have if they want to own a gun and they could go to gun safety classes to learn about guns and how to use them safely. The licence should be renewed like a driver's licence and the person would be re- examined to prove that they are mentally sound and such.

What people need to understand is that a gun has one purpose only: killing. If you're going to have a gun, you should be prepared to use it to kill, I think this is another thing people should be sure they understand before purchasing a gun, even for protection, because proetction means obviously that you may have to shoot to protect yourself.I dont think these things are that unreasonable, under these conditions, people could still own firearms, but it won't be quite as easy for them to fall in the wrong hands.

[Bluerang1]

No one needs any type of automatic weapon. If you want to defend yourself you should be capable of firing by yourself. So civilians should not be able to own automatic weapons.

[Curious.]

Guns need to be taken off the streets. Simple. I don't understand why guns can be so easily bought and distributed. It's putting hundreds of lives in danger every day; I just see no sense in it whatsoever.

[Keiran777]

Originally Posted by Rain Dancer

Tyranny becomes easier when the populations are disarmed also.

A much more effective way to disarm citizens is to make education difficult to obtain whilst promoting mass ignorance. The American government is already doing so much to suppress its citizens, I don't see how making guns illegal to obtain will kill a dead horse.

[Rain Dancer]

Originally Posted by Keiran777

A much more effective way to disarm citizens is to make education difficult to obtain whilst promoting mass ignorance. The American government is already doing so much to suppress its citizens, I don't see how making guns illegal to obtain will kill a dead horse.

I know rite? x)


There's a fear factor here too.. Media fueled. I mean, *Points to Curious' reply to this thread*

It's all you see when you turn on mainstream news, fear fear fear. Sad in a way.
But an excellent control mechanism, while being so obvious.

[Livewire]

Just how many of the users here are in a well-regulated militia? And show of hands? None? I thought so.

Sorry, but the second amendment is a relic from the American Revolution and the Federalist vs. Antifederalist era of American political culture, nothing more - The Second Amendment in its original context was a direct reaction to imperialist aggression from Great Britain, and also a way to protect 'state rights' as people of that line of thinking feared a standing federal army and sought a way to arm state-sponsored militias, what would now be our National Guard/Reserves in case of defense from the big bad evil federalists.

Any modern interpretation deviating from that is simply the result of successful lobbying and misrepresenting of facts from the whack jobs at the NRA, in particular.

[PokéZoom]

More than 31,000 Americans have signed a petition calling for British TV host Piers Morgan to be deported.
They are angry about his advocacy of gun control, in the wake of the 14 December shootings in Connecticut.
The petition followed an interview with Larry Pratt, director of Gun Owners of America, on CNN - in which Mr Morgan called his guest "a dangerous man".
Petitions posted on the White House website only require 25,000 signatures to get a response from the government.
The campaign was started by a journalist in Texas following Mr Morgan's CNN programme of 19 December.
The petition says the talk show host "is engaged in a hostile attack against the US Constitution by targeting the Second Amendment", which protects an individual's right to own guns.
"We demand that Mr Morgan be deported immediately for his effort to undermine the Bill of Rights and for exploiting his position as a national network television host to stage attacks against the rights of American citizens."
Mr Morgan has responded, repeatedly, on his Twitter account.
"If I do get deported from America for wanting fewer gun murders, are there any other countries that will have me?" the 47 year old joked after the 25,000-signature threshold was passed.

Source: http://bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-20838729



Personally I find this petition ridiculous, what are your thoughts? >_<

[Razor Leaf]

Haha, wow. Free speech my arse. Looks like these Americans value weapons over the right of an individual to express an opinion! Absolutely amazing, and even better that they think the, uh, "dangerous man" is the one against guns.

Btw, I think too many threads are starting to form from the whole gun control debate now so I'm merging this into the main Gun Laws thread.

[FreakyLocz14]

Originally Posted by Livewire

Just how many of the users here are in a well-regulated militia? And show of hands? None? I thought so.

Sorry, but the second amendment is a relic from the American Revolution and the Federalist vs. Antifederalist era of American political culture, nothing more - The Second Amendment in its original context was a direct reaction to imperialist aggression from Great Britain, and also a way to protect 'state rights' as people of that line of thinking feared a standing federal army and sought a way to arm state-sponsored militias, what would now be our National Guard/Reserves in case of defense from the big bad evil federalists.

Any modern interpretation deviating from that is simply the result of successful lobbying and misrepresenting of facts from the whack jobs at the NRA, in particular.

D.C. v. Heller and McDonald v. City of Chicago say hi!

I oppose any and all gun control laws. Owning a gun is a right that is on par with freedom of speech and the free exercise of religion. The only way to reduce gun violence is to make gun laws less strict.

[Livewire]

Originally Posted by FreakyLocz14

D.C. v. Heller and McDonald v. City of Chicago say hi!

Conservative Justices upholding a traditional conservative idelology proves what? That doesn't refute any point I made. You have nothing to debate with other than "I love guns and I should be able to own one for no reason!" mantra that the NRA (Who are actual thugs) have strong armed through legislatures all over this country via intimidation, coercion and lobbying.

[Mr. X]

I support gun control, but because I feel like playing both sides here are the top 30 reasons to oppose gun control.

http://guninformation.org/reasons.html

Who here believes the myth of "Guns don't kill people, people kill people?" It's a myth, or at least partially inaccurate. We arm our soldiers with guns. Their duty is to remove threats to our nation. One method for them to remove threats is to kill the enemy. If guns don't kill people, then why do we waste the money arming our soldiers with guns?

[PokéZoom]

Originally Posted by FreakyLocz14

Owning a gun is a right is on par with freedom of speech and the free exercise of religion.

Oh my gosh, please tell me you're not being serious.
Guns are illegal in my country and there is no problem with that, there are much fewer gun murders.

[twocows]

I already expressed my thoughts in the other thread. Banning guns or making it harder for ordinary citizens to acquire them will just leave us defenseless while pushing gun sales among criminals to the black market. And the argument that it would actually have any affect on even gun-related crime, let alone violent crime as a whole, is dubious at best. The best thing we can do is try to better understand the human mind and make mental help more easily available to those who need it. Maybe also provide more security in places that might need it.

[FreakyLocz14]

Originally Posted by Livewire

Conservative Justices upholding a traditional conservative idelology proves what? That doesn't refute any point I made. You have nothing to debate with other than "I love guns and I should be able to own one for no reason!" mantra that the NRA (Who are actual thugs) have strong armed through legislatures all over this country via intimidation, coercion and lobbying.

Civil rights groups like the NRA protect freedom in America, but I prefer the GOA. The justices upheld the Constitution. They actually ruled that regulating guns is not unconstitutional per se, but outright banning them is. That is why nobody who has sworn to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States can vote for any gun ban without violating that oath. Assault weapons are already illegal without special permission from the government, and have been since 1934.

[Starstruck★]

Originally Posted by Curious.

Guns need to be taken off the streets. Simple. I don't understand why guns can be so easily bought and distributed. It's putting hundreds of lives in danger every day; I just see no sense in it whatsoever.

PREACH. I don't undersand why guns are so readily available either. They are used to kill, and the fact that ordinary people can get hold of them and - potentially - a few of them could commit a murder, is utterly shocking and frightening.

[Scarf]

The US has more guns than any country and more gun related deaths than any country. When other countries had gun massacres they put strict gun ownership laws into place and didn't see any more massacres. That's really all I would need to convince me that strict gun laws are the way to go.

Screw skewed interpretations of the US Constitution. That document has some good things in it, but it's flawed. Parts are just outdated dinosaurs who've somehow avoided extinction. The people who wrote the second amendment where envisioning militias with muskets, not lone individuals with automatic weapons.

[Rain Dancer]

Guns are already banned in the UK, but murders seem to continue for some reason. Oh no

They're stabbing each other using kitchen knives now.


It must definetly be the kitchen knives' fault then, without a doubt. Let's ban them:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4581871.stm


It might seem like a joke, but that's the kind of logic all these anti gun people here are following. The same kind of nonsense the medical industry also practices: Treating the symptoms, not the underlying cause. The problems can just go on forever.

Add to that the fear factor caused by the mainstream media news, and the people will accept just about everything in order to have that illusion of ''security''.

[LilJz1234]

Originally Posted by Rain Dancer

Guns are already banned in the UK, but murders seem to continue for some reason. Oh no

They're stabbing each other using kitchen knives now.


It must definetly be the kitchen knives' fault then, without a doubt. Let's ban them:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4581871.stm


It might seem like a joke, but that's the kind of logic all these anti gun people here are following. The same kind of nonsense the medical industry also practices: Treating the symptoms, not the underlying cause. The problems can just go on forever.

Add to that the fear factor caused by the mainstream media news, and the people will accept just about everything in order to have that illusion of ''security''.

Knives were made to cut stuffs, like bread, meat, cheese. Food most likely.

Guns were meant to serve one purpose, to kill. Anything can be used as a weapon. Heck I can even use a spoon as a killing device. People just need to learn that guns were only made to kill, period.

Also, you could perform a massacre with a gun, with a knife, you will lost likely get stopped by someone before killing half of the number of people you would with a gun.

[Went]

Originally Posted by Rain Dancer

Guns are already banned in the UK, but murders seem to continue for some reason. Oh no

They're stabbing each other using kitchen knives now.


It must definetly be the kitchen knives' fault then, without a doubt. Let's ban them:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4581871.stm


It might seem like a joke, but that's the kind of logic all these anti gun people here are following. The same kind of nonsense the medical industry also practices: Treating the symptoms, not the underlying cause. The problems can just go on forever.

Add to that the fear factor caused by the mainstream media news, and the people will accept just about everything in order to have that illusion of ''security''.

The underlying cause is that some people have mental issues. Yes. Let's fix them.

But, turning things upside-down, what are guns freely given to everybody used for? To defend yourself from people using the guns you are freely giving around! Amazing. Since the sauce we used tastes bad, let's have another layer of sauce which will likely make the dish taste even worse.

Crime is hard to avoid -specially when a sizeable amount of US States don't give a flipping burger about education-, but freely handing out weapons whose only purpose is killing people, which do it easily and swiftly and from a distance- is not, not, not helping anything. There are almost as many machines whose only purpose is killing people in the hands of untrained citizens as actual citizens in the US! (88 per 100 people). Meanwhile in Europe and Canada, where guns are heavily restricted, gun crime rates are hundreds of times lower than in the US. Maybe it's because there aren't as many guns lying around? It's just a working theory.

And yes, knives can kill people. But killing people is NOT the only use of a knive, and there are rounded knives that would take a ridiculously insane precision to kill anybody, if at all. Do you know of any sort of gun who can be used for anything else than killing people? No! Because their only use is killing people!

And again, defence. Well, a gun only gives you a true advantage against knives and the like, since any criminal who wants to kill you with one has to get close to you, probably fight against you, etc, giving you time to shoot them (incidentally, this also means you can try to disarm them without a gun, or simply run away or throw things at them in an attempt to incapacitate the criminal as they can't just simply pull a trigger from a distance).

But another gun? Well, you are in a Wild West shootout- the faster one wins! Or the one who is aware that they are carrying a gun they want to use, since the unaware victim won't be able to defend itself in that case, even if they are carrying a billion guns with them. Or the one who decides to shoot instead of running for cover once they see their life directly challenged.

And a car? If someone comes running at you at high speed, shooting them (if you are fast enough to even react) won't probably change a thing. A bomb? Lethal virus? What the hell can you do with a gun? Nothing!

In other words, many countries decided that the "loss" in self-defence is worth it if, in turn, crazy people have it much, much, muuuuuuuuuuuuuuch harder to get their hands on a gun and shoot a dozen people every year.

Education is the best solution? Why of course! Detecting and helping people with mental issues? Certainly! But, until then, maybe not distributing machines whose only purpose is killing people to anybody who asks for them could be a good patch until then.

[FreakyLocz14]

Originally Posted by Scarf

The US has more guns than any country and more gun related deaths than any country. When other countries had gun massacres they put strict gun ownership laws into place and didn't see any more massacres. That's really all I would need to convince me that strict gun laws are the way to go.

Screw skewed interpretations of the US Constitution. That document has some good things in it, but it's flawed. Parts are just outdated dinosaurs who've somehow avoided extinction. The people who wrote the second amendment where envisioning militias with muskets, not lone individuals with automatic weapons.

The Constitution is the supreme law of the land in the United States. If you think that it's outdated, encourage your representatives in Congress to amend it. Until that day happens, I will continue to defend the Constitution's guarantee of an individual right to keep and bear arms.

[Rain Dancer]

Originally Posted by Went

But, turning things upside-down, what are guns freely given to everybody used for? To defend yourself from people using the guns you are freely giving around!

As if most guns used in crimes in the US were legal in the first place. There's your flaw. And yet how does banning legal guns make sense given the amount of smuggling going on?

You can google.

[Razor Leaf]

Originally Posted by Rain Dancer

As if most guns used in crimes in the US were legal in the first place. There's your flaw. And yet how does banning legal guns make sense given the amount of smuggling going on?

You can google.

Actually, most guns used in mass shootings were obtained legally. And I think that, from this, we can probably deduce that the same follows for gun crime in the US on a wider scale. So really I can't see a way in which banning guns wouldn't reduce their use.