• Our software update is now concluded. You will need to reset your password to log in. In order to do this, you will have to click "Log in" in the top right corner and then "Forgot your password?".
  • Forum moderator applications are now open! Click here for details.
  • Welcome to PokéCommunity! Register now and join one of the best fan communities on the 'net to talk Pokémon and more! We are not affiliated with The Pokémon Company or Nintendo.

The U.S Gun Control Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

ShinyUmbreon189

VLONE coming soon
1,461
Posts
12
Years
you keep saying this, but I don't see what point you're trying to make here

I think it's cause he doesn't understand America's history and how it's completely different.. America has guns cause it's America... America is corrupt, more corrupt than people think. America's supposed to be the "land of opportunity" and most "freedom". Tho our country isn't "free" it's more free than the rest of the world. But we're still slaves.. People ignore the history involved in America.. History has proven those that ban guns commit genocide on their own people. Not all countries but lots of leaders did so.
America has guns cause it's the "superpower" of of the world.
 
Last edited:
1,118
Posts
14
Years

I'm on mobile so I'm not gonna sit and format this like I want, but you raised some valid points that I just wanted to touch on for a second.

For the basic gun crimes, IE not mass shootings, extra jail time. Jail time for people that commit straw purchases for the felon friends or family.

This kinda goes into what I mentioned on an individual level. Admittedly, it's a very slippery slope to climb, but it would make sense to try and tackle it, even if the gains are small. I'd much rather some sort of attempt been made to improve the situation as a whole. Some may argue it's unfair, but if you simply don't break the damn law....

Short of turning every establishment into a secured building, I'd go for allowing more citizens to carry concealed.

I do agree that giving citizens more power to defend themselves in situations like that would probably give better peace of mind if NOTHING else. More buildings being secure would be a great alternative, but I can't say everyone is willing to have what is basically TSA at a fast food resturant. I wouldn't mind the "inconvenience" for the sake of my safety, but it ain't just about me. But regarding the rules, I find that odd. I know people can get a license to carry concealed (hell in 7 states you don't even need a license to), so is there something I'm missing there?

There are places in the EU that are just as bad or worse. Multiple break ins per year. Last forum I debated this topic in, I shared links to surveys and whatnot that showed that people were less scared to walk around at night in the US that in the UK. There are any number of scenarios where guns are necessary for protection. Hurricane Katrina, King Riots, random attacks for no freaking reason.

Yup. Reality is, society is enough of a hotbox where your own home isn't as safe as you might think it is. Times of crisis are even WORSE. So it's like...."Damned if you do, damned if you don't" because we can easily say "Well you know with guns, you enable all sorts of scenarios like this to happen", because you can't really control what someone does with a gun. You just pray that a gun owners has a good conscious. Cause someone could pass a psyche evaluation and then all of a sudden be on the news. At the same time, you don't have guns around an environment, but you still have wild crime rates and victims of incidents. Many of which could have PROBABLY been mitigated or even avoided if a gun was present.
 
371
Posts
6
Years
  • Age 43
  • Seen Nov 19, 2022
I'm on mobile so I'm not gonna sit and format this like I want, but you raised some valid points that I just wanted to touch on for a second.



This kinda goes into what I mentioned on an individual level. Admittedly, it's a very slippery slope to climb, but it would make sense to try and tackle it, even if the gains are small. I'd much rather some sort of attempt been made to improve the situation as a whole. Some may argue it's unfair, but if you simply don't break the damn law....



I do agree that giving citizens more power to defend themselves in situations like that would probably give better peace of mind if NOTHING else. More buildings being secure would be a great alternative, but I can't say everyone is willing to have what is basically TSA at a fast food resturant. I wouldn't mind the "inconvenience" for the sake of my safety, but it ain't just about me. But regarding the rules, I find that odd. I know people can get a license to carry concealed (hell in 7 states you don't even need a license to), so is there something I'm missing there?

A lot of places have laws about bringing guns into places where alcohol is served. Or if the place posts specific signs saying guns aren?t allowed at all regardless of permit.
 
1,118
Posts
14
Years
A lot of places have laws about bringing guns into places where alcohol is served. Or if the place posts specific signs saying guns aren?t allowed at all regardless of permit.

Oh yeah, those. Well anywhere with alcohol as the main thing on the menu make sense. You know, drunk person with a gun and all. I feel like what you said earlier about more secure establishments would go hand in hand VERY well for places that don't allow citizens to carry firearms in them. ESPECIALLY including bars.
 
Last edited:
316
Posts
6
Years
People die needlessly of many other things. Plan to ban alcohol, cars, the medical field? And you are right that nothing lasts forever. That includes peaceful times. Can you defend yourself and your family if society is collapsing around you?

Well, if a war did break over here, it's all up to the military to fight the enemy no questions asked. And generally speaking, thinks have been real peace and quiet over here though. If a society has collapsed around here, chances are it would have happened already. Being prepared is of course important but I'm at least contend knowing that everyday will be just as peaceful as the last.

But you are rambling? I'm still waiting and hoping you'll defend your comments. You should actually learn more about firearms. And one of the ways you learn is by going to a gun class or gun range and using a gun.

Yes, I can ramble sometimes, that I can agree with it. That said, my heart's in the right place. And really, me going to a gun class? Again, gun is a 'privilege' around here. Even if I did know how to get a gun, would there be an actual NEED for me to do so?

That's not a dilemma. The Founders of the US recognize that governments can become corrupt tyrannies and an armed populace can prevent that from happening.

Are you suggesting that Finland/EU can in fact become tyrannical one day? Ha, fat chance. Lemme assure you that a dictatorship we are not. And besides, when you look at all of the good things EU has given us, I guess you would like to live here as well? Yes, we do have problems of our too, that's a fact. But really, it's useless trying to bash us like that. As for USA turning rogue, I'm pretty sure they could defeat you pea-shooters easily if they ever wanted to. And really, would they have any INTEREST in actually trying to take over EVERY little aspect of your lives?
 
Last edited:
10,078
Posts
15
Years
  • Age 32
  • UK
  • Seen Oct 17, 2023
At the same time, you don't have guns around an environment, but you still have wild crime rates and victims of incidents. Many of which could have PROBABLY been mitigated or even avoided if a gun was present.

As far as I can tell, there are very few examples of mass shootings (in particular) being stopped by a civilian with a gun. Of the few I've found mention of, those civilians tend to be ex-army or have some kind of combat training back story (some examples here).

Overall, Western-World countries with less guns have less total murders per million people. According to the information on this website (unfortunately limited to 2011 statistics) you can see that the US's murder rate is 42.01 vs Canada at 16.23, UK at 11.68, France at 10.54, etc. Whilst murders might not be the be-all and end-all of crime, its clearly one of the most important indicators.

---

I noticed one or two of the commentators on this thread say they're not scared of the shootings, could I ask why? Is it just that the area you live in feels particularly safe? When most of the big reported shootings are happening at schools/bars/etc. I'm not sure how safe I'd feel as a visitor.
 

Nah

15,926
Posts
10
Years
  • Age 31
  • Seen yesterday
I noticed one or two of the commentators on this thread say they're not scared of the shootings, could I ask why? Is it just that the area you live in feels particularly safe? When most of the big reported shootings are happening at schools/bars/etc. I'm not sure how safe I'd feel as a visitor.
I mentioned why in one of my posts, but I don't blame anyone for missing it, so I'll copy-paste it here again for people:
Nah said:
And personally, as an American, I don't live every day fearing that I'm going to be shot and killed by some gangster or America's Next Top Shooter. Though I suppose part of that has to do with the fact that I live in a little town where nobody does anything instead of say Newark or Detroit or whatever cities are considered dangerous these days, and that I don't care a whole lot if I do get shot.
 
371
Posts
6
Years
  • Age 43
  • Seen Nov 19, 2022
Oh yeah, those. Well anywhere with alcohol as the main thing on the menu make sense. You know, drunk person with a gun and all. I feel like what you said earlier about more secure establishments would go hand in hand VERY well for places that don't allow citizens to carry firearms in them. ESPECIALLY including bars.

I get why but don't particularly agree. The vast majority of people that go to bars don't get so wasted as to cause problems.

Well, if a war did break over here, it's all up to the military to fight the enemy no questions asked. And generally speaking, thinks have been real peace and quiet over here though. If a society has collapsed around here, chances are it would have happened already. Being prepared is of course important but I'm at least contend knowing that everyday will be just as peaceful as the last.
Not talking about a war. At least not specifically. Natural disasters, terrorist attacks, wild animals etc. Sure if a war broke out, you hope your military can handle it but if they can't or if they are deployed away from where you are?



Yes, I can ramble sometimes, that I can agree with it. That said, my heart's in the right place.
Do you know how many awful things can be justified by "at least my heart was in the right place"? I'd rather have your brain engaged in the debate. Your heart has you killing or imprisoning tens of millions for a few thousand people.

And really, me going to a gun class? Again, gun is a 'privilege' around here. Even if I did know how to get a gun, would there be an actual NEED for me to do so?
I bet the rich and the politicians can easily exercise that "privilege". Why is that? Are their lives more important than yours?



Are you suggesting that Finland/EU can in fact become tyrannical one day? Ha, fat chance. Lemme assure you that a dictatorship we are not.
All governments can become tyrannical. All it takes is slowly letting them dictate what you as a citizen can or can not do. All for your own good of course.

And besides, when you look at all of the good things EU has given us, I guess you would like to live here as well?
:laugh-squinted::laugh-squinted::shaking-head-no: No.
Yes, we do have problems of our too, that's a fact. But really, it's useless trying to bash us like that. As for USA turning rogue, I'm pretty sure they could defeat you pea-shooters easily if they ever wanted to. And really, would they have any INTEREST in actually trying to take over EVERY little aspect of your lives?
I'm not "bashing" anything. Easily? Not really. A lot of the gun owners in the US are former military.

As far as I can tell, there are very few examples of mass shootings (in particular) being stopped by a civilian with a gun. Of the few I've found mention of, those civilians tend to be ex-army or have some kind of combat training back story (some examples here).
3 out of 10.
Great numbers. Link also points out that a lot of these shooting took place in "gun free zones" where law abiding gun owners tend not to have guns.

I like this study.
http://dailyanarchist.com/2012/07/31/auditing-shooting-rampage-statistics/


Overall, Western-World countries with less guns have less total murders per million people. According to the information on this website (unfortunately limited to 2011 statistics) you can see that the US's murder rate is 42.01 vs Canada at 16.23, UK at 11.68, France at 10.54, etc. Whilst murders might not be the be-all and end-all of crime, its clearly one of the most important indicators.
I dislike limiting information like that. Two easy to distort things by limiting your data set.


---

I noticed one or two of the commentators on this thread say they're not scared of the shootings, could I ask why? Is it just that the area you live in feels particularly safe? When most of the big reported shootings are happening at schools/bars/etc. I'm not sure how safe I'd feel as a visitor.
"Reported" is the key word there. The media makes money of off viewers so they tend to exaggerate the dangers and will spend days covering an event and discussing other events. The Columbine School shooting happened almost 20 years ago and the media still brings it up. Being caught in a mass shooting is like being hit by lightning. As far as the rest of gun homicides, staying out of really bad neighborhoods and not buying drugs from strangers and you are perfectly safe.
 
Last edited:

ShinyUmbreon189

VLONE coming soon
1,461
Posts
12
Years
Values dissonance, my friend. You Americans having guns just feels alien and wrong to me. I can't help it. That said, every human life is worth the same no matter where they live. If those massacres keep happening, is there any value in human beings at all? Will it truly be a dog eats dog world where only the fittest deserve to live?

It's already kinda like that.. Not just humans.. It's animal instincts in general.. Just like animals humans have to prove their dominance to be a leader or "alpha male". Animals are violent. Humans are violent.. You're expecting us to live in a utopia which is clearly a fantasy world. Where there's good there's evil and vise versa. It's just the way it is. It's survival tactics. And the more "divided" the people grow, the more violence and heinous acts come into light.



True. But that still leaves the issue of guns being a 'right' in first place. If you know how, you can easily get one. There's a reason why that isn't the case over here in EU at all. If some people thing we are less free because of it, I think it's obvious they have never been here in first place.

A gun is not a "right" to a felon or someone who's mentally ill and has a record of it..
A majority of the people who want a gun and don't have a gun don't want to go through the hassle of getting a gun. It's not as easy as you think to get a gun.. Unless you're in Texas or something where everyone has a gun.. Or the ghetto for example but those guns have some serious heat... Getting caught with it will land you in a very worrisome situation...
Besides.. People whom are that mentally ill most likely lack the ability to hold any real position at a job due to their mental issues. These mentally ill people don't have the funds to purchase a cheap pistol.. What makes you think they can afford a rifle? You just get the few that slip through the cracks... These are usually the highly intelligent ones.

And I don't live in EU but I got a friend that lives in UK that I befriened when he lived here in America... 4 years in EU is enough for him as he feels America's the better country to live in.
 
Last edited:
10,078
Posts
15
Years
  • Age 32
  • UK
  • Seen Oct 17, 2023
LDSman said:
3 out of 10.
Great numbers. Link also points out that a lot of these shooting took place in "gun free zones" where law abiding gun owners tend not to have guns.

I like this study.
http://dailyanarchist.com/2012/07/31/auditing-shooting-rampage-statistics/

I dislike limiting information like that. Two easy to distort things by limiting your data set.

Hmm, I see you saying this a lot about statistics, but then you post to a clearly bias source that has independently googled 10 shootings to make up some numbers for comparison. Meanwhile, the website for statistics I have linked is one giant global meta study. It seems to me you only like statistics that fit your point of view.

I'm happy to concede if you can present a reliable source - but that seems unlikely. The number of documented civiliian-saviour shootings seems very small when you consider there have been 300+ mass shootings this year in the US, many with multiple casualties.

LDSman said:
"Reported" is the key word there. The media makes money of off viewers so they tend to exaggerate the dangers and will spend days covering an event and discussing other events. The Columbine School shooting happened almost 20 years ago and the media still brings it up. Being caught in a mass shooting is like being hit by lightning. As far as the rest of gun homicides, staying out of really bad neighborhoods and not buying drugs from strangers and you are perfectly safe.

Ah, I see your POV now. Media elite are covering it up and brainwashing us, basically?

If I take the cases in the last month with the most injured/dead (including some of the most high profile cases):
https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/incident/1249561
https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/incident/1241819
https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/incident/1246489
https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/...screenshots/1237930-weartv.com-1540168257.png

Only one is thought to be gang related, the others are innocents in 'safe' places (whether that means gun-free, I can't confirm, although pretty sure the Synagogue shooting was gun-free?).

This isn't the media exaggerating these cases - they happened, they resulted in more deaths than the usual shooting. Your comment about Columbine School is interesting, do you know how many school shootings have happened since then? You think that past shootings are brought up to manipulate the public rather than serve as a tragic reminder?

Antimedia retort excuses the perpetrators and blames the people informing the public.
 
Last edited:

ShinyUmbreon189

VLONE coming soon
1,461
Posts
12
Years
In case you DO want more insight, I'd recommend that you read this thread I made.

https://forum.deviantart.com/community/politics/2453994/

Again, all that I want is a world where everyone can live without fear...

I'm not gonna waste my time on some biased opinion... You simply ignore the fact that a land of utopia is impossible to achieve.. Please, get that delusion out of your head. Shit's the way it is, cause those in power want it that way. There's no such thing as power to the people cause we're a "tool". You have no clue of what's going on. I shouldn't have to explain WHY this is to be to you.
 
Last edited:
316
Posts
6
Years
I'm not gonna waste my time on some biased opinion... You simply ignore the fact that a land of utopia is impossible to achieve.. Please, get that delusion out of your head. Shit's the way it is, cause those in power want it that way. There's no such thing as power to the people cause we're a "tool". You have no clue of what's going on. I shouldn't have to explain WHY this is to be to you.

Yeah, it's true an Utopia is something that simply doesn't exist. But is with our actions that achieve something that's near it. That said, you think Guns are a human rights? In an ideal world, the answer that that question would obviously be no. And I'd recommend that you at least give my thread a try. You sure you're not using Ad Hominem against me?
 
Last edited:
371
Posts
6
Years
  • Age 43
  • Seen Nov 19, 2022
It's already kinda like that.. Not just humans.. It's animal instincts in general.. Just like animals humans have to prove their dominance to be a leader or "alpha male". Animals are violent. Humans are violent.. You're expecting us to live in a utopia which is clearly a fantasy world. Where there's good there's evil and vise versa. It's just the way it is. It's survival tactics. And the more "divided" the people grow, the more violence and heinous acts come into light.

I disagree that is animal instincts or that people are inherently violent. Most people are decent people. If they weren't, the violence rate would be a lot higher.




Hmm, I see you saying this a lot about statistics, but then you post to a clearly bias source that has independently googled 10 shootings to make up some numbers for comparison. Meanwhile, the website for statistics I have linked is one giant global meta study. It seems to me you only like statistics that fit your point of view.
I didn't say anything was wrong with your link. I said I dislike reducing the area to "western countries". It smacks of manipulating the data to get a predetermined outcome. "We want the US to be #1 in gun deaths so lets drop any country that is not *****."

I'm happy to concede if you can present a reliable source - but that seems unlikely.
Up to you. Person that made the study documented why he used the data in the study. Feel free to point out where's it wrong. Does it not make sense that if an armed person is able to fight back, that the person who is trying to kill others won't be able to kill as many?

The number of documented civiliian-saviour shootings seems very small when you consider there have been 300+ mass shootings this year in the US, many with multiple casualties.
There have not been 300+ mass shootings.


Ah, I see your POV now. Media elite are covering it up and brainwashing us, basically?
What? No. The media sensationalizes things to pull in viewers. If they can make a problem sound worse than it is, they can get more people to tune in.

There's your problem. The GVA uses a different definition of "mass shooting" than the FBI. 4 gang members shoot each other and no one dies? Mass shooting. Teen drives around shooting pedestrians with a BB gun? Mass shooting. Homeowner shoots 4 burglars who broke into his house? Mass shooting.



This isn't the media exaggerating these cases - they happened, they resulted in more deaths than the usual shooting. Your comment about Columbine School is interesting, do you know how many school shootings have happened since then? You think that past shootings are brought up to manipulate the public rather than serve as a tragic reminder?
Yes. More viewers tuning in. I watched a media person out here try and get a random person on the street to express fear that the cops weren't doing enough to keep people safe after a lady was found dead in a motel.

Media does a story on a drive-by. It'll be about how many people got hurt, how many people got hurt by gang violence and how people feel about it and then about how to keep your kids safe from drive bys. They may or may not mention that the people responsible are already in jail or that the gang violence is limited to one specific area of town or that the people that got shot were all suspected in the homicide of a different gang member. Its all about invoking fear and getting people to tune in for the special coverage tonight at 6 PM!!!
Antimedia retort excuses the perpetrators and blames the people informing the public.
They could inform the public in a less sensational manner. Too many people don't actually know that gun violence has been declining for the last 30 years. And it may drive people to commit mass shootings. "If I kill more people, the world will know my name! I can strike fear into all the people who shunned me!" The internet probably doesn't help with that either.

Yeah, it's true an Utopia is something that simply doesn't exist. But is with our actions that achieve something that's near it. That said, you think Guns are a human rights? In an ideal world, the answer that that question would obviously be no. And I'd recommend that you at least give my thread a try. You sure you're not using Ad Hominem against me?
Not reading that. If anything is interesting, then post it here. In an ideal world, it wouldn't matter how many guns I had. No one is violent? Cool, I can have anything I want because there is no violence to worry about.
 

ShinyUmbreon189

VLONE coming soon
1,461
Posts
12
Years
Yeah, it's true an Utopia is something that simply doesn't exist. But is with our actions that achieve something that's near it. That said, you think Guns are a human rights? In an ideal world, the answer that that question would obviously be no. And I'd recommend that you at least give my thread a try. You sure you're not using Ad Hominem against me?

Okay... So how does a society do so with a biased media or source of news to divide it's people? Do you not realize people are biased due to something as simple enough as "needing something to believe in?" One's belief system is fueled by those in power. Those in power said "this" is how things are supposed to be and gained a following.. Sorta like religion.. Do you grasp the power those in power have?
 
25,439
Posts
11
Years
I'm honestly tired of repeating this debate over and over. I've long since realised I'm probably never going to make anyone pro-gun see sense. So I might as well use this as a learning experience instead.

So here's a legitimate question. What is it that makes America so special? Why is it that people in the US are so convinced that gun control will never work there when it has worked in literally every other first world country that has implemented it? Someone explain to me what makes the US so vastly different from similar nations.

You can say it's the gangs, but there's gangs in the UK, Australia, Japan etc etc too. Plus, all of those guns started life off being made and sold by legal manufacturers. On top of that, which we can see from the Chicago situation, a lot of the guns used in gang crime are just bought across state lines from places with laxer laws. Surely having tighter restrictions across the board would thus reduce the number of weapons in the hands of gangs. I don't want to hear the hand-wave answer of "oh but criminals will always get and use guns" either, because while it's true that some criminals absolutely would still manage, there would still be a reduction. Not to mention the lack market is expensive because supply and demand is a thing.

You can say that it's because of having such a large and diverse population. That argument actually doesn't look half bad at first... until you start breaking things down more. Australia, the UK, Canada and, hell, technically even the EU countries all have ethnically diverse populations too. You can say it's because they have smaller populations, but a lot of them have similar population density (obviously not Australia but I'm getting to that). Then there's also the fact that this assumption that population = more gun crime breaks down entirely if you start looking at individual cities. NYC is the largest city with the biggest and most diverse population in the Western hemisphere, but it's got less gun crime than St. Louis, New Orleans, Detroit, Baltimore and a bucketload of other places and coincidentally better gun control than almost everywhere it beats. Internationally, Sydney and Melbourne all have considerably higher populations than every US city bar NYC, less gun crime and also better gun control. Tokyo has a larger population and population density by far compared to US cities, but less gun crime and also coincidentally better gun control.

Because of how prevalent your gun culture is? I can agree that if anything this would be the biggest factor but, let's be realistic for a moment. Nobody is going to start a civil war over gun control. I don't even think people would go to that length for an actual ban and that's not what we're talking about here - at the very least nobody in their right mind is. The simple fact is that anyone who even tried to rise up against the government for enacting gun control would not only be a very good example of the kind of people who shouldn't have guns to begin with but would just flat out lose. A handful of crazy people might actually be stupid enough to try but there wouldn't be any movement catching on.

I'm not trying to change minds here anymore, I have well and truly given up on that. What I want right now is to at the very least try to understand why, despite all of this, you on the the pro-gun side believe that having better gun control would not work in the US.

Or is it not about whether it would work or not? Is it a question of the personal freedom of being able to carry a weapon outweighing the societal affects of easy access to weaponry? Or a question of fear of the government potentially altering the constitutional amendments (nevermind that they're called amendments for a reason) outweighing the positives?

I just want to understand why.
 

Urrr

Devil's Advocate
21
Posts
6
Years
  • Age 29
  • Seen Nov 19, 2021
What I would like to know is:

1. You argue that gun control isnt needed because an overwhelming majority of people are law-abiding citizens.
while
2. The US has a gigantic military budget and strong defenses against any form of attack.

Yet, despite 2. being true, the US has no country in both Americas that could or would declare war on them. You could even argue that no country in the world could declare war on them, because in today's world every country is too interconnected in trade, relationships and economy especially, that it wouldn't help anyone.
Regardless, all evidence suggests that the US as a country and its common people are save from outside sources.

Then the question is this, why do people in the US need private guns - and we are talking not (just) about handguns here, but also semi-automatic or even automatic guns - if 1. is true? From what do you need to save your familiy or yourself, if you are already save?

So either the people of your country are not as law-abiding as you say they are, which would mean that argument 1. is not true, this meaning you would need gun control.
Or 1. is true, which would mean that you would not need guns as you do now, because there is no reason to defend yourself.

Your arguments are flawed either way.
 
Last edited:

Nah

15,926
Posts
10
Years
  • Age 31
  • Seen yesterday
Would anyone like to try and answer gimme's questions? I can't really do so myself, as I'm not completely anti-gun control (I just think that it by itself is not the entire solution and that not every piece of gun legislation is helpful).

What I would like to know is:

1. You argue that gun control isnt needed because an overwhelming majority of people are law-abiding citizens.
while
2. The US has a gigantic military budget and strong defenses against any form of attack.

Yet, despite 2. being true, the US has no country in both Americas that could or would declare war on them. You could even argue that no country in the world could declare war on them, because in today's world every country is too interconnected in trade, relationships and economy especially, that it wouldn't help anyone.
Regardless, all evidence suggests that the US as a country and its common people are save from outside sources.

Then the question is this, why do people in the US need private guns - and we are talking not (just) about handguns here, but also semi-automatic or even automatic guns - if 1. is true? From what do you need to save your familiy or yourself, if you are already save?

So either the people of your country are not as law-abiding as you say they are, which would mean that argument 1. is not true, this meaning you would need gun control.
Or 1. is true, which would mean that you would not need guns as you do now, because there is no reason to defend yourself.

Your arguments is flawed either way.
Internal threats. Sure, it's rather unlikely that anyone's about to try and invade the US, but that doesn't mean that there's nothing else to potentially need to defend yourself from. Gangsters, terrorists--both domestic and ones that just slip into the country from outside of it--wild animals, etc.

Also, people can't really buy an automatic firearm in this country.
 

Urrr

Devil's Advocate
21
Posts
6
Years
  • Age 29
  • Seen Nov 19, 2021
Internal threats. Sure, it's rather unlikely that anyone's about to try and invade the US, but that doesn't mean that there's nothing else to potentially need to defend yourself from. Gangsters, terrorists--both domestic and ones that just slip into the country from outside of it--wild animals, etc.

Also, people can't really buy an automatic firearm in this country.

Why does the US have so many internal threats if most gun owners are so law-abiding? There is a flaw in the argument. You can not have it both ways. Either you have internal threats or not.

Gangsters are also citizens. Gangsters from other countries are a possibility, but isnt that a matter of border safety first then?
Terrorists can be domestic, but then they are also citizens. If you talk about non-US terrorists, then I dont see where they are. No terrorists is gonna attack a family home in the US. 9/11 was 17 years ago, and yet you argue that foreign terrorist are a problem. I can't see it, sorry.

Wild animals may very well be a concern. Yet this would mean that everybody, even children, would need a gun at all times when going outside, because wild animals dont break into your house. And this would still ignore the fact that the most dangerous wild animals are either rare, don't come close to humans by themselves, run away rather than attack or are animals like snakes, which you cant defend against with fire arms.

Depending on the fire arm you seem to be. It seems to be legal to own, use and buy automatic firearms made before 1986. It seems also to be legal to modify your semi-automatic weapon, and kits to upgrade them to basically automatic are legal.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top