Gun Control

[supertails]

Do you believe in gun control? I'm voting yes. I believe most people just don't need guns and I've heard all the argument and non of them hold water to me. The most common one is protection. Someone brakes into your house blah, blah, blah, you shoot them everything is well but what if the guy already has a gun then you'd either have a shoot out or give up and try to sneak out. Sure a gun is a nice cheap way to protect yourself but most people don't take reaction time and sleep into play. I believe most people who just have guns get robbed more then those with alarms. A robber breaks in and the alarm goes off and he just runs but if you just have a gun ask yourself if you're a light sleeper because if you're not he's going to steal everything and you'd be in your empty house saying at least I had a gun. In fact I don't remember a single episode of it takes a thieve that they ever said guns are good anti thieve devices they usually give you a bunch of expensive equipment. Also most people who brake into houses are only looking for stuff and money, not to hurt anyone.

One more argument is that most people don't even hunt anymore. They just go to walmart and buy everything.

 

[Signomi]

...I do see this topic to be somewhat argument-based which is likely to promote discussion, so I'd say this would better belong in Other Chat.

~Moved

 

[Nick]

By gun control, I'm assuming you mean the right to have a gun? I've never heard of gun control, per say, but that's what I'm going to assume you mean.

With that said, I don't think anyone at all needs a gun except for officials of the community/state you live in. It's strange because my grandfather used to be a police officer and just the other day he tried to show me his old gun. I refused to touch it. It's just natural for me to refuse to touch those kind of things. Most times, people who get guns whether legally or illegally just end up regretting it in the future. I just find it too much of a risk for anyone (other than those who need it -- being police officers and those types of people) to have a gun.

I'm going to compare this with mods for now. Though you may not see the similarities between the two of them and normally these two types of things would be associated with each other anyway:

Moderators are basically the police officers of a community. I know that, you know that, everyone on the internet <should> know(s) that. Moderators go a long time before becoming what they are and gaining the power that they can do to a community. As do police officers. If someone is given that power, for whatever reason, without being trusted, and known that they could do a job like that and handle that kind of power. With that said, even some of them turn bad and do something that screws up with they have.

So clearly, I don't agree with having guns for whatever reason as it's too dangerous. And that's my opinion on this discussion.

 

[Zet]

Gun control/the right to own a gun has been a long debate in time before, and nothing is ever resolved from the debate, though in countries where guns aren't allowed for civilians we solve our fights the good old fashion way, with our fists(or any other method, like talking about it). The needs for guns aren't needed at all, people get guns so they can have more power and with that greed in people's hearts, there will never be a way to resolve gun control/the right to own guns.

So, no I don't believe in gun control/the right to own guns

 

[Kurono]

I'm gonna play Devil's Advocate here.

Guns are tools for killing.

This makes them intimidating, so they will often be used by criminals to get something they want.

(that's assuming they don't already have murderous intent.)

Who knows?

Point is, gun control laws do little to deter criminals who really want some guns.

Nor can you expect officers of the law to be everywhere where their guns might come in handy.

Yeah, there are people that can't be trusted with guns. That's a fact. Of course, guns are here and they are not going anywhere anytime soon. So if you can't beat 'em, why not level the playing field and join them?

 

[supertails]

By gun control, I'm assuming you mean the right to have a gun? I've never heard of gun control, per say, but that's what I'm going to assume you mean.

With that said, I don't think anyone at all needs a gun except for officials of the community/state you live in. It's strange because my grandfather used to be a police officer and just the other day he tried to show me his old gun. I refused to touch it. It's just natural for me to refuse to touch those kind of things. Most times, people who get guns whether legally or illegally just end up regretting it in the future. I just find it too much of a risk for anyone (other than those who need it -- being police officers and those types of people) to have a gun.

I'm going to compare this with mods for now. Though you may not see the similarities between the two of them and normally these two types of things would be associated with each other anyway:

Moderators are basically the police officers of a community. I know that, you know that, everyone on the internet <should> know(s) that. Moderators go a long time before becoming what they are and gaining the power that they can do to a community. As do police officers. If someone is given that power, for whatever reason, without being trusted, and known that they could do a job like that and handle that kind of power. With that said, even some of them turn bad and do something that screws up with they have.

So clearly, I don't agree with having guns for whatever reason as it's too dangerous. And that's my opinion on this discussion.

Actually gun control is the opposite. Gun Control is basically when the state owns the guns in turn the more gun control you have the harder it is to get a gun. So really by gun control I'm saying that the state should refuse to let normal people have guns not to let people have guns. Though you could say gun control is the right to own guns because the state owns the guns not you.

https://www.policyalmanac.org/crime/guns.shtml

 

[Gunn]

Yes, I do believe that people have the right to bear arms. Guns are an excellent way to deterrent crimes. Just by the showing of a gun, thousands of violent crimes are prevented, while less than 0.9% of guns in those situations have ever been fired.

During a 21 year period, this chart shows the increase of handgun supply and how it affected the amount of property crime committed. 60% of criminals say that they avoid homes if they know someone there is armed. The rest say that they avoid homes even when they think someone is armed in the home.

So in other words, gun control is no way reduces crime and rather encourages it.

... and remember, it's called the Bill of Rights, not the Bill of Needs.

 

[Cherrim]

I've never understood the need to own a gun. Get a security alarm. Those little stickers you put in your window that say "This home is protected by ____ security company"? THOSE deter crimes too and they'll keep people alerted to break-ins and the like even when you aren't home. It'll let you know someone's breaking in before you hear a crash of them knocking someone over as they loot your things. They hear the alarm start to go off and they get the hell out of there. I just... don't see how a gun is useful, nor do I think it's right to shoot someone for breaking into your house. :| Injuring someone with the possibility of death seems like a much greater crime than stealing--am I the only one who thinks this? (I realize stealing isn't the only crime someone could commit after breaking into a home but unless they're breaking in there to kill you, I don't think shooting them is the right answer.)

However, the problem with gun control is... most of the people who use guns for crime are using stolen guns. Even if there's a gun registry and everyone who owns a handgun or otherwise is listed on it, the guns used in crimes are usually imported from other countries (in Canada, at least, crime guns are usually imported from the US :|) or they're stolen from other people who didn't commit the crime with their gun. There will always be illegal weapon trafficking so in that sense, it won't stop crime at all.

I'm actually rather undecided on how I feel about this issue. I suppose I lean toward a yes for gun control since I just can't fathom why people would really need a gun (or more than one @_@).

 

[Eon-Rider]

I believe in gun control for the simple fact that I hate anything that isn't natural. I believe humankind was not meant to own tools such as guns. If someone breaks into your house, solve it some other way. The fittest survive right? So go fight the proper way. Owning a gun is a cowards way to win a fight imo.

Yes, my post sounds completely idiotic. =O

 

[Percy Thrillington]

I do not oppose gun control. I've been brought up in a country where the possession of firearms gets you arrested. I feel much safer where I live than I think I would if I moved to America or another country that allows its citizens to have their own guns. This way, Ireland doesn't get massacres like the Finland one about a week ago, nobody gets shot. It's really great. Hell, even our police force don't use guns. Well, they do if they're raiding a drug stash but for the most part, they're unarmed in the eyes of the public.

You cannot be sentenced to death in my country. Giving four million people the right to own guns is sentencing several thousand to death in drive-by shootings and misuse of the weapons. I feel safer knowing that when I wake up, I'm not going to see a handgun on my teacher's desk just in case she needs it. Guns are weapons of death and their presence is enough to create a darker and more negative atmosphere.

We have alarms in our houses. We do not need our own way of attacking someone if one was to break in. No one needs to own a gun. The world would be better off without such objects.

 

[Trap-Eds]

I do not oppose gun control. I've been brought up in a country where the possession of firearms gets you arrested. I feel much safer where I live than I think I would if I moved to America or another country that allows its citizens to have their own guns. This way, Ireland doesn't get massacres like the Finland one about a week ago, nobody gets shot. It's really great. Hell, even our police force don't use guns. Well, they do if they're raiding a drug stash but for the most part, they're unarmed in the eyes of the public.

You cannot be sentenced to death in my country. Giving four million people the right to own guns is sentencing several thousand to death in drive-by shootings and misuse of the weapons. I feel safer knowing that when I wake up, I'm not going to see a handgun on my teacher's desk just in case she needs it. Guns are weapons of death and their presence is enough to create a darker and more negative atmosphere.

We have alarms in our houses. We do not need our own way of attacking someone if one was to break in. No one needs to own a gun. The world would be better off without such objects.

Huh. I kinda wish I lived wherever you live sos' I wouldn't have to worry about all the crazed psyhcos running around.

Gun Control is basically when the state owns the guns in turn the more gun control you have the harder it is to get a gun.

Yes, I believe in that. The less people with guns, the less violence would be out there-I think. *thinks of truTV and all the other retarded things people do*

 

[Gunn]

The less people with guns, the less violence would be out there-I think.

Not quite. Guns are not the blame for violent crimes nor are they often used in crimes. Even if guns were in possession during the crime, 83% of the time they were not used or threatened with. The state of Maryland claims to have the toughest gun control law in the nation, yet it ranks highest in robberies and fourth in violent crime and murder; gun control just doesn't work. Even New Zealand had to repeal their gun registration law in the 1980s because the police found it worthless. It's not the gun availability that causes crimes.

 

[Netto Azure]

=D

Well for my rushed 1 hr. WH essay I was for Gun Control....And just like other Gun Control activists I emphasized the Second Amendment's "a well regulated militia" clause....To me it's fun playing Counter-S but real life is no videogame....

 

[Midnight Beat]

Think about it this way. Don't hold me to these statistics, but I'd say about 90% of gun related crimes take place with an illegally obtained fire arm. So if you take guns away from the people that get them legally, what have you done? You've ended 10% of gun crimes, but increased ten fold the number of people who will be harmed by a gun because they didn't have equal protection.

And what about people who get guns for the purpose of hunting or target shooting? Target shooting is an Olympic sport you know.

 

[txteclipse]

Mmm. This one's hard. There's both positive and negative aspects to allowing people to have guns.

Scenario A: a woman leaves a party late at night, and the street lights are far away from where she parked her car. She gets into her vehicle, and realizes that a man she doesn't know was waiting nearby and is now moving quickly to her open door: a rapist. If she has a gun in her glove box, there's a good chance she will be able to fend this guy off without him so much as getting close to her.

So guns are certainly a crime deterrent. I actually based this example loosely off of a true story I read in which a woman used a gun in multiple instances to thwart would-be muggers/rapists.

Scenario B: a family that lives in a bad part of town keeps a gun in the house for protection. The dad keeps it in his nightstand drawer, so he will be able to reach it quickly if someone enters the house. One day, their young child finds the gun and accidentally shoots and kills himself while playing with it.

I don't think anyone would argue that guns are extremely dangerous, and that accidents like this can and do happen far too often. I believe in the right to bear arms, but guns most definitely aren't for everyone. I don't think I will ever own one, for instance.

 

[supertails]

I've never understood the need to own a gun. Get a security alarm. Those little stickers you put in your window that say "This home is protected by ____ security company"? THOSE deter crimes too and they'll keep people alerted to break-ins and the like even when you aren't home. It'll let you know someone's breaking in before you hear a crash of them knocking someone over as they loot your things. They hear the alarm start to go off and they get the hell out of there. I just... don't see how a gun is useful, nor do I think it's right to shoot someone for breaking into your house. :| Injuring someone with the possibility of death seems like a much greater crime than stealing--am I the only one who thinks this? (I realize stealing isn't the only crime someone could commit after breaking into a home but unless they're breaking in there to kill you, I don't think shooting them is the right answer.)

However, the problem with gun control is... most of the people who use guns for crime are using stolen guns. Even if there's a gun registry and everyone who owns a handgun or otherwise is listed on it, the guns used in crimes are usually imported from other countries (in Canada, at least, crime guns are usually imported from the US :|) or they're stolen from other people who didn't commit the crime with their gun. There will always be illegal weapon trafficking so in that sense, it won't stop crime at all.

I'm actually rather undecided on how I feel about this issue. I suppose I lean toward a yes for gun control since I just can't fathom why people would really need a gun (or more than one @_@).

I can agree with that but at times gun control does keep guns away. Why do you think most armed robberies aren't done with AK-47s but with hand guns?

Mmm. This one's hard. There's both positive and negative aspects to allowing people to have guns.

Scenario A: a woman leaves a party late at night, and the street lights are far away from where she parked her car. She gets into her vehicle, and realizes that a man she doesn't know was waiting nearby and is now moving quickly to her open door: a rapist. If she has a gun in her glove box, there's a good chance she will be able to fend this guy off without him so much as getting close to her.

So guns are certainly a crime deterrent. I actually based this example loosely off of a true story I read in which a woman used a gun in multiple instances to thwart would-be muggers/rapists.

Scenario B: a family that lives in a bad part of town keeps a gun in the house for protection. The dad keeps it in his nightstand drawer, so he will be able to reach it quickly if someone enters the house. One day, their young child finds the gun and accidentally shoots and kills himself while playing with it.

I don't think anyone would argue that guns are extremely dangerous, and that accidents like this can and do happen far too often. I believe in the right to bear arms, but guns most definitely aren't for everyone. I don't think I will ever own one, for instance.

I don't believe in the right to bear arms unless your really important or in the armed forces and that counts the police.

 

[LethalTexture]

From what you're saying in your first post it seems to me that you're suggesting homeowners have a choice between either an alarm or a gun. Why can't they have both?

But I'm digressing here. In my opinion, guns are one of the worst inventions in the history of mankind (right up there with cigarretes) and it should be highly illegal to even own one unless you are enrolled in the armed forces. Some naive people just don't realise the destructive force of a mere handgun, never mind something like a shotgun.

So yes, I am in favour of gun control. As far as I'm aware, it is high over here in the UK; hardly any homeowners over here would protect their home with one.

 

[supertails]

From what you're saying in your first post it seems to me that you're suggesting homeowners have a choice between either an alarm or a gun. Why can't they have both?

But I'm digressing here. In my opinion, guns are one of the worst inventions in the history of mankind (right up there with cigarretes) and it should be highly illegal to even own one unless you are enrolled in the armed forces. Some naive people just don't realise the destructive force of a mere handgun, never mind something like a shotgun.

So yes, I am in favour of gun control. As far as I'm aware, it is high over here in the UK; hardly any homeowners over here would protect their home with one.

That's because in the US they do and they can have both but it doesn't mean I have to like it though. I kinda agree with you that they are the worst and I'm all for them be illegal unless you're in the armed forces. I'd say our medical plan is worst but the worst is the Fed Reserve act. As far as I rate money I'd say money is neither good or bad because even though money as done a lot of villainy, it has also done heroic stuff too. A good quote I like a lot goes " The love of money is the root of all evil." Though money isn't evil, greed is and it kills.

 

[Nick]

Mmm. This one's hard. There's both positive and negative aspects to allowing people to have guns.

Scenario A: a woman leaves a party late at night, and the street lights are far away from where she parked her car. She gets into her vehicle, and realizes that a man she doesn't know was waiting nearby and is now moving quickly to her open door: a rapist. If she has a gun in her glove box, there's a good chance she will be able to fend this guy off without him so much as getting close to her.

So guns are certainly a crime deterrent. I actually based this example loosely off of a true story I read in which a woman used a gun in multiple instances to thwart would-be muggers/rapists.

Scenario B: a family that lives in a bad part of town keeps a gun in the house for protection. The dad keeps it in his nightstand drawer, so he will be able to reach it quickly if someone enters the house. One day, their young child finds the gun and accidentally shoots and kills himself while playing with it.

I don't think anyone would argue that guns are extremely dangerous, and that accidents like this can and do happen far too often. I believe in the right to bear arms, but guns most definitely aren't for everyone. I don't think I will ever own one, for instance.

Okay, so, I made the mistake last night at reading Scenario A both in the dark and at night. And it seriously scared me to the point where I was too scared to go to sleep. Sooo..., I guess I shouldn't read these kind of things in the middle of the night.

Though I am against guns even being in existence, with that said, in Scenario B, people should know better than that. Even if it was for their protection, not to go leaving guns on nightstands where small children can reach it. Now that's just stupid. It's not like you wouldn't have enough time if someone were to break into your home in the middle of the night and you having heard it to run to the closet or something and pull it from a high shelf.

I can agree with that but at times gun control does keep guns away. Why do you think most armed robberies aren't done with AK-47s but with hand guns?



I don't believe in the right to bear arms unless your really important or in the armed forces and that counts the police.

Oh right. So just because you don't have an important part in the community, you shouldn't allowed to defend yourself regardless of what it is.

Now that right there just seems really cold and cruel in my opinion. Limiting the right to bear arms to just those in the armed forces and all those types? Now that's just not right. Everyone, regardless of who they are should have the right to defend themselves if need be. Now having said that, I'm not saying that guns should be included in this right as I've pretty much stated that I am against them ever being created. Everyone is important. Everyone contributes to the society. That's like saying, "Supertails, you're not important. If someone comes up to you and attempts to rob you, you have to let them do so."

The right to bear arms was meant to prevent that type of thing, you know?

 

[Cherrim]

@DeanoDance: Well, in my post I didn't say they couldn't have both, but why bother? The only real argument given FOR people owning guns (except one) is that it deters people from breaking into homes. But alarms do too, and arguably even BEFORE the criminal even decides to break into your home. They see the sticker, know an alarm will go off if they can't provide the security code and that the police will be called. I don't know maybe it's very different in the states but do people put big signs on their lawn saying "I HAVE A GUN; DON'T EVEN THINK ABOUT BREAKING INTO MY HOUSE >:O" How would criminals know which houses to avoid based on whether they have a gun or not? And this is all assuming they break in while you're even HOME. We all have mental images of robbers slipping into your house in the dead of night but they're more likely to break in during the day when no one's home. I think, anyway. I don't care enough to go research it right now. :| I know you aren't even for guns but you did bring up the alarms vs. guns thing. :O

As for the owning a handgun to fend off rapists/muggers argument? (Now addressing a different person and I'm too lazy to quote. XD) I don't think that'd be necessary. If pepper spray is too harmless, that's why a fair amount of women have tazers. Not... that I agree with that either, but regardless, guns aren't always the best answer. I just don't agree with needing to own one for self-defence.

And lastly, for the point about having guns for sport--I'm okay with that. That's why I believe in a strict gun registry. Canada has one and I believe that when you buy a gun here there's a lot to be done. Firstly, YOU have to be approved. There's a firearms saftey course you must take, there are background checks, and you must be licensed before you register your gun with the RCMP.

I can agree with that but at times gun control does keep guns away. Why do you think most armed robberies aren't done with AK-47s but with hand guns?

o_O Because it's a hell of a lot easier to get your hands on a handgun, not to mention you'd have a lot of trouble hiding an AK-47 in your jacket pocket and keeping it subtly hidden while you held up a store and it'd be incredibly awkward to break into a house, steal the valueables, and get back out with anything larger than a typical handgun. Common sense, dude.

Okay, so, I made the mistake last night at reading Scenario A both in the dark and at night. And it seriously scared me to the point where I was too scared to go to sleep. Sooo..., I guess I shouldn't read these kind of things in the middle of the night.

Though I am against guns even being in existence, with that said, in Scenario B, people should know better than that. Even if it was for their protection, not to go leaving guns on nightstands where small children can reach it. Now that's just stupid. It's not like you wouldn't have enough time if someone were to break into your home in the middle of the night and you having heard it to run to the closet or something and pull it from a high shelf.




Oh right. So just because you don't have an important part in the community, you shouldn't allowed to defend yourself regardless of what it is.

Now that right there just seems really cold and cruel in my opinion. Limiting the right to bear arms to just those in the armed forces and all those types? Now that's just not right. Everyone, regardless of who they are should have the right to defend themselves if need be. Now having said that, I'm not saying that guns should be included in this right as I've pretty much stated that I am against them ever being created. Everyone is important. Everyone contributes to the society. That's like saying, "Supertails, you're not important. If someone comes up to you and attempts to rob you, you have to let them do so."

The right to bear arms was meant to prevent that type of thing, you know?

He never said that. He said they should be the ones with the right to have a gun. There are TONS of ways to protect yourself that don't involve a gun.