gun controll

[ZEB 99]

last time i saw a thread like this it was full of people trying to insult, not even trying to argue, so yea, vezok is right

[tungdil]

Rampages are way harder with knifes for examples.

[Vezok]

Rampages are way harder with knifes for examples.

Knives also have a practical use in society. Whereas an item that is designed as a dedicated weapon is not.

[danhezee]

As an Australian, worked out pretty well here, leave the guns for a shooting range I say.

PS. What's the deal with Americans fearing Obamacare? It's a good concept and it works... Well at least in Australia.

I think your country has free health care provided by taxes. Obamacare is not that, it is law which makes it mandatory to purchase a product not from the government but from private corporations. As far as I know It is the first time a law has stated you have to buy something or face a penalty at least in the united states.

And I am against taking guns from citizens, it is like trying to ban shovels, wait I mean spades. It is a tool, a device, it is a piece of equipment. It can used to provide sustenance, defense, and offense. Large, heavy equipment, like a vehicle, require extensive training before you are allowed to legally operate it. I am for a more thorough gun education program. Teach children at a young age to treat guns with the utmost seriousness and respect.

[valkyriiking]

I have the right to bear arms so I will bear arms. to keep me safe and to go range shooting. The government ain't going to stop me with gun control or registering. And at this point if they got to heavy with gun control there would be too many guns laying around that criminals have. Who the hell is gonna protect us? the police fk no they never arrive on scene on time. And you need license to get bigger caliber weapons so its a somewhat flawed system but it ain't bad enough that random peeps can walk in buy a gun and walk out.

[ZEB 99]

even some police forces are refusing to enforce gun control,
anyways i think that it should be required to teach children gun safety , so if they find one in daddys closet they dont go all like pew pew pew BANG while playing cowboys and indians,

[Gunslinger]

I don't understand why people think guns should be legal for self defense. Leaving a guy dead or bleeding out on the floor isn't self defense, it's killing someone. If someone honestly wanted to shoot you, having a gun wouldn't save anyone, you'd be dead before you could take it out.

[ZEB 99]

that's not why the founding fathers wanted it, they wanted it because they thought one day that the government would decide to act like a monarchy and obtain absolute control, the reason is so that if that happens the citizens could have a chance of winning and restoring freedom.
also they are commonly used for hunting

[Vezok]

that's not why the founding fathers wanted it, they wanted it because they thought one day that the government would decide to act like a monarchy and obtain absolute control, the reason is so that if that happens the citizens could have a chance of winning and restoring freedom.
also they are commonly used for hunting

Oh I'm sorry, I forgot you were there to hear their rationale for the decision that totally existed on the matter.
If you are referring to the second amendment,
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Wait, what was that? "A well regulated Militia"?

The second amendment is, quite obviously, the government's right to create organized forces in order to better the common good, such as police or a standing army. No where in the original documents was there any law pertaining to ordinary civilians owing weapons. The founding fathers never even addressed the issue.
As for your second point, that is a part that most people are willing to budge on, as it actually provides as a tool in that circumstance. How to enforce that, however, is a different matter entirely.

As for danhezee's post,
No, it is not a "tool," it is a "weapon." An object that has little outside of the realm of tearing through human flesh at high velocity and range.

[danhezee]

Um even without quote after quote of the founding fathers basically stating that citizen owning guns keeps the government at bay. The declaration of independence, everything else in the entire constitution, alludes to armed citizen prevent tyrannical governments.

And there is the Federalist Papers, which aren't taught in school, written by the founding father explaining what the constitution means. I have a copy of it at my parent's house it is like a 1000 pages. I havent read all of it, it is a very tough read. And there are parts in the federalist papers that state armed citizens will prevent tyranny.

Edit:

an example of the Federalist papers

To these would be opposed a militia amounting to near half a million of citizens with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from among themselves, fighting for their common liberties, and united and conducted by governments possessing their affections and confidence. It may well be doubted, whether a militia thus circumstanced could ever be conquered by such a proportion of regular troops. Those who are best acquainted with the last successful resistance of this country against the British arms, will be most inclined to deny the possibility of it. Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of.

James Madison wrote that and as you see the word militia meant exactly what it means today a military force that is raised from the civil population to supplement a regular army. Not the regular army.

[CommieBuffalo]

I don't understand why people think guns should be legal for self defense. Leaving a guy dead or bleeding out on the floor isn't self defense, it's killing someone. If someone honestly wanted to shoot you, having a gun wouldn't save anyone, you'd be dead before you could take it out.

The purpose of a gun made for self-defense is not for killing. It is a tool to stop someone, not to kill. Guns used for self-defense are supposed to stop the assailant for enough time so you can call the proper cops and probably an ambulance.
That said, I don't see why people would need the heavy-weight, military stuff in their homes. It is not like you need a full-auto assault rifle to fend off a couple of robbers. If you do, then shit, look for somewhere else to live. That neighbourhood is really fucked up.
Guns for self-defense and hunting, though? I see no reason to be excessively restrictive on the guns themselves, just make sure it is a person that will actually use that gun for its intended purpose, not some sociopathic dipshit getting that gun for robbery or murder.

[Fleischgeruch]

I wonder what horrors do you have in USA that other countries don't so that everyone needs to carry a weapon (not really a shovel since guns are designed specifically to kill or cripple). *cough* terrorism, no doubt.
And lol at using hunting as an excuse. That's just one more reason to ban guns for civilians imo.

so if they find one in daddys closet they dont go all like pew pew pew BANG while playing cowboys and indians,

Wouldn't be surprised if you did this a few times tbh.

I'm still confused about the whole 'you must protect yourself against your own government' thing. Isn't that kind of a foundation for anarchy? So at a slight disagreement between the public and the government you have another civil war? Then again I don't know jack about politics and should probably stop talking.

just make sure it is a person that will actually use that gun for its intended purpose, not some sociopathic dipshit getting that gun for robbery or murder.

I think in most countries that allow guns for private ownership they do background checks, history of illness/criminal record etc.

tl;dr giving everyone death tools (not spades) will probably bring more harm than good in the end

[danhezee]

I wonder what horrors do you have in USA that other countries don't so that everyone needs to carry a weapon (not really a shovel since guns are designed specifically to kill or cripple). *cough* terrorism, no doubt.
And lol at using hunting as an excuse. That's just one more reason to ban guns for civilians imo.

so if they find one in daddys closet they dont go all like pew pew pew BANG while playing cowboys and indians,

Wouldn't be surprised if you did this a few times tbh.

I'm still confused about the whole 'you must protect yourself against your own government' thing. Isn't that kind of a foundation for anarchy? So at a slight disagreement between the public and the government you have another civil war? Then again I don't know jack about politics and should probably stop talking.

just make sure it is a person that will actually use that gun for its intended purpose, not some sociopathic dipshit getting that gun for robbery or murder.

I think in most countries that allow guns for private ownership they do background checks, history of illness/criminal record etc.

tl;dr giving everyone death tools (not spades) will probably bring more harm than good in the end

Switzerland lets their citizens own guns. And they didnt get invaded in either of the world wars. In 3 days they were ready to fend off an invasion from Germany but it never happened. Armed citizens are a deterrent to invasion. Which is a foreign government being tyrannical. And I believe you and everyone else can relate to defending yourself against a foreign threat.

As far as I know Switzerland's gun violence isn't near as high as America's. That leads me to believe that it is something else besides the gun triggering the violence. It is the person behind the gun. I think, and it is simply my belief not fact, it is education reform and not gun reform that would lower the crime rate. I think the people committing these horrible acts of violence would still be able to get their hands on guns regardless of a change in policy, so I dont see the need in taking guns away from the honest people that have not and would not commit a crime with their guns.

"you must protect yourself against your own government" that comes from reading anything by the founding fathers.. They say it, they say every government including the one they are setting up will seek absolute control and they only way to prevent that is too overthrow it.

[bullets]

As an Australian, worked out pretty well here, leave the guns for a shooting range I say.

PS. What's the deal with Americans fearing Obamacare? It's a good concept and it works... Well at least in Australia.

I think your country has free health care provided by taxes. Obamacare is not that, it is law which makes it mandatory to purchase a product not from the government but from private corporations. As far as I know It is the first time a law has stated you have to buy something or face a penalty at least in the united states.

And I am against taking guns from citizens, it is like trying to ban shovels, wait I mean spades. It is a tool, a device, it is a piece of equipment. It can used to provide sustenance, defense, and offense. Large, heavy equipment, like a vehicle, require extensive training before you are allowed to legally operate it. I am for a more thorough gun education program. Teach children at a young age to treat guns with the utmost seriousness and respect.

Thanks for clearing that up.

[Venator]

I think access to a gun should be hard.
Not in the sense of having to do much for it or pay something.
Just taking time to get,and not just being able to walz into a place to grab a few guns.
Also what other people already said:Owning a small handgun for self protection is no big deal,but I dont believe people need or should own automatic rifles and that stuff.