Gun Control: Hot or Not?

[DarkTemplarZero]

*yawn* I'll humor you.

First of all, I'm not arguing with you that allowing police to carry guns in order to prevent others from carrying guns is like having a huge stockpile of Nukes in order to force others to disarm their stockpiles; stupid and worthless. Police should not carry guns in civilian areas, neither should anyone else. Next, yeah, there is no moral difference, but the practical results are different, a police officer is trained to shoot as a last resort and to aim for non-fatal shots, whereas a scared civilian with a gun will probably shoot someone at the first sign of trouble right in the chest. You make a good point with the morality aspect, but as they say, in theory, practice is no different from theory.

[Mewtwo-D2]

I posted an article without checking it out thoroughly. That was unprofessional of me and below my usual standards. I'll delete it.


However- DTZ, you're ignoring completely the fact that criminals are criminals because they break the law. Why on earth would someone who is unwilling to follow laws about murder, rape, robbery, assault, etc. follow gun laws? What's more- most criminals already don't follow gun laws, so why would more make a difference?

Also- have you ever shot a gun? When you're in a crisis situation, you don't shoot for non-fatal areas. You shoot for the biggest target- namely, the torso. If you try to aim for the knee or the hand on someone threatening you physical harm, you're probably going to miss. You usually only get one chance, so to carry a gun, you better be willing to kill or be killed.

[Leon-IH]

Why on earth would someone who is unwilling to follow laws about murder, rape, robbery, assault, etc. follow gun laws?

Who said they'd follow them, it's just much harder for them to actually use a gun for their crimes.

Heres why gun control works, you can try to disagree with it, but you might not get far.


The difficulties relating to the purchase of guns if properly policed, if you've ever tried to buy a banned substance you'd know you can't just say "I'm going to buy some heroin" and then go out and do it in most cases.

The inability to perform a crime out of anger on the spot (takes all of 3 seconds to shoot someone, while it takes a LOT longer to choke someone to death) because you don't have a loaded gun in your home or workplace.

The people you'd have to deal with in order to get a gun would put some people off too.

[Mewtwo-D2]

The people you'd have to deal with in order to get a gun would put some people off too.

And the people who really wanted to commit murder and mayhem? The people who aren't going to be put off are the people I would especially not want having a gun. Also- the people selling guns would be in organized crime. Great idea! Let's strengthen those scumbags even more. We didn't have enough drug smuggling and sex slavery, so let's make them even richer with arms smuggling! Also, let's make it impossible for private citizens or police to stand up to organized crime. If police can't carry guns into civilian areas, where do you think organized crime is going to set up?

In America, the Supreme Court has ruled that the job of the police is to uphold the law, not to protect private citizens. My security should not rest on anyone else- I am responsible for my own body and my own property. The thing with gun control that you can't argue is that it makes people weak and dependent. With a gun, I have the ability to fight back against the criminals who wish to harm me, my loved ones, and take my property, regardless of how they are armed. Without a gun, I am dependent on my ability to get to a phone, police response time, and my ability to appease the criminal long enough that there is a minor chance they'll get caught. Also why is it that you hardcore pro-gun control make no distinctions between the average law-abiding citizen and trigger happy ghetto rats? (Note: ghetto rats come in all colors and economic levels- their distinguishing marks are a belief that crime is cool and the urge to destroy everything good or beautiful)

Read interviews with criminals- they are less likely to commit a crime on someone they suspect is carrying a gun. If 0% of reported rapes involved a firearm, aren't I much safer from the possibility of rape by carrying a firearm?

[DarkTemplarZero]

Blademaster: If I didn't think that lame ass banner in your sig was serious, I'd sig it for comedy, but I just feel bad for you

M2: No offense, but your points flat out suck. Go get laid before you argue with me jk jk, don't stalk me and kill me with your chosen modus operandi.
First of all, google how to build a gun. I defy you to find something that's not either a bad air gun or a cheesey high school physics experiment in magnetism. Bombs I admit are fairly straightforward, a gun requires a bit more precision, otherwise at best you have something that'll blow up in your face.
And really, I don't see how this topic of people liking to use weapons other than guns relates to gun control, if there are no guns then what's the effect on people who like to kill each other with half-eaten cereal bars let's say? The point is that it's just much more efficient to kill people with guns than with cereal bars. You try to go on a rampage with a knife, you won't get very far, with a handgun on the other hand you can easily and effectively kill a large number of people without too much threat of retaliation unless they have a gun as well.

[mr_pikachu]

You try to go on a rampage with a knife, you won't get very far, with a handgun on the other hand you can easily and effectively kill a large number of people without too much threat of retaliation unless they have a gun as well.

Bombs I admit are fairly straightforward

I shouldn't have to explain how these quotes relate to one another. But considering how you seem to like ignoring the logical arguments of others, maybe it's necessary.

Guns kill one person at a time in rapid succession. Bombs kill a lot of people simultaneously.

Numbers are fun!

[DarkTemplarZero]

True, numbers are fun. However, bombs are not, but I don't see how the issue of whether or not it should be easy to buy a gun relates to the fact that with a little bit of effort you can make something go boom. However simple it may be to cut apart batteries and do whatever else to make an explosion, it's still far easier to go to a store in Virginia and buy a gun.

And don't mistake disagreeing with ignoring "logical arguments", for lack of a better term.

[Mewtwo-D2]

on the other hand you can easily and effectively kill a large number of people without too much threat of retaliation unless they have a gun as well.

Thank you for proving my point. If I have a gun, I can stop a shooting spree, thus saving many innocent lives.


Also- building a gun isn't too difficult. My dad showed me how. Anyone who's been in the military can show you how.

[Last Exile]

The 2nd Amendment was written during the bloody Civil War when the whole damn US was scared all the time and arms were required. It's nearly 200 years down the track now. Who the bloody hell do people need to bear arms against now? The conditioning that has gone into making that many people believe guns are necessary is just sad. They're not necessary. This is the 21st century. Change the damn law and outlaw guns. Every other major country that did this had their critics and said it would never work and that it wouldn't reduce gun-related crime. Yet it did. Don't hide behind the excuse of the US being a unique situation or that it's the bullet or the person firing the gun that kills people that removes guns from having responsibility. Guns provide the easiest way to kill someone. Why allow them to circulate so freely?

[DarkTemplarZero]

Umm Roy, if I was living in Los Angeles I would need a rifle. Preferably a minigun or something similar that's capable of several thousand rounds a minute. Just in case some African-American youth who's a member of a gang decides I'm a buster fool and a playerhater and that he wants to pop a cap or whatever it is they say. Little does he know that I'm a trap star and that I'll put 200 warning shots right in his face Hahah jk jk.

http://www.unicri.it/wwd/analysis/ic...0OWNERSHIP.pdf
^ An interesting study. Apparently homicide rates are much lower in countries that have very strict gun laws, i.e. the UK, etc. Woo.

[Mewtwo-D2]

The 2nd Amendment was written during the bloody Civil War when the whole damn US was scared all the time and arms were required. It's nearly 200 years down the track now. Who the bloody hell do people need to bear arms against now? The conditioning that has gone into making that many people believe guns are necessary is just sad. They're not necessary. This is the 21st century. Change the damn law and outlaw guns. Every other major country that did this had their critics and said it would never work and that it wouldn't reduce gun-related crime. Yet it did. Don't hide behind the excuse of the US being a unique situation or that it's the bullet or the person firing the gun that kills people that removes guns from having responsibility. Guns provide the easiest way to kill someone. Why allow them to circulate so freely?

There are just so many things wrong with your post, I hardly know where to begin... I guess at the beginning.

1) Revolutionary War. The Constitution was written in 1789 and ratified in 1791- the Civil War was fought between 1860-1865. Clear? Okay.
2) Needed guns because we were "scared"? How about "Needed guns because most of the continent was a fucking wilderness, and people needed guns to provide food for their families and protect themselves from criminals where there was no one to enforce the law."
3) Who do we need to bear arms against? Let's start with the most common one- CRIMINALS. Like all countries, America has crime. Unlike many countries, people in America have the right to defend themselves against criminals. There's also the reason the 2nd Amendment was written- to defend against tyrannical governments. What has every dictator in history done first? De-arm the populace. You can't rule an armed population through fear and terror.
4) It's the 21st century? Oh, goody! I guess all violent crimes will stop now that you have made that astute observation. Hey, criminals! It's the 21st century! Rape, murder, and armed robbery are now primitive as well as bad, so you'd better stop it.
5) No, it really didn't reduce crimes. Fewer people were shot, but more people were stabbed or bludgeoned to death, and rape and robbery statistics skyrocketed. Criminals, like everyone else, prefer to operate in the simplest way possible- they are very unlikely to attempt an assault on an individual they believe is armed. Don't believe me? Read interviews with mafioso's and other gangsters. They're happy when their potential victims are disarmed.
6) It's the price of avoiding tyranny. I have the right to live free, and I have the right to prevent anyone from infringing on my rights. I have the rights to my life and property, and therefore, logically, I have the right to protect both.

Bottom line, you fail American history, you fail elementary psychology, and you fail on world history.

[Last Exile]

1. You didn't have a big army then, granted. You have the biggest army in the world now, you have numerous armed police forces. They are your protection. I don't recall being vigilante as being a factor for the greater good. Furthermore, the 2nd Amendment wasn't written for the general public. It was written for STATE MILITAS! NOT for the general public. The 2nd Amendment was taken out of context from Day 1 and still is. That's American History. You are not in a war, you are not under attack. Stop living in fear!

2. You have just admitted you live in constant fear! Fear of being overrun, fear of being defenseless, fear or not being able to stick it to someone who sticks it to you?! If you're meant to be the greatest democracy on Earth, what the bloody hell do you have to fear?! You've got the bombs, you've got the armies, the power but you're still afraid. Because the world no longer lives in awe of the US. And we shouldn't. Is that not the definition of a tyranny? Why on earth should 6 billion other people live the way that a country that has only 270 odd million decides is fit for the rest of the world? This isn't colonial times, Civil War, WWI, WWII, Cold War, Gulf War. Wars in the Middle East are fought far, far away from your comfy home where you can sleep at night without the worry of a shell blowing you to smithereens or militia running into your home. What the bloody hell do you have to fear? Criminals. Okay. You make guns and ammo so easily obtainable that anyone with the moolah could access them even if they're the biggest dickbrain alive. So make them unaccessible. I repeat - every other bloody country that ever outlawed guns had their critics, but you know what? We're much safer for having done so!

3. Tyranny? TYRANNY?! You call disarming the general population tyrannical?! Well excuse me! Australia wanted them banned after we had, and what still is, the biggest gun massacre in modern history. Yes, we did. Martin Bryant, a very mentally sick person, bought a gun via normal means and randomly killed 35 people, for which he is imprisoned for life and will never see the light of day. That's more than Virgina, than Columbine, than all of them. How did we feel? Bloody mortified. We didn't want anyone to do this again! So we banned those bloody guns. But we do allow the odd but of game hunting, we do allow recreational use of guns under appropriate conditions. Even professional shooters/gun-users in Australia don't have problems with it. They think this is just fine and that it is for the greater good. Australia, England, virtually all of the western block of Europe, India - guns are illegal and the population wanted that to be so! Even countries with larger populations with yours have far less gun-related deaths than yours. And here's the strange part - the other forms of crime DON'T go up to compensate! That is a complete load of crap. There is a difference between perception and truth. If you honestly believe everything a gangster or crook says, you are a prisoner of fear. If you believe everything the media says, you are a prisoner of fear for they are the biggest circulators of it. You are a prisoner of their tyrrany. There is truth in the media, but only when it is profitable. If fear and lies are profitable, they will do whatever it takes to make you believe that. You are a prisoner of fear and they have won the battle versus people like you.

4. So shoot them before they shoot you? That's really responsible. You've just admitted once again, you live in fear and terror of what MIGHT happen! Yes, what MIGHT happen! There is a dark side to humanity, bad things happen because ultimately there is the capability for anyone to be evil. OF COURSE VIOLENT CRIME IS GOING TO HAPPEN! Did I ever bloody say it didn't?! Don't put words into my mouth or twist what I said. Crimes happen because of people. THAT'S WHY THE POLICE EXIST! Police may not be perfect but for the greater part they do their bloody job. We may not approve of all their means but they get the job done and they make the world a safer place. YOU ARE NOT THE LAW! So you think having a weapon and having the right to kill someone, just because it's in self defense, makes you any better than a criminal?! Killing someone is killing someone, murder is murder. Unless it is in war, on the battlefield, IT'S MURDER. It's vigilante warfare. Yeah, that's living free - not. No thanks, I don't want to live like that.

5. You are deluded if you think all tyrannical governments disarm the population. Iran, Iraq before Saddam's fall, Yemen, North Korea, the African states under tyrannical rule. They were all given the right to bear arms. And look what happened to them. Look what happened to them once they decided to arm themselves once their loonie took over. Living in constant fear, believing in the right to bear arms against the POTENTIAL of being attacked. This line of thinking, of fear of the unknown - this is what breeds paranoia and being a prisoner of fear. This ISN'T freedom. It's the exact opposite.

Your argument falls flat. Your claims are as ill-founded as any I have ever seen. You contradict yourself every few sentences. You are a prisoner of the fear and tyranny that you claims to be against and free of. You fail at aruging, at history, but most of all, as being a free person. You are the opposite. You have done everything criminals and terrorists wanted people like you to do. You are a prisoner of fear. You are a prisoner of self-inflicted tyranny. You are the ultimate failure.

You are the ultimate failure.

[Roy Karrde]

The difficulties relating to the purchase of guns if properly policed, if you've ever tried to buy a banned substance you'd know you can't just say "I'm going to buy some heroin" and then go out and do it in most cases.

You must not have been to many Southern American Cities. If I am going to go get a few grams of heroin all I have to do is go to South Dallas. Same goes with Pot and many other substances. It may cost alot, but many Police do not have the man power to patrol some of the more gang related areas. If there is a illigal market place for it, then it will be available to anyone that is willing to look.

The inability to perform a crime out of anger on the spot (takes all of 3 seconds to shoot someone, while it takes a LOT longer to choke someone to death) because you don't have a loaded gun in your home or workplace.

Yes becuase it took OJ Simpson so long to strangle two people to death. Oh wait he stabbed both of them. If people are going to kill some one out of anger they will find a way, either by guns, by knives, by nunchucks, anything.

The people you'd have to deal with in order to get a gun would put some people off too.

This holds really no weight, why? Becuase if you want to do something, if you really want something, if it is a gun, or drugs, or bombs. You will get it eventually. No matter how many hoops you jump over.

Police should not carry guns in civilian areas,

Okay Good friend, I am going to have to call Bull Shit on this. I have lived through one shooting in my life. It took place in a Public Area where just two hundred feet away two gangs opened fire on eachother. Shootings in Public Places do happen, and a Cop should have a weapon to not only protect himself but the civilians around him.

[Mewtwo-D2]

Also, forgot a few points:

1) You can build guns in your own home with not a ton of difficulty.
2) Most serial killers and mass murderers do not use guns- serial killers tend to favor strangulation, stabbing, and poisoning as their modus operandi, and most mass murderers favor explosives.
3) One of the most effective bombs is a standard 25 gallon propane tank- available at your local gas station for under $50.
4) Building bombs, making molotov cocktails, and mixing napalm are not difficult processes, and walkthrus are available online.
5) Death by strangulation or by beating may expend more effort, but are not terribly difficult all things considered. If you are angry enough to shoot someone and have that little control over yourself, you are angry enough to kill them in any way possible.
6) A good kitchen knife will slice through bone like hot butter.
7) Anything can be made into a weapon by someone with some ingenuity. ANYTHING.

[Leon-IH]

1) You can build guns in your own home with not a ton of difficulty.

I could use that argument to propose a removal of a ban on explosives, given it's possible to make some extremely easily in your own back yard.

2) Most serial killers and mass murderers do not use guns- serial killers tend to favor strangulation, stabbing, and poisoning as their modus operandi, and most mass murderers favor explosives.

Somehow though, I'd rather someone try to strangle or stab me, then be able to kill me in 3 seconds from 10 yards. I can at least have a vague opportunity to defend myself against someone with a knife or who is trying to choke me, and I'd like that chance.

3) One of the most effective bombs is a standard 25 gallon propane tank- available at your local gas station for under $50.

Indeed it is. But it's still far more difficult to do than walking down to your local hardware store, buying a gun and some bullets then shooting me.

4) Building bombs, making molotov cocktails, and mixing napalm are not difficult processes, and walkthrus are available online.

Theres walk throughs to making freaking personal hovercrafts like those on old sci-fi cartoons online. Also, it's actually slightly more difficult to make and use these effectively than it is to shoot someone.

5) Death by strangulation or by beating may expend more effort, but are not terribly difficult all things considered. If you are angry enough to shoot someone and have that little control over yourself, you are angry enough to kill them in any way possible.

It's a great deal more difficult to kill someone with your hands than with a gun, generally speaking people don't totally snap for long enough to choke someone to death (it's surprisingly difficult).

6) A good kitchen knife will slice through bone like hot butter.

I still rate my chances better at 2 feet than at 10.

7) Anything can be made into a weapon by someone with some ingenuity. ANYTHING.

Sure, I could probably choke someone to death with my computer mouse, I could also kill them with a chair leg if I wanted to. But, my point is, you can't spontaneously go berserk and kill someone with ingenuity, they just don't go together.

I'm not saying that banning guns works on premeditated attacks, because even if they can't get a gun, you can with enough planning kill someone with damn near anything, no disputing that. However, it does have something of a change on ones ability to just snap and shoot someone.


Got to admit Roy, I've not been to the states, I wouldn't go by choice, in part because Americans seem to be perfectly happy to put up with all sorts of things that we wouldn't have down here (e.g. your workplace laws, gun laws, choice of presidents). That said, I doubt it's as easy to get drugs as "go to bad area of town, purchase drugs" I suspect there's a little more to it than that (that said, maybe our drug dealers are a little more wary than yours).

[Roy Karrde]

Got to admit Roy, I've not been to the states, I wouldn't go by choice, in part because Americans seem to be perfectly happy to put up with all sorts of things that we wouldn't have down here (e.g. your workplace laws, gun laws, choice of presidents). That said, I doubt it's as easy to get drugs as "go to bad area of town, purchase drugs" I suspect there's a little more to it than that (that said, maybe our drug dealers are a little more wary than yours).

For one man that was a pretty cheap shot on Bush. Second if you have not been to the states then you probably do not know the Constitutional Reason for having guns. Think of it as a failsafe, the creators had just faced a overwhelming army and a tyranical Government who did not care about the people. Mind you I will preface that with that is their opinion so that we don't start any historical debates. Anyway think of the Second Amendment as their way of making sure that their creation does not go Frankenstein on them. That their creation doesn't turn against the people. Ala the Government should fear the people, the people shouldnt fear the Government.

Take away Guns, take away the Second Amendment, you don't just risk being over run by criminals, but you risk that one day the Government will become so overpowerful and controlling that the people will have no choice but to bend to it's will.

Also just to add, getting drugs is just that easy, infact easier as you can usually drive up to a street corner and they will come to your window. So if you are careful enough to venture in and not get shot, you can get almost any drug for the cost.

[Mewtwo-D2]

I could use that argument to propose a removal of a ban on explosives, given it's possible to make some extremely easily in your own back yard.

I was just pointing out that a ban on guns would not prevent criminals from getting them by any stretch of the imagination. They can buy them illegally, or they can build them themselves.

Somehow though, I'd rather someone try to strangle or stab me, then be able to kill me in 3 seconds from 10 yards. I can at least have a vague opportunity to defend myself against someone with a knife or who is trying to choke me, and I'd like that chance.

And since your argument was against people snapping suddenly in anger and shooting, why would they be 10 yards away from you? Again, if guns made people more prone to violence, then why are there never shootings at gun shows, gun stores, and shooting ranges? Also- why were there no school shootings and a far lower crime rate when guns were in almost every home and were easily available everywhere?

Indeed it is. But it's still far more difficult to do than walking down to your local hardware store, buying a gun and some bullets then shooting me.

Actually, it's much easier.
1) Buy propane tank
2) Set it up where you want to commit mayhem
3) Pop the cap and light it

1) Go to hardware store and choose a model of gun
2) Fill out forms
3) Fill out forms
4) Fill out forms
5) Provide proof of competency
6) Submit to standard 3-day waiting period longer on some weapons
7) Buy bullets
8) Clean and test gun
9) Find person you want to kill
10) Shoot him

It's easier to buy and murder someone with a crossbow than it is a gun.

Theres walk throughs to making freaking personal hovercrafts like those on old sci-fi cartoons online. Also, it's actually slightly more difficult to make and use these effectively than it is to shoot someone.

No, it's really not.
-Bombs: too many to list, but not at all difficult to make.
-Molotov cocktails: kerosene, bottle, rag, lighter. That's all it is.
-Napalm: bezene and polystyrene mixed with gasoline. Not difficult at all.

With shooting, you have to aim. With those, you just throw and everyone dies.

It's a great deal more difficult to kill someone with your hands than with a gun, generally speaking people don't totally snap for long enough to choke someone to death (it's surprisingly difficult).

Generally people don't snap.

I still rate my chances better at 2 feet than at 10.

Perhaps, but it is easier to hit a moving target with a knife as opposed to a gun.

Sure, I could probably choke someone to death with my computer mouse, I could also kill them with a chair leg if I wanted to. But, my point is, you can't spontaneously go berserk and kill someone with ingenuity, they just don't go together.

Most non-psychotics don't spontaneously go berserk. And actually, most impromptu murders involve impromptu weapons.

I'm not saying that banning guns works on premeditated attacks, because even if they can't get a gun, you can with enough planning kill someone with damn near anything, no disputing that. However, it does have something of a change on ones ability to just snap and shoot someone.

But you're not answering how many people do that.

Also, for the drugs, I once lived in Reston, VA. Beautiful area, the first planned community in America, very, VERY upscale. We had a drug dealer who parked on top of our hill every Friday night, to sell cocaine to the rich kids.

[Heald]

Guns ought to be banned. They're so gauche. They need to be banned so people think up more inventive ways of killing each other.

Think about it: how many people do you hear getting shot? And how many people do you hear getting killed through interpretive dance? Exactly. People have gotten boring and predictable. If everyone has a gun, people are always ready for each other, and thus, if someone pulls out a gun, chances are someone else has a gun too, and therefore someone is going to go down like Monica.

However, take the guns out of the equation, and instead of hearing about 'another' school shooting, you hear about some Chinese kid who massacred several of his classmates with trained killer bees, or two guys who decide Columbine is too conventional and decide to blow up all reason with a context bomb. What about an army of trained squirrels that fire darts out of bamboo pipes? What about playing a tune on the ukulele of death that is so bizarre that it literally melts the victim?

And when was the last time you heard of someone strangling another person with their feet?

Yes, it is certainly true that people will kill each other, whether or not they have guns, so ban the guns and tap into that creative strain! The dimension-skipping volkswagen of doom awaits.

[Blademaster]

a police officer is trained to shoot as a last resort and to aim for non-fatal shots

If I didn't know you were serious, I'd sig that quote for purposes of comedy.