The only thing I agree with maybe is the reporting of stolen weapons. Lawmakers should focus on harsher sentencing for people who possess firearms illegally or who try to buy firearms illegally. There is an enforcement problem going after people who aren't supposed to buy guns who go out and try to buy them anyway.
And crackdown on morons who leave loaded weapons where they can be picked up by young kids.
I expected most of this forum to jump on my comment and I was right.
A handgun is designed for the express purpose of hurting/killing another human being. In a society that outlaws assault/murder and disregarding historical precedent why should it be a fundamental right to own such a weapon?
I agree that guns are not the only part of the problem. It is the American attitude toward guns that is the problem (easily seen the the thread where a woman shot an intruder and 95% of the people posting agreed this was 100% justified) and seen in this thread.
Many countries (ignore the 3rd world) with fewer guns and importantly less of a 'gun culture' suffer far far less shooting.
The trend is clear.
Guns rule in terms of effectiveness. If means of violence are readily accessible they will be used.
Sweet! Now if we can make it a requirement for gun dealers and shooting range to have facilities on the premise to handle emergency services and hospital admitting privileges just in case something goes wrong. Maybe California will also make it so that in order to buy a gun and ammo they will require proof that all a buyers taxes (income, property, child support, dmv) are paid and they are current. It would probably help to also male it that all five are required to be painted pink and have at least one penis drawn on it. I think guns should probably have a speaker built into them that above that there is a fun present so that people will know when they aren't in a fun free zone.
Lastly, it should be legal to fire employees who own guns or at least have the ability for employers to prevent employees from spending money paid to them on guns.
I really need to believe this is sarcasm, no one is this stupid.
I expected most of this forum to jump on my comment and I was right.
A handgun is designed for the express purpose of hurting/killing another human being. In a society that outlaws assault/murder and disregarding historical precedent why should it be a fundamental right to own such a weapon?
I agree that guns are not the only part of the problem. It is the American attitude toward guns that is the problem (easily seen the the thread where a woman shot an intruder and 95% of the people posting agreed this was 100% justified) and seen in this thread.
Many countries (ignore the 3rd world) with fewer guns and importantly less of a 'gun culture' suffer far far less shooting.
The trend is clear.
Guns rule in terms of effectiveness. If means of violence are readily accessible they will be used.
Because example 1084897586th showing prohibition doesnt work.
Well it works in other countries but they dont already have 300 million guns. So yeah it wont work here. Pandoras box and all that. People will die every day and I just hope it isnt me.
This is the country with 300 million guns as god intended.
As a Canadian I love these threads.
Seems like America still hasn't gotten the memo that nobody can get shot if nobody has a gun.
France had more mass shootings than the US had last year. Again, if you really did care about the victims of mass shootings, (Which I doubt you do) you would be more of an advocate more mental health in the US.
http://crimeresearch.org/2016/01/fr...during-obamas-entire-presidency-508-to-424-2/
It is our right to own handguns because we don't think tools are necessarily evil. Just because something was designed to hurt people doesn't mean it will be used to hurt people. We don't need a nanny state government telling us what is ok and what isn't.
The vast majority of people who own handguns and indeed all types of guns never use them for any unlawful purpose. Just because a tiny minority of people use them to kill and hurt others does not mean the majority should give up their guns.
The greater good when it comes to guns is protecting the rights of those who never intend to hurt another.
Murder and hurting people is already illegal. Banning guns won't change that.
Yes guns are designed to kill people. But the Constitution was not written to limit the power of the people... it was written to limit the power of the government.
Statistics show violent crime has been trending down. Yes there are ~32,000 gun deaths in the U.S. per year. About ~20,000 of those are suicides. Of the remaining 12,000 the majority are gang/drug related. Taking those two groups into consideration.. gun death statistics in the U.S. are basically irrelevant considering the population size and the number of guns that are owned.
You are going to have to deal with it. People will not give up their guns. You want to stop gun violence... well work on better mental health solutions and figure out how to get gang members to stop murdering each other.
As an American I love the stories about the Canadians who use firearms to defend themselves from people like Michael Zehaf-Bibeau.
You all thought Kevin Vickers was a hero for killing MZB at work but you'd turn around and deny Vickers the right to protect himself in his own home.
Also you fail to recognize what utter disasters your gun control measures have been...like the CDN$2 billion you squandered on the Long Gun Registry and like how you fools can't summon the nerve to stop the Mohawks from smuggling guns into Canada across their reserve.
And then you're all shocked when the RCMP ignores not just what few gun rights you people have left but it also ignored basic search and seizure rights when they broke into homes in High River in their lawless zeal to disarm the citizenry.
Yep, I just LOVE those stories where your government rapes your rights and you people complain only a little while consoling yourselves that you're just too polite to protest the soft tyranny of Ottawa.
Hard to believe that you Canadians were once so fierce that German divisions feared you and that when the US, UK, and AnZac couldn't get something done it was Canadian troopers who were called upon to do the impossible.
Seriously, that you'd so willingly give up the rights that were secured for you in the blood of the Princess Pats' and the RCR pisses me off. You don't deserve their sacrifice and you determination to be a serf shits all over the principles those men fought for.
At the moment, it only take four and the "right" case for you to have the right to bear arms only in government service. You know, like serfs did.All it takes 5 supreme court justices to say that the 2nd amendment doesn't say what it says. Anybody who cares about gun rights can't vote Hillary.
Too bad there wasn't a non-evil concealed carry holder there, for in the land of the blind the one-eyed man is king.none of these kids will ever need kisses from mommy again:
Hmm. Strict licensing requirements, storage requirements, government with total control over who may be armed . . .Fuck you. I grew up in Bosina. Tell me about war.
Hmm. Strict licensing requirements, storage requirements, government with total control over who may be armed . . .
Obviously Bosnia must be an extremely safe place with a government that loves its citizens.
none of these kids will ever need kisses from mommy again:
What if it said a well regulated militia. What would you do then?
Me. Weren't you paying attention? Seriously, I was just talking about gun laws in Bosnia.Who was talking about gun laws in Bosnia?
Pretty sure that gays can merry because of that right to pursue happiness bidness. Merry & happiness, they goes together.and where does it say gays can merry? or men can use womens bathrooms?
Libs love to expand the meaning of the constitution only when it suits them.
Why stop there, let's have unannounced door to door searches as well as random vehicle checkpoints to search cars for violators, if you are going to go violate the constitution might as well go all the way.Sweet! Now if we can make it a requirement for gun dealers and shooting range to have facilities on the premise to handle emergency services and hospital admitting privileges just in case something goes wrong. Maybe California will also make it so that in order to buy a gun and ammo they will require proof that all a buyers taxes (income, property, child support, dmv) are paid and they are current. It would probably help to also male it that all five are required to be painted pink and have at least one penis drawn on it. I think guns should probably have a speaker built into them that above that there is a fun present so that people will know when they aren't in a fun free zone.
Lastly, it should be legal to fire employees who own guns or at least have the ability for employers to prevent employees from spending money paid to them on guns.
Well it works in other countries but they dont already have 300 million guns. So yeah it wont work here. Pandoras box and all that. People will die every day and I just hope it isnt me.
This is the country with 300 million guns as god intended.
Wa...wa....wah.... Blah...blah...blah
It's a state law... If you don't like it, move to another state!
Grow a pair, and stop your bitching. If the people of X state want this or that (the majority)... That's that... Move or conform.
But don't move to Hawaii...Hawaii, has some of the strictest gun laws around, and I like it!!! I voted for it... Good luck getting a conceal and carry permit here in Hawaii.
Wa...wa....wah.... Blah...blah...blah
It's a state law... If you don't like it, move to another state!
Grow a pair, and stop your bitching. If the people of X state want this or that (the majority)... That's that... Move or conform.
But don't move to Hawaii...Hawaii, has some of the strictest gun laws around, and I like it!!! I voted for it... Good luck getting a conceal and carry permit here in Hawaii.
It is a small minority that is causing the problem. But what advantage does owning a handgun give oneself? Does it improve your standard of living? Quality of life? No it does nothing of this sort. People will say that it gives you protection but that point is moot if everyone you are trying to protect yourself from also has a gun (arguably you are less safe). Simply put if there is no violence/violent people a gun is near meaningless for defensive purposes. Likewise if everyone has a gun nobody is safe.
In my opinion the issue isn't so much gun ownership but the gun mentality in the USA (which you nicely illustrated). Its the "I'm going to shoot someone cause they walked on my lawn attitude."
Did I say eliminate all the guns? No. My point is make guns a privilege not a right. There is no need for contemporary society in a first world country to give its citizens 'rights' to possess killing machines (ie handguns that serve no other purpose).
How the heck does your last sentence even make sense? America is the only first world country with these kinds of gun/social problems. Canadians as far as the average goes live longer and have a higher standard of living. Its a different perspective on life.
Nevertheless there are three main arguments presented in favour of firearms.
1) Defence
2) Constitution
3) Its too hard so why bother.
First is easily disproven - other first world countries are much better off.
Second argument is historical (not relevant as many things which were done in the past are not done today, often for good reason). You live in a different world compared to when the constitution was written. Third argument is perhaps the most practical - but you have to start somewhere.
But nobody has given a real fundamental reason why guns should be part of modern society.