Gun Control

[NeoV]

That's good BA, hide behind "it's in the 2nd amendment" - exactly what I am talking about. You are completely ignoring the issues.

 

[BA]

The constitution is the supreme law of the US. How is it not an issue?

If you wish to modify or repeal the 2nd amendment, why? Is it obsolete? Fundamentally unsound?

Stating a problem and offering no solution is at best irresponsible.

 

[jtusa]

Originally posted by: NeoV
my favorite topic here on AT

First of all, lets get a few things out of the way.

Those of you who really think that your right to 'bear arms' in relation to overthrowing the government like "the idea of the second amendment was that if this government that we set in place became tyrannical like that of england... the people have the right to form miltia and overthrow that government..."..wake up...this is 2004, good luck overthrowing the goverment with your local militia..please stop using this when discussing gun control.

Don't be so ignorant to think that the amount of guns owned by private citizens doesn't play a part in the preservation of our way life, either from our government or a foreign one. In a conventional war, yes, private citizens with their guns wouldn't hold a candle to the American war machine. Lets put forth a hypothetical situation. Say the President and Congress decide no more guns for citizens, period. Now, there's two ways they could get the guns: A) People turn them in(some will, most won't), and B) Take them. So, in order to go take them you have to put "boots on the ground" and go house to house to take them. That would be a disaster. There would be thousands of casualties for both the military and the private citizens. Believe me, there are more than enough people that take their Constitutional rights, particularly the 2nd Amendment, VERY seriously(myself included), to cause a major heartache for the forces unlucky enough to garner the task of confiscating privately owned guns. And no, they would not run over my house with a tank or bomb me if I fought back, so man-to-man is the only option.

Tabb basically summed it up - pistols, ok...rifles for hunting, ok.....anything beyond that...why?

Well, first off, I'm going to say, because I can. It's my right granted to me by the Constitution of the United States of America. Period. Now for those that take the Constitution and their individual rights seriously, that should be argument enough. Apparently you are not one of those so I will put forth an additional argument.

Sport and hobby. I own an "assault weapon". Do I hunt with it? No. Could it be used for hunting? Yes. I simply take my AR-15 variant to the rifle range or my buddy's farm and shoot at targets. Stupid and pointless and unnecessary? Think what you want. But I have an incredibly good time shooting that particular rifle and hanging out with friends while I do so.

An additional reason people like AR15s, AKs, Uzis, etc. is because they are a part of history. I could keep going into the reasons for owning "assault" weapons, but I'll stop there because I think you get the point.

Then there is glenn1, who apparently thinks that 'urbanites' don't know anything about guns because where he lives, guns are a 'way of life', and he apparently lives very far from 'urbanites'. It's a nice 'talking points' line, isn't it? Doesn't really mean much of anything though.

I think what glenn1 was getting at, is that in most parts of the country, gun related crime simply isn't a big issue. Very rarely will you here of assaults with guns in rural areas or small to midsize American towns and cities. Most gun crime is a big city problem(hence the Urbanites comment.)

Then there is always the guy who says "in the UK, crime actually went up when guns were banned, so gun control doesn't work.." The fact of the matter is that gun crimes make up less than half of one percent of all crimes recorded by the police in the UK-care to guess what percentage they are in the US?

Well yeah, when you include all crime into the equation I'm sure gun crime makes up a small percent.

Look - approximately 30,000 people are killed by guns in the US every single year. (yes, I know many more die in car accidents, but the comparison is entirely meaningless, nice try) We can all sit back and say that "guns don't shoot people, people shoot people", or "over my dead body", or any other NRA-talking point line, but if we fail to admit there is a problem there will never be progress. With the NRA so deeply entrenched into American politics, a complete ban on guns is never going to happen, so you can all relax. That being said, (and let me be the first to admit that the ASSAULT - wouldn't want to word it wrong and offend anyone - weapons ban was a very poorly constructed piece of legislation - well intentioned perhaps, but a poor end-product) you don't need an AK-47..you don't need to have a Glok - however the heck you spell it....you don't need armor-piercing bullets...you don't need a gun that can kill an elephant, you aren't hunting them....you don't need plastic weapons....you don't need guns that are more powerful than what our soldiers are using in Iraq....you don't need silencers......there has to be a line drawn somewhere. Gun shows need to have the same restrictions on purchasing that gun stores have...existing laws about gun-related crimes need to be enforced...I don't have all the answers, but I can admit this country has a problem.

First of all I just want to say there are several flaws in your above statement, but I won't go into them because some quick research with common sense applied will let you figure out what those flaws are. Second, if guns were never available to private citizens from the beginning and there were no corrupt and/or poor governments willing to sell illegal weapons to the masses, gun control might work. That's not the case though. Yes, the country does have a problem, but it's not the law-abiding citizens. It's the criminals. And by default any gun control measures put forth are only going to affect the law-abiding citizens, not the criminals. So it will do no good. If you banned guns, yes, gun related crime might drop, but I bet the rate of murders and assaults with weapons would about stay the same. If I want to kill somebody, I'm going to do it, be it with a gun, knife, bat, etc. If a gun isn't available, I'll just go to the next item on the list.

 

[imported_Condor]

Originally posted by: Hossenfeffer

Originally posted by: ajf3
So...

- Car manufacturers should be held liable and sued when someone kills a persion via a hit & run or an accident?
.
.
.
- The water company should be held liable and sued when someone drowns another in the water they supplied?

Maybe you're right - it probably would be a better, safer world without cars, knives, planes, baseball bats, extension cords, lamps, gas grills, gasoline, toasters, pencils, pillows, machetes, tvs, boxcutters, pipes, or water.

Face it - our guns are never going away. Guns don't commit crimes - criminals do.

I'm gonna go drive to work on my gun.
I'm gonna go clean a fish with my gun.
I'm gonna go take a ride on my gun.
I'm gonna go hit some balls with my gun.
I'm gonna go plug my christmas lights into my gun.
I'm gonna go fire up my gun and grill some steaks.
I'm gonna go fill my car up with my gun.
I'm gonna go make toast with my gun.
I'm gonna go take a test with my gun.
I'm gonna go lay down on my gun for a rest.
I'm gonna go clear the underbrush with my gun.
I'm gonna go watch my gun for an hour or two.
I'm gonna go open some boxes with my gun.
I'm gonna go build a gun scaffolding.
I'm gonna go drink a tall glass of gun.

Sorry, there is a fundamental difference between guns and the items you listed, namely primary uses. I won't sit and defence every gun control measure, but many don't seem too out of the question as far as reason goes. I don't "like" guns but I also don't see them going away and that's just fine by me.

How about "I'm going to feed my family with my gun."

Not that many hunters these days, but 30 years ago, there was a lot of that going on. I like to wear a sidearm when I am rock hunting in areas with lots of snakes too.

 

[imported_Condor]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: ajf3

Maybe you're right - it probably would be a better, safer world without cars, knives, planes, baseball bats, extension cords, lamps, gas grills, gasoline, toasters, pencils, pillows, machetes, tvs, boxcutters, pipes, or water.

Face it - our guns are never going away. Guns don't commit crimes - criminals do.

Nice try. Nobody is saying you get rid of cars, planes, baseball bats. The point is that their price will include their external costs to society. It's putting the cost of the burden of such objects on the people who choose to use them. There's a difference between taxing something and not having it.

Go after something real. Look at the cost of drug abuse, unprotected sex, or smoking to our health system. Either of those kill far more than guns every year. When it was normal to have a gun in every house in America, gun killings were much less than today, after all useless laws of today. Remember the Florida deal of the early 1990's? Remember the Kennesaw, GA and Half Day, Il deal?

 

[imported_Condor]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: jtusa4

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: jtusa4
Ted Kennedy's car has killed more people than my guns.

I have never gotten a ticket in my car or hurt anyone. But I pay insurance for it. Take personal responsibility for your decision to own a gun and pay for the societal costs. Mmmkay?

I do take personal responsibility as a gun owner. If I misused my guns I would pay the cost(prison). However, I do not misuse them so there is no societal costs I should have to pay.

I pay car insurance. The government forces me to. Even though I take personal responsibility and have never hurt anyone. Same goes for you and your possessions. You should have to pay insurance. The only reason people like you don't is because you refuse to take responsibility for your decisions.

I can't speak for everyone, but I don't drive my guns on the public highway. Since you brought it up, pedestrians in the cities should have to carry liability and personal injury insurance. There is a cause you could persue.

 

[imported_hscorpio]

Got any pics of your AR jtusa4? I got to shoot an AR before california banned them and it was so nice. I remember thinking it was going to kick a lot (I was around 12) and I was pleasantly surprised. Shooting my 30-30 was never as fun after that.

 

[imported_Condor]

Originally posted by: Tom
"the kids from columbine didnt get their weapons legally anyway"


The way they got weapons points out why the present laws are unenforceable, hardly an argument against changing them.

If the kids from Columbine hadn't been in a walled prison with grounds that were fenced and cross-fenced and denied any sort of defensive equipment they wouldn't have been entrapped victims. They were denied both fight and flight by a very misguided society.

 

[NeoV]

Nice Condor, make excuses for the Columbine killers with references to 'walled prisons'...nice....you are apparently denied common sense by the same misguided society.

JT, I respect the fact that you are a gun owner, and like I said, I don't want to take them away from you...but...we have the most violent society in the civilized world..yes, criminals commit crimes, but criminals aren't 'born' - people commit crimes and then become criminals.....I don't have the solution, but pretending that guns are no part of the problem is wrong in my opinion.....and really, you have to stop with the "going door to door" discussion - it's never going to happen, so don't use it as justification...and don't use the "if I wanted to commit a crime with a gun, and I couldn't find a gun, I'd just use something else" - good luck robbing a bank with a baseball bat - again, it's a poor excuse for defending gun ownership.

 

[jtusa]

Originally posted by: NeoV
Nice Condor, make excuses for the Columbine killers with references to 'walled prisons'...nice....you are apparently denied common sense by the same misguided society.

JT, I respect the fact that you are a gun owner, and like I said, I don't want to take them away from you...but...we have the most violent society in the civilized world..yes, criminals commit crimes, but criminals aren't 'born' - people commit crimes and then become criminals.....I don't have the solution, but pretending that guns are no part of the problem is wrong in my opinion.....and really, you have to stop with the "going door to door" discussion - it's never going to happen, so don't use it as justification...and don't use the "if I wanted to commit a crime with a gun, and I couldn't find a gun, I'd just use something else" - good luck robbing a bank with a baseball bat - again, it's a poor excuse for defending gun ownership.

Get some globalist as a President that lets the UN walk all over the US and you'll see gun confiscation happen, I guarantee it.

Yes, we do have a violent society, but blaming guns is far from the proper solution. The problem is that morals and discipline are dwindling in this country. Society as a whole is going downhill in the US and people don't want to admit that they are the problem so they blame it on something else, guns.

And you think you can't rob a bank without a gun? Go put a knife to a teller's throat and see if she gives you the money. My 2 cents say she will.

 

[imported_Condor]

Originally posted by: NeoV
Nice Condor, make excuses for the Columbine killers with references to 'walled prisons'...nice....you are apparently denied common sense by the same misguided society.

JT, I respect the fact that you are a gun owner, and like I said, I don't want to take them away from you...but...we have the most violent society in the civilized world..yes, criminals commit crimes, but criminals aren't 'born' - people commit crimes and then become criminals.....I don't have the solution, but pretending that guns are no part of the problem is wrong in my opinion.....and really, you have to stop with the "going door to door" discussion - it's never going to happen, so don't use it as justification...and don't use the "if I wanted to commit a crime with a gun, and I couldn't find a gun, I'd just use something else" - good luck robbing a bank with a baseball bat - again, it's a poor excuse for defending gun ownership.

No excuses. The responders had trouble getting the kids out of the building because it was locked down so tightly. Remember the vid of the one wounded kid being removed from the second story window? Had the same thing happened in the schools I attended, we would have bolted out the windows and into the buildings or the woods. One or two of us may have shot back.

 

[NeoV]

my apologies Condor, I thought you were referring to the killers and their 'tortured' school years....

JT...you blew it....some of what you were saying made sense, but then you had to say "Get some globalist as a President that lets the UN walk all over the US and you'll see gun confiscation happen, I guarantee it. "

Globalist, as in 'pass the global test' - I get it...too bad the context of what he was saying had nothing to do with the UN or any country other than our own...sad when a good mind goes to waste....

If you really think that under a Kerry presidency there will be a 'gun confiscation', then any futher discussion with you on any matter even remotely political is pointless..

 

[jtusa]

Originally posted by: NeoV
my apologies Condor, I thought you were referring to the killers and their 'tortured' school years....

JT...you blew it....some of what you were saying made sense, but then you had to say "Get some globalist as a President that lets the UN walk all over the US and you'll see gun confiscation happen, I guarantee it. "

Globalist, as in 'pass the global test' - I get it...too bad the context of what he was saying had nothing to do with the UN or any country other than our own...sad when a good mind goes to waste....

If you really think that under a Kerry presidency there will be a 'gun confiscation', then any futher discussion with you on any matter even remotely political is pointless..

You really need to watch the debate that was aired last week(or the week before). It was a debate between a lady sponsored by the UN and a gentleman from the NRA. The UN is proposing a treaty that makes private ownership of small arms illegal internationally. I can send you the torrent link for the debate if you'd like.

ETA: I never once mentioned Kerry, so you must think that Kerry is a globalist, so that should worry you even more. I'm a very skeptical person when it comes to "conspiracies" and world governments and such, but watching that debate scared the sh!t out of me, because it is real.

ETAA: If you think that the UN has nothing to do with our country when it comes to issues like this(or even politics in general), then discussing anything remotely political with you is pointless.

 

[Tom]

Originally posted by: Condor

Originally posted by: NeoV
Nice Condor, make excuses for the Columbine killers with references to 'walled prisons'...nice....you are apparently denied common sense by the same misguided society.

JT, I respect the fact that you are a gun owner, and like I said, I don't want to take them away from you...but...we have the most violent society in the civilized world..yes, criminals commit crimes, but criminals aren't 'born' - people commit crimes and then become criminals.....I don't have the solution, but pretending that guns are no part of the problem is wrong in my opinion.....and really, you have to stop with the "going door to door" discussion - it's never going to happen, so don't use it as justification...and don't use the "if I wanted to commit a crime with a gun, and I couldn't find a gun, I'd just use something else" - good luck robbing a bank with a baseball bat - again, it's a poor excuse for defending gun ownership.

No excuses. The responders had trouble getting the kids out of the building because it was locked down so tightly. Remember the vid of the one wounded kid being removed from the second story window? Had the same thing happened in the schools I attended, we would have bolted out the windows and into the buildings or the woods. One or two of us may have shot back.

So your solution is to improve ingress and egress in public schools, so only a few kids get killed and maimed, and then have gun battles between the perps and the rest of the kids ?

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: NeoV
Nice Condor, make excuses for the Columbine killers with references to 'walled prisons'...nice....you are apparently denied common sense by the same misguided society.

JT, I respect the fact that you are a gun owner, and like I said, I don't want to take them away from you...but...we have the most violent society in the civilized world..yes, criminals commit crimes, but criminals aren't 'born' - people commit crimes and then become criminals.....I don't have the solution, but pretending that guns are no part of the problem is wrong in my opinion.....and really, you have to stop with the "going door to door" discussion - it's never going to happen, so don't use it as justification...and don't use the "if I wanted to commit a crime with a gun, and I couldn't find a gun, I'd just use something else" - good luck robbing a bank with a baseball bat - again, it's a poor excuse for defending gun ownership.

Actually you can easily rob any bank with no weapon. Bank employees are prohibited from interfering with a robbery in progress, regardless of the presence of weapons. Many banks are held up using a note and nothing more. It's policty.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: NeoV
my favorite topic here on AT

First of all, lets get a few things out of the way.

Those of you who really think that your right to 'bear arms' in relation to overthrowing the government like "the idea of the second amendment was that if this government that we set in place became tyrannical like that of england... the people have the right to form miltia and overthrow that government..."..wake up...this is 2004, good luck overthrowing the goverment with your local militia..please stop using this when discussing gun control.

Tabb basically summed it up - pistols, ok...rifles for hunting, ok.....anything beyond that...why?

Then there is glenn1, who apparently thinks that 'urbanites' don't know anything about guns because where he lives, guns are a 'way of life', and he apparently lives very far from 'urbanites'. It's a nice 'talking points' line, isn't it? Doesn't really mean much of anything though.

Then there is always the guy who says "in the UK, crime actually went up when guns were banned, so gun control doesn't work.." The fact of the matter is that gun crimes make up less than half of one percent of all crimes recorded by the police in the UK-care to guess what percentage they are in the US?

Look - approximately 30,000 people are killed by guns in the US every single year. (yes, I know many more die in car accidents, but the comparison is entirely meaningless, nice try) We can all sit back and say that "guns don't shoot people, people shoot people", or "over my dead body", or any other NRA-talking point line, but if we fail to admit there is a problem there will never be progress. With the NRA so deeply entrenched into American politics, a complete ban on guns is never going to happen, so you can all relax. That being said, (and let me be the first to admit that the ASSAULT - wouldn't want to word it wrong and offend anyone - weapons ban was a very poorly constructed piece of legislation - well intentioned perhaps, but a poor end-product) you don't need an AK-47..you don't need to have a Glok - however the heck you spell it....you don't need armor-piercing bullets...you don't need a gun that can kill an elephant, you aren't hunting them....you don't need plastic weapons....you don't need guns that are more powerful than what our soldiers are using in Iraq....you don't need silencers......there has to be a line drawn somewhere. Gun shows need to have the same restrictions on purchasing that gun stores have...existing laws about gun-related crimes need to be enforced...I don't have all the answers, but I can admit this country has a problem.


And finally, Glenn1, you can take your arrogant attitude about cities - or 'blight infested sewers' as you so nicely put it, and stick it up your A - maybe you saw Compton in a movie, or read about it somewhere, but you clearly need to get out a bit more - and you don't need to use "hubristic" to make us think you aren't a redneck.

The right to bear arms against the government isn't so much about right to overthrow, althought that's implied, it's more about right to resist the tyrannical oppression of a government. That's where the 2nd ammendment shines. The government knows that if they wish to try to oppress me, they'll have to do so at the peril of the men they send to do their dirty work. It's the ultimate check/balance.

It makes absolutely no difference what percentage of crime guns make-up in Uk and Australia, what matters is that crime itself, violence ITSELF increased when those countries took away the ability of the common citizen to defend themselves. Gun control CAUSES crime increases, PERIOD. This fact is absolute and proven. Obviously it doesn't necessarily increase 'gun crime', but violence against innocents in general. Fact: guns banned = increased crime. Fact: more open gun rights in the US = declining crime. It's just that simple.

 

[PingSpike]

I do not wish to see citizens right to own pistols or rifles removed. But I think that the current laws should be enforced better.

Beyond that...I guess I just don't care.

 

[imported_Condor]

Originally posted by: NeoV
my apologies Condor, I thought you were referring to the killers and their 'tortured' school years....

..

I appreciate it, but you didn't hafta.