Guns are bad, mmmmkay?

#1 Posted by farrell2k (5808 posts) -

Why is it that Americans are the only people in the modern world who just can't seem to understand that guns are dangerous and make you less safe? It seems like Americans are always the last to learn anything!

http://news.yahoo.com/texas-police-chief-shot-dead-during-traffic-stop-041459378.html?bcmt=comments-postbox

The argument is that is you are not armed, you are a "victim", and yet we have an armed police chief shot and dead, a victim. The only thing that would have saved this cop's life is no one having guns, yet that flies completely over the heads of my fellow Americans...

#3 Edited by airshocker (29036 posts) -

Why is it that people around the world can't seem to understand that guns aren't inherently dangerous? People are.

The vast majority of gun crime is committed by people who DO NOT have permits or are not allowed to legally own a gun. So really, I'm not sure what you people are talking about.

Also, this is even more reason to be armed. Police aren't always capable of saving people. I might be a cop but I always try and persuade people to get armed.

#4 Posted by farrell2k (5808 posts) -

Why is it that people around the world can't seem to understand that guns aren't inherently dangerous? People are.

The vast majority of gun crime is committed by people who DO NOT have permits or are not allowed to legally own a gun. So really, I'm not sure what you people are talking about.

Yes, people are dangerous, which is why more people with guns means more gun violence. I love when detractors make my point for me. Thank you!

#5 Edited by Ackad (3158 posts) -

Guns are tools of death...just like knives, scissors, hammers, saws, and so on. If you carry any of the things that I mentioned, then you cannot lack common on using it properly. It's some of the idiots in America that are giving guns a bad name.

#6 Edited by airshocker (29036 posts) -

@farrell2k said:

@airshocker said:

Why is it that people around the world can't seem to understand that guns aren't inherently dangerous? People are.

The vast majority of gun crime is committed by people who DO NOT have permits or are not allowed to legally own a gun. So really, I'm not sure what you people are talking about.

Yes, people are dangerous, which is why more people with guns means more gun violence. I love when detractors make my point for me. Thank you!

So are cars, yet we allow people the privilege of driving with a proper license. Just because something is capable of being used violently doesn't mean it should be banned.

You haven't made any points, actually. You've conceded the fact that the majority of gun crime isn't committed by legal gun owners. Now you're just flailing.

Actually, you've made one point: You've given more evidence as to the fact that cops aren't always able to protect everybody.

#7 Posted by airshocker (29036 posts) -
@Ackad said:

Guns are tools of death...just like knives, scissors, hammers, saws, and so on. If you carry any of the things that I mentioned, then you cannot lack common on using it properly. It's some of the idiots in America that are giving guns a bad name.

Guns are tools. Just because they can be used to kill doesn't make them tools of death.

Are you saying everyone in America are idiots? If not you may want to change that last sentence.

#8 Posted by toast_burner (21428 posts) -

@Ackad said:

Guns are tools of death...just like knives, scissors, hammers, saws, and so on. If you carry any of the things that I mentioned, then you cannot lack common on using it properly. It's some of the idiots in America that are giving guns a bad name.

The only thing you listed there that is a tool of death is guns. Hammers can be used to kill, but they aren't designed to kill.

#9 Posted by ferrari2001 (16811 posts) -

I've got a gun in my house. Surprisingly the gun has yet to kill me.

#10 Posted by SpartanMSU (3440 posts) -

Switzerland.

#11 Posted by airshocker (29036 posts) -

I've got a gun in my house. Surprisingly the gun has yet to kill me.

I think you need to get another gun to protect yourself. Obviously, if we're to believe the TC, your life is in great danger.

#12 Edited by Ackad (3158 posts) -

@Ackad said:

Guns are tools of death...just like knives, scissors, hammers, saws, and so on. If you carry any of the things that I mentioned, then you cannot lack common on using it properly. It's some of the idiots in America that are giving guns a bad name.

Guns are tools. Just because they can be used to kill doesn't make them tools of death.

Are you saying everyone in America are idiots? If not you may want to change that last sentence.

I was going mainly towards liberals who are constantly blaming guns. Hence the word some.

#13 Posted by airshocker (29036 posts) -

@Ackad said:

@airshocker said:
@Ackad said:

Guns are tools of death...just like knives, scissors, hammers, saws, and so on. If you carry any of the things that I mentioned, then you cannot lack common on using it properly. It's some of the idiots in America that are giving guns a bad name.

Guns are tools. Just because they can be used to kill doesn't make them tools of death.

Are you saying everyone in America are idiots? If not you may want to change that last sentence.

I was going mainly towards liberals who are constantly blaming guns. Hence the word some.

To me that reads like you're calling all Americans idiots. Not trying to nit pick, just letting you know.

#14 Edited by foxhound_fox (87668 posts) -

I'm Canadian and think guns in the hands of responsible citizens are inherently safe and a good way to supplement law enforcement efforts where their response time might be too slow to save a life or where a situation happens so quickly there is no time to call them.

I also believe that guns in the hands of citizens are essential to the protection of a society from a police state/dictatorship. Sometimes it baffles me how people trust so much in their government and police force.

#15 Posted by Flubbbs (2966 posts) -

@airshocker said:

Why is it that people around the world can't seem to understand that guns aren't inherently dangerous? People are.

The vast majority of gun crime is committed by people who DO NOT have permits or are not allowed to legally own a gun. So really, I'm not sure what you people are talking about.

Yes, people are dangerous, which is why more people with guns means more gun violence. I love when detractors make my point for me. Thank you!

gun violence has dropped 49% since 1993, so youre wrong

#16 Posted by EasyComeEasyGo (584 posts) -

Guns don't kill people, people kill people.

#17 Posted by farrell2k (5808 posts) -

@farrell2k said:

@airshocker said:

Why is it that people around the world can't seem to understand that guns aren't inherently dangerous? People are.

The vast majority of gun crime is committed by people who DO NOT have permits or are not allowed to legally own a gun. So really, I'm not sure what you people are talking about.

Yes, people are dangerous, which is why more people with guns means more gun violence. I love when detractors make my point for me. Thank you!

So are cars, yet we allow people the privilege of driving with a proper license. Just because something is capable of being used violently doesn't mean it should be banned.

You haven't made any points, actually. You've conceded the fact that the majority of gun crime isn't committed by legal gun owners. Now you're just flailing.

Actually, you've made one point: You've given more evidence as to the fact that cops aren't always able to protect everybody.

Cops aren't able to protect everyone, especially themselves, despite the fact that they have guns too. The only thing that would have stopped this cops death is if none of them had a gun.

You like the car analogy so much, so then let's regulate guns as much as cars. I am all for licensure, registration, mandatory training and insurance.

I'm Canadian and think guns in the hands of responsible citizens are inherently safe and a good way to supplement law enforcement efforts where their response time might be too slow to save a life or where a situation happens so quickly there is no time to call them.

I also believe that guns in the hands of citizens are essential to the protection of a society from a police state/dictatorship. Sometimes it baffles me how people trust so much in their government and police force.

Please. You live in a country with less than 200 gun murders per year with much stricter gun regulation. The U.S. literally has 50x the amount of gun murders and much less regulation, despite the fact that ownership rates between the two countries are about the same with Canada having an ownership rate of about 28% and the U.S. 34%. Canada is a shining example of gun regulation working for the safety of the people.

Switzerland.

Military service required which is why ownership rates are so high, about 27% of the population. Still less than Canada. Regulations are very strict. One must be permitted to carry in public and guns cannot be loaded. You also need to be a member of a gun club. Permits are not typically given to average citizens. Mostly given to people with security type jobs. Switzerland is another fine example that gun regulation worls for the benefit of the people. Japan is another fine example. They outlawed private gun ownership and now see less than 800 violent crimes per year, despite being a country of 120,000,000 people. Gun regulation working again.

I've got a gun in my house. Surprisingly the gun has yet to kill me.

It's not necessarily the gun in your house that will kill you, but the stranger who has one pointed at you probably will.

#18 Posted by airshocker (29036 posts) -

Cops aren't able to protect everyone, especially themselves, despite the fact that they have guns too. The only thing that would have stopped this cops death is if none of them had a gun.

You like the car analogy so much, so then let's regulate guns as much as cars. I am all for licensure, registration, mandatory training and insurance.

Nothing that we do will be able to stop death entirely. Even if you try and take away guns, you'll never get them all. So your solution is to piss away with everyone's freedom in an attempt to stop something that can't be stopped? Real logical. I would rather be free and have that 1% chance that I'll be killed with a firearm. As opposed to having the same chance of dying by a gun and not having my freedom.

Because it's appropriate. We do regulate guns as much as cars. We even regulate them more: Most states require a permit to own a handgun, you also have to go through a background check when buying a firearm in every state. You don't need a background check to get a car.

Firearms don't need liability insurance because even though we have millions of guns in this country, the average citizen is far safer with them than they are with their cars.

You're not doing so well in the point department. Maybe you need to actually figure out what it is you're talking about before you run your mouth.

#19 Posted by foxhound_fox (87668 posts) -

@farrel2k: I also live in a country with a tenth of the population of the US. And most gun crime in Canada are perpetrated with illegal guns. So no, we aren't a shining example of gun control.

#20 Posted by thegerg (14857 posts) -
#21 Posted by lostrib (34428 posts) -

Yes, I'm sure banning guns will keep violent criminals from getting them

#22 Posted by thegerg (14857 posts) -

@Flubbbs said:

@farrell2k said:

@airshocker said:

Why is it that people around the world can't seem to understand that guns aren't inherently dangerous? People are.

The vast majority of gun crime is committed by people who DO NOT have permits or are not allowed to legally own a gun. So really, I'm not sure what you people are talking about.

Yes, people are dangerous, which is why more people with guns means more gun violence. I love when detractors make my point for me. Thank you!

gun violence has dropped 49% since 1993, so youre wrong

Listen, this is OT. Take your facts and leave!

#23 Edited by PurpleLabel (301 posts) -

Why is it that Americans are the only people in the modern world who just can't seem to understand that guns are dangerous and make you less safe? It seems like Americans are always the last to learn anything!

http://news.yahoo.com/texas-police-chief-shot-dead-during-traffic-stop-041459378.html?bcmt=comments-postbox

The argument is that is you are not armed, you are a "victim", and yet we have an armed police chief shot and dead, a victim. The only thing that would have saved this cop's life is no one having guns, yet that flies completely over the heads of my fellow Americans...

I agree.

#24 Posted by Korvus (3206 posts) -

What I can't figure out is if whether everybody in the US owns a gun because the criminals have them or if criminals have them because everybody owns a gun. All countries have crimes but I have never witnessed/heard of anybody using a gun to rob someone in any of the places I have lived in...I'm sure it has happened, but definitely not to the extent that it happens in the US...I mean, for crying out loud, almost every time someone tried to rob me their threat would be that they would punch me in the mouth...only got threatened with a knife once, and calling that a knife is being generous, you could probably use it to clean under your nails...not even sure if it was long enough to pierce all the skin layers =P

#25 Posted by airshocker (29036 posts) -

@farrell2k said:

Why is it that Americans are the only people in the modern world who just can't seem to understand that guns are dangerous and make you less safe? It seems like Americans are always the last to learn anything!

http://news.yahoo.com/texas-police-chief-shot-dead-during-traffic-stop-041459378.html?bcmt=comments-postbox

The argument is that is you are not armed, you are a "victim", and yet we have an armed police chief shot and dead, a victim. The only thing that would have saved this cop's life is no one having guns, yet that flies completely over the heads of my fellow Americans...

I agree.

LOL. Yeah, because John Wilkes Booth would have given up because he couldn't use a gun. Are you trolling?

#26 Posted by PurpleLabel (301 posts) -

@purplelabel said:

@farrell2k said:

Why is it that Americans are the only people in the modern world who just can't seem to understand that guns are dangerous and make you less safe? It seems like Americans are always the last to learn anything!

http://news.yahoo.com/texas-police-chief-shot-dead-during-traffic-stop-041459378.html?bcmt=comments-postbox

The argument is that is you are not armed, you are a "victim", and yet we have an armed police chief shot and dead, a victim. The only thing that would have saved this cop's life is no one having guns, yet that flies completely over the heads of my fellow Americans...

I agree.

LOL. Yeah, because John Wilkes Booth would have given up because he couldn't use a gun. Are you trolling?

I like how that is what you get out of it. Keep thinking about it.

#27 Posted by airshocker (29036 posts) -

I like how that is what you get out of it. Keep thinking about it.

If you were trying to make my own point, only subtler, you forgot to take into account that there are people who actually think that way on this forum. It's an attitude I've had to deal with it.

#28 Posted by lostrib (34428 posts) -

@purplelabel said:

I like how that is what you get out of it. Keep thinking about it.

If you were trying to make my own point, only subtler, you forgot to take into account that there are people who actually think that way on this forum. It's an attitude I've had to deal with it.

It's a joke...abe lincoln would still be dead because he was born over 200 years ago

#29 Posted by Ackad (3158 posts) -

@Ackad said:

@airshocker said:
@Ackad said:

Guns are tools of death...just like knives, scissors, hammers, saws, and so on. If you carry any of the things that I mentioned, then you cannot lack common on using it properly. It's some of the idiots in America that are giving guns a bad name.

Guns are tools. Just because they can be used to kill doesn't make them tools of death.

Are you saying everyone in America are idiots? If not you may want to change that last sentence.

I was going mainly towards liberals who are constantly blaming guns. Hence the word some.

To me that reads like you're calling all Americans idiots. Not trying to nit pick, just letting you know.

Never that, only some people, but I see where you're coming from. I should've made a quick edit, but oh well.

#30 Posted by PurpleLabel (301 posts) -

@lostrib said:

@airshocker said:

@purplelabel said:

I like how that is what you get out of it. Keep thinking about it.

If you were trying to make my own point, only subtler, you forgot to take into account that there are people who actually think that way on this forum. It's an attitude I've had to deal with it.

It's a joke...abe lincoln would still be dead because he was born over 200 years ago

lol. ^^^

#31 Edited by farrell2k (5808 posts) -

@Flubbbs said:

@farrell2k said:

@airshocker said:

Why is it that people around the world can't seem to understand that guns aren't inherently dangerous? People are.

The vast majority of gun crime is committed by people who DO NOT have permits or are not allowed to legally own a gun. So really, I'm not sure what you people are talking about.

Yes, people are dangerous, which is why more people with guns means more gun violence. I love when detractors make my point for me. Thank you!

gun violence has dropped 49% since 1993, so youre wrong

Of course it has. The Brady bill was passed at the end of 93, and gun ownership has decline by 13% from 47% in the 70s to 34% today. It exactly prove my point.

@lostrib said:

Yes, I'm sure banning guns will keep violent criminals from getting them

It worked for the Japanese. They banned private ownership and made penalties for carrying a gun so harsh that even the Yakuza are afraid to be caught with one. Less than 35 crime with a gun yearly in Japan with a population of 120,000,000 people. Gun regulation works, and when taken seriously works well. You are perpetuating that ignorant, paranoid gun nut argument that somehow it's impossible to keep guns away from criminals, when we know for a fact that it is very possible.

@thegerg said:

@Flubbbs said:

@farrell2k said:

@airshocker said:

Why is it that people around the world can't seem to understand that guns aren't inherently dangerous? People are.

The vast majority of gun crime is committed by people who DO NOT have permits or are not allowed to legally own a gun. So really, I'm not sure what you people are talking about.

Yes, people are dangerous, which is why more people with guns means more gun violence. I love when detractors make my point for me. Thank you!

gun violence has dropped 49% since 1993, so youre wrong

Listen, this is OT. Take your facts and leave!

Brady bill passed in 93 and gun ownership at its lowest levels in the u.s. since the 70s. Pretty simple.

@farrel2k: I also live in a country with a tenth of the population of the US. And most gun crime in Canada are perpetrated with illegal guns. So no, we aren't a shining example of gun control.

Nonsense. You have 1/10th the population, but 1/50th the amount of gun murders. 30,000,000 people with less than 200 annual gun murders. 300,000,000 in the u.s. with more than 10,000 gun murders per year. Ownership rates are nearly the same between our countries. 28% you to 34% u.s.

@farrell2k said:

Cops aren't able to protect everyone, especially themselves, despite the fact that they have guns too. The only thing that would have stopped this cops death is if none of them had a gun.

You like the car analogy so much, so then let's regulate guns as much as cars. I am all for licensure, registration, mandatory training and insurance.

Nothing that we do will be able to stop death entirely. Even if you try and take away guns, you'll never get them all. So your solution is to piss away with everyone's freedom in an attempt to stop something that can't be stopped? Real logical. I would rather be free and have that 1% chance that I'll be killed with a firearm. As opposed to having the same chance of dying by a gun and not having my freedom.

Because it's appropriate. We do regulate guns as much as cars. We even regulate them more: Most states require a permit to own a handgun, you also have to go through a background check when buying a firearm in every state. You don't need a background check to get a car.

Firearms don't need liability insurance because even though we have millions of guns in this country, the average citizen is far safer with them than they are with their cars.

You're not doing so well in the point department. Maybe you need to actually figure out what it is you're talking about before you run your mouth.

So your "freedom" to own a gun trumps someone's freedom to live. Nice. This is why you get nowhere with irrational gun nuts.

I remember during the Bush administration every single person in New Orleans was disarmed and their weapons confiscated. Not a whimper from anyone because no matter what you have, you are never a match for the government. Confiscation worked and kept people safe.

We do not regulate guns nearly as much as cars. We live in a country where in 33 of 50 states you can buy a gun at a garage sale, no background check required, no registration required, no license required, no training required, and no insurance required. How do you think "criminals" get their guns, from some imaginary "black market"? Hell no, they buy them in private sales, legally!

#32 Posted by PurpleLabel (301 posts) -

@Flubbbs said:

@farrell2k said:

@airshocker said:

Why is it that people around the world can't seem to understand that guns aren't inherently dangerous? People are.

The vast majority of gun crime is committed by people who DO NOT have permits or are not allowed to legally own a gun. So really, I'm not sure what you people are talking about.

Yes, people are dangerous, which is why more people with guns means more gun violence. I love when detractors make my point for me. Thank you!

gun violence has dropped 49% since 1993, so youre wrong

Of course it has. The Brady bill was passed at the end of 93, and gun ownership has decline by 13% from 47% in the 70s to 34% today. It exactly prove my point.

@lostrib said:

Yes, I'm sure banning guns will keep violent criminals from getting them

It worked for the Japanese. They banned private ownership and made penalties for carrying a gun so harsh that even the Yakuza are afraid to be caught with one. Less than 35 crime with a gun yearly in Japan with a population of 120,000,000 people. Gun regulation works, and when taken seriously works well. You are perpetuating that ignorant, paranoid gun nut argument that somehow it's impossible to keep guns away from criminals, when we know for a fact that it is very possible.

@thegerg said:

@Flubbbs said:

@farrell2k said:

@airshocker said:

Why is it that people around the world can't seem to understand that guns aren't inherently dangerous? People are.

The vast majority of gun crime is committed by people who DO NOT have permits or are not allowed to legally own a gun. So really, I'm not sure what you people are talking about.

Yes, people are dangerous, which is why more people with guns means more gun violence. I love when detractors make my point for me. Thank you!

gun violence has dropped 49% since 1993, so youre wrong

Listen, this is OT. Take your facts and leave!

Brady bill passed in 93 and gun ownership at its lowest levels in the u.s. since the 70s. Pretty simple.

@foxhound_fox said:

@farrel2k: I also live in a country with a tenth of the population of the US. And most gun crime in Canada are perpetrated with illegal guns. So no, we aren't a shining example of gun control.

Nonsense. You have 1/10th the population, but 1/50th the amount of gun murders. 30,000,000 people with less than 200 annual gun murders. 300,000,000 in the u.s. with more than 10,000 gun murders per year. Ownership rates are nearly the same between our countries. 28% you to 34% u.s.

@airshocker said:

@farrell2k said:

Cops aren't able to protect everyone, especially themselves, despite the fact that they have guns too. The only thing that would have stopped this cops death is if none of them had a gun.

You like the car analogy so much, so then let's regulate guns as much as cars. I am all for licensure, registration, mandatory training and insurance.

Nothing that we do will be able to stop death entirely. Even if you try and take away guns, you'll never get them all. So your solution is to piss away with everyone's freedom in an attempt to stop something that can't be stopped? Real logical. I would rather be free and have that 1% chance that I'll be killed with a firearm. As opposed to having the same chance of dying by a gun and not having my freedom.

Because it's appropriate. We do regulate guns as much as cars. We even regulate them more: Most states require a permit to own a handgun, you also have to go through a background check when buying a firearm in every state. You don't need a background check to get a car.

Firearms don't need liability insurance because even though we have millions of guns in this country, the average citizen is far safer with them than they are with their cars.

You're not doing so well in the point department. Maybe you need to actually figure out what it is you're talking about before you run your mouth.

So your "freedom" to own a gun trumps someone's freedom to live. Nice. This is why you get nowhere with irrational gun nuts.

I remember during the Bush administration every single person in New Orleans was disarmed and their weapons confiscated. Not a whimper from anyone because no matter what you have, you are never a match for the government. Confiscation worked and kept people safe.

We do not regulate guns nearly as much as cars. We live in a country where in 33 of 50 states you can buy a gun at a garage sale, no background check required, no registration required, no license required, no training required, and no insurance required. How do you think "criminals" get their guns, from some imaginary "black market"? Hell no, they buy them in private sales, legally!

You believing you can get guns away from all the criminals lol. Visit Detroit please.

#33 Posted by lostrib (34428 posts) -

@lostrib said:

Yes, I'm sure banning guns will keep violent criminals from getting them

It worked for the Japanese. They banned private ownership and made penalties for carrying a gun so harsh that even the Yakuza are afraid to be caught with one. Less than 35 crime with a gun yearly in Japan with a population of 120,000,000 people. Gun regulation works, and when taken seriously works well. You are perpetuating that ignorant, paranoid gun nut argument that somehow it's impossible to keep guns away from criminals, when we know for a fact that it is very possible.

Um, that's a completely different country and culture. I mean, the US can't even keep illegal immigrants and illicit drugs from crossing the boarder, I doubt we'll be able to keep guns out.

#34 Posted by farrell2k (5808 posts) -

@lostrib said:

@farrell2k said:

@lostrib said:

Yes, I'm sure banning guns will keep violent criminals from getting them

It worked for the Japanese. They banned private ownership and made penalties for carrying a gun so harsh that even the Yakuza are afraid to be caught with one. Less than 35 crime with a gun yearly in Japan with a population of 120,000,000 people. Gun regulation works, and when taken seriously works well. You are perpetuating that ignorant, paranoid gun nut argument that somehow it's impossible to keep guns away from criminals, when we know for a fact that it is very possible.

Um, that's a completely different country and culture. I mean, the US can't even keep illegal immigrants and illicit drugs from crossing the boarder, I doubt we'll be able to keep guns out.

Yes, because the Japanese are a magical breed of humans that can do things no one else can. You are just making stupid excuses.

#35 Posted by PurpleLabel (301 posts) -

@lostrib said:

@farrell2k said:

@lostrib said:

Yes, I'm sure banning guns will keep violent criminals from getting them

It worked for the Japanese. They banned private ownership and made penalties for carrying a gun so harsh that even the Yakuza are afraid to be caught with one. Less than 35 crime with a gun yearly in Japan with a population of 120,000,000 people. Gun regulation works, and when taken seriously works well. You are perpetuating that ignorant, paranoid gun nut argument that somehow it's impossible to keep guns away from criminals, when we know for a fact that it is very possible.

Um, that's a completely different country and culture. I mean, the US can't even keep illegal immigrants and illicit drugs from crossing the boarder, I doubt we'll be able to keep guns out.

Yes, because the Japanese are a magical breed of humans that can do things no one else can. You are just making stupid excuses.

It's a completely different culture. Try visiting there, and see what we are talking about.

#36 Posted by foxhound_fox (87668 posts) -

@farrel2k: You avoided my point about gun crime in Canada involving mostly illegal guns.

#37 Posted by lostrib (34428 posts) -

@lostrib said:

Um, that's a completely different country and culture. I mean, the US can't even keep illegal immigrants and illicit drugs from crossing the boarder, I doubt we'll be able to keep guns out.

Yes, because the Japanese are a magical breed of humans that can do things no one else can. You are just making stupid excuses.

No, but it's a significantly different culture and country.

Also, in the US you would have to amend the constitution, which isn't exactly easy.

#38 Posted by farrell2k (5808 posts) -

You believing you can get guns away from all the criminals lol. Visit Detroit please.

Don't have to go to Detroit. I can instead go to neighboring pro-gun, Republican Gary, Indiana which has a 3x higher rate of gun murder per capita than Detroit.

#39 Edited by PurpleLabel (301 posts) -

@farrell2k said:

@purplelabel said:

You believing you can get guns away from all the criminals lol. Visit Detroit please.

Don't have to go to Detroit. I can instead go to neighboring pro-gun, Republican Gary, Indiana which has a 3x higher rate of gun murder per capita than Detroit.

There's no reasoning with you. You're comparing a state to a city.

#40 Posted by plageus900 (993 posts) -

I'm still waiting for my pistol to grow legs and walk up to me and blow my head off.

#41 Edited by airshocker (29036 posts) -

So your "freedom" to own a gun trumps someone's freedom to live. Nice. This is why you get nowhere with irrational gun nuts.

I remember during the Bush administration every single person in New Orleans was disarmed and their weapons confiscated. Not a whimper from anyone because no matter what you have, you are never a match for the government. Confiscation worked and kept people safe.

We do not regulate guns nearly as much as cars. We live in a country where in 33 of 50 states you can buy a gun at a garage sale, no background check required, no registration required, no license required, no training required, and no insurance required. How do you think "criminals" get their guns, from some imaginary "black market"? Hell no, they buy them in private sales, legally!

Constitutional rights trump pretty much everything. When the right to bear arms is needed for so many things, exceptions have to be made. You want absolute security, go live in a bunker. The vast majority of gun owners haven't killed anybody, nor have they done any kind of wrong with their firearms. Why are you having such a hard time realizing that?

You are misrepresenting the situation. Not every single firearm was confiscated. It was an extremely small amount, actually. And it was primarily being done by FLEOs and military service members. Not for nefarious reasons, either. What this actually goes to show is that you need to be armed to protect your property in the case of emergency. The federal government sure wasn't able to do a lot in the very beginning.

Yes, we actually do. Federal law prohibits many more things concerning firearms than they do with cars. Actually, criminals mostly obtain handguns by theft. Handguns are the most regulated and they have the most red tape attached to them when it comes to trying to sell them.

#42 Edited by airshocker (29036 posts) -

@lostrib said:

@farrell2k said:

@lostrib said:

Yes, I'm sure banning guns will keep violent criminals from getting them

It worked for the Japanese. They banned private ownership and made penalties for carrying a gun so harsh that even the Yakuza are afraid to be caught with one. Less than 35 crime with a gun yearly in Japan with a population of 120,000,000 people. Gun regulation works, and when taken seriously works well. You are perpetuating that ignorant, paranoid gun nut argument that somehow it's impossible to keep guns away from criminals, when we know for a fact that it is very possible.

Um, that's a completely different country and culture. I mean, the US can't even keep illegal immigrants and illicit drugs from crossing the boarder, I doubt we'll be able to keep guns out.

Yes, because the Japanese are a magical breed of humans that can do things no one else can. You are just making stupid excuses.

Every culture is different. The Japanese have a much higher respect for authority than Americans do, for instance. You really don't know what you're talking about.

#43 Edited by farrell2k (5808 posts) -

@farrell2k said:

@purplelabel said:

You believing you can get guns away from all the criminals lol. Visit Detroit please.

Don't have to go to Detroit. I can instead go to neighboring pro-gun, Republican Gary, Indiana which has a 3x higher rate of gun murder per capita than Detroit.

There's no reasoning with you. You're comparing a state to a city.

Gary, Indiana is a city. Detroit, Illinois is a city...

@lostrib said:

@farrell2k said:

@lostrib said:

Um, that's a completely different country and culture. I mean, the US can't even keep illegal immigrants and illicit drugs from crossing the boarder, I doubt we'll be able to keep guns out.

Yes, because the Japanese are a magical breed of humans that can do things no one else can. You are just making stupid excuses.

No, but it's a significantly different culture and country.

Also, in the US you would have to amend the constitution, which isn't exactly easy.

Which I take it means to you that they are somehow special and no one else could emulate their position on guns? It used to be culturally acceptable to own slaves. We somehow managed to change our culture to get past that. Sorry, but the "it's a different culture" is a stupid excuse straight from the NRA playbook. Weak sauce.

@farrel2k: You avoided my point about gun crime in Canada involving mostly illegal guns.

What's to avoid? I'd wager that a good amount of the gun crimes in the U.S. also involve illegal guns. You still have 50x few gun murders despite having nearly the same levels of ownership.

#44 Posted by lostrib (34428 posts) -

@lostrib said:

@farrell2k said:

@lostrib said:

Um, that's a completely different country and culture. I mean, the US can't even keep illegal immigrants and illicit drugs from crossing the boarder, I doubt we'll be able to keep guns out.

Yes, because the Japanese are a magical breed of humans that can do things no one else can. You are just making stupid excuses.

No, but it's a significantly different culture and country.

Also, in the US you would have to amend the constitution, which isn't exactly easy.

Which I take it means to you that they are somehow special and no one else could emulate their position on guns? It used to be culturally acceptable to own slaves. We somehow managed to change our culture to get past that. Sorry, but the "it's a different culture" is a stupid excuse straight from the NRA playbook. Weak sauce.

Actually you're the only one who keeps saying that

#45 Posted by PurpleLabel (301 posts) -

@purplelabel said:

@farrell2k said:

@purplelabel said:

You believing you can get guns away from all the criminals lol. Visit Detroit please.

Don't have to go to Detroit. I can instead go to neighboring pro-gun, Republican Gary, Indiana which has a 3x higher rate of gun murder per capita than Detroit.

There's no reasoning with you. You're comparing a state to a city.

Gary, Indiana is a city. Detroit, Illinois is a city...

@lostrib said:

@farrell2k said:

@lostrib said:

Um, that's a completely different country and culture. I mean, the US can't even keep illegal immigrants and illicit drugs from crossing the boarder, I doubt we'll be able to keep guns out.

Yes, because the Japanese are a magical breed of humans that can do things no one else can. You are just making stupid excuses.

No, but it's a significantly different culture and country.

Also, in the US you would have to amend the constitution, which isn't exactly easy.

Which I take it means to you that they are somehow special and no one else could emulate their position on guns? It used to be culturally acceptable to own slaves. We somehow managed to change our culture to get past that. Sorry, but the "it's a different culture" is a stupid excuse straight from the NRA playbook. Weak sauce.

@foxhound_fox said:

@farrel2k: You avoided my point about gun crime in Canada involving mostly illegal guns.

What's to avoid? I'd wager that a good amount of the gun crimes in the U.S. also involve illegal guns. You still have 50x few gun murders despite having nearly the same levels of ownership.

I just looked at a map. Indiana is a state. A state can't be a republican, that's a person.

#46 Edited by Korvus (3206 posts) -

Yes, because the Japanese are a magical breed of humans that can do things no one else can. You are just making stupid excuses.

#47 Edited by Flubbbs (2966 posts) -

@farrell2k said:

Of course it has. The Brady bill was passed at the end of 93, and gun ownership has decline by 13% from 47% in the 70s to 34% today. It exactly prove my point.

lol its not 34%.. they did a gallup poll just a couple years ago that had it estimated at 47%. i wouldnt be suprised if it was higher than that, i know if somebody called me and asked me questions about my guns i would say i didnt own any

#48 Edited by farrell2k (5808 posts) -

@airshocker said:
@farrell2k said:

@lostrib said:

@farrell2k said:

@lostrib said:

Yes, I'm sure banning guns will keep violent criminals from getting them

It worked for the Japanese. They banned private ownership and made penalties for carrying a gun so harsh that even the Yakuza are afraid to be caught with one. Less than 35 crime with a gun yearly in Japan with a population of 120,000,000 people. Gun regulation works, and when taken seriously works well. You are perpetuating that ignorant, paranoid gun nut argument that somehow it's impossible to keep guns away from criminals, when we know for a fact that it is very possible.

Um, that's a completely different country and culture. I mean, the US can't even keep illegal immigrants and illicit drugs from crossing the boarder, I doubt we'll be able to keep guns out.

Yes, because the Japanese are a magical breed of humans that can do things no one else can. You are just making stupid excuses.

Every culture is different. The Japanese have a much higher respect for authority than Americans do, for instance. You really don't know what you're talking about.

Presuppositional apologetics are weak and easily defeated because they presuppose that attitudes about something cannot change, when we know they clearly can.

See: Slavery, Women's suffrage, the civil right movement, the gay rights movement, and the legalization of pot.

#49 Posted by PurpleLabel (301 posts) -

@airshocker said:
@farrell2k said:

@lostrib said:

@farrell2k said:

@lostrib said:

Yes, I'm sure banning guns will keep violent criminals from getting them

It worked for the Japanese. They banned private ownership and made penalties for carrying a gun so harsh that even the Yakuza are afraid to be caught with one. Less than 35 crime with a gun yearly in Japan with a population of 120,000,000 people. Gun regulation works, and when taken seriously works well. You are perpetuating that ignorant, paranoid gun nut argument that somehow it's impossible to keep guns away from criminals, when we know for a fact that it is very possible.

Um, that's a completely different country and culture. I mean, the US can't even keep illegal immigrants and illicit drugs from crossing the boarder, I doubt we'll be able to keep guns out.

Yes, because the Japanese are a magical breed of humans that can do things no one else can. You are just making stupid excuses.

Every culture is different. The Japanese have a much higher respect for authority than Americans do, for instance. You really don't know what you're talking about.

Presuppositional apologetics are weak and easily defeated because they presuppose that attitudes about something cannot change, when we know that things clearly can.

See: Slavery, Women's suffrage, the civil right movement, the gay rights movement, and the legalization of pot.

This has nothing to do with gun control. Can you stay on topic please and keep the trolling to a minimal?

#50 Posted by farrell2k (5808 posts) -

@lostrib said:

@farrell2k said:

@lostrib said:

@farrell2k said:

@lostrib said:

Um, that's a completely different country and culture. I mean, the US can't even keep illegal immigrants and illicit drugs from crossing the boarder, I doubt we'll be able to keep guns out.

Yes, because the Japanese are a magical breed of humans that can do things no one else can. You are just making stupid excuses.

No, but it's a significantly different culture and country.

Also, in the US you would have to amend the constitution, which isn't exactly easy.

Which I take it means to you that they are somehow special and no one else could emulate their position on guns? It used to be culturally acceptable to own slaves. We somehow managed to change our culture to get past that. Sorry, but the "it's a different culture" is a stupid excuse straight from the NRA playbook. Weak sauce.

Actually you're the only one who keeps saying that

You are presupposing that attitudes cannot change about something, and that is clearly not correct.

@Flubbbs said:

@farrell2k said:

Of course it has. The Brady bill was passed at the end of 93, and gun ownership has decline by 13% from 47% in the 70s to 34% today. It exactly prove my point.

lol its not 34%.. they did a gallup poll just a couple years ago that had it estimated at 47%. i wouldnt be suprised if it was higher than that, i know if somebody called me and asked me questions about my guns i would say i didnt own any

You do realize that we are all connected to the Internet and can check the horse shit that comes out of your mouth, right?

http://www.gunfaq.org/2013/03/four-decade-decline-in-gun-ownership/

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/10/us/rate-of-gun-ownership-is-down-survey-shows.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

@farrell2k said:

@airshocker said:
@farrell2k said:

@lostrib said:

@farrell2k said:

@lostrib said:

Yes, I'm sure banning guns will keep violent criminals from getting them

It worked for the Japanese. They banned private ownership and made penalties for carrying a gun so harsh that even the Yakuza are afraid to be caught with one. Less than 35 crime with a gun yearly in Japan with a population of 120,000,000 people. Gun regulation works, and when taken seriously works well. You are perpetuating that ignorant, paranoid gun nut argument that somehow it's impossible to keep guns away from criminals, when we know for a fact that it is very possible.

Um, that's a completely different country and culture. I mean, the US can't even keep illegal immigrants and illicit drugs from crossing the boarder, I doubt we'll be able to keep guns out.

Yes, because the Japanese are a magical breed of humans that can do things no one else can. You are just making stupid excuses.

Every culture is different. The Japanese have a much higher respect for authority than Americans do, for instance. You really don't know what you're talking about.

Presuppositional apologetics are weak and easily defeated because they presuppose that attitudes about something cannot change, when we know that things clearly can.

See: Slavery, Women's suffrage, the civil right movement, the gay rights movement, and the legalization of pot.

This has nothing to do with gun control. Can you stay on topic please and keep the trolling to a minimal?

You're upset because you are wrong. It's understandable. Just learn from the experience.