America is going CRAZY...Time to Ban Guns

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for K4ss3r
K4ss3r

8697

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 0

#201 K4ss3r
Member since 2004 • 8697 Posts
I don't think people would give up their rights to own a gun that easily. It would turn into a riot and they'd take over the country! But no doubt, banning guns would help I'm sure.
Avatar image for JLAudio7
JLAudio7

2729

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#202 JLAudio7
Member since 2007 • 2729 Posts
[QUOTE="cool_baller"][QUOTE="dsmccracken"]

[QUOTE="freshgman"]i like guns for real. Just cuz one idiot decides to kill it shouldnt be banned. Plus it is in the constitutiondsmccracken

Again, so was slavery, that's why you have amendments.

Slavery wasn't in the Amendment. They left it out on purpose, because they couldn't come to a conclusion so they lets the States decide.

Slavery was indeed in an amendment, the 13th amendment to be exact.

13th amendment abolished slavery. there wasnt an amendment that legalized slavery. they left that decision up to the states.
Avatar image for perqill
perqill

199

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#203 perqill
Member since 2004 • 199 Posts
[QUOTE="dbowman"]

The TC is right, even if he did put it in a rather odd manner.

You Americans are so het up with your overly liberal ideas that you can't see its the cause of all your problems.

Being overly Liberal is the problem not the solution.

ImaPirate0202

Owning guns is a foundation for which our country was built on. You really think were gonna let some soccer moms rally to ban guns?


Is that true? Sounds strange:?
Avatar image for ImaPirate0202
ImaPirate0202

4473

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#204 ImaPirate0202
Member since 2005 • 4473 Posts
[QUOTE="ImaPirate0202"][QUOTE="dbowman"]

The TC is right, even if he did put it in a rather odd manner.

You Americans are so het up with your overly liberal ideas that you can't see its the cause of all your problems.

Being overly Liberal is the problem not the solution.

perqill

Owning guns is a foundation for which our country was built on. You really think were gonna let some soccer moms rally to ban guns?


Is that true? Sounds strange:?

Yes, and if you're familiar with American History it makes perfect sense as to why it's there.

Avatar image for perqill
perqill

199

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#205 perqill
Member since 2004 • 199 Posts
[QUOTE="perqill"][QUOTE="ImaPirate0202"][QUOTE="dbowman"]

The TC is right, even if he did put it in a rather odd manner.

You Americans are so het up with your overly liberal ideas that you can't see its the cause of all your problems.

Being overly Liberal is the problem not the solution.

ImaPirate0202

Owning guns is a foundation for which our country was built on. You really think were gonna let some soccer moms rally to ban guns?


Is that true? Sounds strange:?

Yes, and if you're familiar with American History it makes perfect sense as to why it's there.


No, I'm not too familiar with American history. Could you explain it for me? Keep it short, eh?
Avatar image for KG86
KG86

6021

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#206 KG86
Member since 2007 • 6021 Posts
[QUOTE="perqill"][QUOTE="ImaPirate0202"][QUOTE="dbowman"]

The TC is right, even if he did put it in a rather odd manner.

You Americans are so het up with your overly liberal ideas that you can't see its the cause of all your problems.

Being overly Liberal is the problem not the solution.

ImaPirate0202

Owning guns is a foundation for which our country was built on. You really think were gonna let some soccer moms rally to ban guns?


Is that true? Sounds strange:?

Yes, and if you're familiar with American History it makes perfect sense as to why it's there.

Are the British coming back?:roll:

Avatar image for markebici
markebici

781

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#207 markebici
Member since 2005 • 781 Posts
simple solution, just ban criminals from useing guns, even if they have 1 minor assult charge just ban em premenantly.
Avatar image for james28893
james28893

3252

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#208 james28893
Member since 2007 • 3252 Posts

I don't think people would give up their rights to own a gun that easily. It would turn into a riot and they'd take over the country! But no doubt, banning guns would help I'm sure. K4ss3r

The UK did. We're not even allowed BB guns anymore unless they're painted bright green :cry:.

Avatar image for dsmccracken
dsmccracken

7307

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#209 dsmccracken
Member since 2003 • 7307 Posts
[QUOTE="dsmccracken"][QUOTE="cool_baller"][QUOTE="dsmccracken"]

[QUOTE="freshgman"]i like guns for real. Just cuz one idiot decides to kill it shouldnt be banned. Plus it is in the constitutionJLAudio7

Again, so was slavery, that's why you have amendments.

Slavery wasn't in the Amendment. They left it out on purpose, because they couldn't come to a conclusion so they lets the States decide.

Slavery was indeed in an amendment, the 13th amendment to be exact.

13th amendment abolished slavery. there wasnt an amendment that legalized slavery. they left that decision up to the states.

That is what I meant, of course, should have been more clear. My point is that flaws or omissions have been seen in the Constitution before, or there would never have been any amendments.

Avatar image for MattUD1
MattUD1

20715

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#210 MattUD1
Member since 2004 • 20715 Posts
simple solution, just ban criminals from useing guns, even if they have 1 minor assult charge just ban em premenantly.markebici
Gun shops aren't the only places to purchase weapons.
Avatar image for g-unit248
g-unit248

7197

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#211 g-unit248
Member since 2005 • 7197 Posts
a gun ban will not solve anything...
Avatar image for Luminouslight
Luminouslight

6397

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#212 Luminouslight
Member since 2007 • 6397 Posts
[QUOTE="JLAudio7"][QUOTE="dsmccracken"][QUOTE="cool_baller"][QUOTE="dsmccracken"]

[QUOTE="freshgman"]i like guns for real. Just cuz one idiot decides to kill it shouldnt be banned. Plus it is in the constitutiondsmccracken

Again, so was slavery, that's why you have amendments.

Slavery wasn't in the Amendment. They left it out on purpose, because they couldn't come to a conclusion so they lets the States decide.

Slavery was indeed in an amendment, the 13th amendment to be exact.

13th amendment abolished slavery. there wasnt an amendment that legalized slavery. they left that decision up to the states.

That is what I meant, of course, should have been more clear. My point is that flaws or omissions have been seen in the Constitution before, or there would never have been any amendments.

In the original Constitution, Slavery wasn't even Mentioned (with the exception of the 3/5 comprimise). So technically you wouldn't even needed to amend the constitution to have banned slavery.

Avatar image for MattUD1
MattUD1

20715

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#213 MattUD1
Member since 2004 • 20715 Posts
[QUOTE="dsmccracken"][QUOTE="JLAudio7"][QUOTE="dsmccracken"][QUOTE="cool_baller"][QUOTE="dsmccracken"]

[QUOTE="freshgman"]i like guns for real. Just cuz one idiot decides to kill it shouldnt be banned. Plus it is in the constitutionLuminouslight

Again, so was slavery, that's why you have amendments.

Slavery wasn't in the Amendment. They left it out on purpose, because they couldn't come to a conclusion so they lets the States decide.

Slavery was indeed in an amendment, the 13th amendment to be exact.

13th amendment abolished slavery. there wasnt an amendment that legalized slavery. they left that decision up to the states.

That is what I meant, of course, should have been more clear. My point is that flaws or omissions have been seen in the Constitution before, or there would never have been any amendments.

In the original Constitution, Slavery wasn't even Mentioned (with the exception of the 3/5 comprimise). So technically you wouldn't even needed to amend the constitution to have banned slavery.

But with the Supremacy Clause it would make sense for an amendment.
Avatar image for Luminouslight
Luminouslight

6397

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#214 Luminouslight
Member since 2007 • 6397 Posts
[QUOTE="Luminouslight"][QUOTE="dsmccracken"][QUOTE="JLAudio7"][QUOTE="dsmccracken"][QUOTE="cool_baller"][QUOTE="dsmccracken"]

[QUOTE="freshgman"]i like guns for real. Just cuz one idiot decides to kill it shouldnt be banned. Plus it is in the constitutionMattUD1

Again, so was slavery, that's why you have amendments.

Slavery wasn't in the Amendment. They left it out on purpose, because they couldn't come to a conclusion so they lets the States decide.

Slavery was indeed in an amendment, the 13th amendment to be exact.

13th amendment abolished slavery. there wasnt an amendment that legalized slavery. they left that decision up to the states.

That is what I meant, of course, should have been more clear. My point is that flaws or omissions have been seen in the Constitution before, or there would never have been any amendments.

In the original Constitution, Slavery wasn't even Mentioned (with the exception of the 3/5 comprimise). So technically you wouldn't even needed to amend the constitution to have banned slavery.

But with the Supremacy Clause it would make sense for an amendment.

A federal Law would work just fine, considering that too is under the supremacy clause.

But I suppose they added an amendment so that the Supreme Court couldn't overthrow the law by some means.

Avatar image for Elraptor
Elraptor

30966

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#215 Elraptor
Member since 2004 • 30966 Posts

[QUOTE="K4ss3r"]I don't think people would give up their rights to own a gun that easily. It would turn into a riot and they'd take over the country! But no doubt, banning guns would help I'm sure. james28893

The UK did. We're not even allowed BB guns anymore unless they're painted bright green :cry:.

Is that really a problem, though? I can drive to the nearest gun shop, purchase a 44 magnum if I want, and have it in three days. Last time I checked, I can buy a high-powered rifle or shotgun and take it directly home (I don't know if that's still true). All the same, I've never bought a firearm. I've been given several, but they're all sitting at my parent's house in the country. My youngest sister, ironically, is the only kid in the family who has a firearm in her house (I say "ironically" because she was always the one least interested in shooting).
Avatar image for james28893
james28893

3252

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#216 james28893
Member since 2007 • 3252 Posts
[QUOTE="james28893"]

[QUOTE="K4ss3r"]I don't think people would give up their rights to own a gun that easily. It would turn into a riot and they'd take over the country! But no doubt, banning guns would help I'm sure. Elraptor

The UK did. We're not even allowed BB guns anymore unless they're painted bright green :cry:.

Is that really a problem, though? I can drive to the nearest gun shop, purchase a 44 magnum if I want, and have it in three days. Last time I checked, I can buy a high-powered rifle or shotgun and take it directly home (I don't know if that's still true). All the same, I've never bought a firearm. I've been given several, but they're all sitting at my parent's house in the country. My youngest sister, ironically, is the only kid in the family who has a firearm in her house (I say "ironically" because she was always the one least interested in shooting).

I was just saying that the UK gave up their rights to own all types of guns except shotguns (large double barreled ones for hunting), so why couldn't Americans. So yeah here in the UK it's a large shotgun, or a bright green BB gun.

Avatar image for Hoobinator
Hoobinator

6899

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#217 Hoobinator
Member since 2006 • 6899 Posts

These shootings in the US are becoming so frequent it's untrue. They're like the US version of bombs going off. I think they should be declared terrorist attacks.

Avatar image for Hoobinator
Hoobinator

6899

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#218 Hoobinator
Member since 2006 • 6899 Posts
[QUOTE="ImaPirate0202"][QUOTE="perqill"][QUOTE="ImaPirate0202"][QUOTE="dbowman"]

The TC is right, even if he did put it in a rather odd manner.

You Americans are so het up with your overly liberal ideas that you can't see its the cause of all your problems.

Being overly Liberal is the problem not the solution.

KG86

Owning guns is a foundation for which our country was built on. You really think were gonna let some soccer moms rally to ban guns?


Is that true? Sounds strange:?

Yes, and if you're familiar with American History it makes perfect sense as to why it's there.

Are the British coming back?:roll:

No but I hear Bears are still not extinct in the USA. ******* bears. :evil:

Avatar image for -dark-shadow-
-dark-shadow-

985

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#219 -dark-shadow-
Member since 2007 • 985 Posts
People always blame guns, video games, music, etc on these things, but nobody is willing to recognize the real problem - MODERN SOCIETY!Choga
I agree with you.
Avatar image for dsmccracken
dsmccracken

7307

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#220 dsmccracken
Member since 2003 • 7307 Posts

[QUOTE="Choga"]People always blame guns, video games, music, etc on these things, but nobody is willing to recognize the real problem - MODERN SOCIETY!-dark-shadow-
I agree with you.

Canada is a modern society, yet less guns have meant less gun deaths.

Avatar image for dsmccracken
dsmccracken

7307

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#221 dsmccracken
Member since 2003 • 7307 Posts
[QUOTE="dsmccracken"][QUOTE="JLAudio7"][QUOTE="dsmccracken"][QUOTE="cool_baller"][QUOTE="dsmccracken"]

[QUOTE="freshgman"]i like guns for real. Just cuz one idiot decides to kill it shouldnt be banned. Plus it is in the constitutionLuminouslight

Again, so was slavery, that's why you have amendments.

Slavery wasn't in the Amendment. They left it out on purpose, because they couldn't come to a conclusion so they lets the States decide.

Slavery was indeed in an amendment, the 13th amendment to be exact.

13th amendment abolished slavery. there wasnt an amendment that legalized slavery. they left that decision up to the states.

That is what I meant, of course, should have been more clear. My point is that flaws or omissions have been seen in the Constitution before, or there would never have been any amendments.

In the original Constitution, Slavery wasn't even Mentioned (with the exception of the 3/5 comprimise). So technically you wouldn't even needed to amend the constitution to have banned slavery.

Even if true, what does that have to do with the original point? That the Constitution belongs to you, not the other way around. You can change it if it serves the good, it is not your overlord. If it was perfect, it would not have ever needed amending... hell, even the right to bear arms is an amendment. So anyone arguing that "you can't take our guns, it's in the Constitution" should take note that your guns were given to you in the first place by a CHANGE to the original.

Avatar image for LJS9502_basic
LJS9502_basic

169991

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#222 LJS9502_basic
Member since 2003 • 169991 Posts

Even if true, what does that have to do with the original point? That the Constitution belongs to you, not the other way around. You can change it if it serves the good, it is not your overlord.

dsmccracken

Why should we remove the rght to bear arms from the Constitution? Helps keep the government honest.;)

Avatar image for dsmccracken
dsmccracken

7307

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#223 dsmccracken
Member since 2003 • 7307 Posts
[QUOTE="dsmccracken"]

Even if true, what does that have to do with the original point? That the Constitution belongs to you, not the other way around. You can change it if it serves the good, it is not your overlord.

LJS9502_basic

Why should we remove the rght to bear arms from the Constitution? Helps keep the government honest.;)

Other democracies are doing fine without that "aid"... that and the 30,000 of you dying from guns every year.

Avatar image for dsmccracken
dsmccracken

7307

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#224 dsmccracken
Member since 2003 • 7307 Posts

California Chicago San Francisco and New York and DC all have the strictist gun control outside of europe. Yet they are still very dangerous places. That doesn't stop people from sterotyping us as gun crazy americans even though we have a 10 day background check in California and don't give out carry licences. A gun control group gave california a A+ for its gun control yet it is still violent. Wonder why!?:roll:

peppersfan2

I don't know, why? Unless you think that America is somehow inherently more violent then anywhere else, why do you think that controls that work everywhere else wouldn't help you? If California gun control is on a level with Britain, why is it I saw gun stores everywhere when I was in LA and San Francisco, and nowhere when I was in London? Also, I'd imagine it would help if the States surrounding California, if ALL the states had equal laws so people can't just drive them across state lines.

Avatar image for LJS9502_basic
LJS9502_basic

169991

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#225 LJS9502_basic
Member since 2003 • 169991 Posts

Other democracies are doing fine without that "aid"... that and the 30,000 of you dying from guns every year.

dsmccracken

1. It's impossible to remove guns from individuals at this stage. Even if some were turned in...many more would not be. Making them illegal.

2. Illegal guns are behind the majority of deaths by gun.

3. If an individual wants to kill...he will find a way. That is apparent by the history books.

4. If an individual wants a gun and can't get one legally. He will obtain one. That is also apparent.

5. I'd rather we still keep the government in check. History has many examples for this scenario as well.

6. What valid, logically, and possible reason is there for banning guns. Don't mention crime as I've just covered that issue.

Avatar image for dsmccracken
dsmccracken

7307

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#226 dsmccracken
Member since 2003 • 7307 Posts

Guns save another innocent life.br0kenrabbit

No one would deny that incidents like this occur. That is cold comfort for the 30,000 of you that died from guns last year, the 30,000 that will die this year, and next year, and the year after that....

Avatar image for mlbslugger86
mlbslugger86

12867

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 0

#228 mlbslugger86
Member since 2004 • 12867 Posts
pfftt as if were the only one's with guns...:|
Avatar image for Hoobinator
Hoobinator

6899

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#229 Hoobinator
Member since 2006 • 6899 Posts
I say free AK-74's for everyone.
Avatar image for mlbslugger86
mlbslugger86

12867

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 0

#230 mlbslugger86
Member since 2004 • 12867 Posts

I say free AK-74's for everyone. Hoobinator

hell, make it a m4 carbine and you got your a deal

Avatar image for ImaPirate0202
ImaPirate0202

4473

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#231 ImaPirate0202
Member since 2005 • 4473 Posts
[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="dsmccracken"]

Even if true, what does that have to do with the original point? That the Constitution belongs to you, not the other way around. You can change it if it serves the good, it is not your overlord.

dsmccracken

Why should we remove the rght to bear arms from the Constitution? Helps keep the government honest.;)

Other democracies are doing fine without that "aid"... that and the 30,000 of you dying from guns every year.

The only people who you would be taking guns away from are those who own them legally.

Do you think criminals go out and get permits for their guns?

Avatar image for dsmccracken
dsmccracken

7307

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#232 dsmccracken
Member since 2003 • 7307 Posts
[QUOTE="dsmccracken"]

Other democracies are doing fine without that "aid"... that and the 30,000 of you dying from guns every year.

LJS9502_basic

1. It's impossible to remove guns from individuals at this stage. Even if some were turned in...many more would not be. Making them illegal.

2. Illegal guns are behind the majority of deaths by gun.

3. If an individual wants to kill...he will find a way. That is apparent by the history books.

4. If an individual wants a gun and can't get one legally. He will obtain one. That is also apparent.

5. I'd rather we still keep the government in check. History has many examples for this scenario as well.

6. What valid, logically, and possible reason is there for banning guns. Don't mention crime as I've just covered that issue.

I'm sorry, but I will mention crime as your "covering" of the issue is not adequate.

1) Your country is so full of guns, it will take a loooong time to round them up. Certainly criminals won't just "turn them in", but your police confiscate weapons during arrests and raids constantly. If there is no new supply, the guns will dry up like, well, EVERYWHERE ELSE this has been done. It will take awhile, but to not begin because it is too hard is like a student who has put off studying saying "I've got so much homework, I'll never catch up so why even try to start?"

2) Every illegal gun began life as a legal gun. Illegal guns don't just appear spontaneously like a virgin birth in a dark crime alley. Gun control limits guns, legal guns, and less legal guns in turn reduces the supply of illegal guns because a legal gun that DOESN'T EXIST naturally can't ever become illegal.

3) Removing guns will not stop all deaths. Some people just have bloody murder in their hearts, and will use a knife instead of a gun. However, do you really think that other weapons make it so easy, so tempting? Do you think that in Japan or England, there is a mass wave of gas stations being robbed with knives and bricks? Does a bat in a shaky hand of a kid doing his first robbery go off by accident? Does a father holding a golf club late at night when he hears a ruckus accidentally club his son to death who has broken curfew? Get real.

4) See point 2

5) What can I say to this? If 30,000 dead annually is a fair trade to you in return for the chance that one day your country suffers a coup d'etat, and you believe with the equipment the modern military has that your handgun can protect you, nothing I can ever say will change your mind. But it is madness.

Avatar image for Dreams-Visions
Dreams-Visions

26578

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#233 Dreams-Visions
Member since 2006 • 26578 Posts

[QUOTE="-dark-shadow-"][QUOTE="Choga"]People always blame guns, video games, music, etc on these things, but nobody is willing to recognize the real problem - MODERN SOCIETY!dsmccracken

I agree with you.

Canada is a modern society, yet less guns have meant less gun deaths.

Canada has more guns per capita that the United States. Try again.

Avatar image for dsmccracken
dsmccracken

7307

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#234 dsmccracken
Member since 2003 • 7307 Posts
[QUOTE="dsmccracken"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="dsmccracken"]

Even if true, what does that have to do with the original point? That the Constitution belongs to you, not the other way around. You can change it if it serves the good, it is not your overlord.

ImaPirate0202

Why should we remove the rght to bear arms from the Constitution? Helps keep the government honest.;)

Other democracies are doing fine without that "aid"... that and the 30,000 of you dying from guns every year.

The only people who you would be taking guns away from are those who own them legally.

Do you think criminals go out and get permits for their guns?

How do you think criminals get their guns? Some buy them from shady dealers who bend or break the rules (which better controls would help with). Some get illegal stolen guns in back alley deals and such, out of a trunk or something. Where do you think that THOSE guns came from. Ultimately, every illegal gun in the hands of a gangbanger was at one time a legal gun that "went astray." Limiting legal guns by definition ultimately will limit illegal guns down the road.

Avatar image for Rikusaki
Rikusaki

16474

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#235 Rikusaki
Member since 2006 • 16474 Posts

Banning guns will do nothing in curbing the level of violence in America. Atheos-Arkhaios

Its working fine in Japan! Japan has one of the lowest crime rates in the world.

Avatar image for dsmccracken
dsmccracken

7307

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#236 dsmccracken
Member since 2003 • 7307 Posts
[QUOTE="dsmccracken"]

[QUOTE="-dark-shadow-"][QUOTE="Choga"]People always blame guns, video games, music, etc on these things, but nobody is willing to recognize the real problem - MODERN SOCIETY!Dreams-Visions

I agree with you.

Canada is a modern society, yet less guns have meant less gun deaths.

Canada has more guns per capita that the United States. Try again.

Wow, didn't know that. Good point! Looking into it, Canada DOES have more guns and less controls than most Western European countries, and a correspondingly higher rate of murders and rapes. On top of that, most of the illegal guns are coming from the US! I am in your debt for aiding my point, thank you.

Quick edit: where did you get the guns per capita comparison between the US and Canada? I can find the Canada vs. Europe info, but not yours.

Avatar image for Dreams-Visions
Dreams-Visions

26578

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#237 Dreams-Visions
Member since 2006 • 26578 Posts

[QUOTE="br0kenrabbit"]Guns save another innocent life.dsmccracken

No one would deny that incidents like this occur. That is cold comfort for the 30,000 of you that died from guns last year, the 30,000 that will die this year, and next year, and the year after that....

Estimates suggest that there are 2.5 million defensive gun usages annually in the United States.

How much higher would that 30,000 death figure be if these people couldn't protect themselves?

Avatar image for Rhazakna
Rhazakna

11022

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#238 Rhazakna
Member since 2004 • 11022 Posts
[QUOTE="ImaPirate0202"][QUOTE="dsmccracken"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="dsmccracken"]

Even if true, what does that have to do with the original point? That the Constitution belongs to you, not the other way around. You can change it if it serves the good, it is not your overlord.

dsmccracken

Why should we remove the rght to bear arms from the Constitution? Helps keep the government honest.;)

Other democracies are doing fine without that "aid"... that and the 30,000 of you dying from guns every year.

The only people who you would be taking guns away from are those who own them legally.

Do you think criminals go out and get permits for their guns?

How do you think criminals get their guns? Some buy them from shady dealers who bend or break the rules (which better controls would help with). Some get illegal stolen guns in back alley deals and such, out of a trunk or something. Where do you think that THOSE guns came from. Ultimately, every illegal gun in the hands of a gangbanger was at one time a legal gun that "went astray." Limiting legal guns by definition ultimately will limit illegal guns down the road.

Then criminals would start getting them from overseas, or buying them from crooked soldiers. They do this stuff already, they'd just have to start doing it more. There is no law that could keep guns out of the hands of criminals, at least not for very long.

Avatar image for LJS9502_basic
LJS9502_basic

169991

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#239 LJS9502_basic
Member since 2003 • 169991 Posts

I'm sorry, but I will mention crime as your "covering" of the issue is not adequate.

1) Your country is so full of guns, it will take a loooong time to round them up. Certainly criminals won't just "turn them in", but your police confiscate weapons during arrests and raids constantly. If there is no new supply, the guns will dry up like, well, EVERYWHERE ELSE this has been done. It will take awhile, but to not begin because it is too hard is like a student who has put off studying saying "I've got so much homework, I'll never catch up so why even try to start?"

2) Every illegal gun began life as a legal gun. Illegal guns don't just appear spontaneously like a virgin birth in a dark crime alley. Gun control limits guns, legal guns, and less legal guns in turn reduces the supply of illegal guns because a legal gun that DOESN'T EXIST naturally can't ever become illegal.

3) Removing guns will not stop all deaths. Some people just have bloody murder in their hearts, and will use a knife instead of a gun. However, do you really think that other weapons make it so easy, so tempting? Do you think that in Japan or England, there is a mass wave of gas stations being robbed with knives and bricks? Does a bat in a shaky hand of a kid doing his first robbery go off by accident? Does a father holding a golf club late at night when he hears a ruckus accidentally club his son to death who has broken curfew? Get real.

4) See point 2

5) What can I say to this? If 30,000 dead annually is a fair trade to you in return for the chance that one day your country suffers a coup d'etat, and you believe with the equipment the modern military has that your handgun can protect you, nothing I can ever say will change your mind. But it is madness.

dsmccracken

1. Unrealistic. Firearms will continue to be made, stolen, and sold. FYI, illegal guns exist in controls that don't allow citizens to legally purchase guns. Your point is moot.

2. Not all legal guns were stolen from a registered legal owner. Shipments are hijacked. Therefore, your point is moot.

3. Violent crime exists in both England and Japan. Your point is moot.

4. Your point is moot.

5. You may want to research that fact that almost all legally obtained firearms are NOT used in a crime.

6. You haven't given any logical and realistic reason why you think banning guns will stop crime.

Avatar image for ImaPirate0202
ImaPirate0202

4473

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#240 ImaPirate0202
Member since 2005 • 4473 Posts
[QUOTE="ImaPirate0202"][QUOTE="dsmccracken"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="dsmccracken"]

Even if true, what does that have to do with the original point? That the Constitution belongs to you, not the other way around. You can change it if it serves the good, it is not your overlord.

dsmccracken

Why should we remove the rght to bear arms from the Constitution? Helps keep the government honest.;)

Other democracies are doing fine without that "aid"... that and the 30,000 of you dying from guns every year.

The only people who you would be taking guns away from are those who own them legally.

Do you think criminals go out and get permits for their guns?

How do you think criminals get their guns? Some buy them from shady dealers who bend or break the rules (which better controls would help with). Some get illegal stolen guns in back alley deals and such, out of a trunk or something. Where do you think that THOSE guns came from. Ultimately, every illegal gun in the hands of a gangbanger was at one time a legal gun that "went astray." Limiting legal guns by definition ultimately will limit illegal guns down the road.


What about guns that are smuggled in? Are those born legally? If a criminal wants a gun, he can get it.

Putting a ban on guns will do nothing in America. Your points simply aren't realistic.

Avatar image for dsmccracken
dsmccracken

7307

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#241 dsmccracken
Member since 2003 • 7307 Posts
[QUOTE="dsmccracken"][QUOTE="ImaPirate0202"][QUOTE="dsmccracken"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="dsmccracken"]

Even if true, what does that have to do with the original point? That the Constitution belongs to you, not the other way around. You can change it if it serves the good, it is not your overlord.

Rhazakna

Why should we remove the rght to bear arms from the Constitution? Helps keep the government honest.;)

Other democracies are doing fine without that "aid"... that and the 30,000 of you dying from guns every year.

The only people who you would be taking guns away from are those who own them legally.

Do you think criminals go out and get permits for their guns?

How do you think criminals get their guns? Some buy them from shady dealers who bend or break the rules (which better controls would help with). Some get illegal stolen guns in back alley deals and such, out of a trunk or something. Where do you think that THOSE guns came from. Ultimately, every illegal gun in the hands of a gangbanger was at one time a legal gun that "went astray." Limiting legal guns by definition ultimately will limit illegal guns down the road.

Then criminals would start getting them from overseas, or buying them from crooked soldiers. They do this stuff already, they'd just have to start doing it more. There is no law that could keep guns out of the hands of criminals, at least not for very long.

If this is what would happen, then explain why this is NOT happening in other western nations? Why aren't the british all gunning it up with overseas weapons, if this is the natural next step.

Avatar image for Manly-manly-man
Manly-manly-man

3477

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#242 Manly-manly-man
Member since 2006 • 3477 Posts
[QUOTE="Manly-manly-man"][QUOTE="madmidnight"][QUOTE="dsmccracken"][QUOTE="madmidnight"][QUOTE="dsmccracken"]

[QUOTE="proctorsurf"]if anything .... we should ban pharmaceutical drugs. Every shooter.. such as the Columbine kids... VT shooter... all on prescription drugs... Some may disagree.. and hey if they work for you that's great.. I've personally seen the impact of them when my sister went insane during the time she was consuming copious amounts of Zoloft prescribed by a doc.madmidnight

I drink, and recently quit smoking (knock on wood), so the hypocrite in me cries no to what I'm about to suggest: No more alcohol (pipe-dream, never happen of course), no more cigarettes, no more coke/pot/heroin. Gone. Done. Whatever it takes. Nuke Columbia, Bolivia, where the junk is made, wipe it from the face of the earth along with anyone associated with it. Then wipe out their neighbours, their family, their pets. I'm exagerrating... about the pets, but I'm serious.

Actually if we legalized those drugs and taxed them we would make so much money, and drug dealers would be out of business which is where a lot of the violence comes from. LEGALIZE IT ALL!!

Other countries have tried and failed at this. Holland does ok with pot, but the experiment with Heroin et al is a disaster, a nightmare. Legalizing arguments always tempts with taxes, but in the end, let me ask you: what is greater, the gain of the taxes on tobacco, or the drain of treating the multitudes of cancer/emphysema, etc? It's not even close.

Yeah that legalized it all thing wasn't a great idea, I think pot being legal would be okay, maybe cocaine too. Tabacco is ok, its all an individuals choice. Health Insurance shouldn't cover peoples self inflicted cancer via smoking tabacco.

Coke? Are you kidding? Cocaine is highly addictive, it changes the state of mind of a person dramatically, and you can easily OD on it. Not to mention crack is one ingredient away.

Crack is not an ingredient in cocaine, it can be made from cocaine with baking soda, but that is beside the point. Cocaine isn't that much more addictive than alcohal, and causes less deaths. It takes quite a bit of Cocaine to OD, and a person wouldn't OD unless they are depressed and want to end themselves. It doesn't change the state of mind as dramatically as alcohal...

I didn't say crack is an ingredient of cocaine, wtf. I said crack is one ingredient away, meaning one ingredient away from cocaine.

Avatar image for LJS9502_basic
LJS9502_basic

169991

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#243 LJS9502_basic
Member since 2003 • 169991 Posts

If this is what would happen, then explain why this is NOT happening in other western nations? Why aren't the british all gunning it up with overseas weapons, if this is the natural next step.

dsmccracken

Just for the record....gun crime is on the rise in the UK...and violent crime has been declining in the US.

Avatar image for Rhazakna
Rhazakna

11022

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#244 Rhazakna
Member since 2004 • 11022 Posts
[QUOTE="Rhazakna"][QUOTE="dsmccracken"][QUOTE="ImaPirate0202"][QUOTE="dsmccracken"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="dsmccracken"]

Even if true, what does that have to do with the original point? That the Constitution belongs to you, not the other way around. You can change it if it serves the good, it is not your overlord.

dsmccracken

Why should we remove the rght to bear arms from the Constitution? Helps keep the government honest.;)

Other democracies are doing fine without that "aid"... that and the 30,000 of you dying from guns every year.

The only people who you would be taking guns away from are those who own them legally.

Do you think criminals go out and get permits for their guns?

How do you think criminals get their guns? Some buy them from shady dealers who bend or break the rules (which better controls would help with). Some get illegal stolen guns in back alley deals and such, out of a trunk or something. Where do you think that THOSE guns came from. Ultimately, every illegal gun in the hands of a gangbanger was at one time a legal gun that "went astray." Limiting legal guns by definition ultimately will limit illegal guns down the road.

Then criminals would start getting them from overseas, or buying them from crooked soldiers. They do this stuff already, they'd just have to start doing it more. There is no law that could keep guns out of the hands of criminals, at least not for very long.

If this is what would happen, then explain why this is NOT happening in other western nations? Why aren't the british all gunning it up with overseas weapons, if this is the natural next step.

Because England doesn't have a country full of guns right under them. The US does. Overseas was perhaps the wrong phrase. No sea crossing necessary, you just have to go south of the border.

Avatar image for Dreams-Visions
Dreams-Visions

26578

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#245 Dreams-Visions
Member since 2006 • 26578 Posts
[QUOTE="Dreams-Visions"][QUOTE="dsmccracken"]

[QUOTE="-dark-shadow-"][QUOTE="Choga"]People always blame guns, video games, music, etc on these things, but nobody is willing to recognize the real problem - MODERN SOCIETY!dsmccracken

I agree with you.

Canada is a modern society, yet less guns have meant less gun deaths.

Canada has more guns per capita that the United States. Try again.

Wow, didn't know that. Good point! Looking into it, Canada DOES have more guns and less controls than most Western European countries, and a correspondingly higher rate of murders and rapes. On top of that, most of the illegal guns are coming from the US! I am in your debt for aiding my point, thank you.

Don't worry, I have much more food for thought for you:

Here's the kicker:UK GUN CRIME SOARS AFTER GUN BAN . Image that.

Still more on the UK violence subject.

What happens when the people can't legally protect themselves with firearms? But a gun BAN was supposed to take firearms out of the hands of CRIMINALS, right? Guns--much like drugs today or alcohol during prohibition--will find their way to the hands of criminals one way or another. Banning firearms only creates a extremely lucrative black market for them and puts the citizenry at the mercy of those who have them.

Avatar image for dsmccracken
dsmccracken

7307

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#246 dsmccracken
Member since 2003 • 7307 Posts
[QUOTE="dsmccracken"]

I'm sorry, but I will mention crime as your "covering" of the issue is not adequate.

1) Your country is so full of guns, it will take a loooong time to round them up. Certainly criminals won't just "turn them in", but your police confiscate weapons during arrests and raids constantly. If there is no new supply, the guns will dry up like, well, EVERYWHERE ELSE this has been done. It will take awhile, but to not begin because it is too hard is like a student who has put off studying saying "I've got so much homework, I'll never catch up so why even try to start?"

2) Every illegal gun began life as a legal gun. Illegal guns don't just appear spontaneously like a virgin birth in a dark crime alley. Gun control limits guns, legal guns, and less legal guns in turn reduces the supply of illegal guns because a legal gun that DOESN'T EXIST naturally can't ever become illegal.

3) Removing guns will not stop all deaths. Some people just have bloody murder in their hearts, and will use a knife instead of a gun. However, do you really think that other weapons make it so easy, so tempting? Do you think that in Japan or England, there is a mass wave of gas stations being robbed with knives and bricks? Does a bat in a shaky hand of a kid doing his first robbery go off by accident? Does a father holding a golf club late at night when he hears a ruckus accidentally club his son to death who has broken curfew? Get real.

4) See point 2

5) What can I say to this? If 30,000 dead annually is a fair trade to you in return for the chance that one day your country suffers a coup d'etat, and you believe with the equipment the modern military has that your handgun can protect you, nothing I can ever say will change your mind. But it is madness.

LJS9502_basic

1. Unrealistic. Firearms will continue to be made, stolen, and sold. FYI, illegal guns exist in controls that don't allow citizens to legally purchase guns. Your point is moot.

2. Not all legal guns were stolen from a registered legal owner. Shipments are hijacked. Therefore, your point is moot.

3. Violent crime exists in both England and Japan. Your point is moot.

4. Your point is moot.

5. You may want to research that fact that almost all legally obtained firearms are NOT used in a crime.

6. You haven't given any logical and realistic reason why you think banning guns will stop crime.

1) Firearms that can't be sold won't be made or stolen, definitely not at the mind boggling pace they are now. There was one sentence I frankly didn't understand. Mootage denied.

2) How can a shipment of guns that don't exist because they are banned be hijacked? Mootage denied.

3) Look up the numbers on violent crime in England and Japan. Less is better my friend. How many people died by gunfire in Japan last year? 200? Less? If there were more stabbing to make up for the lack of guns, which there were not, is this an argument FOR guns? I'd say its an argument AGAINST whatever alternative was used. Not the same thing. Mootage denied.

4) Mootage denied

5) I don't know how your point 5 addressed my point 5, so I will simply say mootage denied.

Avatar image for Rhazakna
Rhazakna

11022

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#247 Rhazakna
Member since 2004 • 11022 Posts
[QUOTE="dsmccracken"][QUOTE="Rhazakna"][QUOTE="dsmccracken"][QUOTE="ImaPirate0202"][QUOTE="dsmccracken"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="dsmccracken"]

Even if true, what does that have to do with the original point? That the Constitution belongs to you, not the other way around. You can change it if it serves the good, it is not your overlord.

Rhazakna

Why should we remove the rght to bear arms from the Constitution? Helps keep the government honest.;)

Other democracies are doing fine without that "aid"... that and the 30,000 of you dying from guns every year.

The only people who you would be taking guns away from are those who own them legally.

Do you think criminals go out and get permits for their guns?

How do you think criminals get their guns? Some buy them from shady dealers who bend or break the rules (which better controls would help with). Some get illegal stolen guns in back alley deals and such, out of a trunk or something. Where do you think that THOSE guns came from. Ultimately, every illegal gun in the hands of a gangbanger was at one time a legal gun that "went astray." Limiting legal guns by definition ultimately will limit illegal guns down the road.

Then criminals would start getting them from overseas, or buying them from crooked soldiers. They do this stuff already, they'd just have to start doing it more. There is no law that could keep guns out of the hands of criminals, at least not for very long.

If this is what would happen, then explain why this is NOT happening in other western nations? Why aren't the british all gunning it up with overseas weapons, if this is the natural next step.

Because England doesn't have a country full of guns right under them. The US does. Overseas was perhaps the wrong phrase. No sea crossing necessary, you just have to go south of the border.

No response?

Avatar image for Darthmatt
Darthmatt

8969

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#248 Darthmatt
Member since 2002 • 8969 Posts
Damn, do people forget that violence like this has happend all throughout American history. Its not like this is just happening now. Yeah it sucks, but most of the people who own guns use them responsibly. Crazy people would find a way to harm others with or without firearms.
Avatar image for Wolf-Man2006
Wolf-Man2006

4187

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

#249 Wolf-Man2006
Member since 2006 • 4187 Posts
Yep, ban guns so that the non-crazies will find it harder to defend themselves. Also, the hunters will appreciate this banning of guns. Although, its a shame people go crazy and think killing people will solve everything. Kids could carry guns to school in the 19th century as defense against wild animals and robbers. We live in a time where people will think suicidal thoughts. Banning guns will not work because the crazies will be able to get around those laws.
Avatar image for dsmccracken
dsmccracken

7307

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#250 dsmccracken
Member since 2003 • 7307 Posts

Don't worry, I have much more food for thought for you:

Here's the kicker:UK GUN CRIME SOARS AFTER GUN BAN . Image that.

Still more on the UK violence subject.

What happens when the people can't legally protect themselves with firearms? But a gun BAN was supposed to take firearms out of the hands of CRIMINALS, right? Guns--much like drugs today or alcohol during prohibition--will find their way to the hands of criminals one way or another. Banning firearms only creates a extremely lucrative black market for them and puts the citizenry at the mercy of those who have them.

Dreams-Visions

I see that you accidentally tapped into a hardline right wing blog. Don't worry, I can hook you up to a real news agency:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/7191769.stm