Forums

ForumsWorld Events, Politics, Religion, Etc.

Gun control in the US

Posted Dec 22, '12 at 12:01am

nichodemus

nichodemus

12,166 posts

Knight

So you guys are stating that the bill of rights is outdated and the right to bear arms law is outdated in it. So does that mean that the law of freedom of speech is also outdated? What about right to a jury of your peers? Maybe you would also like to discourage the ban on slavery since it was created roughly around that time. So, by stating that one law is outdated in that time period. You are stating all laws are outdated in that time period.

No it doesn't. Just because a part is outdated, does not mean everything else is. Each law is separate in the Bill of Rights, and should be treated separately. Unless you mean to tell me that since one mentally deficient person has shot and killed a dozen others, all gun owners are crazy.

 

Posted Dec 22, '12 at 12:13am

404011xz

404011xz

218 posts

Now you are getting into how a think a bit. If not all gun owners are mentally unstable then why punish them all? That is how most people see it though, most gun owners are crazy preppers who think everything the government does is absoletly wrong and stuff like that. That may be a small number but that isn't all of us. So why is it that they want to punish us all for actions these few stupid people do? Sorry if I jump back and forth between things in my paragraph. I would make it nice and pretty but I have the tendancy to go for crude and effective, well, sometimes more effective than others.

 

Posted Dec 22, '12 at 12:30am

nichodemus

nichodemus

12,166 posts

Knight

If not all gun owners are mentally unstable then why punish them all?

For the sake of everyone. Statistically it has been shown that gun control has saved lives; by restricting the sale of guns (Note, not forcefully taking, which negates your ''punishment'' point), everyone except the mad men win.

So why is it that they want to punish us all for actions these few stupid people do? Sorry if I jump back and forth between things in my paragraph. I would make it nice and pretty but I have the tendancy to go for crude and effective, well, sometimes more effective than others.

1) No evidence.
2) Not even addressing most of our points.

Effective? I beg to differ.

What gun control lobbyists want is to restrict the sale of guns to undesirables, eg those with criminal records, and those who are mentally unfit, whilst at the same time proposing stronger intra border restrictions. No where is it punishing people who have a legitimate reason to own guns.

Now you are getting into how a think a bit.

A tad hypocritical.

 

Posted Dec 22, '12 at 1:14am

pangtongshu

pangtongshu

8,704 posts

Statistically it has been shown that gun control has saved lives; by restricting the sale of guns (Note, not forcefully taking, which negates your ''punishment'' point), everyone except the mad men win.

Kennesaw-1

Kennesaw-2

 

Posted Dec 22, '12 at 1:22am

nichodemus

nichodemus

12,166 posts

Knight

First, the ordinance passed in Kennesaw was purely symbolic; it's not as if police went door-to-door to ensure every head of household owned a gun. Second, when one actually performs a statistical analysis , one finds there was a slight, though statistically insignificant, increase in burglaries after the ordinance.

http://***************.com/_zARnMsqcFh8/TMntNlyKKjI/AAAAAAAAAJk/HkRilLxmWpc/s1600/kennesaw.png

UK Gun control.

 

Posted Dec 22, '12 at 1:23am

nichodemus

nichodemus

12,166 posts

Knight

 

Posted Dec 22, '12 at 2:52am

pangtongshu

pangtongshu

8,704 posts

Second, when one actually performs a statistical analysis , one finds there was a slight, though statistically insignificant, increase in burglaries after the ordinance.

As one person commented on that page..that graph does not take into account the rise of the cities population

 

Posted Dec 22, '12 at 3:24am

nichodemus

nichodemus

12,166 posts

Knight

As one person commented on that page..that graph does not take into account the rise of the cities population

Fair point. But the introduction of the gun law is misleading in itself. It's not mandatory. And experts don’t think the Kennesaw ordinance, which has never actually been enforced, did much to change gun ownership rates among Kennesaw residents.

 

Posted Dec 22, '12 at 11:21am

partydevil

partydevil

5,109 posts

Sorry if I jump back and forth between things in my paragraph. I would make it nice and pretty

lets start whit making your post nicer...
quote people and press enter sometimes will do wonders.

 

Posted Dec 24, '12 at 8:10am

danielo

danielo

1,397 posts

The one major thing i dont understand is:

A man want a pistol? I can agree to that. A carabine? Overly armed, but meh, lets say he want to hunt.

But why someone will want a M4 Or a M16 in his house? defend his house from what? the Huns? Why would someone want to buy a Uzi? Its a good gun indeed, but for clearing bunkers, not for "defending your house". What would you do, spray the street to kill the 'invader'? Isnt a simple pistol is enough?

In my opinion, a man will be able to buy a pistol and a small amount of ammo. That it. No one need massive amount of ammo is his garage for "defending his loved ones". A 9mm and 12 bullets its much more then enough.

I love guns my self. I wish for an MP5 {dont ask me why MP5, I just felt in love with this gun}. But i know its not Logical to have one. Its like wanting to have a tank for me {Which i do. I even founded a place}. My only wepone is a swiss army knife which i keep under my pillow.

 
Reply to Gun control in the US

You must be logged in to post a reply!