personaly i stand by the logic that steel is nothing without the flesh that wealds and that people that say that guns kill are wrong that its the people that kill guns are tools for the intentions of the user and that gun bans and gun control are unproperly used and moniterd thats were the black market comes in people that really to get a weapon can what are your thoughts
Oh. A guy who was not an American yet was kicked out for having tattoos that look really similar to gang tattoos?
That was the only case I could find close to what you said, and his name does not even come up on google search. More kids die each year do to your Kinder Eggs then effect this.
As I already said, I aknowledge that it is reasonable to let everyone have a gun at home for self-defence, and maybe one for sport/hunting. I know people with guns aren't necessarily mad, but mad people with guns are bad.
Mad people are bad period. Lets say there is an insane person with a truck, something that no one looks up. People who go into shooting rages like this know they are going to die, so what would stop him from ramming his truck into a bus? Or a movie theater, if he really hated movies or something, or really anything else. What would stop him from using explosives? What would stop him from knifing? Having a gun and being mad is exactly the same as having anything else and being insane.
As I also already said, I'm sure that by allowing regular people to have all sort and quantity of guns they want, you will not necessarily influence the number of shootings but the number of victims per shooting.
But you have yet to explain how it effects the number, would you care to explain that?
Ah yes, the one in a hundred case of murder with a legally owned weapon, and everyone goes insane saying guns should be banned.
Ladies and gentlemen, most gun crimes use illicit weaponry by people already forbidden from owning firearms. In one sentence, I have literally destroyed any "logical" argument you could come up with.
Ladies and gentlemen, most gun crimes use illicit weaponry by people already forbidden from owning firearms. In one sentence, I have literally destroyed any "logical" argument you could come up with.
But if guns were illegal a while ago and we never let people have access to certain guns or their bullets, wouldn't the problem be solved? The illegal guns and bullets need to come from somewhere, and if the more powerful guns were never made avalible to the public, then wouldn't that mean almost no one would have the opprotunity to get one? Of course I'm not saying we should ban guns now, but maybe have a restriction. Make it so that less ammunition and guns get out into the public.
Then all of America would have died from the wildlife and hostile forces?
and we never let people have access to certain guns or their bullets, wouldn't the problem be solved?
Yeah, since it worked so well for alcohol?
The illegal guns and bullets need to come from somewhere, and if the more powerful guns were never made avalible to the public, then wouldn't that mean almost no one would have the opprotunity to get one?
Nope. The same way that drugs are illegal in America and people still manage to get their hands on them, it just surrounds them with crime and gives gangs a way to make money.
Of course I'm not saying we should ban guns now, but maybe have a restriction. Make it so that less ammunition and guns get out into the public.
Please name one point in history when banning or restricting something was effective.
well i dont think this is realy straying from the topic of gun laws so let me take another crack at this spring loaded vs bolt action show me your votes
Except alcohol and drugs are fairly easy to make. I don't think bullets and guns are as easy to make.
it just surrounds them with crime and gives gangs a way to make money.
I can see that happening. But a restriction probably wouldn't be too drastic. It would probably wouldn't stop people from carrying handguns, or maybe shotguns. Just the ones that take it a step further. So I don't think they could really make much money from the public by selling ammo for semi-automatic rifles. But I wouldn't really know.
So what should be done about this? How are we going to prevent those few people who are crazy and kill a bunch of people. Because it is pretty obvious that without the guns not as many people would get hurt.
Of course I'm not saying we should ban guns now, but maybe have a restriction. Make it so that less ammunition and guns get out into the public.
Well, felons can't have guns, people under 21 can't have handguns, automatic weapons are banned, in my states armor piercing and hollow point rounds for pistol and rifles are banned, and so on. We have all the restrictions we need, and about a dozen we don't.
Because it is pretty obvious that without the guns not as many people would get hurt.
You can't control it. The vast majority of gun crimes are committed using illegal weapons, or weapons possessed and/or purchased under illicit circumstances. All it would do is deny law-abiding citizens from having guns, and criminals would be woefully unaffected (they're criminals, I don't think they cared to begin with).
It would probably wouldn't stop people from carrying handguns, or maybe shotguns
"or maybe shotguns"? Shotguns account for 4% of gun-related homicide. Please tell me how that would help anything?
As for the rest, most people using handguns can't have them anyways, or are concealing them illegally and without a permit. Concealed carry permit holders account for so few murders that's it's almost nothing. Legal weapons, possessed legally by the original buyer, account for almost as little, and most of these are domestic incidents that could be accomplished in the same way with a knife or poison.
Let me bring up the point about weapon modifacations again.Even a handgun can be turned into an automatic weapon with the right amount of tinkering so whos to stop people from having legaly obtained and owned weapons with ileagle modifacations thus a legal ileagle weapon
having legaly obtained and owned weapons with ileagle modifacations thus a legal ileagle weapon
That's just an illegal weapon. Modifying a weapon for automatic fire outside of its intended use is a pretty serious felony, though one that is quite victimless.
The pervasive gun culture is detestable, but there's nothing solid that can be done. People often quote statistics that show the number of deaths is just a few thousand as if it's insignificant; yet relatively speaking, gun violence is still far higher in America than any other OECD nation, with 3.6 deaths per 100,000 compared to roughly 0.5 for other nations.
And even the argument about illegal guns being the problem doesn't hold water entirely. If there wasn't this gun obsession in the first place, this obsession on protecting civil rights this whole mess might never have occurred.
If there wasn't this gun obsession in the first place
What's wrong with a gun obsession by people who don't kill others?
People often quote statistics that show the number of deaths is just a few thousand as if it's insignificant
It is. We have more than 300,000,000 people in this country. A few thousand people is nothing, just a few hundredths or thousandths of a percent.
And even the argument about illegal guns being the problem doesn't hold water entirely
Entirely? No. But I find the holes in blaming illegal weaponry to be well within the margin of error.
Might I remind you of a town called Kennesaw, that made gun ownership mandatory for every household. Gun crime plummeted nearly 75% from before the ordinance to after the ordinance.
Proof that guns can deter? No, but some more of the plenty strong evidence that they do. Not all gun owners are murderous villains, hell, not even most. Of the estimated 300,000,000 guns in America, so few are used in crime that even that is within a margin of error. It's not even a 75% or 99% punishment when banning weapons, it's a 99.95% punishment.
Haven't other countries controled it? Shouldn't we try to follow that example, or look at the differences between us and them, then figure out whats keeping us from controling it.
dair5 other countries ban it completely which is bad because as it has been mentioned before people can purchase guns illeagly through the black market and the thing that keeps us from controling it is that our constitution allows the right to bear arms s
What's wrong with a gun obsession by people who don't kill others?
The historical roots of a gun obsession fueled by a dedication to the Constitution, just because it is the Constitution fosters a mindsets that guns are a right for people, when in the first place, no citizen should have the right to carry such dangerous items. If this gun obsession has not steadily entrenched throughout history, and rectified earlier, this mess, including the illegal gun market wouldn't be present. Even as people claim that it's all the fault of the illegal gun market, we don't see such a problem on such a significant scale in other countries. This gun culture by itself has contributed significantly to the scale of the illegal gun market problem.
It is. We have more than 300,000,000 people in this country. A few thousand people is nothing, just a few hundredths or thousandths of a percent.
A few thousand lives being lost, when they could easily have been saved isn't very significant? I'm sorry, but this is just ridiculous. Even if it were just a fraction of a percent, these lives can very much have been saved with tighter gun control. And to reiterate, when we view this relatively to other nations, the proportion of gun violence is much much higher in the USA.
Entirely? No. But I find the holes in blaming illegal weaponry to be well within the margin of error.
Refer to gun culture argument.
Might I remind you of a town called Kennesaw, that made gun ownership mandatory for every household. Gun crime plummeted nearly 75% from before the ordinance to after the ordinance.
Yet, a 1991 study in The New England Journal of Medicine compared Washington to its suburbs before and after the gun law took effect. It found that the law was linked to a 25 percent drop in homicides involving firearms and a 23 percent drop in such suicides. The study found no drops in other kinds of homicides and suicides in Washington, and no changes in the suburbs.
Of course, the mixed quality of the evidence on the efficacy of gun control, along with its varying interpretations, means that lawmakers should be allowed to assess it for themselves to set reasonable gun control policies. Yet, there is always this ideological juncture, where we have to consider preserving individual rights as a priority over collective safety, which is reached everytime a massacre occurs.
