Discuss. General Tavern rules apply. (No mudslinging, be respectful, etc.) I'll open with the statement that people should not have guns. No one at all, except the armed forces, and even then, keep the guns on the bases. Cops should carry riot shields and armor instead of guns. If they need crowd control, use Water Cannons. Supporting evidence: the following skit: What's your reason? Setting: A gun shop, modern day. A Customer walks into the gun shop and asks the Shopkeeper, "Hi, i'd like to buy a gun please." The Shopkeeper pulls out an application form and asks the customer "Alright, what's your reason for wanting to buy a gun?" The Customer says "I need one for personal protection." The Shopkeeper nods. "I have just the thing for you, I guarantee you cannot get any more personal protection than this baby right here. What i'm about to show you offers so much protection, it can stop a shotgun shell." The customer, very interested, stares at a full-size Riot Shield, the kind the police use. He scoffs. "That's not what I want, I want a gun!" The Shopkeeper shrugs. "Are you sure? This fine piece of equipment will protect you more than a gun ever will! It's very strong, reinforced titanium and kevlar..." by now, the angry Customer has left. Later, another Customer enters. "Hi, I need a gun." Again, the Shopkeeper clicks his pen and pulls out an application form. "For what reason?" he asks. The Customer hesitates, than says "Hunting." The shopkeeper smiles. "Of course! I love to hunt. Hunting is a wonderful sport. I guarantee that this item will give you the maximum amount of satisfaction you can ever get from hunting! Here, this is the sport at its peak." And he pulls out a Crossbow, complete with crosshairs for better accuracy. The customer shakes his head. "No, I want a gun." he states. The shopkeeper reluctantly puts away the Crossbow. "Are you sure? With a gun, it's so...boring, just pulling a trigger. And it's unfair to the animal, with this you give the deer a chance and have to chase it for up to an hour, just like the Native Americans did back in the day! Unless of course..." He fails to finish his sentence, as the pissed off customer has left in a huff. Later, a third customer walks in. "Hi, I'd like to buy a gun." he says. The shopkeeper holds his pen at the ready. "For what reason, sir?" he asks. The customer glares. "I dont need a reason, read the god **** second amendment "THE RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS." It's in the constitution you idiot! The shopkeeper merely smiles. "Of course, I have the perfect thing for you. This gun is covered under Second Amendment laws, guaranteed!" And he holds up a 200-year-old, civil-war-era musket, complete with rusty bayonet. The customer shrieks. "No, man! I want a Glock, a shotgun, something better than that civil war crap!" The shopkeeper merely smiles. "I'm sorry sir, please come back when they update the second amendment to include those types of guns. Here, i'll even give you a discount..." the shopkeeper holds out a discount to the enraged customer, who tears it in half and leaves. Fourthly, another Customer walks in. "I really need a gun, now." He says. The Shopkeeper holds his pen and application form ready. "For what reason, sir?" he asks. Instead of stating his reason this time, the Customer snatches the application form and looks at it. There, in the spot titled "Reasons" is a circle for "other". "Other! That's my reason!" the Customer declares triumphantly. The shopkeeper shrugs. "Very good answer sir." he says, while pressing a button under the counter. Two cops arrive at the shop in less than a minute and cuff the Customer. "Hey! What the *PROFANITY* ARE YOU *PROFANITY* GUYS DOING? I'VE DONE NOTHING WRONG!" He yells, almost breaking the glass of the windows. "Actually, you have." The Shopkeeper begins. "the "other" reason, by exclusion of the other reason, can only include wanting to kill or rob someone. Therefore, you were thinking about commiting a crime when you selected "Other" as your reason. Caught you red-handed, trying to buy the tools necessary to commiting a crime. You confessed to it when you selected "Other"! Take him downtown, please." The cops nod and take the Customer away. The last thing he hears from the Shopkeeper is "Oh, and I knew it was you all those times!"
Moral of the story: You do NOT need a gun for a particular activity. In any given activity (And I challenge you to give me a valid, legal activity for which you would need to personally own a gun), there are many other options. Why buy a gun for personal protection when a Riot Shield blocks shotgun shells? Why buy a gun for hunting when the point of hunting (and every other sport) is satisfaction, and since you get more satisfaction with more challenge, and since a crossbow offers more challenge than a gun, you'll get more satisfaction with the crossbow. Why buy a gun based on the Second Amendment when the Colonial-age guns were either giant cannons or black-powder, muzzle-loading Muskets? Did the Founding Fathers have AR-15's, and SPAZ-12 shotguns,And AK 47s, not to mention all the accessories like laser scopes and hollow-point bullets? I dont think so!
The only way you can disprove my argument is to give me a valid, LEGAL activity which requires you to personally own a gun. This excludes Skeet-shooting, because the facility can and should/will provide the gun. Until anyone can do that, YOU DONT NEED A GUN, NO ONE NEEDS GUNS! They're WAY too dangerous and make it too easy to kill someone! Why have something you dont need?
Right, so let's look at this logically. Guns are quite durable and are typically secure from theft. Therefore, the supply currently held by the populace should be sufficient for most needs at present. We can therefore expect modern day gun dealers to be catering to a notably diminished market, which would be a big deciding factor for going crooked.
If the guns used to commit crimes are confiscated at the time of arrest and not returned, the supply of illegally owned guns is diminished until more are aquired, but the guns used only for defense would remain relatively static.
You stated that nearly 60 percent of the guns used in crimes are from crooked gun dealers. Your statistics suggest that the remainder is almost entirely in the form of illegal gifting and borrowing.
If the guns used to commit crimes are confiscated at the time of arrest and not returned,
they do what with them?
You stated that nearly 60 percent of the guns used in crimes are from crooked gun dealers. Your statistics suggest that the remainder is almost entirely in the form of illegal gifting and borrowing.
Does this make sense so far?
Matt is focusing on guns used in crimes, instead of focusing on the wisdom of letting the general public (In America. If you're icelandic, no debate needed, knock yourself out) have guns.
Also, give me a reference to a time when a citizen went in "all guns blazing" with a rifle (I assume that means emptying the magazine at a target).
Here. I have complied with your demands. I don't care if this actually supports your viewpoint, because it's an isolated incident. Let's go large.
In Iceland, 30.3% of people own guns. They have one of the lowest gun crime rates in the world (Basicly 0). In the USA, 88.8% own guns, and 60% of murders are by firearm. The reason Iceland can enjoy this level of security is that it has a large number of things that the US doesn't, mainly a lack of hard drugs, a government that cares about you, and effective gun control. People have guns, but feel safe enough to keep them out of harms way. It is the world's most peaceful nation.
The reason Iceland can enjoy this level of security is that it has a large number of things that the US doesn't, mainly a lack of hard drugs, a government that cares about you, and effective gun control.
They also have a relatively small land claim and population, so I don't see that as being a valid comparison.
Criminals buy guns from crooked dealers. In case of gun control, I'm inclined to think that nothing much will change as more gun obsessed citizens will go looking for illegal guns. To control guns, that bit needs to sorted out.
As for the Longsword thing, that was from when I was thinking of ways to constitutionally disarm everyone. Longsword is the least practical weapon I could think of at the time. Since then, I have decided it's more important to stop the obsession with guns first.
They don't just like them, they're obsessed. Plus, there are lots of highly paranoid people who believe they have the right to shoot anyone they suspect of being a home invader. There's also a ton of hard drugs around. This is not the right social climate for firearms.
You're making generalizations and blanket statements which are simply inaccurate. You act as though all legal gun owners are obsessive freaks.
Second, a person is not classified as paranoid if they are owning a firearm in the instance of home invasion. That is one of the best reasons to own one. For protection in the event of an emergency that would cause harm. I would call that prepared, not paranoid.
Third, what do hard drugs have to do with anything related to this? You are a sensationalist.
To control guns, that bit needs to sorted out.
There is nothing to sort. There will likely be criminals for the remaining duration of human existence. You deal with it.
All in all, philj, I feel you have a lot of misconceptions on this topic.
All in all, philj, I feel you have a lot of misconceptions on this topic.
I am, to be fair, facing the problem from the UK, where the state has taken a hard line on gun control and licensing, and gun crime is very low.
Third, what do hard drugs have to do with anything related to this?
In retrospect, it's the drug laws rather than the drugs. My reasoning is that in most of the US, possession of illegal drugs of any kind will land you with a colossal sentence if you get caught. Consequently, dealers committed to selling hard drugs will not be so bothered with comparatively small sentences for having an illegal gun.
I am, to be fair, facing the problem from the UK, where the state has taken a hard line on gun control and licensing, and gun crime is very low.
You being in the UK makes more sense on your preconceptions with firearms. Thanks for clarifying. This subject can be a little touchy for me because legal, safe firearm owners get lumped into the idiots that buy a firearm illegal and do something stupid with it.
In retrospect, it's the drug laws rather than the drugs. My reasoning is that in most of the US, possession of illegal drugs of any kind will land you with a colossal sentence if you get caught. Consequently, dealers committed to selling hard drugs will not be so bothered with comparatively small sentences for having an illegal gun.
I'm having a hard time following philj's points. The Iceland argument made sense but had too many confounding variables. The longsword idea is completely impracticable. The relation to drug laws seems to have only tentative relevance to the topic.
At least 20 students were stabbed by a sophomore in Franklin Regional Senior High School, PA. So far none have died, but several are in surgery and 11 are in hospitals. The school's security guard was also injured. The suspect is alive and in custody.
And that's the difference. There were no deaths. I'm surprised at the number of people who were injured, but the severity of injury was magnitudes lower. Was there no one aware what was going on? Did the security guard get attacked first? Were they all trapped in one location due to lockdown policy?
The choice of weapon is irrelevant. The fact remains that 20 students were assaulted in both cases with completely different weapons.
Try comparing the fatality rate and tell me again that the choice of weapon is irrelevant.
So what is the real solution to school violence?
The real solution is awareness/treatment of mental health. People undermine the severity/implications of bullying, ignore depression, stigmatize illnesses, and have no way to get help. If we want school violence to stop, we need to stop blaming the victims, because then they become the aggressors.
southern new Mexico is lenient on just about about everything.
they hardly ever do anything about guns or knifes almost everyone has something. if you have a proper license you can own full auto rifles the license itself is hard to get but not the gun. and no no one goes around shooting each other witch is surprising.
their is a lot of (mostly) legal sources in some places for some example
1 ciudad juarez 2 puerto palomas 3 parts of El Paso Texas 4 the state of chihuahua
we have access to illegal firework guns drugs switchblades and multiple other things... and what surprises me is nothing happens. the cops in some areas are corrupt and tend to cause more problems then citizens. security gourds Cary concealed weapons in schools. the only thing that is asked of vehicle owners is that the tern signals work. all of this scary and yet nothing happens. the west is still wild just a bit more relaxed.
Why weren't there any ambulances or rescue vehicles at the scene?
Weren't there? Can you verify this?
Why did the medical examiner state that the rifle had been used when it was actually in his trunk?
Was that the medical examiner? Did you actually see the contents of his trunk?
Why were the parents of the dead children so cheerful?
Were they? Can you verify that they actually appeared in the video?
Why was one of the victims photographed sitting with the president?
Was that even one of them?
Why did FEMA set up a drill for Children in Emergency Situations at the same day at the same time as the shooting before the shooting happened?
Did they? Do you have any verifiable record of this?
Why did the parents of the victims create a facebook page to support the victims of the shooting three days before the shooting happened?
Did they? Would they? Can you think of any sane reason for this?
I advise you to recheck your assumptions. I have seen many such conspiracy "theories". They all follow the same general format:
1 Government has some goal. 2 It decides upon the single most outlandish, irrational, and counterproductive way of reaching it. 3 It makes a huge mess of everything. 4 It somehow deceives everyone except one or two obsessive paranoiacs. 5 Paranoiacs happen to have exhaustive supply of "top secret" information on hand. 6 One of them makes a tell-all video that is inexplicably immune to any form of government censorship.
Don't any of these "coincidences" strike you as being just a little bit suspect?
