AGS Steam Games

Forums → WEPR → Firearms and whatnot

122 21195
jdoggparty
offline
jdoggparty
5,860 posts
Nomad

To starty this debate, lets say that we're starting up a brand new country with no existing laws or cultural prejudices on the issue. This is because it is a much different arguement if you take the U.S., than if you take somewhere like Britain. It prevents arguments revolving around destroying the thousands of jobs in the industry too.

So. Brand new country. What are its gun laws going to be?

Should people have the right to own guns? If so, should they be securely locked away in a cabinet until the country is invaded, or should people be allowed to carry them on the street? Should people be allowed handguns but not assault rifles?

  • 122 Replies
Wavecrest
offline
Wavecrest
73 posts
Nomad

All taking away guns does it make it so that criminals will have them and you won't, so you stand no chance. Hurray for pacifism.


How about reducing the chances of would-be criminals turning into criminals? We got too many campus shootouts because people lay their hands on firearms too easily.
Kasic
offline
Kasic
5,552 posts
Jester

How about reducing the chances of would-be criminals turning into criminals? We got too many campus shootouts because people lay their hands on firearms too easily.


If someone wants a gun, they are going to get one. You can't stop them, so you might as well have the ability to defend yourself. Even if they couldn't get a gun, they'd go with someone like Arson or a Knife or something. But I highly doubt they couldn't.
Wavecrest
offline
Wavecrest
73 posts
Nomad

If someone wants a gun, they are going to get one.


Guns are not made from paper. If someone wants a gun the illegal way, he has to know the right people to approach. He has to pay the black market price for it. If a trigger happy kid wants to shoot his principal, instead of taking his careless Dad's gun in the basement, he has to somehow steal or rob one from someone with the right to possess firearms without getting caught or do the above. Most people, not just kids, are not that resourceful.

You can't stop them, so you might as well have the ability to defend yourself


We can make things harder for them by decreasing the availability of firearms. That does count for something. The ability to defend yourself does not completely rely on having firearms. It is seldom necessary and there are many alternatives.

Even if they couldn't get a gun, they'd go with someone like Arson or a Knife or something.


Not being able to stop them fully doesn't mean we should just sit there and let them do it.
Kasic
offline
Kasic
5,552 posts
Jester

Guns are not made from paper. If someone wants a gun the illegal way, he has to know the right people to approach.


True, but I still don't think it would be all that hard to find a simple weapon. Albiet i've never looked, but with all the guns out there...

The ability to defend yourself does not completely rely on having firearms


True, but you don't have to be particularly skilled to use one, whereas other forms of defence you may have to be. Point and shoot. More than likely just point.

Not being able to stop them fully doesn't mean we should just sit there and let them do it.


Of course it doesn't, but i'm saying that there will be violence if they want it, you have to do what you can to minimize it.
NoNameC68
offline
NoNameC68
5,043 posts
Shepherd

We can make things harder for them by decreasing the availability of firearms. That does count for something. The ability to defend yourself does not completely rely on having firearms. It is seldom necessary and there are many alternatives.


Please don't say knife.

How about reducing the chances of would-be criminals turning into criminals? We got too many campus shootouts because people lay their hands on firearms too easily.


Too many campus shootouts? One can easily be considered "too many". Can we talk about all the shootouts that have not happened? College shootings are not a regular thing. School shootings aren't even a regular thing.

Let's ALSO take into consideration the fact that guns can be used to deter criminals. You are less likely to be robbed in a town where it is legal to carry a firearm. If you're a woman, your chances of being ***** are also lowered.

I also believe anyone who works behind a gas station counter should be allowed a concealed gun.

I support the right for people to own guns. Everyone should be privileged to hunt. Everyone should be privileged to protect their home and themselves. We should be allowed to protect each other.
Wavecrest
offline
Wavecrest
73 posts
Nomad

Please don't say knife.


I presume you have heard of pepper sprays and tazers? These are just as effective, without the lethal side factor.

One can easily be considered "too many"


Hmm, I am quite sure there have been more than one.

College shootings are not a regular thing. School shootings aren't even a regular thing.


These happen from time to time. There are shootings in other areas as well.
MRWalker82
offline
MRWalker82
4,005 posts
Shepherd

Guns are not made from paper. If someone wants a gun the illegal way, he has to know the right people to approach. He has to pay the black market price for it. If a trigger happy kid wants to shoot his principal, instead of taking his careless Dad's gun in the basement, he has to somehow steal or rob one from someone with the right to possess firearms without getting caught or do the above. Most people, not just kids, are not that resourceful.


Umm... 'black market' prices, at least here in Arizona, run about $200 for a revolver. Yep, 1/4 of what I paid for my perfectly legal Sig P229. So no, cost is NOT prohibitive in any sense. And really it's not that hard to find someone that can get a gun. As for the other part of your argument, what does an irresponsible but otherwise law abiding person who obviously has some parenting issues have to do with whether or not I have the right to own and maintain firearms for my own personal enjoyment? Shouldn't we instead place stiffer punishments on the gun owners who fail to properly secure their weapons?

How about someone steals a baseball bat and beats someone to death with it. Are we going to increase baseball bat security laws? Of course not! Yet that is what is being proposed with firearms, and it's ridiculous.
NoNameC68
offline
NoNameC68
5,043 posts
Shepherd

I presume you have heard of pepper sprays and tazers? These are just as effective, without the lethal side factor.


Talk to a policeman and ask them why pepper spray is last resort.

Tazers are great. However, one should not be so limited. If someone breaks into your house, a tazer will work. However, they still make as horrible crime deterrents.

Hmm, I am quite sure there have been more than one.


Can we not quote mine please? My point is that a single school shooting is too much. All shootings are bad. But we can't take firearms from every law abiding citizen just to prevent a few school shootings. School shootings are NOT common by any means. They seem to happen often, but please take into consideration the fact that there are tens of thousands of high schools and colleges out there. Chances are, you aren't going to be shot.

These happen from time to time. There are shootings in other areas as well.


So are bat beatings and knife stabbings. Think of all the innocent people who would be alive if someone had a gun to protect them. Not all crimes and murders are a result of guns. If more women carried guns around, I am willing to bet my life that there will be less **** victims.

So what is your opinion on communities where people are allowed to carry fire arms openly with a permit?
Wavecrest
offline
Wavecrest
73 posts
Nomad

Umm... 'black market' prices, at least here in Arizona, run about $200 for a revolver. Yep, 1/4 of what I paid for my perfectly legal Sig P229. So no, cost is NOT prohibitive in any sense. And really it's not that hard to find someone that can get a gun.


Cost is not prohibitive in Arizona. However, if you refer to the OP, you'd notice that we are currently talking about 'a brand new country with no existing laws'. There is no proof whatsoever that prices in this new country are the same as in Arizona.

As for the other part of your argument, what does an irresponsible but otherwise law abiding person who obviously has some parenting issues have to do with whether or not I have the right to own and maintain firearms for my own personal enjoyment?


My example of 'Careless Dad' was intended to describe the ease with which a person can lay his hands on a gun. It was not intended to act as a reason to support stricter gun laws.
MRWalker82
offline
MRWalker82
4,005 posts
Shepherd

Cost is not prohibitive in Arizona. However, if you refer to the OP, you'd notice that we are currently talking about 'a brand new country with no existing laws'. There is no proof whatsoever that prices in this new country are the same as in Arizona.


I am well aware of that. However what I was illustrating is that, as we are a border state, we get our 'black market stuff' mainly from a neighboring nation who we do not dictate to regarding laws. In the instance of a fledgling nation this would likely be an analogous scenario, especially if the neighboring nations were weaker economically. Just as I can't postulate on the costs in a new nation neither can you. However I am offering real world examples off of which we may formulate hypothesis.

My example of 'Careless Dad' was intended to describe the ease with which a person can lay his hands on a gun. It was not intended to act as a reason to support stricter gun laws.


And that is fully understood. However this has no bearing on strict gun laws, as short of complete prohibition of firearms instances like this will still occur. And likely they will occur even with total prohibition! What happens when Mr. Gangster leaves his pistol out on his nightstand lest he be robbed and his exploring son finds the weapon whilst he sleeps? Mr. Gangster will have gone around your prohibitive gun laws and purchased on illegally and yet we arrive at the same situation as Mr. Careless.
Wavecrest
offline
Wavecrest
73 posts
Nomad

However, they still make as horrible crime deterrents.


May I ask what your source of information is?

there are tens of thousands of high schools and colleges out there. Chances are, you aren't going to be shot.


Yet there is a chance of that happening and people do get shot, and there are ways to further lower it. I am not saying that we should prohibit all firearms so people can't even hunt, but we can certainly have stricter gun laws.

So are bat beatings and knife stabbings. Think of all the innocent people who would be alive if someone had a gun to protect them. Not all crimes and murders are a result of guns. If more women carried guns around, I am willing to bet my life that there will be less **** victims.


Yes there are cases when having guns are better than not having guns. But a gun is not necessary and can make things worse in a lot of cases. A gun's practical use for defense is limited other than deterring. If you are in a crowd and have to shoot, the consequences of missing are far worse than missing with a tazer. If you walk around the corner and suddenly have a gun pointed to your head, having a gun makes no difference from having a tazer. If someone breaks into your house at 3 am, are you sure you can aim properly and shoot him in the right place?

So what is your opinion on communities where people are allowed to carry fire arms openly with a permit?


Reminds me of the Wild West. If a robber comes at you, challenge him to a duel.
Wavecrest
offline
Wavecrest
73 posts
Nomad

What happens when Mr. Gangster leaves his pistol out on his nightstand lest he be robbed and his exploring son finds the weapon whilst he sleeps? Mr. Gangster will have gone around your prohibitive gun laws and purchased on illegally and yet we arrive at the same situation as Mr. Careless.


With prohibitive gun laws, the father has to be both Mr. Gangster and Mr. Careless for that to happen. Without prohibitive gun laws, Mr. Careless alone is enough.
NoNameC68
offline
NoNameC68
5,043 posts
Shepherd

May I ask what your source of information is?


It's simple logic. A simple taser must be used in close quarters. Any person who breaks into your home or tries to attack you will likely have a lethal weapon. A knife is much more threatening than a taser.

A taser gun can only be fired once.

Tasers are great, don't get me wrong. However, you shouldn't limited to tasers alone.

This is all assuming that the offender does NOT have a gun. A gun is far more threatening than a taser. Tasers, again, are great, but they lack intimidation against someone who is armed.

I am not saying that we should prohibit all firearms so people can't even hunt, but we can certainly have stricter gun laws.


Tasers are inferior to guns. In a world where criminals have guns (something that will happen, even with prohibition), it is foolish to rely on a taser more than a gun unless you are specifically trained in combat.

A gun's practical use for defense is limited other than deterring. If you are in a crowd and have to shoot, the consequences of missing are far worse than missing with a tazer.


People drop to the ground and/or scatter when a dangerous person pulls out a weapon, such as a gun. But even if there's a risk in killing an innocent person in the crowd, it's not nearly as risky as having no weapon at all and letting the offender have control. Taser guns are great, but must they be the only alternative? Tasers are inferior to guns.

If you walk around the corner and suddenly have a gun pointed to your head, having a gun makes no difference from having a tazer.


True, but owning a gun doesn't hurt you in any way. Not only that, but if you see someone pointing a gun at another person, you're still able to protect that person.

Even if an innocent person is harmed, it's better than everyone being killed.

If someone breaks into your house at 3 am, are you sure you can aim properly and shoot him in the right place?


If you point a gun at someone who does not have a gun, they will put their hands up or run away. If they begin to draw their own gun, then at least you have a fighting chance! Again, it doesn't hurt to have a gun in this situation.

Sure, it's possible for them to shoot and kill you despite the fact you are armed with a gun. The gun, in this case, did not help. But at least the gun increased your odds of survival.

Reminds me of the Wild West. If a robber comes at you, challenge him to a duel.


Yeah, because we see this all the time in places where guns are legal today.
skarl
offline
skarl
250 posts
Nomad

in my country, guns are allowed, but you have to have a license, like you need a licence to drive a car, and you have to use it only for sports. It's true that criminals will get firearms whitout al licence. but this will make that a lot harder, and you can arrest someone just for having a firearm, whithout him needing to hurt something with it first.

remember: if everybody carry's a gun for their safety, it's much more likely that someone who freaks out pulls it out and shoot somebody. or remember all those school masacres?

harryoconnor
offline
harryoconnor
77 posts
Peasant

In my country completely illegal in cities for both police and citizens. In countryside only allowed for certain jobs and only hunting rifles. Special forces and military are allowed them. Untrained people with guns will just lead to deaths, ether train everyone and give everyone a gun like switzerland, or make them as near to illegal as possible like UK.

Showing 16-30 of 122