First  Prev  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  48  Next  Last
Post Reply Should people be allowed to own guns?
31067 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / Arizona
Offline
Posted 9/25/12

IINatsu wrote:

well duh i know because i own 12 2 of them are for hunting and i own a pistol for as the law calls it self defense i think and agree that it should be legal but there are people who abuse that right and people get hurt because of it so i can agree 50/50 that people should and shouldn't be allowed that's my personal view lol btw i own about 12 guns so that means i have 9 guns that are iilegal soooooo yaaaaa


how do you get 9 are illegal? Once i get a new place (more room for a bigger gun safe) i will be getting at least 3-4 more including a .308 AR (scar 17 or hk762, not sure which)
Ronule 
39065 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M
Offline
Posted 9/25/12
I say yes. As a gun-owner myself I obviously want the right to keep my gun. Admittedly, I sometimes think we should have stricter laws though; but I have a feeling that most of the time when somebody is killed by a gun, the shooter probably came to own it by less than savory means, which would probably imply that limiting sales or people's ability to own guns wouldn't help much in the long run.
31067 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / Arizona
Offline
Posted 9/25/12

ndalum75 wrote:

Short answer yes, as there are many legitimate purpose for having them (self defense, hunting, shooting ranges, or someone's just a collector). Even if you outlawed them there would still be an illegal market that would let criminals get their hands on them. For those saying someone could go crazy and go on a rampage, such a person could just as easily do so with a knife or sword, and you can't ban everything in existence that could possibly be used to kill someone.





M3wKitty wrote:

As a shooting enthusiast, I'll have to say yes. In the hands of responsible, good people, they're no more dangerous than the 2 ton cars we drive around in. It's one of our constitutional rights (for us U.S. citizens haha).

Think of it this way: if you get caught in the middle of a shooting, you're going to want your fellow, law-abiding citizens around you to have guns too, right? The bad guy doesn't give a s**t about the law and when seconds count, the police takes minutes.


this has been said multiple times, and it has been said multiple times because it is true. Glad im not the only one paying attention to the big picture

Summary:
Criminals are by definition people who dont follow the laws. You can pass all the laws you want, but criminals will still have access to them and then you end up with a situation where the law abiding citizens cant defend themselves
12513 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / F
Offline
Posted 9/25/12 , edited 9/25/12
If guns were made illegal, do you think it would stop criminals from getting them? Or rather anyone who wanted a gun from getting them? Trust me it would just make a hug underground market of buying and selling guns.


Just because guns are not legal does not mean people will stop using, people will stop getting hurt, and murders will stop.

So should people own them? to each his own I say. If that's what makes you feel safe at night. Most of the people I know who have guns don't carry them around, they are usually locked up in the house. Not saying that all people who use them for protection don't carry them around.
Posted 9/26/12

crash1187 wrote:


IINatsu wrote:

well duh i know because i own 12 2 of them are for hunting and i own a pistol for as the law calls it self defense i think and agree that it should be legal but there are people who abuse that right and people get hurt because of it so i can agree 50/50 that people should and shouldn't be allowed that's my personal view lol btw i own about 12 guns so that means i have 9 guns that are iilegal soooooo yaaaaa


how do you get 9 are illegal? Once i get a new place (more room for a bigger gun safe) i will be getting at least 3-4 more including a .308 AR (scar 17 or hk762, not sure which)


well i got two m16 and an m4 a full auto pistol omg if they found out i had that and a gold plated desert eagle btw go with the scar its accuracy is amazing and its sooo fun to shoot
Tarya 
47511 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
35 / F / Glen Allen, Virgi...
Offline
Posted 9/26/12


Hopefully will be getting the Kimber Solo within the next couple weeks! So excited - it is such a beautiful pistol!
15266 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
18 / M / Canada, Montreal
Offline
Posted 9/27/12

crash1187 wrote:


AnoAnaru wrote:

Of course not!! Not having guns in a society reduces the criminality and deaths. Especially in the United-States where most people have guns and there are more shooting fatalities than their peers, like example Canada who are way more strict about guns. In 2009 there were 16 799 homicides in the US, 11 493 were caused by firearms and so I came to realize guns encourage people to commit violence. In America almost anyone could get his hands on a gun, that's whats dangerous about it. One thing that shocked me when I was in the US is the numbers of casualties I saw on tv, almost more than one per week...

Well that's my opinion, based on what I learned and lived. I may be wrong, if so tell me


there are countries that have done that, and their crime rates went up.

also Switzerland has crazy lax gun laws and their crime rate is really low.

you have to remember, the people doing the crimes dont care about the laws. outlaw guns (remember they dont care about laws) and they will still get them, but then people who follow the laws dont have any and the power shifts into the favor of the criminals.

Think about it, if you were looking at two houses to break into (assume the same stuff in each house) but u knew one had no gun and one might have a gun. which house would you chose to break into?


Ya that is true but I'm taking into account that there are many "normal" people who go crazy and with guns try things.. and if it were harder to get guns then maybe some wouldn't get some. Though i understand your point.
15266 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
18 / M / Canada, Montreal
Offline
Posted 9/27/12
Well of course banning the use of cars wouldn't pass, but I mean guns, what are they good for? Protect yourself? If no one had a gun life would be safer. Though I kinda understand you can't just ban all guns, but are the laws harsh enough? I mean to acquire a gun, I don't really live in the USA so I'd like to know It's just like drunk drivers, we can't really do anything about it, just improve the laws and find better solutions like taxis at the bars and stuff like that By the way I'm sure there is alot more drivers than gun owners and imagine if it would be more than 1% (1%=800k)? That would be catastrophic, but in a way I understand you can't really dream about a world without casualties...
eldos1 
66108 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34
Offline
Posted 9/27/12

SlimShadyDogg wrote:

You do realize that, like 70% of Americans are stupid right?!?! On a non joking note (though there WAY to many stupid people down south), peoples minds are fragile things. A person who may be perfectly normal for 30 years, who finally gets a gun may just end up pulling an aurora Colorado type thing. It doesn't take much to turn a perfectly normal person into a physco. But I guess since it's your constitutional right, it's fine.


Don't make fun of those Cajuns in Louisiana, They might want to come back up to Canada.

Posted 9/27/12
No.
Fullstop.
There are no arguments about it, it doesn't matter what I think of America (for example) who are able to get their hands on weapons so easily for "self defensive purposes", allowing citizens the right to guns is like going up to a high school student in their final exam and saying "Hey, I know you're a good kid who won't cheat, but here's the answer sheet!".
10 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
66
Offline
Posted 9/27/12
Guns don't kill people. People kill people. Humans have been killing each other for centuries without the use of a gun.
5151 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / Michigan city Ind...
Offline
Posted 9/27/12
YES! Gun laws really only keep guns away from normal good people that fallow the law, it is not hard to get an illegal gun from a drug dealer or what not.
5151 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / Michigan city Ind...
Offline
Posted 9/27/12 , edited 9/27/12
Lets do something better then banning all guns... Like lets give everyone a gun so if some one tries to rob some one everyone around will pull out their gun. Makes people think twice when they are thinking no good.

PS this was ment to be a replay to AnoAnaru but it didn't replay...
49294 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
32 / M / US
Offline
Posted 9/27/12

Hintkin wrote:

People should carry guns ONLY IF they are in war or there's a terrorism going on..
Security guards ,Police and Military should be the ones to have guns in the first place because it's their job and responsibility to protect the unarmed citizens.
People who are not even on those jobs should not have one. Guns are not some kind of fashion sense.
Self protection should not be the case.. Because there's no justification and evidence that the one who's holding the gun is right of shooting his/her "enemy" or not. How would you know that the one suspect is attempting to shoot the "victim"? That's just my opinion though



Who protects the people from the police?

There have been numerous cases of law-enforcement officers using unnecessary or unwarranted force. In the Northwest US a few years back, a deaf old man was shot to death for carving on a bit of scrap wood with a knife. There are several unwarranted law-enforcement killings each year -- and plenty of information to be found if someone were to go looking (though they don't often make the morning news).

In Romania (and other former soviet block countries) when the Soviet Union took power, the first thing they did was make everyone register weapons. The second thing they did was to round up all of those registered weapons (and the law-abiding people obeyed the law) then all the land, factories, businesses and houses were redistributed in accordance with the "equality" of the communist ideal.

In the US prior to and during the Revolution, English officers rounded up and arrested community leaders and businessmen who expressed pro-american attitudes (like the Red scare or our current airport security). It was this callous indifference towards the rights of the people that, in great part, inspired the American Revolution.

Carrying weapons isn't about hunting or target shooting. It isn't even necessarily about home defense. An armed citizenry is a free citizenry. In any republic or democracy, the people hire law enforcement (and military) as servants either directly ( in a democracy) or through representatives (in a republic). The police and military exist to SERVE the people, not to protect them, mother them, watch over them, and certainly never to control them.

As a society as a whole, the presence of weaponry in the civilian population acts as a check-and-balance in the governmental process. There are morons in the world and there will be an occasional rare accident (although medical malpractice kills many, many, many times more people than gunshot wounds each year). There will be the occasional psychotic who goes on a rampage. Life is never perfectly safe and banning guns will not make it any safer. There have been numerous mass-killings with improvised bombs, knives ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osaka_school_massacre ), gasses and even AIRPLANES (Remember one September a few years back?). Banning guns does not, on the macro scale, noticeably increase the statistical safety of the population. A psychopath driven to the point of going on a murder spree is very unlikely to check with his local laws to make sure his murder weapons are socially acceptable. By contrast, countries such as Switzerland have actually had good success with REQUIRING gun ownership. Switzerland for example has remained neutral in global conflicts for decades and decades. Even Hitler went right around it in WWII since it is virtually impossible to subdue and armed citizenry. Crime rates also drop since assault and theft are very unpopular when the victims shoot back.

So banning guns does not make you more likely to be safe. The whole point of the 2nd amendment in the US is to ensure that the government obeys the people -- not the other way around. Arming only the police and military is the quickest way to ensure corruption.

Fear is a useless emotion. If you are unfamiliar with guns, learn a bit about them. Fear of guns or people with guns is as absurd as fear of kitchen knives or motor vehicles. Humans are a tool-using species and guns are one of the many tools we use in life. There are many of them all over the world. They are everywhere and they aren't going away.


49294 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
32 / M / US
Offline
Posted 9/27/12 , edited 9/27/12

eldos1 wrote:

One problem is that when some one says that there should be no guns, the starting point is not zero. They are out there now.
Imagine this experiment:
10 people are locked in a room. You are told that there is 1 drug abuser, 2 people convicted of domestic violence and a convicted sex offender. Also, there are 2 people in the room who have guns. They could be anyone in the group. Now your choice is, do you want one also? Do you think you can talk the others out of their guns, so no one in the room has one, or are you counting on that only the nice people have them and will help you?


This post has an awesome analogy. Thanks.
First  Prev  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  48  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.