First  Prev  57  58  59  60  61  62  63  64  65  66  67  68  69  70  71  72  73  Next  Last
Post Reply Should people be allowed to own guns?
71790 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
66 / M / Columbia, MO
Offline
Posted 1/23/13
Guns are the People's defense against Government. The answer to your question is YES.
17170 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / St Louis Mo
Offline
Posted 1/23/13

animegirl2222 wrote:

People should be allowed to own smaller guns for protection/hunting/etc.
But people should not be allowed to own assault rifles. Those things are harmful. There's a reason why they're used for war, you know.

You do realize the term assault rifles is a made up term. there is no such thing as an assault rifle. there are semi automatic rifles ie you normal hunting rifles and full auto it is illegal to own a full auto. the term assault is not about auto or semi but the ascetics http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yATeti5GmI8
63241 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / N.C.
Offline
Posted 1/23/13

trekeyus wrote:


animegirl2222 wrote:

People should be allowed to own smaller guns for protection/hunting/etc.
But people should not be allowed to own assault rifles. Those things are harmful. There's a reason why they're used for war, you know.

You do realize the term assault rifles is a made up term. there is no such thing as an assault rifle. there are semi automatic rifles ie you normal hunting rifles and full auto it is illegal to own a full auto. the term assault is not about auto or semi but the ascetics http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yATeti5GmI8


So you should be able to own an AR-15 or MP-4 for hunting? Also, it's extremely easy to turn a semi-automatic weapon into a fully automatic one. It's a moot point anyway for those that claim they need to defend themselves against imperialist Obama. If he were really the tyrannical leader the right wing raves about he would just drone strike your paranoid ass...
17170 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / St Louis Mo
Offline
Posted 1/23/13 , edited 1/23/13
It is much harder then you would think to convert a semi to a full. if you really wanted a full you would need a class C license witch these days is almost imposable to get.
14991 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / New York City
Offline
Posted 1/23/13

cero69 wrote:

Also guns aren't just meant to kill just people, but wild animals like bears, feral hogs, cougars, etc...


Caveman- I sure could have used a gun hunting this sabertooth instead of this sharp stick :(

63241 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / N.C.
Offline
Posted 1/23/13
I'm not saying it's easy, but it's not terribly difficult and it happens all the time. You can find videos on youtube on how to do it, and criminals and gun nuts do it all the time, so it's not that daunting a task. There shouldn't even be a license for owning anything fully automatic. Unless you are actively serving in the military there is absolutely no need for one...
63241 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / N.C.
Offline
Posted 1/23/13 , edited 1/23/13
I have a solution. Eliminate guns and bring back the days of the sword. I bet if you had to actually take a life with your own hands and look into someones eyes as you took their life there would be a lot less murders. Guns give people a false sense of empowerment. If the shit goes down I'm grabbing my camel back, my katana, and my speed skates. What are you gonna do when you run out of ammo?
314 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
19 / M / my mother's womb
Offline
Posted 1/23/13


I don't think you can really judge whether a place has lower crime rates due to gun ownership. It is not the only factor affecting crimes because there will always be crime with or without guns. I personally live in New Jersey and I believe that the crime rate is lower due to the fact that there's not much going on in this state. What I mean is that the location matters more, like what kind of environment people are living in as well as many other factors people are exposed to. It is very quiet and peaceful where I live so as a result, there is less crime. I once read a small excerpt from Malcolm Gladwell's The Tipping Point . Gladwell suggests that "The Power of Context" is influential in people's decision making. The Power of Context is basically the influence by the immediate environment around an individual. Gladwell uses the example of the NY subway system which used to be full of crime and filled with graffiti and trash. After a complete revision to eliminate farebeating and to prevent reoccurring graffiti, crime rate at the subways decreased as a result. This is showing that the immediate environment has a large impact on the way people act. So if you grow up in a bad neighborhood, of course you would be more prone to committing crimes like the majority. You cannot solely believe that higher gun ownership is the only factor in affecting crime rate when the environment is a much more influential factor.

Now, if no one were allowed to have a gun, then gun wouldn't be as big of a problem. Besides, anyone with a clean history could easily have experienced a traumatic event and starts going on a killing spree after buying a gun with no problem. Why do you want to kill a perpetrator? Even for self-defense, first thing you think about isn't to kill the person but to keep yourself alive right? As humans, we just shouldn't think about killing all the time. I know it's impossible. But isn't basically everything in the civil world theory-driven? You cannot expect anyone to follow the rules but we still need to spell out the rules just for the hopes. Government intervention into the free market is supposed to prevent trusts and monopolies right? Yet there are always loopholes, always powerful people who finds way around the rules. However, there is still the duty to do our best to keep these theories working toward 100%.
673 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Los Angeles, Ca
Offline
Posted 1/23/13

Sulla wrote:

Should people own guns for protection?

Should be carry guns on their person either in the open or secret?


I say yes they should own guns for protection and carry guns in the open, but not conceiled guns without permits.
Gun permit for guns in the open should be easy to get. People should get greater time if they shoot others with their gun out of anger or unjustified fear.


Of course we should be able to own guns, whether it be for protection, sport, or collection; it is our right. Although, military-style guns should only be available through licensed dealers followed by a mandatory in-class session(s) and a psychological evaluation.
17170 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / St Louis Mo
Offline
Posted 1/23/13
when ever I hear people talk about eliminating all guns i think of this skit it just make me laugh oh nieve some people are. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQcnE5lnPxg
314 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
19 / M / my mother's womb
Offline
Posted 1/23/13

DAN213 wrote:


Sulla wrote:

Should people own guns for protection?

Should be carry guns on their person either in the open or secret?


I say yes they should own guns for protection and carry guns in the open, but not conceiled guns without permits.
Gun permit for guns in the open should be easy to get. People should get greater time if they shoot others with their gun out of anger or unjustified fear.


Of course we should be able to own guns, whether it be for protection, sport, or collection; it is our right. Although, military-style guns should only be available through licensed dealers followed by a mandatory in-class session(s) and a psychological evaluation.


IMO psychological evaluations will never work unless you can fully analyze how an individual responds to different events. Let's face it, shit happens, emotions get ahead of morals. There will always be cases people cannot handle.
314 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
19 / M / my mother's womb
Offline
Posted 1/23/13

trekeyus wrote:

when ever I hear people talk about eliminating all guns i think of this skit it just make me laugh oh nieve some people are. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQcnE5lnPxg


that's the saying everyone is naive for opting for a crime-free world by creating laws that prevent crimes.
"There will always be criminals, so what's the point of laws?" <- exactly what you are inferring
3082 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 1/23/13
A world without guns will never exist.
63241 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / N.C.
Offline
Posted 1/23/13

DetectiveAlex wrote:

A world without guns will never exist.


True. They will never go away. Not when humans practice war and murder like we have for thousands of years. Only a truly world changing event may change that, but sadly we're just hard-wired for violence, and biological evolution is just too slow to make a difference.We need cultural evolution to even stand a chance of breaking this viscous cycle of bigotry, violence, and hate. Maybe Psycho Pass doesn't seem like such a bad future after all...
673 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Los Angeles, Ca
Offline
Posted 1/23/13 , edited 1/24/13

Pi3volution wrote:


DAN213 wrote:


Sulla wrote:

Should people own guns for protection?

Should be carry guns on their person either in the open or secret?


I say yes they should own guns for protection and carry guns in the open, but not conceiled guns without permits.
Gun permit for guns in the open should be easy to get. People should get greater time if they shoot others with their gun out of anger or unjustified fear.


Of course we should be able to own guns, whether it be for protection, sport, or collection; it is our right. Although, military-style guns should only be available through licensed dealers followed by a mandatory in-class session(s) and a psychological evaluation.


IMO psychological evaluations will never work unless you can fully analyze how an individual responds to different events. Let's face it, shit happens, emotions get ahead of morals. There will always be cases people cannot handle.


I agree, a psychological evaluation will not be 100% effective, but it's a preventative measure that should be common-sense. Take for example in California, if you are under the age of 21 you are mandated to complete 16hrs. of in-class and field training on how to ride safely and pass a written/ riding test in order to receive you're motorcycle license. Of course, by completing this, you are not immune to future accidents whether it be you're fault or not , it is a preventative measure to help decrease future accidents.
First  Prev  57  58  59  60  61  62  63  64  65  66  67  68  69  70  71  72  73  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.