Is there a gun thread?

[t0yrobo]

Man I haven't shot a gun in over 5 years now. I used to shoot in a IDPA league with my dad. Everything is based on real life (more or less) defensive situations, and you get scored on time accuracy and some technical stuff.
I shot either a Kimber 1911 in .45, or a HS200 (Springfield XD) in 9mm. I really liked shooting the .45, but I was much better with the 9 . I had a chance to shoot a friends Les Baer custom 1911 in 9mm, that was easily the nicest gun I've ever shot, everything was just right.

[GamerMON]

Everyday civilians shouldn't be able to carry around guns, I'm all for rights and all that but this is one right I think people should not have.
If you use them for fun in gun ranges or to hunt that's cool, and I'm sure that's what only the members on this forum use them for. There are a lot of very bad people out there though, and they abuse this (muggers, gangsters etc).
The only people who should be able to carry these around with them everywhere they go are the Military and the Police.

Hate to say the cliche but "If you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns". I don't think criminals should have guns. However, I believe everyone else should have guns.

[BRIK]

I'm really not going to bother to take this any further, mostly because I'm not American. But I'm just going to say this; guns are bad. If people didn't have the right to carry them around in the first place there wouldn't be the massive gun related crimes there are now.
In Australia a lot of people who live in dodgy areas regally carry around blades with them, not because their dangerous but just in case. If some mugger comes up to you demands all valuable possessions, they can just wave their blade and be, you know I don't think so. That usually ends that. But if a mugger comes up to you with a loaded pistol, all they have to do is pull a trigger and you're done for. Even if the mugger has a knife as well, its still damn easy to disable them. Not so much with a gun.
As I said I'm all for weapons and recreation, that's a big thing over here with shooting ranges and you can get hunting permits in the bush if you're so inclined. But I just strongly believe that civilians shouldn't be able to own and carry around a gun in public.

[Ack]

I'm really not going to bother to take this any further, mostly because I'm not American. But I'm just going to say this; guns are bad. If people didn't have the right to carry them around in the first place there wouldn't be the massive gun related crimes there are now.
In Australia a lot of people who live in dodgy areas regally carry around blades with them, not because their dangerous but just in case. If some mugger comes up to you demands all valuable possessions, they can just wave their blade and be, you know I don't think so. That usually ends that. But if a mugger comes up to you with a loaded pistol, all they have to do is pull a trigger and you're done for. Even if the mugger has a knife as well, its still damn easy to disable them. Not so much with a gun.
As I said I'm all for weapons and recreation, that's a big thing over here with shooting ranges and you can get hunting permits in the bush if you're so inclined. But I just strongly believe that civilians shouldn't be able to own and carry around a gun in public.

You make a few good points, but I think you should consider a few things. First, anti-gun laws limit you from owning a gun, yes. That doesn't mean the criminal won't have one. We've already established that he's willing to commit the crime, so it's possible he's already broken it and has an illegal firearm.

Second, if he does have a firearm, he has to contend with the knowledge that you might also have a firearm, possibly a much bigger one than his, and that you may be better trained with it than he is.

Third, there are stories of people firing entire magazines at each other across a table and missing...it's still possible to disable said criminal with a gun, just like one with a knife. He may have a false sense of security from a weapon, but he would with another weapon as well.

Fourth, gun crime may cut down, but crime wouldn't stop. The United States offers an interesting case in which a mass of differing ethnicities of varying economic status sit in close proximity to each other, with a history that focuses heavily on racial interaction. While much of it is pivotal to our nation's history, the interaction between minorities has been just as bloody. Remove guns, and you still haven't addressed the real problem with crime in the US.

Fifth, the US isn't exactly liked internationally, stemming from many policies related to the Cold War and its puritanical background. I prefer the thought that if suddenly one day someone does attempt an invasion, I already have the tools to wage a guerrilla campaign at my disposal.

[GamerMON]

http://www.theblessingsofliberty.com/articles/article11.html
This a great Article on the differences between American and Swiss gun culture.

While many shoot for sport, all males aged 20 to 42 are required by militia system regulation to keep rifles and/or pistols at home. In addition, gun shops abound. Yet firearms are rarely used in crime.

Hate to use another cliche but "guns don't kill people, people kill people". I am looking at my shotgun in the closet. It doesn't look like it is going to go run off into the street and kill people.

But if a mugger comes up to you with a loaded pistol, all they have to do is pull a trigger and you're done for.

Yeah because their victim is at disadvantage not having a gun (being in this instance a law abiding citizen). If the mugger knew his victim was legally required to own a gun, he would be less likely to attack as it would not be such an easy target. Now I am not saying guns bring peace. I concede that if someone walks up behind you and puts a gun to your head there is nothing you can do but shit a break. More important than laws is the culture around guns that really matters. You can't get the cat back in the bag. Guns exist and criminals don't follow laws. This puts law abiding citizens at in disadvantage in places with excessive gun control laws.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_YTM_eAWnQ

[BRIK]

Fifth, the US isn't exactly liked internationally, stemming from many policies related to the Cold War and its puritanical background. I prefer the thought that if suddenly one day someone does attempt an invasion, I already have the tools to wage a guerrilla campaign at my disposal.

Wow I hope you never have to come to that, I'm sure you never would need to though considering you have as many Allies as Enemy's, namely my own country and the UK.

[Erik_Twice]

That image about rape that implies that people advocating gun control like to see women raped is wrong on so many levels I almost exploded.

Fact 1) Most rapes do not happen in a "dark alley". Period.
Fact 1.5 ) Most rapes are done by people the victim trusted, like familiars or friends.
Fact 2) Most rapes do not end in murder
Fact 3) If the woman being raped has a gun, so can the rapist. In fact, since the rapist is the one attacking here he has
Fact 4) Assuming death penalty for rape is the best thing to do is, on the very least, very debatable.
Fact 5) Theory =/= Hypothesis

I think it's very dishonest to charge the debate by introducing rape in the equation, specially in such a manner. If you want to argue something, no matter what your position is, do yourself a favor and lay the facts on the table in the most rational and academic manner instead of relying on alarmism.

And unless you are a twelve-year old, please, "Hitler ate sugar" is not going to win you any debates.

Fifth, the US isn't exactly liked internationally, stemming from many policies related to the Cold War and its puritanical background. I prefer the thought that if suddenly one day someone does attempt an invasion, I already have the tools to wage a guerrilla campaign at my disposal.

Nobody is going to invade the US. Who is going to attack the most powerful army in the world?

The US is allied with every single powerful country in the world. Who can wage war against Japan, every single European country, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and Russia at the same time? Nobody can, even assuming that someone wants to

Nuclear detterance also mean that war between those states is possible.

[Ack]

Fifth, the US isn't exactly liked internationally, stemming from many policies related to the Cold War and its puritanical background. I prefer the thought that if suddenly one day someone does attempt an invasion, I already have the tools to wage a guerrilla campaign at my disposal.

Nobody is going to invade the US. Who is going to attack the most powerful army in the world?

The US is allied with every single powerful country in the world. Who can wage war against Japan, every single European country, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and Russia at the same time? Nobody can, even assuming that someone wants to

Nuclear detterance also mean that war between those states is possible.

But all of this could change in a relatively short time. I realize that the US has many valuable allies, more than we ever seem to openly acknowledge. But the future is unpredictable, and what seems a guaranteed fact today may not be in a decade, depending on what happens in the world and who comes into power.

When the second amendment was put into place, the United States was a fledgling nation, worried about a secondary attack from the most powerful empire on the planet. Yes, the US now has the most powerful military, but it only took two centuries, and it's possible that the military can change dramatically in a few short years. Consider the rapid decline of the quality in the American armed forces in the short period between World War II and the Korean War.

The use of a nuclear deterrence is also questionable. If one was launched, it would cause Armageddon...we've threatened it for years, but could we really do it? Are we actually psychologically capable of annihilating a large portion of the world as a reflexive action to save ourselves? We've had some military commanders who were willing to discuss doing so in the wake of wars, such as in Korea (against the North Koreans and Chinese) or in Vietnam (against the North Vietnamese), but whether our civilian government would ever truly authorize it ever again...I don't know.

[Bradtemple87]

This just made me laugh, I have always loved guns and always will.

[BoringSupreez]

This just made me laugh, I have always loved guns and always will.

Yeah. It's funny how many people who are against guns have never fired one. The fun is undeniable.