Gun Control

[ZeroAX]

No proof or source for the claim of the murder rates? Is it based on totals or percentages? And that chart I provided gives more detail than you are admitting. You just have to do a little extrapolation using math.
We have a huge border issue and many murders occur on our border due to Mexican drug gangs. There is no distinction made between a violent murder using Mexican guns as perpetrated by Foreign Nationals and murders that occur involving only Americans.
This is never discussed by those that want to maintain the stereotype of the John Wayne American.

Yes let's insert racism into this discussion too. That will prove the redneck stereotype to be false.

[Johnodog]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... grace.html


I didn't think this happened without guns?

[ZeroAX]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... grace.html


I didn't think this happened without guns?

Your sentence doesn't make sense.

Also daily mail, you might as well have linked to Fox News.

And if I was desperate enough to prove my opinion correct (which I'm not, cause simple numbers already proved my correct, not that I needed the numbers since COMMON sense proved me correct), I'd too go through google trying to find ALL the stories about ALL the shootings in America by people who had free access to guns. Only I don't have the unlimited time to do that.


Here we are worried of terrorists and the mafia having guns. There you are afraid of teenagers having guns. See the difference?

[Ivo]

Step one: some lunatic fires in a dark and crowded place
Step two: some law abiding citizen fires at the direction of the lunatic
Step three: some one thinks that the law abiding citizen is the lunatic and fires at his direction
Step four: some one who just arrived at the place only vaguely heard the first shots and assumes that the law abiding guy who shot at the other law abiding citizen is the lunatic who shoot the first shots and shoots him
And so on and so on.(...)

Indeed, many good points there. So-called "friendly fire" is a real issue with professionally trained people (police / army) so that is yet another strike against the reasoning that trivialising access to weapons improves things. Overall I think it makes things worse.

I think people that really want to have guns (because they feel the need to or whatever - and I do grant there are legitimate reasons) should be able to get guns legally. I just think they should very well jump through special hoops to get them (or more likely, to get the ammo). The same with driving, which I still maintain is a very good comparison.
It is justifiable to get a gun and a few rounds once in a while for hunting and other legitimate uses. It is harder to justify having a full automatic or keeping hundreds of bullets. I just don't see why it is unreasonable to require you should have to put in the hours to be trained and demonstrate you can use it and keep it safe.
People that have insufficient eyesight etc. are not allowed to drive for obvious reasons and similarly should not be allowed to own guns, and there are other examples where it is not so complicated to see there should be some reasonable regulation on access.
If you want an automatic weapon (why? And why is it unreasonable to require to citizen to justify the need in a case like that?) you should demonstrate you are able to handle the recoil and so on - just like truck drivers need to demonstrate they can handle driving with long trailers etc. in order to do so.

Another common thing brought up in these discussion is that criminals will always be able to get weapons so law abiding citizens should as well. That is only true to some extent. If it is easier to get weapons legally it also makes getting weapons illegally that much easier - it should be noted that some of those "law abiding" citizens may actually be intermediates in getting the guns to the criminals (on purpose or inadvertently). Given ZeroAX above post, teenagers that may steal the guns of their parents may be a good example of this happening (so having to go through a mandatory safety course and passing a written test bout the respective regulations, as happens for getting a driver's license, may help avoid some of those cases by giving greater education to the licensed gun owners).

There is also the factor that if criminals know that many citizens are armed, they can become more violent. If you are a (smart) criminal you may just shoot first and rob rather than just rob at gunpoing and escape (why risk getting shot in the back).

Great power should come with responsibility and all that. As easy as a fishing license, I can only hope that was a joke.

Ivo.

[Luke]

As easy as a fishing license, I can only hope that was a joke.
Ivo.

Getting a concealed license depends on where you live, but where I live in NC, it is just about that easy.

[DinnerX]

I think people that really want to have guns (because they feel the need to or whatever - and I do grant there are legitimate reasons) should be able to get guns legally. I just think they should very well jump through special hoops to get them...

I agree with this. I don't think I can keep guns away from determined criminals, but I can make life a little more annoying for them. It might stop some of criminals all together. It might simply lessen the damage others can do. Some of them will still get guns, but I think the gains are worth it, since the background checks and such cost me almost nothing.

It is justifiable to get a gun and a few rounds once in a while for hunting and other legitimate uses. It is harder to justify having a full automatic or keeping hundreds of bullets.

I don't agree with this. I don't think citizens need justification for owning something. I think the government needs justification for taking something away. Small difference perhaps, but it does lead to slightly more lenient weapon laws. It's a chance I'm willing to take.

[Johnodog]

Yes let's insert racism into this discussion too. That will prove the redneck stereotype to be false.

Racism???????Is this what passes for a thoughtful response these days? A shallow baseless charge of racism. How pathetic. If you are gonna make up things why even bother to answer? Do you not follow news. Have you not heard of Fast and Furious? Are you unaware of the Mexican drug cartels? How big of a rock do you live under?

[Luke]

People are pissy on this board today. I know it is a Monday but jeez.

Smile.

[Johnodog]

zeroax.
You still did not provide any facts. Nice try to impeach my sources,especially when you provide none. I must take your word as even less reliable than Fox(I don't watch) or the Guardian( I'll take you word that it is a British rag)
But so far nothing you have said has made any logical sense.( Wow that IS easier than actually answering or providing a counter point,now I see why you do it)

[Johnodog]

There is also the factor that if criminals know that many citizens are armed, they can become more violent. If you are a (smart) criminal you may just shoot first and rob rather than just rob at gunpoint and escape (why risk getting shot in the back).


You do understand that this is pure conjecture and that others have at least as much proof that the opposite will occur. Plus what you say is contrary to human nature and all know science of criminology.