Gun Bans

[Paixao]

So... when are we going to get some links for all these stats the OP is claiming?

Seriously.

As for gun control: taking away pepper spray is too far, but nobody but the police and the military need guns on an everyday basis. Due to the nature of guns as devices for gaining control over another person, they'll always be 'at hand' to those that want them (i.e: those people wanting to threaten people with guns) rather than those that need them (the little old lady being mugged).

YES, guns can be used for perfectly OK uses: e.g. hunting or recreational shooting. But you certainly you don't need to own an assault rifle with a short barrel and 30 shots in a magazine to do either of those, though.

[Big Jim P]

For the purposes of safety, if you have not cleared the weapon and checked the chamber personally in the last few secounds, or it's currently in a state of complete or partial disassembly, a gun is always loaded.

Firearms Safety 101: Keep your booger-hook off the bang-stick, damnit!

Diane Feinstein does not need silly "safety", especially not on the floor of the Senate.

Anyone displaying the level of sheer ignorance and stupidity as in the photo does not have the legitimacy to be proposing any law pro or con concerning firearms. Of course the gun-control faction have a beef about gun accidents. They apparently cause them.

[Tagmatium]

It will always happen here. It goes in cycles and since we've had a spate of high-profile firearms incidents in the USA, it manifests here as this sort of thing.

The rehashed topics, perhaps.

Since you've been here a long time, I assume you've noticed patterns?

flogging dead horses is what we do best around here, but I haven't seen a thread like this in a while.

What, one with an unsourced OP filled with wild assertions that the crime-rate in Europe? And how it's sky-rocketing, therefore the USA shouldn't change its gun laws?

I'm virtually certain we've seen it before, or perhaps once I've seen one OP filled with anecdotes presented as evidence and claims of research, I've seen them all.

[Frisivisia]

Diane Feinstein does not need silly "safety", especially not on the floor of the Senate.

Anyone displaying the level of sheer ignorance and stupidity as in the photo does not have the legitimacy to be proposing any law pro or con concerning firearms. Of course the gun-control faction have a beef about gun accidents. They apparently cause them.

Just like how people how have never smoked Marijuana before have no right to regulate it. And the ATF must be comprised entirely of drunken, gunwielding chainsmokers.

[Big Jim P]

flogging dead horses is what we do best around here, but I haven't seen a thread like this in a while.

What, one with an unsourced OP filled with wild assertions that the crime-rate in Europe? And how it's sky-rocketing, therefore the USA shouldn't change its gun laws?

I'm virtually certain we've seen it before, or perhaps once I've seen one OP filled with anecdotes presented as evidence and claims of research, I've seen them all.

I was actually rather happily surprised that the OP was leaving the U.S. alone and talking about the laws of Europe for a change.

[Kouralia]

Or the gun is not loaded, and even if she does shoot someone, it would be a member of the US Senate, so no big deal.

For the purposes of safety, if you have not cleared the weapon and checked the chamber personally in the last few secounds, or it's currently in a state of complete or partial disassembly, a gun is always loaded.

And therefore unable to hurt anyone unless it's some dangerous open-bolt weapon, or you do a 'me vs Aqi' and smash them in the teeth with the butt-stock.

^_^

I'm annoying like this.

[Big Jim P]

Anyone displaying the level of sheer ignorance and stupidity as in the photo does not have the legitimacy to be proposing any law pro or con concerning firearms. Of course the gun-control faction have a beef about gun accidents. They apparently cause them.

Just like how people how have never smoked Marijuana before have no right to regulate it. And the ATF must be comprised entirely of drunken, gunwielding chainsmokers.

First point, I agree. They do not. Second point, at least the ATF seems to train it's agents.

Edit: And there are many, many places one can go to learn the basics of just about any subject. Add willful ignorance to Feinstiens obvious stupidity.

[Nua Corda]

Anyone displaying the level of sheer ignorance and stupidity as in the photo does not have the legitimacy to be proposing any law pro or con concerning firearms. Of course the gun-control faction have a beef about gun accidents. They apparently cause them.

Just like how people how have never smoked Marijuana before have no right to regulate it. And the ATF must be comprised entirely of drunken, gunwielding chainsmokers.

nice logical fallacy there.

Knowledge on the subject of guns =/= Being addicted to substances

[Tagmatium]

What, one with an unsourced OP filled with wild assertions that the crime-rate in Europe? And how it's sky-rocketing, therefore the USA shouldn't change its gun laws?

I'm virtually certain we've seen it before, or perhaps once I've seen one OP filled with anecdotes presented as evidence and claims of research, I've seen them all.

I was actually rather happily surprised that the OP was leaving the U.S. alone and talking about the laws of Europe for a change.

Eh, we're, as a whole, usually held up as an example of what the USA would become if they take away the guns.

It's a shame the OP's a bit weak, and doesn't mention any sources, though. Strains credibility.

[Frisivisia]

Just like how people how have never smoked Marijuana before have no right to regulate it. And the ATF must be comprised entirely of drunken, gunwielding chainsmokers.

nice logical fallacy there.

Knowledge on the subject of guns =/= Being addicted to substances

6/10, needs poorer grammar.

[Iseran]

I'm not sure you understand...

i was talking about how armed self-defense can stop such atrocities.

A mother killing her children could have been stopped by self defense? Yeah they were just gonna pull out their AK and off their mother

Kim De Gelder killed toddlers and their care-givers in a nursery. You think it would have been a good idea that there would have been guns present in said nursery for "self defense"?

of course, less-lethal tools of self-defense don't exist.

[Big Jim P]

I was actually rather happily surprised that the OP was leaving the U.S. alone and talking about the laws of Europe for a change.

Eh, we're, as a whole, usually held up as an example of what the USA would become if they take away the guns.

It's a shame the OP's a bit weak, and doesn't mention any sources, though. Strains credibility.

It points out something obvious: Self preservation (in this case in the form of self defense) is a basic biological imperative.

[Tagmatium]

Eh, we're, as a whole, usually held up as an example of what the USA would become if they take away the guns.

It's a shame the OP's a bit weak, and doesn't mention any sources, though. Strains credibility.

It points out something obvious: Self preservation (in this case in the form of self defense) is a basic biological imperative.

However, it uses anecdotal evidence and assertions to do so.

My own "research", conducted due to this OP, seems to point towards the UK having significantly less crime than the RSA. Similarly, I've never been in any violent incidents in my life but my anecdotes as to how safe the areas I've lived in are worth bollocks without anything backing up those claims.

[Warshania]

So, which member of the gun lobby's puppet are you?

Did you even read the OP? It's about self-defense, not just gun ownership.

[Big Jim P]

So, which member of the gun lobby's puppet are you?

Did you even read the OP? It's about self-defense, not just gun ownership.

I read the OP and have responded. the post you quoted was directed at Choronzon, making fun of his rather silly statement.

[Tagmatium]

Did you even read the OP? It's about self-defense, not just gun ownership.

I read the OP and have responded. the post you quoted was directed at Choronzon, making fun of his rather silly statement.

He's quoting Choronzon directly.

[Big Jim P]

I read the OP and have responded. the post you quoted was directed at Choronzon, making fun of his rather silly statement.

He's quoting Choronzon directly.

Duh. Time for me to sleep.

[Nua Corda]

nice logical fallacy there.

Knowledge on the subject of guns =/= Being addicted to substances

6/10, needs poorer grammar.

How about actually responding to the argument? Or perhaps you cannot?

[Dyakovo]

6/10, needs poorer grammar.

How about actually responding to the argument? Or perhaps you cannot?

I think you probably nailed it right there...

[Iseran]

here are some of my sources:

http://libertarianhome.co.uk/2012/12/uk ... us-states/

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... a-U-S.html (notice how all of the countries in the "hall of shame" either ban or severely restrict self-defense)

http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2 ... rol-lobby/

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/ ... ted-898817 (unreported crime in the UK, specifically manchester)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... urope.html (shows how crime rates increased under socialist governments who tightened gun control and further restricted all forms of self-defense)

[Tagmatium]

here are some of my sources:

http://libertarianhome.co.uk/2012/12/uk ... us-states/

From that source: "In response to various comments, please note: There are 50 states in the USA. The graph above does not show them all, it shows the lower end. I would have thought this was obvious, but apparently not …"

So the UK's murder rate is higher than the US states at the lower end of the graph.

Not brilliant, but the graph doesn't display the higher rates.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog ... land-wales

One of the sources I found, which says that, on the whole, crime is down across the UK.

[Nua Corda]

@OP: Your sources are clearly biased, and your method of attacking the problem is silly, but you are right in that banning guns does not stop mass shootings or crime in general.

[Astholm]

I think, rather than banning guns outright, shouldn't there be more emphasis on the mental health of purchasers of guns:
Chron.com article
WSJ.com article

Mental illness and violence aren't always connected, but shouldn't it be at a magistrate-type level to decide if someone is unfit? Not all mentally ill people are, or have the ability to be, violent, the stereotype however, is still in place (and I know this personally, seeing as I have a friend who works with mentally ill adults, not in a hospital setting, but a daycenter).

Guns are necessary in certain circumstances; e.g. shooting as a sport, re-creating historical events, historical dramas on television, self-defense [in certain circumstances] etc. so they can't and shouldn't be banned outright (it would mean sanitizing history, e.g. how could you have Deadwood [if they were to make this type of drama again?] without guns - they were, and are a fundamental part of Western culture - Western in this case, referring to the Old West, i.e. Clint Eastwood-type films, not the Western world].

Already, gun laws have gone to the Circuit Court of Appeals (which is the highest court in the U.S., IIRC), and the recent case in Illinois involving the 2nd Amendment, which seems to suggest that the right to bear arms is still considered fundamental in the United States.

Personally, I feel more emphasis should be put on treating guns as an implement, in much the same way a metal-welder, or specialised equipment is; basically, taking the "oh-its-cool-I-have-a-gun" attitude and reframing it into "I've got a gun, but it's an implement, not a weapon, not a toy" mindset - just like you wouldn't treat fireworks as toys, you'd have to get special licences to use them, and how to handle them carefully (OK, so fireworks aren't used for murder, but they can and do kill, and are often used as a de facto weapon in riots).

These are just my thoughts, and opinions, nothing more, nothing less.

[Tagmatium]

But in many places you don't need a license to use or buy fireworks.

[Freiheit Reich]

here are some of my sources:

http://libertarianhome.co.uk/2012/12/uk ... us-states/

From that source: "In response to various comments, please note: There are 50 states in the USA. The graph above does not show them all, it shows the lower end. I would have thought this was obvious, but apparently not …"

So the UK's murder rate is higher than the US states at the lower end of the graph.

Not brilliant, but the graph doesn't display the higher rates.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog ... land-wales

One of the sources I found, which says that, on the whole, crime is down across the UK.

The Libertarian article said that the UK has a lower murder rate 'than the USA as a whole' but how can you explain 4 states that have lower murder rates than the UK? It seems banning guns does not drop the murder rate to 0 like liberals would have us believe.

What would you do if you heard a man break your windown in the kitchen? You are in your bedroom? The police live 15 minutes drive from your home (assuming they will rush out). Can you hide for 15 minutes while you wait for them? The man broke in at night knowing somebody was probably home. He might want to rape you. The liberal would say call the police, hide, let the man rape you once he finds you (which is fine because he is a minority and came from a broken home), and then the man runs away out the back door when he hears sirens. Maybe he gets caught but you still live with the memory of rape and liberals cheer because no gun was used.

In a libertarian society this is what would happen. You hear the broken window, you jump out of bed and grab your gun from the closet (or under the bed), you turn on the light and you wait. The intruder comes in. You hold up the gun and he runs away or comes towards you and you fire. He gets hit and runs or he tries again and you kill him. You then call the police. You are not raped.

If he is killed than society lost a dangerous reject. If he runs away than nobody was hurt.

If you like the first scenario than say yes to Obama and his buddies that hate gun rights. Say no to guns. If you like the latter scenario than say yes to the libertarian party and gun rights.