Gun Control: Your Opinion

[F1-Insanity]

[citation needed]

You have the internet, bro. Read up. The amount of information out there on this is astounding, and me trying to summarize it will just be a waste of everyones time.

That's not how it works. You make the claim, you back it up. Simple rule of internet debate.

don't taze him, bro'

[Neu California]

The above as well as strict limitations on automatic/sniper rifles pretty much sums up my views. There is no real reason why anyone needs those. Not for hunting (unless you're ging for utter overkill) or self defense.

Please define what you consider automatic and sniper rifles.

The basic definition of a sniper rifle is pretty much a rifle with a scope. By that definition, you just out lawwed almost every single hunting rifle.

I think that's his idea...

What I should have said was high powered rifles.

And isn't the standard defintion of an automatic rifle one that you hold down the trigger and it keeps shooting

[New BladeSlayer Land]

There isn't a debate on the effectiveness of gun control. There are hundreds of studies that show the lack of the effectiveness of gun control. Along with many real world examples.
http://www.fff.org/freedom/fd0210e.asp
There is pretty much what I would say, though.

[Neu California]

[citation needed]

You have the internet, bro. Read up. The amount of information out there on this is astounding, and me trying to summarize it will just be a waste of everyones time.

That's not how it works. You make the claim, you back it up. Simple rule of internet debate.

don't taze him, bro'

WTF?

[Brogavia]

[citation needed]

You have the internet, bro. Read up. The amount of information out there on this is astounding, and me trying to summarize it will just be a waste of everyones time.

That's not how it works. You make the claim, you back it up. Simple rule of internet debate.

Backing up your claims on NSG is futile. Both sides dismiss the other source as disinformation and propoganda.

[United Dependencies]

[citation needed]

You have the internet, bro. Read up. The amount of information out there on this is astounding, and me trying to summarize it will just be a waste of everyones time.

It is the norm that whoever makes the claim shoulders the burden of proof. NSGers aren't too keen on looking stats that go contrary to what they may believe.

[Marinetus]

Gun control, like many other laws, is what holds society back and halts future improvements.

[United Dependencies]

Gun control, like many other laws, is what holds society back and halts future improvements.

source?

[Neu California]

There isn't a debate on the effectiveness of gun control. There are hundreds of studies that show the lack of the effectiveness of gun control. Along with many real world examples.
http://www.fff.org/freedom/fd0210e.asp
There is pretty much what I would say, though.

Highly biased source is highly biased

Do you have something more reputable/less biased?

Edit: Proof of bias:

Mission
The mission of The Future of Freedom Foundation is to advance freedom by providing an uncompromising moral and economic case for individual liberty, free markets, private property, and limited government.

back to top



Declaration of Principles
The United States was founded on the principles of individual freedom, free markets, private property, and limited government. As the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution reflect, individuals have the natural and God-given right to live their lives any way they choose, so long as their conduct is peaceful. It is the duty of government to protect, not destroy, these inherent and inalienable rights.

Thus, for well over a century, the American people said "No" to such anti-free-market government policies as income taxation, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, welfare, immigration controls, economic regulations, drug laws, gun control, public schooling, and foreign wars. Despite the tragic exception of slavery, the result was the most prosperous, healthy, literate, and compassionate society in history. Unfortunately, in the 20th century, our country has moved in an opposite direction. Operating through the IRS, DEA, ATF, INS, FDA, FTC , and a multitude of other bureaucracies, our government has waged immoral and destructive wars on our freedom, our property, and our well-being.

It has seduced us into believing that we cannot live without this political paternalism. It has weakened our moral fiber and our sense of self-reliance, self-esteem, voluntary charity, and community. It has damaged our families. It has hurt the poorest people in society. It has turned foreigners into enemies. It has trampled on our Constitution. It has undermined our commitment to the moral foundations of freedom and to the benefits of free markets.

The time has come for us to reevaluate our relationship to our government — to repeal, not reform, these immoral and destructive government programs — to recapture our commitment to the principles of free markets, private property, voluntary charity, and limited government that made our nation great — and to believe in ourselves again. It is time for us once again to lead the world to the highest reaches of freedom in history. It is to this end that The Future of Freedom Foundation is dedicated.

If that ain't biast I don't know what is

[EvilDarkMagicians]

Gun control, like many other laws, is what holds society back and halts future improvements.

Explain how it hold society back?

[F1-Insanity]

[citation needed]

You have the internet, bro. Read up. The amount of information out there on this is astounding, and me trying to summarize it will just be a waste of everyones time.

That's not how it works. You make the claim, you back it up. Simple rule of internet debate.

don't taze him, bro'

WTF?

you were zapping him for what you considered to be a 'violation' of 'internet debate'

[Marinetus]

Hell, if guns didn't exist, we would all be speaking German.

[United Dependencies]

Hell, if guns didn't exist, we would all be speaking German.

Why?

[New BladeSlayer Land]

There isn't a debate on the effectiveness of gun control. There are hundreds of studies that show the lack of the effectiveness of gun control. Along with many real world examples.
http://www.fff.org/freedom/fd0210e.asp
There is pretty much what I would say, though.

Highly biased source is highly biased

Do you have something more reputable/less biased?

This is why I left it to you to find your own sources. There is tons out there you can read. Until you have read both sides of the argument, trying to discuss any of it is useless.

[Silver Falcon]

I don't see why anyone would need a handgun. It's not very useful for hunting purposes. It's great if you want to keep it concealed and shoot somebody though. A handgun ban seems alright to me.

[Moronius]

I think we should treat it just like we treat other useful yet sometimes publicly dangerous machines: cars.

You should have to go to a gun school (which would include as part of its curriculum an ethics class, among other things). After successful completion of the course and its tests, you get a gun license. Whenever you buy or sell a gun, you report the transaction to a central authority.

If necessary, to prevent illegal arms trading, I think it would be reasonable to mandate random (perhaps yearly) "inspections" where you would take all the guns registered to your license and present them to verify that they are all still in your custody. Failure to do so would result in the suspension of your license.

[Marinetus]

[...]
Why?

Because firearms aren't the reason Hitler hated the Jews and waged war with the allied nations.

[United Dependencies]

[...]
Why?

Because firearms aren't the reason Hitler hated the Jews and waged war with the allied nations.

Your going to need to rephrase that because I have no idea what you just said.

[Uawc]

If you use a weapon with a higher-caliber round, you need to be careful of the recoil to keep your control on the gun.

On a more serious note, if you impose gun control laws, only the baddies who don't care about the laws will get the guns, leaving innocent citizens defenseless. Think you can count on the cops to protect you when you're held at gunpoint on the street corner? Think again.

Guns don't kill people. People kill people.

[Brogavia]

The above as well as strict limitations on automatic/sniper rifles pretty much sums up my views. There is no real reason why anyone needs those. Not for hunting (unless you're ging for utter overkill) or self defense.

Please define what you consider automatic and sniper rifles.

The basic definition of a sniper rifle is pretty much a rifle with a scope. By that definition, you just out lawwed almost every single hunting rifle.

I think that's his idea...

What I should have said was high powered rifles.

And isn't the standard defintion of an automatic rifle one that you hold down the trigger and it keeps shooting

I'm not going to argue with you on your defintion of automatic rifles, but your other one only proves you know nothing about firearms.

The majority of popular hunting rounds are based on military cartridges. For example, 30-06 was the mainstay of the American military from 1906 until the 1950s. .308 winchester is for all intends and purposes identical to 7.62mm NATO, .233 Remmington is the same a 5.56mm NATO.

[New World Liberty]

Hell, if guns didn't exist, we would all be speaking German.

and we wouldn't be speaking english if your from the states. you'd be speaking whatever native dialect and regional language. or the internet either.

[New BladeSlayer Land]

I don't see why anyone would need a handgun. It's not very useful for hunting purposes. It's great if you want to keep it concealed and shoot somebody though. A handgun ban seems alright to me.

To defend yourself from the criminals that can get illegal handguns?

[Marinetus]

[...]

Guns didn't cause World War II, they just made it more efficient.

[Brogavia]

I don't see why anyone would need a handgun. It's not very useful for hunting purposes. It's great if you want to keep it concealed and shoot somebody though. A handgun ban seems alright to me.

When it comes to hunting, yes they are. Hunting bear almost requires it.

[F1-Insanity]

Gubmint sez: