Dagobahn Eagle Posted November 5, 2002 Share Posted November 5, 2002 Okay, before I start on this, let me just ask everyone not to flame the other side. I know this is a "touchy subject", but let's try to keep this out of the flaming pit. - Every 16th minute in the USA, a gun takes a life. - Policemen have ended up shooting all these innocent people becuase they have thought that these people were carrying guns. - You may say they defend against robbers, but hey, you're not supposed to defend yourself against robbers. It's not worth killing some guy over $10-300. - If you're scared of burglars, get a burglar alarm. If you can't afford one, order some fake "I've got a burglar alarm" stickers . - We're in the 22nd Century. Wild West rules do not apply; it's the juries who are supposed to procsecute and sentence criminals, not the American people. 1. A gun in the hand is better than a cop on the phone. A gun in the hand often leads to attitude, which leads to provocation, which leads to 2. 911, government sponsored dial-a-prayer. 3. By the time the cops get there, they'll be drawing chalk lines. Yeah, the burglars chalk lines, when you could have given him the money and he would not have had to die. If you didn't have a gun, why would the burglar have one (outside of the USA they don't; take the hint). A gun is the only tool that affords a 5'0" petite woman the ability to stop or deter a 6'5" 300-lb man. Why stop him? Try running away. Yeah, rapes are ugly and nasty, but hey, it's part thanks to the US ton of rights that the crime rate is so high. Can't hurt to ban something, can it? We can't uninvent the gun. Ordinary eople can always make them, or failing that, make bombs which are even more deadly. That's why Palestinians prefere suicide bombing. Those that try to attack Israel with a gun usually get shot before they "accomplish" very much. Terrorists get their guns from "gunsmiths" in Pakistan who can duplicate almost any make and model. Remember the cell-phone guns in Europe? The look like cell phones but hold four .22 cal. rounds linked to firing pins in the keypad. Those are the kinds of "toys" criminals make when guns are banned. Millions of illegal guns are flooding through the porous borders of Britain..on and on and on....blah blah blah.[/qipte] So what you're saying is we legalize narcotics and drunk driving? I mean, people do that anyway too, doesn't have to mean banning it isn't preventive. Washington DC has the most strict gun control laws in the nation. Maryland is also very strict. Look where it got them. DC has one of the highest murder rates in the country. Look at rural areas, lax gun control laws, high gun ownership rates and very low crime rates. Look at the statistics, there is a positive relationship between gun control and crime rates. There is a negative relationship between gun ownership and crime rates--more guns means less crime--a provable fact by simply comparing rural areas with urban. Criminals go to areas of high gun control because they know their chances of running into armed resistance are slim. If we ban guns completely, well, the burglars won't go to some places more than other places. We tried banning alcohol, it failed. Yeah, but it failed by only 3 states voting against it, didn't it? Right now we have a good deal of people who are against both alcohol and guns. If we vote again, how do we know that will fail? Self defense is everyone's birthright, not just in the USA. Get over it. Name one other nation where it's considered a good idea to deny a burglar money when you know he has a gun, for then to shoot him when he tries to use it; which comes down to killing him instead of handing over $200. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jediduo Posted November 5, 2002 Share Posted November 5, 2002 I agree with you for the most part, Eagle, but I must point out something: If there is someone lurking around in my house at night, potentially endangering my wife and kids, I'm gonna f****** shoot him. I won't try to kill him, but if he's on my property without permission at night, he is legally defined as a threat and it is within my right to bear arms and protect my loved ones. With all due respect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dagobahn Eagle Posted November 5, 2002 Author Share Posted November 5, 2002 You shoot him but you don't try to kill him ? One can amazingly fast lead to the other, which is my point. Just lock your doors and call 911. Some places they get there really fast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artoo Posted November 5, 2002 Share Posted November 5, 2002 Well I'm gonna stay out of this one cause I really don't think "debating" this will be the best of things for me right now. Anyway to add something to this post... "Wear a T-Shirt, support you right to bear arms." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drey Posted November 5, 2002 Share Posted November 5, 2002 get security gun emplacements set up around the yard. that'll teach 'em! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Homer Posted November 5, 2002 Share Posted November 5, 2002 I can see both sides of this, however, I happen to agree with Duo on this one...if guns are banned, criminals will find a way, knives, baseball bats , something....next we'll have to ban bows and arrows and then throwing knives...crime will always happen, it's an inescapable fact...if someone tries to rob me and I shoot him and he dies, well, I'm sorry...he was threatening me, he should have gone out and found a job like most other people...I don't mean to be so calous about it, but it's the truth...someone taking your stuff that you have worked hard to get is hard sit by and just watch, you want to protect it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xwing guy Posted November 5, 2002 Share Posted November 5, 2002 Eagle, if I had the time I would disprove all of your points. But don't worry I'll be back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zygomaticus Posted November 5, 2002 Share Posted November 5, 2002 I wont take sides in this argument, but i'll ask you these questions: Do you think it's better that: a) a guilty person dies from a shot by someone. b) an innocent person dies at the expense of some potential guilty person who might do harm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clefo Posted November 6, 2002 Share Posted November 6, 2002 The 2nd amendment is probably the most outdated thing ever... None of us needs to form militia or hunt.. Of course I'm an unpatrotic comminist terrorist liberal, so pay no mind, Charlton Heston is a great american hero Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dagobahn Eagle Posted November 6, 2002 Author Share Posted November 6, 2002 Just 300 years old. Norway is 1200+, China is 4000+... the constitution is 300. And the US army isn't that big.. Heh, the US moans and whines about how Saudi Arabia is so filthy rich, but for crying out loud, you can freaking buy Saudi Arabia for what you'd get selling most of your army stuff to China or whatever:D Anyways.. ...I don't mean to be so calous about it, but it's the truth...someone taking your stuff that you have worked hard to get is hard sit by and just watch, you want to protect it. But does he deserve to die for it? Look, if he's put in jail, well, they've got educational facilities. When he gets out, he might get a job. How about just pointing the gun at him and march him to the nearest PD, instead of shooting him? That, and well, yes, you worked hard for your money; that's what capitalism is all about (I'll save all my bad thoughts about capitalism for later, but at least cappie is better than commie), and I understand you want to keep them, but hey, I still don't think they're worth killing for. If you have a job, you'll make more money. And if you really for some reason spend a lot of money in public each day, carry a check book or a credit card, which thieves can't steal (okay, maybe the credit card, but you know what I mean). I can see both sides of this, however, I happen to agree with Duo on this one...if guns are banned, criminals will find a way, knives, baseball bats , something....next we'll have to ban bows and arrows and then throwing knives...crime will always happen, it's an inescapable fact... Well, look at the rest of the world. Crime rates might be high, but criminals do not use guns as much because they know the people they threaten do not have them. And even if police shows up, they have no reason to go from Robbery to Murder, as the police won't be shooting on them (in many countries it's harder for a cop to get permission fire a gun than it is for NATO to get permission to launch one of the USA's nukes ). You know, psychologically, guns make you want to kill people instead of negotiating. That's been proven somewhere, unless I'm mistaken. It might be subconcsious, you might not be a person like that. But I think that if it comes down to that "guns don't kill, people do" argument, then let me copy someone else's (forgot who) sig: "But a lot more people succceed in killing with guns". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xwing guy Posted November 6, 2002 Share Posted November 6, 2002 - Every 16th minute in the USA, a gun takes a life. I would like to see where to proof in that is, cause I don't believe it. - Policemen have ended up shooting all these innocent people becuase they have thought that these people were carrying guns. Yeah, thats happened, but if you don't have a gun and police think you do and you just keep approaching police and they tell you to stop, but you don't stop and they shoot you, then thats your own fault. - You may say they defend against robbers, but hey, you're not supposed to defend yourself against robbers. It's not worth killing some guy over $10-300. Yeah, but robbers are also murderers, rapists, and other scum of the earth. If a robber comes into your home and wants to take all your stuff and vandalize the place, and rape your wife/gf too, what are you gonna do? Let him rape her, or do the smart thing and just shoot the sorry SOB. If you're scared of burglars, get a burglar alarm. If you can't afford one, order some fake "I've got a burglar alarm" stickers Burglar alarms might scare off some criminals, but against one thats crazy and determined then it won't do you any good. Its like all talk but nothing to back it up. We're in the 22nd Century. Wild West rules do not apply; it's the juries who are supposed to procsecute and sentence criminals, not the American people. True, but British rules don't apply here either, where you can't defend youself and the criminal gets a minmal sentence if that. Yeah, the burglars chalk lines, when you could have given him the money and he would not have had to die. If you didn't have a gun, why would the burglar have one (outside of the USA they don't; take the hint). Thats a complete lie. Excerpts from British newspaper headlines a little while after February 27, 1998 when the British government did its gun ban, "Handgun crime soars despite gun ban", "London gun murders tripled in 2001, "Steep rise in violent crime". That proves that taking away guns from lawful citizens DOES NOT solve violent crime. I'll be back later for more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jatt13 Posted November 6, 2002 Share Posted November 6, 2002 Just 300 years old. Norway is 1200+, China is 4000+... the constitution is 300. i'm not sure what you're getting at, but it's obvious that the constitution is succesful. it's lasted longer than any other government without any major changes. sure, we might be a young country, but we've had only 1 civil war and no government changes in 300 years. i'd say that's pretty good. back on the ranch, just because the thief gets your money, what's to say he won't kill you anyway? some people just like killing, otherwise there'd be no murders. there's been plenty of times where the robber took the money, then just killed the people. and what if you didn't have any money, because you did what you were suggesting and only carried checks? he could kill you just out of anger. yeah, guns are bad if used wrong, but like others have said, crime will happen. there was plenty of crime before guns were invented (not as much, i admit, but that was partly caused by less people living close to each other), and they found other ways to kill people. another thing. guns are fun. and i don't mean shooting people, but plenty of people hunt for sport and most eat a lot of what they kill, at least around here. also, target ranges and skeet shooting are fun too. and one more thing. you said earlier, just lock the doors and call 911. well, if the guy is armed (and i mean with a bat or something, not a gun), then he could easily break in. and if you had nothing to protect yourelf with, if he was bigger or stronger than you, then you're either dead or hurt. also, how cold the cops capture anyone? if the guy is faster, then he gets away. no guns to even shoot out his tires. and another thing. if you ban guns, people would still have them. and not just "bad guys" either. there are plenty of people who like to go hunting, or use them for protection. and the "bad guys" would still have them too. plus you have to consider the number of guns out there. even if you did ban them, and everyone happily complied, how would you dispose of them? you couldn't just throw them away. that's another problem. last thing. Yeah, but it failed by only 3 states voting against it, didn't it? Right now we have a good deal of people who are against both alcohol and guns. If we vote again, how do we know that will fail? we did ban alchohol, btu how long did that last? people liked it to much and the amendment was made null and void by another one. even if we did get it banned, it'd probably just get knocked down by another amendment. and that would lead to more people who shouldn't be there getting elected to office by promising to try and get guns back. and try changing the bill of rights. that's gonna be harder than just a normal amendment. well, not changing, but completely taking something out. phew. i'm done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dagobahn Eagle Posted November 6, 2002 Author Share Posted November 6, 2002 Main points: - It's EASIER to get guns without restrictions. - It's EASIER to kill/do damage with a gun than with a knife. I would like to see where to proof in that is, cause I don't believe it. I'll get evidence for that, just wait. Right now the evidence I've got is thin (a European newspaper website stated it, which is easy for you to turn down of course), but I'll find a US page saying the same thing. However, this number also includes accidents and suicide, and hey, you are a couple of million people.. Yeah, thats happened, but if you don't have a gun and police think you do and you just keep approaching police and they tell you to stop, but you don't stop and they shoot you, then thats your own fault. If those were the worst cases, I'd be happy. But when a cop shoots before even telling the suspect to stand down, which has happened too many times... 1. Policeman thinks you've got a gun, 2. Policeman shoots you to preserve life and realises that that thing you were holding wasn't a gun after all... Yeah, but robbers are also murderers, rapists, and other scum of the earth. If a robber comes into your home and wants to take all your stuff and vandalize the place, and rape your wife/gf too, what are you gonna do? Let him rape her, or do the smart thing and just shoot the sorry SOB. I know what you mean, if the girl I like was threatened I'd want to kill the person who threatened her too. Even without a gun, you could do stuff to stop him. But hey, even girls with guns get raped. Burglar alarms might scare off some criminals, but against one thats crazy and determined then it won't do you any good. Its like all talk but nothing to back it up. Most alarms automatically call police/security company so that they'll come and arrest the criminals. Also, it works as a preventive effort as a burglar seeing a sticker is likely to move on to another house. True, but British rules don't apply here either, where you can't defend youself and the criminal gets a minmal sentence if that. Thats a complete lie. Excerpts from British newspaper headlines a little while after February 27, 1998 when the British government did its gun ban, "Handgun crime soars despite gun ban", "London gun murders tripled in 2001, "Steep rise in violent crime". That proves that taking away guns from lawful citizens DOES NOT solve violent crime. If you increased funding to the police force so that they could move out faster and arrest people, crime would probably go down. Also, think about school massacres and stuff. You think that 10-year old who brings a gun to school got it on the black market? No. He probably got it from his home because his parents didn't lock it away properly. I'll be back later for more. Uh, oh i'm not sure what you're getting at, but it's obvious that the constitution is succesful. Humor, boy, humor . back on the ranch, just because the thief gets your money, what's to say he won't kill you anyway? some people just like killing, otherwise there'd be no murders. there's been plenty of times where the robber took the money, then just killed the people. and what if you didn't have any money, because you did what you were suggesting and only carried checks? Well, nobody carries only checks. And even if you did, you could still give the thief your jacket or wallet or watch or whatever. another thing. guns are fun. and i don't mean shooting people, but plenty of people hunt for sport and most eat a lot of what they kill, at least around here. also, target ranges and skeet shooting are fun too. and one more thing. you said earlier, just lock the doors and call 911. well, if the guy is armed (and i mean with a bat or something, not a gun), then he could easily break in. Those things will happen even if you had your own little nuclear missile at home. Someone will always break into places. Look at the USA with their 1000 nukes. Yet you lost 3000+ lives at 9/11. What I'm saying is that, hey, if guns are banned, it'll be harder to get them (not every crook can know of a black market or bother trying to smuggle guns into the USA). "Guns do not kill, people do. However, it's easier with a gun." And hey, it's the USA. What's the probability that you'll NOT have a bat yourself ? and another thing. if you ban guns, people would still have them. and not just "bad guys" either. there are plenty of people who like to go hunting, or use them for protection. and the "bad guys" would still have them too. plus you have to consider the number of guns out there. even if you did ban them, and everyone happily complied, how would you dispose of them? you couldn't just throw them away. that's another problem. Sell them to the Palestines for them to retake Israel, and the Sioux to retake the US of A . Seriously, though, yeah, hunters will still have guns. However, I think the culture will change over time. Okay, let's change Ban to Heavy Restrictions. In Norway a lot of people who are into hunting (which are quite a deal) have guns. Also, we've got sporting shooting clubs for people down to the age of 14(?). BUT These clubs keep their weapons locked down tightly, in an Iron safe/room that's virtually impossible to break into. And these bird hunting people (like my dad, who used to have a rifle at home) keep them locked down, out of sight, and keep their ammunition hidden somewhere else than the guns. Result: You can't get to your guns for self-defense so it's like you don't have one. I think it's as illegal to keep a rifle loaded at home as it is for a missile base to suddenly launch a nuke at North Korea without the Pentagon knowing. We do, however, have a counterpart of your right to carry arms: The HV (Home ) branch of the Armed Forces. This is a number of guerrilia unit of sort, much like the US Minute Men during the Revolutionary War. Now the problem is, there aren't any regulations on these weapons. As a result, there have been all these cases of HV soldiers who appeared perfectly healthy (who might even be elite soldiers) who suddenly went deranged and started shooting up people (don't know if you heard about the Geilo massacre?). Well, point is, the people who do that are people who have free access to guns; not the bird hunters. I think what both Norway and the USA should do was issue weapons to the HV (N) or Public (USA) only when the country was mobilizing for an invasion of own territory. That way, when we knew someone was invading us, we'd have the Militia/HV alive and kicking by the time the enemy lands at our shores, but during peacetime this militia could not hurt our country. See, that's what guns at home is for; defending your homeland, not your loved ones (sorry if that sounded harsh). Also, everyone who got a gun to join this 2nd Amendment Militia should register (if they are issued guns only during DefCon, this would be achieved as the Army could only issue guns to these people), be trained in gun use, and respond to orders from the army when they could (just general ones, though, like "lie low", etc.). The Militia in question in the Second amendment is not "well regulated", so yes, it's in violation of the constitution . Yes, in Britain crime rates are going up. But eventually, they'll level and go down, and we'll "get the lives back" over time as less people will die. Because the culture will simply change. I'm impressed. 5+ posts and no flaming. Pretty good for a gun thread PS: Did I tell you I love writing ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jediduo Posted November 6, 2002 Share Posted November 6, 2002 I must say, this thread is going really well. Good idea, Eagle. Let's keep this one flame-free, fellas! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zygomaticus Posted November 6, 2002 Share Posted November 6, 2002 did i tell you that i hate long posts? well, i'll tell you now: i hate long posts did anyone look at my question earlier in this thread? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Young David Posted November 6, 2002 Share Posted November 6, 2002 Wow, Eagle ...have you ever made a short post? I'm not gonna get involved in this discussion. I did not read the complete post, their a bit too long for me ... but I'll have my say. What is wrong with America? Why is still not illigal to own a gun there? Their are kids shooting at schools, snipers killing people randomly ... things like that. And yet, it's legal to own a gun. A GUN ... You know, that thing that is made for killing or severly hurting. Here in the Netherlands weapons are illegal unless you have a permit. And I think thats how'it should be. I don't have a weapon. I can sleep peacefully. I don't I could sleep well if there were a weapon in my house. What if I had children and they would find a gun a 'play' with it. I don't want any killing machine near me ... It's just so ... hypocrite to have a weapon and at the same time watch in terror at the news because some lunatic freaks out with a gun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Havoc Stryphe Posted November 6, 2002 Share Posted November 6, 2002 I would normally jump at the chance to debate a controversial topic, but this topic is a really personal for me. I did this debate once before, and I would not want to travel this road again. xwing guy remembers, I'm sure We had it out before, matter of fact, I think I'll just go forum spelunking and bring it back up, so that you can see where I stand without me actually having to post it again. *goes off to spelunk* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy_dog no.3 Posted November 6, 2002 Share Posted November 6, 2002 I will admit it here. I have a gun (kinda), although it does not kill. It fire those sort of lead pellets. Now I'm not saying it isn't harmless, however, and it even looks like a real gun. Now if someone comes up to me while I'm in town and walking through a dark alleyway, and they start attacking me, then I'd shoot the lousy motherf***er in the leg or eye. I think my reason would be justifiable, given that he/she was assualting me and trying to take my stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dagobahn Eagle Posted November 6, 2002 Author Share Posted November 6, 2002 Short ones: Yeah, here's one: Get a pellet gun, not a real gun. They don't kill, they keep the bad guys out of your house. About the long post: I cut and pasted out of a school essay. Fit in nicely, though. Yes, Krkode, I answered your question in my last post. Here's a map, compass, and food rations for 7 days. Go find my answer now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Havoc Stryphe Posted November 6, 2002 Share Posted November 6, 2002 Here you go, the link to my original post in the original Gun Control debate. This will explain my stand and my conviction. However, I will not jump in this debate simply because last time, it got just a little hot under the collar! My Opinion on this matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boba Rhett Posted November 6, 2002 Share Posted November 6, 2002 Originally posted by Dagobahn Eagle Short ones: Yeah, here's one: Get a pellet gun, not a real gun. They don't kill, they keep the bad guys out of your house. You're joking, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breton Posted November 6, 2002 Share Posted November 6, 2002 It is quite simple, guns are meant for killing, not for defending. Bullets do not deflect bullets. Lets take an example. A guy gets a gun, and is a little short on money, so he decides that with his new gun, he can easily rob a house. So he breaks into a house. But the people living in the house notices the burgular, and get their own gun. The gun carrier and the criminal suddenly meets face to face in the living room. Both panics, and shoots. 2 people dead. However, if there had been no guns in the picture in the first place, the robber would have never broke into the house. 0 people dead. We do, however, have a counterpart of your right to carry arms: The HV (Home ) branch of the Armed Forces. This is a number of guerrilia unit of sort, much like the US Minute Men during the Revolutionary War. Now the problem is, there aren't any regulations on these weapons. As a result, there have been all these cases of HV soldiers who appeared perfectly healthy (who might even be elite soldiers) who suddenly went deranged and started shooting up people (don't know if you heard about the Geilo massacre?). Yeah, I remember that, 3 or 4 casualities, and after that there was a lot of huge debates about how to prevent this ever happening again, by for example having locks on these few guns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dagobahn Eagle Posted November 6, 2002 Author Share Posted November 6, 2002 I'm sorry, Havoc . Really. Havoc, your story shows two things: That's the kind of culture the US is. Not only do the kids do something as dangerous as taking a gun off of a wall in a nation where you obviously hear about gun accidents once a week, but people also keep loaded guns on museum walls without even securing them to the walls? Ironically, the country with the most guns is also the one with the most lax gun control. The argument of some is that "hey, if we can't have guns, wouldn't there be accidents with knives"? First of all, knives aren't understood by kids. They've been cut several times by age 10 but never shot (hopefully). Thus, they're more carful with knives; never play with them, etc. Now a gun is not readily understood. It's something dangerous, like climbing up on the roof of your house. And with a gun, you can't tell wheter it can hurt you or not. No sane person would take a sword or dagger off of the wall and "think it couldn't kill you". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zygomaticus Posted November 6, 2002 Share Posted November 6, 2002 Qui Gon, true that no guns make this a perfect world...but now that guns are already out there, there's no way to confiscate every single gun in the USA...there'll always be people out there who have an unaccounted for gun and there'll always be people out there who say they want to keep their gun to protect themselves from those that have them....i think we've crossed the point of almost no return...pray we don't cross it completely... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boba Rhett Posted November 6, 2002 Share Posted November 6, 2002 As it stands now: Average Joe : Have Guns and Outlaws: Have Guns Now, if we outlaw guns, Average Joe: No Guns and Outlaws: Still have guns Do I like it that any Joe can get a gun? Not very much but the thought of what I said above makes me cold and frightened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.