Firearms? Whos got em.

[Methost]

Even as a gun owner and avid hunter, I agree there needs to be more restrictions on the kind of guns people can own. But the problem is that if you ask law abiding people to turn in their AKs and M-16s, then only the criminals will have them. This is for people much smarter then me to figure out.

All of my guns are used for hunting (well, my SKS is more for shooting cans) and IMO, education is the best weapon against gun accedents. Most gun murders are commited with illeagle guns anyway, so even if all law abiding people gave theirs up, most murders would still happen.

 

[BuzzStPoint]

Quite a few people have said that they can carry their gun in the street, I have to ask the question, why would you want to?

Simply because we can.. We have earned out privlege to.

For instance, a friends uncle was filling his car, when he came back from paying there were a group of people trying to break into his car to steal the stereo, when he asked what the hell they thought they were doing, he was shot in the stomach.

The point here is that if they'd needed a license to get that gun, 1, any local person would have known the person, they may know that they have a troubled past, or deal in petty crime, and hence would not be eligable to own a gun.
-the guy wouldn't have been shot.

Do you really think that a criminal that is theiving cars and carrying a gun is going to take the time to buy a gun with a certificate? No.. It's called crime. Just like now felons get weapons while there privledge is taken away.

 

[lurkswithin]

root,
again you are refering to someone else as a person of responsibility. Do you not think that you are such a person. To me you are stating a fact that you are not responsible...why...because you have to get some responsible person to vouch for you. That is rediculous. are you a second class citizen? Do you not have the same rights as these people that must vouch for you? it is apparent that you do not.. and that is precisely my point. why should someone be concidered a second class person to another born in the same country. The point being is that you shouldn't be.
Now so as to not be acussed of making apples to oranges... let us straighten this out a little. You are born to a country that doesn't guarantee you the right to own a gun....and what has happened...you have been turned into a second class citizen because now you must have a few responsible citizens to vouch for you to own a gun.... This is not rocket science....your country because of its laws says that you are not responsible enough to own a gun.
Now I am born to a country that guarantees me the right to own a gun...I don't have to have someone vouch for me to say that I am responsible. The law guarantees me that I am and that I always shall be until within "due course of the law" I am found not responsible. And that is the difference... Both of us have the right not to own. but if I choose to then I go down and buy one..why because I have been born with the same rights as my fellow man(sic). No one is better than i am regardless of their education or occupation or idealogy. We all have that right here unless it has been proved that we are not responsible. Now there seems to be certain people that have an issue with my being a responsible law abiding citizen...solely based on the fact that someone else was.....ludicrous.
now you accuse me of supporting criminal intent for defending my rights. That astounds me that a person of intelect can say something so absurd.
If a person has some criminal intent to do something do you really believe that restricting my rights is going to prevent it. Absolutely not, That person is going to circumvent what ever laws are in place to acheive his delusional thoughts. or he will substitute one means to another.
It is illegal to drink and drive here. Yet these drivers have to take the drivers tests and know the laws and as you want.....prove that they are responsible drivers and all of that...Does this prevent them from driving under the influence, does this prevent them from speeding and breaking other laws after they proved themselves worthy of driving..No, Yet here the NUMBER ONE CAUSE OF DEATHS IS CAUSED BY AUTOMOBILES AND RECLESS?DRUNK DRIVERS...

For instance, a friends uncle was filling his car, when he came back from paying there were a group of people trying to break into his car to steal the stereo, when he asked what the hell they thought they were doing, he was shot in the stomach.

now you live in a place of restricted firearms yet you stated this....Now I ask you if having all those restrictions saved that man from getting shot... no, of course not. Yet you think that because I have a right to own a gun it is my fault because this moron had access to the gun...The punk probably stole the gun or purchased it from the thief that stole it from a law abiding citizen...but that doesn't count...right?
It only counts that this guy got a gun and committed more crimes and shot someone. And although you don't live here I bet you are going to say that it happened here.
That last statemnet :

The way that you propose is best is that the person is allowed to buy a gun, then when he shoots people the police have to spend time tracking the person down, prooving it was them, and then they are not allowed any more guns, (for a period of time!)...

that is to say you think it is best to wait until someone is dead before taking the weapon out of the murders hands?

i had rather wait and prove a person responsible of committing a criminal act than to accuse him of going to commit a crime without proof of any kind except to that he has a firearm he is going to kill someone so let us take away his rights as a citizen to prevent this heinous act..
History has shown what course that takes... Let the responsible people have it all and you peon/peasant don't have the right to do anything about it.

 

[Tommy Boy]

when did this turn into a big political debate??
we're here to discuss the guns we own and dream of, not rights and wheither someone is responsible or not.

 

[lurkswithin]

you are so right there Tommy Boy

 

[Tommy Boy]

and I hate those loooong posts btw.....lol so cut it out

 

[lurkswithin]

please keep your guns guys and protect me from those peons/peasant ,second class ,no rights citizens that want to make me like them...

 

[root]

and I hate those loooong posts btw.....lol so cut it out

And I hate short pointless one-liner posts...

in fact some call them spam.

by having to proove I am responsible does not make me any less of a citizen...

You are a second class citizen because you had to take a driving test before getting in a car?
you're a second class citizen because you had to take exams before leaving school?
are you second class because you had to have an interview to get your job? -I mean in that situation someone could quite easily have been telling you you are not good enough to take a position of responsibility, but you accept it as a daily occurance.

are you a second class citizen because you have to provide credit references before getting a loan or mortgage?


The answer to all of those questions is no, so why should having to prove yourself be any different for guns?
-oh yes I remember, because of an old law that doesn't have a true relevance today!

It's odd how people who lobby for tighter gun control can throw up a hundred or more arguments and all the people who want to keep existing controls, or lessen controls have to say is, either "yes I'm responsible" or "second amendment!"...

In answer to both buzz and lurks,
No I don't think that trying to ban all guns will stop criminals getting guns, I don't think crime and robberies and murder will disapear over night, I realise criminals break the law! (it's in their job description!)

but by controlling the sale of guns it will make it a little harder for law abiding citizens to buy guns, but also make it a lot harder for criminals to get guns.

 

[Tulsileaf]

lurkswithin, i challenge you to a duel *slaps lurkswithin's face with a glove*

anyways....i've also had numerous chances to debate this issue in my academic career. from what i understood, people against guns fear that they may go into the hands of trigger-happy psychos like me. while this is a good reason to ban guns, it can not be effective. i don't know about the U.S. but the world-wide blackmarket for guns is well developed and i'm sure that people in the U.S. who are not legally qualified to posess certain weapons are still capable of doing so in the same way they are capable of obtaining drugs such as crack, marijuana, etc. additionally it can be said that the presence of a gun can increase the chance that a 'flipped-out' person will commit a murder. to this i say, so can knives, lamps, and stilletto shoes. whats the chance that your girlfriend will not shove you down the stairs when she's angry (thereby breaking your neck). we can not ban everything out of fear that it can be used as a weapon, though i've heard that they are trying that in the U.K. with the banishment of long knives. remember, Jason used a CHAINSAW.

 

[root]

Just to clear things up, I'm not even suggesting that guns should be banned, just better controlled.