LLD101

[Jerkazoid]

since vtech. im hearing alot more (again) about if we had more "responsible" people with guns in public, this kinda thing wont really happen, and the innocent shall be saved more frequently..

how many people really think that alowing our society to have more guns in public would alter the level of order?

what would staples riots be like after lakers games?
what if that girl that brought a flail into school had a gun? and other classmates had guns?


edit,,,
dammit.. i never made a poll before i screwd it up

[oleo79]

Well, the KEY is "responsible"

And who is to make that call? The government? You? Me? The individual purchasing the firearm?

The only thing that really matters is the morals and training and yes, responsiblity, of the individual holding the firearm. I was raised with all sorts of them, and learned a healthy respect for them and good "gun etiquette." I have never once even been tempted to direct one at another human being, or ever needed one to defend myself either. The chances of "needing" one for defense are fairly slim in my opinion; most confrontations can be avoided completely by an observant individual.

I am against so-called "gun control" because all it does it keep them out of the hands of the majority, and those who really want to do harm to their fellow man, will, with whatever is most convenient.
Don't think I am advocating having them lying around every home, and in every purse or glove box. It is up to us adults and responsible parents to teach our kids not only about respecting the firearms, but also other people.

I think the issues go much deeper than just trying to regulate guns. I think our society's job of parenting has gone completely to hell.

[Mr_Bilson]

im not from america but to me it seens the problem isnt the amount of guns, its how easy it is to get one.

how does it work in america? seems like this kid got some guns way too easy

[Hades]

[heprea]

well, imo guns should be banned but eh go ahead and try to do that, or ofc u can try it and make it go through but eh.. in the end even if it goes it dosnt do a thing(i think)

[AmishSpeedGoat]

To make it simple, crooks already can obtain guns and will use the to harm people. So if we put more guns out into the market, there we still be people killing each other, but atleast civilians can use something back.

Putting people on a gun restriction would be the stupidest thing in the world, because then the only people who will own the are cops and crooks.

[zarc]

i think how easy it is to own and obtain a gun isnt too easy. i do however feel that obtaining ammo is. The constitution give you the right to own a gun, however it does not give you the right to own ammo.

[Hades]

[AmishSpeedGoat]

[Grim04]

Crack is made here for the most part, other drugs get sneaked in.

Unfortunately... Mega Moose is right. If I had enough money, I could get a semi automatic/fully automatic in a week if I wanted to. I could get a pistol/rifle today.

[Hades]

When I say developed countries, I mean the first world countries. The 20% your talking about are certainly not under that title, and pehaps not even in the 3rd world/developing countries because those in africa in civil war are still basically stagnant if not degenerating. But that conversation is slightly off topic.

You probably miss read my arguments, I am saying Gun restrictions work in most civilised countries. So it does obviously work in reducing gun crime. In the 1st world countries I have lived in where there are gun restrictions, there isn't a state of anarchy where the hoodlums and crooks blast ever bystander because they dont have a gun. Sure there are exceptions like the odd person that goes abit crazy or some gangland warfare. But it's not remotely as comon because not everyone can get a gun, they arn't just in every 2nd household. You have to go out of your way to obtain them legally even more so illegaly. I would bet you it would take you twice as long to obtain a gun in the uk with a high chance of being busted by the police, and twice aslong again in Australia to purchase a gun with more of a chance of being caught by the fuzz.

But my point also encorporated the fact that doing this in america, would be very hard to do. It's part of your culture and its your 'right'. Hell if you could go out and buy an Rocket proppeled grenade launcher real easy on the streets illegaly, would it be wise to make it legal so every wise and law abiding citizen could 'fairly' defend themselves. If you say yes to this where would it stop, you could extrapolate this to a worldwide scale. Why can some countries posses nuclear weapons and others may not?

To me the arguement appears flawed and hypocritical.
But knowing that I wont change your mind, and the countless millions this is just a statement of my beliefs that gun restrictions would work, but I doubt we will see a functioning system for this in america in the next half century.

[KnightXENO2]

I think part of the cause is that their isn't alot of smuggling involved in illegal weapons. I'd hazard a guess that most of the weapons used in crimes are made in America. We are still #1 or #2 arms dealer in the world last I heard...

I think atleast one way gun laws decrease the amounts of guns used is because most illegal guns are STOLEN from rightful owners. The reason its so easy to buy a gun in certain areas? You can bet its not because of the plentiful smuggling, but because someone ripped off a gun store, or other robberies, etc. Of course, smuggling of weapons into the country occurs, but your common criminal doesn't have enough money or connections to get many of those.... but the same handguns that stay in circulation are quite plentiful.

Now all that said, I don't think gun-control is every going to happen in America in any meaningful way nor do I neccessarily think thats the right way to go. Just don't ever claim guncontrol doesn't work.... Its alot easier for the police atleast, when in other countries anyone seen with a gun is a criminal. While in the states, you have people with permits, normal hunting weapons, cops, security guards, etc all with guns legally.

[Knifer]

the way i see it, if someone wants to go out and kill some people, there isnt much you can do about it. if you ban guns, which wont work anyway, theres always a way to either get them or find something else to use.

just think what would have happened if the VT guy used home bombs, dirty bombs, or any other types of explosives. with the classrooms of what, 30 people, it would have easily doubled the death toll. just saying if you want something in the states, you can most likely get it (except for a 20 max jewel), legal or not.

[ubermoose]

Its easy to legally buy a gun and shoot someone.
Its less easy to get a gun illegally and shoot someone.
And its even less easy to blow people up with homemade bombs [where does he get the materials from? How can he test them without being caught? etc].

I wonder how many murders are committed with legally bought guns vs illegally obtained ones?

[Jerkazoid]