FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > America and Guns
America and Guns
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By *oodmess OP Man
over a year ago
yumsville |
Peoples opinions on this?
Mine are: I simply do not understand how Americans are so attatched to bearing arms.
It may statistically show (if it does) they have fewer actual murders by guns though IMO fear/panic/protectionism seems rife. The US seem to be sleepwalking into over control, whether in schools, ariport security, bio-scans etc but they simply do not appreciate that current gun law perpetuates/contributes to this? I may be drawing quick conclusions though to me, 'fear' both in and outside of their boarders appears prevalent, something which I dont think we have over here?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *yrdwomanWoman
over a year ago
Putting the 'cum' in Eboracum |
To be honest, as I am not American nor a gun owner (although I love shooting things!) I am probably not qualified to respond to this. We get very sniffy if the Yanks criticise us so its probably the same the other way round. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Does it ultimately matter how much or little any country controls its gun laws, if a person wishes to do harm with a firearm, they can get hold of them by any means.
I am a law abiding, sane and normal (yeah right) citizen but if I wish, I can pop a few streets away to the seedier parts of town with a pocket full of bank notes and get hold of weapons with which I could raze a small town's population. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Peoples opinions on this?
Mine are: I simply do not understand how Americans are so attatched to bearing arms.
...
"
I think it is one of those subjects you simply can't clump all Americans into the same basket, as the cultural differences from state to state vary so much. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
91% of the NRA agree that people with mental health issues shouln't own firearms. Or put another way, 1 in 10 members of the NRA do not think being mentally ill is sufficient reason to stop someone owning a gun.
That's just one of many examples, America is seriously fucked up when it comes to this issue. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oodmess OP Man
over a year ago
yumsville |
"Does it ultimately matter how much or little any country controls its gun laws, if a person wishes to do harm with a firearm, they can get hold of them by any means.
I am a law abiding, sane and normal (yeah right) citizen but if I wish, I can pop a few streets away to the seedier parts of town with a pocket full of bank notes and get hold of weapons with which I could raze a small town's population. "
thats my point though, at the moment we rely on the govt and its agencys to keep us safe - over there - they rely on theirselves, even against any protection offered by state agencies such is the second ammendment.
The picture I see is the US offers up protection - possibly by allowing guns, though enforces a minimal amount of actual life freedoms that we take for granted
e.g not having a shotgun behind an off license counter or getting strip searched boarding a plane |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Hey, an American gun owner here. You will find its hotly debated here too. Realize it is an urban/rural divide largely though. We have a HUGE amount of rural areas where police protection and the like can be a long way off so we do have to rely on ourselves for protection. Enough people in the cities were raised with that same mindset, and most people are only a generation or two away from that history as well. I myself have about 15 weapons and I am not considered a gun nut at all by local standards, LOL. Just our culture combined with the logistics of how rural much of this country is. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
OH.. also, that mental disorder issue...
Alone many do NOT think that alone is enough to ban someone from owning because we are VERY aggresive in diagnosing every little thing as a mental disorder. If I have arachnaphobia should that be a disqualifying issue? lol, unless I'm going to go shooting spiders I think it would be ok. LOL |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
It is so easy to obtain an NRA handgun certificate....I have one myself after a day course as part of my close protection training, it consisted of instruction, in a classroom and on the firing range....all I need is to be a resident in Florida state for 30 days then I can carry a handgun not showing under my jacket..........it's a scary thought |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Whats scary? I probably know 15 people with permits. Probably half of them are carrying when i talk to them. My wife and sister both have carried. Im just lazy and never got mine. My boys started shooting at about nine and had their own guns by their mid teens.
All in what you are raised with. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oodmess OP Man
over a year ago
yumsville |
"Hey, an American gun owner here. You will find its hotly debated here too. Realize it is an urban/rural divide largely though. We have a HUGE amount of rural areas where police protection and the like can be a long way off so we do have to rely on ourselves for protection. Enough people in the cities were raised with that same mindset, and most people are only a generation or two away from that history as well. I myself have about 15 weapons and I am not considered a gun nut at all by local standards, LOL. Just our culture combined with the logistics of how rural much of this country is. "
Nice for you to comment.  I'm by no means picking bones but do you think your current gun law is appropriate?
I can understand guns used in rural areas say for farming/culling though with everyone carrying them, in every walk of life and profession does it not make you nervous of (pouching up on what the other guy said) how sane they could be?
I.E does it not create a spiral within itself.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oodmess OP Man
over a year ago
yumsville |
is that what keeps people holding onto their guns or its it the patriotic amendment bit that people are more attached to.
I suppose I'm asking very tall questions, but just interested on how Americans deal with guns freely being at a persons side |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
It comes down to the bill o rights.
They think it is 100% justifiable to own automatic rifle to fight back a tyranical government.
They also think they need them for personal defense.
I've argued the fact with them that if a woman is carrying a gun and she gets attacked say at night.if she pulls the gun out.what was going to be a robbery or rape will suddenly be her murder.
They don't see that though.
They think owning a gun turns you into an invinsible foe who is a marksman.
Imagine the cinema shooting,if a member of public started to return fire.more people would have died and when the police showed up you can bet they would have shot him.
It will never change over there.
Just give every citizen one and leave them to it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Simple stats show clearly that cities with the tightest laws are also the worst with gun crime so it has to be another factor. Till that is addressed no gun law will help."
Those sorts of stats are void as there is no control a few miles away,unless to get into the city everyone needs to be searched.then there would be no gun crime. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
It's none of our business what America decide to do with THEIR gun laws. If they feel dead children is an acceptable price to pay for the freedom to own a gun then let them suffer the agony of that freedom every couple of months, in a high school, or a burger bar, or a movie house.
Sure, we've had our Michael Ryans, Thomas Hamiltons and Derrick Birds, but we've never had teenagers blasting away in schools, which is something America needs to understand if they continue to allow people to hold guns in their homes. A teenager hasn't learned about restraint and how to control his/her emotions. The 'Shoot em up' gaming culture hasn't helped as it desensitises teenagers to violence and the damage a gun can do. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"OH.. also, that mental disorder issue...
Alone many do NOT think that alone is enough to ban someone from owning because we are VERY aggresive in diagnosing every little thing as a mental disorder. If I have arachnaphobia should that be a disqualifying issue? lol, unless I'm going to go shooting spiders I think it would be ok. LOL"
Really? Am I not right in thinking that the suicide rate in America is higher than the homicide rate? That's hardly indicative of a nation that's on top of mental health? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"It's none of our business what America decide to do with THEIR gun laws. If they feel dead children is an acceptable price to pay for the freedom to own a gun then let them suffer the agony of that freedom every couple of months, in a high school, or a burger bar, or a movie house.
Sure, we've had our Michael Ryans, Thomas Hamiltons and Derrick Birds, but we've never had teenagers blasting away in schools, which is something America needs to understand if they continue to allow people to hold guns in their homes. A teenager hasn't learned about restraint and how to control his/her emotions. The 'Shoot em up' gaming culture hasn't helped as it desensitises teenagers to violence and the damage a gun can do."
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan
over a year ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
"Peoples opinions on this?
Mine are: I simply do not understand how Americans are so attatched to bearing arms.
It may statistically show (if it does) they have fewer actual murders by guns though IMO fear/panic/protectionism seems rife. The US seem to be sleepwalking into over control, whether in schools, ariport security, bio-scans etc but they simply do not appreciate that current gun law perpetuates/contributes to this? I may be drawing quick conclusions though to me, 'fear' both in and outside of their boarders appears prevalent, something which I dont think we have over here?
"
see.... the issue in american isn't about the right to bear arms as such... no one is suggesting them take them all away..... and besides that ship sailed ages ago!
the issue is more a case of people saying "well should you be able to have ANY gun you like?"
there are sensible measures than could be taken.... banning certain types of assult style weaponry (should me where you would need that sort of gun in normal society... and it could stay)
banning extended magazine rounds (again show me where you would need lets say 30 bullets instead of 6 without reloading and i'll entertain an arguement)
the thing is... things can be done.....
at state level, my home state (new york) already had some of the tougher gun control laws in the nation... after the incident at sandy hook, it toughened those up... it banned the sale of certain guns in the state, and extended rounds, and closed loopholes on private sales without mandatory checks....
simple measures...
the probably is any measure to tighten gun control is met with "they are coming for all ya guns!!" which doesn't make it easy for sensible conversation...
I've been to shooting ranges... and been hunting.... didn't do much for me, but I am not going to take away peoples rights to do those things.... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Hey, I can agree with that as well to a certain extent, there are huge issues with what to allow and what not to allow. The assault weapons bans unfortunately were not written by folks who understood what they were controlling. also, they help marginally, yes, an 'assault rifle' was used at sandy hook, but the guns used in the Va tech massacre were completely legal under the same ban.
The simple fact is these weapons are out there and exist now. All debate about rights aside, the sheer logistics of banning so many guns in private hands and suddenly making MILLIONS of gun owners criminals if they don't comply is pretty daunting. Add to it our current political divide and it is a recipe for disaster and will lead to deaths in of itself.
Someone above stated that the fact that cities with high gun crime and tight gun control were indications we needed it everywhere. I say no because why do many cities with much more lax gun control not have the same issues? I dunno, but I think we are trying to fix the problem by treating the symptom, not the root cause. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Peoples opinions on this?
Mine are: I simply do not understand how Americans are so attatched to bearing arms.
It may statistically show (if it does) they have fewer actual murders by guns though IMO fear/panic/protectionism seems rife. The US seem to be sleepwalking into over control, whether in schools, ariport security, bio-scans etc but they simply do not appreciate that current gun law perpetuates/contributes to this? I may be drawing quick conclusions though to me, 'fear' both in and outside of their boarders appears prevalent, something which I dont think we have over here?
see.... the issue in american isn't about the right to bear arms as such... no one is suggesting them take them all away..... and besides that ship sailed ages ago!
the issue is more a case of people saying "well should you be able to have ANY gun you like?"
there are sensible measures than could be taken.... banning certain types of assult style weaponry (should me where you would need that sort of gun in normal society... and it could stay)
banning extended magazine rounds (again show me where you would need lets say 30 bullets instead of 6 without reloading and i'll entertain an arguement)
the thing is... things can be done.....
at state level, my home state (new york) already had some of the tougher gun control laws in the nation... after the incident at sandy hook, it toughened those up... it banned the sale of certain guns in the state, and extended rounds, and closed loopholes on private sales without mandatory checks....
simple measures...
the probably is any measure to tighten gun control is met with "they are coming for all ya guns!!" which doesn't make it easy for sensible conversation...
I've been to shooting ranges... and been hunting.... didn't do much for me, but I am not going to take away peoples rights to do those things...."
What is the death rate due to handguns in New York?
It's all well and good banning guns of a certain calibre etc but if it isn't backed up by draconian prison sentences for possession of such weaponry it becomes meaningless.
Possess a firearm in the UK without a licence and you stand a fair chance of doing jail time. We all know it. America doesn't. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Also, it is creating a situation where the needs of the urban centers suddenly have to be applied to rural areas. I do NEED firearms, I have to deal with predetors, possibly putting down livestock, self defense when the police can take a long time to respond because of my location. Is my safety worse less then those in a city? There is no easy answer for a county that is massive and as diverse as we are in geography, population density, levels of protective services, etc.
And yes, I have pulled a gun when I had an intruder and nobody got shot or died. I have also killed coyotes that are a big problem here. If I were to call animal control here they would laugh at me and rightfully so, If you live out of a city as far as I do, you have to be ready to handle issues yourself. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan
over a year ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
"
What is the death rate due to handguns in New York?
It's all well and good banning guns of a certain calibre etc but if it isn't backed up by draconian prison sentences for possession of such weaponry it becomes meaningless.
Possess a firearm in the UK without a licence and you stand a fair chance of doing jail time. We all know it. America doesn't."
good question...
in new york state.... actually on the lower scale of average for the US... in NYC, Mayor Bloomberg is more anti gun than they are in the outer state so in the 5 boroughs in the city they do come down hard on gun crime...
the other point I would make about New York State as a whole... is for as liberal it is perecived to be, it actually has a Republican Majority State House (rural new york state is very conservative, just doesn't have the population) and a Democratic Majority State Senate
they still had to work together to get the bill thru.... they did... Govenor Cuomo signed it...
total process time..... 2 days! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
They have a right to bear arms. So are rights actual rights or not ?
They like their guns because once upon a time they used them to get rid of a totalitarian regime which was..... Ooooops, us the british.
The latest move to get them to give up guns was brought about by the shooting of children at sandy hook school.The murder of innocent young children is an evil and terrible thing in the usa but not apparently in cambodia, vietnam, urugauy, nicaragua, afghanistan, east timor. el salvador, libya, iraq, south korea, lebanon,somalia,rwanda, hiroshima and nagasaki........ god its a massive list. Anyway when the usa decides that its murder of 100's of thousands of innocent people in foreign lands is equally evil and terrible and decide to stop doing it i will take there pretense of valuing life more seriously. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan
over a year ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
I think what we are seeing is that states politics is so diverse... the arguments seen in florida politics is different to those in New York politics for example...
they are still dealing with issues from the Treyvon Martin case.....
there are not things I am happy with...
the amount of people allowed to carry guns in public (concealed weapon permits) for example... when is defense not a defense. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Our hands are not the only bloody ones in that regard, its just that as with most things, if we decide to do something we do it exceptionally well, including those terrible things you mention. But a look at history does bear out that most countries share in a bloody history, few can justify throwing stones from the glass houses they live in as well. I do believe British troops were right beside ours in a large number of those theaters of conflict.. just sayin. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Our hands are not the only bloody ones in that regard, its just that as with most things, if we decide to do something we do it exceptionally well, including those terrible things you mention. But a look at history does bear out that most countries share in a bloody history, few can justify throwing stones from the glass houses they live in as well. I do believe British troops were right beside ours in a large number of those theaters of conflict.. just sayin."
errr well i said that about the usa as we are talking about the usa and not germany, france, uk, israel.......... i was making the point that the usa govt is a total hypocrite when it comes to arms and murder. To be honest i think the use of the word "theatre" to describe a conflict in which innocent people are oppressed and murdered extremely distasteful.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Distasteful or not areas of conflict are called 'theaters' its a military term and I am come from a military background. I prefer to use proper terms in these regards even if found distasteful.
As for government being hypocritical, that is not exactly a newsflash. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Distasteful or not areas of conflict are called 'theaters' its a military term and I am come from a military background. I prefer to use proper terms in these regards even if found distasteful.
As for government being hypocritical, that is not exactly a newsflash."
yeah my problem with that is that a theatre is a place to go and see some form of entertainment. War has only been called a theatre in recent years its an innocuous propaganda word to disguise the horror of what war actually is, after all we all love the theatre but we arent so keen on war. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"And 15 guns? Seriously why does anyone need 15 guns?"
that would tell me the holder of that many has more than just a need to protect them and theirs effectively in any area..
handgun, shotgun and hunting rifle..
one of each maybe.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"They have a right to bear arms. So are rights actual rights or not ?
They like their guns because once upon a time they used them to get rid of a totalitarian regime which was..... Ooooops, us the british.
The latest move to get them to give up guns was brought about by the shooting of children at sandy hook school.The murder of innocent young children is an evil and terrible thing in the usa but not apparently in cambodia, vietnam, urugauy, nicaragua, afghanistan, east timor. el salvador, libya, iraq, south korea, lebanon,somalia,rwanda, hiroshima and nagasaki........ god its a massive list. Anyway when the usa decides that its murder of 100's of thousands of innocent people in foreign lands is equally evil and terrible and decide to stop doing it i will take there pretense of valuing life more seriously."
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
meh, like I said, what we are raised with. I inherited probably half of them and regularly shoot only about 1/4 of them. Nice thing about rights, you don't need to explain why you use your rights, its nobodies business so long as you do not infringe on anyone elses rights. Not being scared of what I, a law abiding sane person (mostly sane) does is not enough of a reason in my mind to give up the inherent right to self defense. i.e. I will listen to people and speak with them in civil tones, but until they repeal the second amendment they will have a fight (a political one) on their hands getting me to give up those weapons. Yes, I am somewhat of an absolutist when it comes to rights, I am the same with speech, privacy, etc. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"meh, like I said, what we are raised with. I inherited probably half of them and regularly shoot only about 1/4 of them. Nice thing about rights, you don't need to explain why you use your rights, its nobodies business so long as you do not infringe on anyone elses rights. Not being scared of what I, a law abiding sane person (mostly sane) does is not enough of a reason in my mind to give up the inherent right to self defense. i.e. I will listen to people and speak with them in civil tones, but until they repeal the second amendment they will have a fight (a political one) on their hands getting me to give up those weapons. Yes, I am somewhat of an absolutist when it comes to rights, I am the same with speech, privacy, etc."
respect your rights etc under your constitution, however can you see that when someone in the current climate of gun control being the subject of discussion ..
sadly once more on the back of another slaughter of innocents..
that people (even ex uk military)may wonder why someone would want that many..? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"meh, like I said, what we are raised with. I inherited probably half of them and regularly shoot only about 1/4 of them. Nice thing about rights, you don't need to explain why you use your rights, its nobodies business so long as you do not infringe on anyone elses rights. Not being scared of what I, a law abiding sane person (mostly sane) does is not enough of a reason in my mind to give up the inherent right to self defense. i.e. I will listen to people and speak with them in civil tones, but until they repeal the second amendment they will have a fight (a political one) on their hands getting me to give up those weapons. Yes, I am somewhat of an absolutist when it comes to rights, I am the same with speech, privacy, etc."
A gun has only one purpose and that is to kill. It's all well and good claiming the right to self defence but the right of a child to go to school and return to it's parents alive supercedes any right to an adult to bear arms if they so wish.
Sure, own guns if it legal to do so in your country, but they must not be made available to anyone other than the licence holder, and I'm talking about guns kept at home here. In the UK a gun stored in the home has to be kept in a secure cabinet that is bolted/fixed to a solid wall. It doesn't need to be readily available 24/7/365 on the off chance you need to get at it to shoot your government (which is what the right to bear arms is all about - the ability to form a militia against a hostile government) |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Well of you follow you arguement on gins against the government then allowing the government such tight controls on them is not at all logical.
As for my rights not trumping the rights of children's safety then we need to outlaw swimming pools... far far far more children die in swimming pools and they are not designed to kill. Now that is a defective product. There is no push to outlaw them though..why not?
And before it is argued. Yes I have lost freinds and family to both of these things. You know what? Gun or pool.. they are still dead. I will not cower because life isn't all padded with the corners rounded. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Well of you follow you arguement on gins against the government then allowing the government such tight controls on them is not at all logical.
As for my rights not trumping the rights of children's safety then we need to outlaw swimming pools... far far far more children die in swimming pools and they are not designed to kill. Now that is a defective product. There is no push to outlaw them though..why not?
And before it is argued. Yes I have lost freinds and family to both of these things. You know what? Gun or pool.. they are still dead. I will not cower because life isn't all padded with the corners rounded. "
That is a ridiculous analogy to make. Learning to swim should be foremost in every parent for their child but it doesn't ensure that a child will not succumb to water if they get into trouble. That's hardly the same as sending a child to school one morning and them being shot dead by a nutter with his dad's semi-automatic rifle!
As I said, what is so worng with stringent laws that ensure semi-automatics are not sold and a mandatory lockbox is installed in the home for single shot guns and rifles?
Where is the illogic in that? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Semi autos? Lol. And no it is not illogical at all to compare pools. They are much worse because people think they are more safe when they are far far more dangerous.
Banning semi autos would be an incredibly hard fight. Almost every gun sold here is semi auto. Lol |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Semi autos? Lol. And no it is not illogical at all to compare pools. They are much worse because people think they are more safe when they are far far more dangerous.
Banning semi autos would be an incredibly hard fight. Almost every gun sold here is semi auto. Lol"
Sheesh! Ok, fully automatics then.
(Sorry about me not knowing the difference, we don't have guns lurking around in the kitchen drawer as a matter of course here)  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Semi autos? Lol. And no it is not illogical at all to compare pools. They are much worse because people think they are more safe when they are far far more dangerous.
"
I am more worried that someone who believes what you have posted is allowed to own a gun!
A swimming pool is only dangerous to someone who can't swim. That is so obvious that I feel rather stupid for actually saying it.
I can't help feeling that all those against tighter gun controls were offering empty expressions of sadness to the families of those children that died, and that false sympathy soon exposed itself when their darling right to bear a gun came under fire (pun intended).
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I know someone who died in a pool who was a scuba dive master.. I think je knew how to swim. A gun is jusy as safe if one is responsible. I have never killed anyone and all my weapons are under lock and key yet my political and phulosophical views are enough reason for you to feel i should be disarmed... Do you see why gun owners question new restrictions that seemed to punish legal gun owners and do not address causes of massacres. Those guns did not walk in and shoot children by themselves. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan
over a year ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
"Semi autos? Lol. And no it is not illogical at all to compare pools. They are much worse because people think they are more safe when they are far far more dangerous.
Banning semi autos would be an incredibly hard fight. Almost every gun sold here is semi auto. Lol
Sheesh! Ok, fully automatics then.
(Sorry about me not knowing the difference, we don't have guns lurking around in the kitchen drawer as a matter of course here) "
wishy... fully automatics are already banned under the law.. they are classed as "assult weapons"...
the fight is going to be over semi automatics... and the amount of rounds possible to fire in a certain amount of time....
slower the number.. more guns would be banned..
I actually agree with you for the most part, it is to us seems like a sensible measure.... but all one side hear from all that is "give up guns".... which is the depressing bit...
as someone said... shotgun, handgun, hunting rifle..... if you really need anymore than that then I would really want to know why!
the problem is that where that the line between giving up certain types of guns, and giving up all guns (which isn't on the table) is blurred by the types of the NRA.....
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Semi autos? Lol. And no it is not illogical at all to compare pools. They are much worse because people think they are more safe when they are far far more dangerous.
Banning semi autos would be an incredibly hard fight. Almost every gun sold here is semi auto. Lol
Sheesh! Ok, fully automatics then.
(Sorry about me not knowing the difference, we don't have guns lurking around in the kitchen drawer as a matter of course here) "
So you want to ban something without knowing what it is or isnt? That is why our old assault weapons ban was allowed to sunset. It was wrjtten very badly and did little to achieve anything |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Semi autos? Lol. And no it is not illogical at all to compare pools. They are much worse because people think they are more safe when they are far far more dangerous.
Banning semi autos would be an incredibly hard fight. Almost every gun sold here is semi auto. Lol
Sheesh! Ok, fully automatics then.
(Sorry about me not knowing the difference, we don't have guns lurking around in the kitchen drawer as a matter of course here)
wishy... fully automatics are already banned under the law.. they are classed as "assult weapons"...
the fight is going to be over semi automatics... and the amount of rounds possible to fire in a certain amount of time....
slower the number.. more guns would be banned..
I actually agree with you for the most part, it is to us seems like a sensible measure.... but all one side hear from all that is "give up guns".... which is the depressing bit...
as someone said... shotgun, handgun, hunting rifle..... if you really need anymore than that then I would really want to know why!
the problem is that where that the line between giving up certain types of guns, and giving up all guns (which isn't on the table) is blurred by the types of the NRA.....
"
The realist in me can see it's plainly evident that a motion to ban all guns in a country like the US is nonsensical. Guns are as much a part of life over there as owning a car for a sizable portion of the populace, and it is enshrined in law for them to own them. What isn't enshrined in law though is where these guns are kept. I believe the focus should be on ensuring that nobody other than the licence holder can gain access to guns kept at home. I don't feel that a gunowner needs to keep thousands of rounds of ammunition either. How many rounds would be fired in a typical hunting outing? Or during an afternoon at a shooting range (and if you think about it bullets can be kept at the range and not at home). Separating the gun from it's ammunition would prevent any teen with an attitude from murdering innocent people (unless he takes the gun and clubs them to death with it).
There are plenty of ways that guns can be controlled without giving the NRA people a reason to go up in arms about it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Just a point of info. Restricting access is legally considered a de facto restriction on the right. If you make it illegal to have ammo with a firearm you really are making it an unusable hunk of metal. Not being all defensive on your idea. Just pointing this out. Such reztrctipns were overturned in our supreme court.
Also sorry for typos.. Back on my cell phone lol |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I usually stay away from these disagreements, but people have been killing each other since the beginning of time. With rocks and clubs in the beginning then we moved on to more efficient ways of doing it. People should be allowed to defend themselves. I had a home invasion that took place in my home 6 years ago. 4 males kicked in my door. What chance does 1 person have against 4 ? What chance does a 50 year old women ( no offense meant ladies ) have against 2 young fellows with the intent of rapping her? Where were the police? Not protecting me. They are there to pic up the pieces, odds of them getting there in time are pretty slim. While a firearm is not the begin all end all means, it does level the playing field. ( if your trained with it. ) Had I not been armed the day of that home invasion, I would not be here to right this post. I do not under any circumstances want to see any more children hurt. But 1,095,000 people die every year in car crashes. Should we ban the car? Timothy Mcveigh used a bomb made out of fertilizer and a lot of innocent people died. If guns are banned or not your still going to have the same problem. Mankind has been killing each other since the beginning of time. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Amen. I do think this is a basic cultural issue that divides us. I dont think those saying restrict to keep ppl safe meam any harm. But i also do not realize the long term impact either. It unfortunately will have many unintended results |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oodmess OP Man
over a year ago
yumsville |
"Amen. I do think this is a basic cultural issue that divides us. I dont think those saying restrict to keep ppl safe meam any harm. But i also do not realize the long term impact either. It unfortunately will have many unintended results"
Just to say - I posted the thread to get an idea if people thought owning a gun would make them more fearful of those around them. If it would lean to protectionst attitudes - I suppose ultimately looking to see if a ban would serve the country better as any 'threat' would be lessened.
It was not meant to start into a people bashing or 10 opinions against 1. So thanks CaptainShiny for replying .. appreciate your efforts |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
No worries. Im a pro at being a jackass and have a thick hide. Just nobody take my opinions too serious as i love to advocate and debate. It is never personal unless someone makes it so. Then i try to gracefullu bow out. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oodmess OP Man
over a year ago
yumsville |
"No worries. Im a pro at being a jackass and have a thick hide. Just nobody take my opinions too serious as i love to advocate and debate. It is never personal unless someone makes it so. Then i try to gracefullu bow out."
well, nice to have you  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *li87Man
over a year ago
Preston |
Glad no one was hurt that sounds terrible. Calibre of rounds size of fire arms magazine size. Is my argument.
1. Calibre a 7.62 will remove your arm its a killing round and not a lot you can do about it celox and toniquets if you can get them on quick enough. 5.56 will cause massive damage less chance of a simple through and through it will bounce of your bones and round your body causing massive damage and cavity tracks as long the way it will not kill you on the spot but you will die if not treated quickly. Thats if you can get treated in time a massive hemorrage will take about 2 min for you to bleed to death if it hits the femoral artery. If you get shot in the chest you will cause a sucking chest wound your lung will collapse and you could die if not treated. Low calibre bullet with flat head is what should be legal
2. Hand guns are lethal there dangerous and require more respect than a rifle. They are easily hidden and is used for up close and personal fighting. Rifles are harder to hide and are harder to use when your up close.
3. Magazine size you don't need 30 rounds. And defiantly don't need automatics. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
