Mega-Thread: Gun Control Thread

[Fugus]

Just gonna point you to a simple link: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Norway (damn you first post, can't make it a link)

Yes, we've had a shooting rampage as late as last year, and this is the current record holder for the most fatal single person shooting rampage. The failures there have been well documented, and he did go through extremely long planning before being able to carry it out, so he should have been picked up before it happened. Yes, I agree, enforcement is important.

Everyone who has a legal, conceivable use for a weapon can get one, yet because of the strict control and enforcement, everytime one person kills one person using a firearm in Norway, it's on the news for a long time. Yes, you read that right: Usually, our most fatal shootings have only one victim. Don't tell me "this doesn't work in America" or "America is special, we can't have the same laws as other places", that doesn't really matter. If you want to limit the use of guns, limit the availability of guns. People who go through long courses to qualify for them can shoot people if they really want to, but you need to prepare to get that weapon. You can't just go to the grocery store(hyperbole, watch out!) and pick up a gun and shoot the first person you don't like.

Two things,

1)Norway has a vastly different culture than the United States.

2)Norway is bordered by by Sweden and Finland, the United States of bordered by MEXICO so for every gun they picked up in the US, 3 would makes it way across the border to be sold here. And to be honest, we have enough, do-it-yourself people here that they could and would start making their own due to statement #1.

With which I leave you with...

<snip>

Mod Edit: No meme images please.

[hythos]

Removing alcohol would reduce driving accidents. Limiting cars to 100 HP and not allowing motorcycles at all would save many, many lives.

Banning cigarettes, (or regulating them so that no one is allowed to smoke more than 3 per day) would save countless lives.

New York, obviously, has already saved countless lives by regulating beverages.

I mean, even if it only reduces them by a fraction of a fraction, that's enough justification, right?

And hell, when it comes to a realistic argument/solution, it would be just as realistic to demand munitions manufacturers create smart bullets that will dodge innocents as to propose we simply 'remove guns'.

I've been thinking this absolute thing - No one can say "we must protect children" from guns, while their lives are permanently affected by MANY things like alcohol, marijuana/drug-use, excessive refined sugars, and pr0n. All of these things are idolized in TV, movies, internets, and children are directly exposed to them, almost daily.

[zEmini]

Gun culture is a big part of American culture. None Americans will just never understand it, and I suggest for them to not even bother trying. People in this country just love to have them for hobbies and what not. 99.9999% of them are not going to snap and do the atrocious and horrendous things these shooters have done.

Shooters are still going to be shooters. Criminals are not going to be like "Hey they are illegal now, I better turn mine in!" We are doing nothing but disarming the good citizens and giving criminals a huge upper hand. They may be more willing to commit crimes knowing they have that advantage.

Do you think the foreign invaders are going to be like "Oh the civilian population can only carry pistols, we better keep our rifles on the boat!"

What about our fight against Tyranny? What if shit hits the fan and we must fight against our own government? Aweful thought but you never know.

I am all for some type of Gun Control Reform however. I would think some type of ranking and/or badge system for people who want to carry weapons in the public may be a good suggestion.

[siafu]

Proof, please.

its simple logic really, if there's a nation wide ban on those guns that means the police will have to enforce that, by 10 years time it will be very dificult for anyone in your country to get any weapon besides those allowed. just like my country where basically only hunting rifles/ and self protect pistols are allowed with permit, im 31 year's old and i cant even think of a place where i can get and illegal gun.
people need to realize that illegal guns in your country are only illegal cause they are reported stolen and lost. if there's simply no guns likes that on the market the illegal market will only have small caliber weapons as well. the only thing illegal would be to get them without a permit.

changes like this take time. but if dont make them they never gonna change.

[Deleted]

I never called anyone a bad parent, you are reading the wrong post. Even I disagreed with the thought of someone being a bad parent over this issue as they are not related.

MOST criminals attempt stuff when people are out, others really don't care. I live in an area where many times they really just don't care and if you have an area where they have no issues breaking into your homes with you there, you need something to defend yourself when/if they do.

I don't claim to be an authority, but I do know what many of them think on this issue and there is a reason why the lower the number of legal gun owners the higher the crime rate is. Most of them only have balls as big as their perceived advantage. This was even noticed when the mob owned Vegas, when they owned that place and there was a real threat of retaliation, that was the safest that place had ever been, cause they didn't know who was armed and who wasn't.

From the mind of a criminal, lets say I have 2 marks I am scouting out who live side by side. One of them has a security system and is unarmed, the other doesn't have a security system but I know is pretty well armed and prepared. I am going to go clip the phone lines of the unarmed guy and meet him at his front door so I can take my time with his place and make sure he unlocks any safe he has. Why didn't I attack the house of the guy who doesn't have the system, cause I know he can fire back and I might mess up and end up breaking in when he or company is home.

If I am in an area where half of them are armed, I won't try shit cause I am likely to get my ass killed. If I am in an area where next to no one has guns, I am a kid in a candy store.... Sucks but it really isn't that hard to put yourself into their mindset on this issue.

Firstly, apologies - I was lazy in my quoting and bridged your quote with the one you were replying to.

However, criminality is generally a last-resort. The average street criminal won't have the know-how to dismantle a security system quietly in the dead of night. Also, since (if I was a criminal) I'd much rather take my chances trying to out-run the owner of a property than I would the law - which, if you bungle a robbery on a house with an alarm system, will be on scene within minutes. The criminal will more likely attack the house without the alarm system, and I'm basing this assessment on the estimation that most burglars aren't ex-military Recon so don't A>H occupants prior to breaking in. He'll also have no idea whether the occupant is armed, so invariably 'tool himself up for any eventuality'. Ergo, take a gun.

I'm basing this on the situation in the UK - the only people that bear arms (generally speaking) are farmers and hunters. So that raises a three-fold response from me.. Firstly, Burglars don't generally carry guns because they've no requirement to. They know no house they break into will have a gun. Secondly, robbery is about property acquisition, most violent crime that happens within dwellings is from someone you will actually know - they'd know you have a weapon and likely escalate their equipment for the job accordingly. Thirdly, I don't know if there's any evidence to suggest, here atleast, that farmers are less likely to suffer a burglary or break in because they carry weapons.

[ddark]

It is intellectually lazy to perpetually equate banning weapons like this to banning all guns.

What do you mean weapons like 'this'? What about ones that are a little less like 'this' and more like 'that'? Cherry-picking a couple of guns and magazines and leaving equivalent options and pretending they fixed a problem, is that not intellectually lazy?

[bergmann620]

Why is it that on a topic of banning assault weapons, everyone that is apparently against is arguing against the strawman of banning all guns? It is intellectually lazy to perpetually equate banning weapons like this to banning all guns.

Because it's not much of a strawman when half the people in this thread are simply saying, "Remove guns." Also, because 'Assault Weapons' have about the same meaning to the general populace as 'Pit Bull'... Which is to say, 'Looks scary and I don't really know anything else about them.' Lastly, because pro-gun folks know that the vast majority of gun crimes are committed with handguns, so an 'Assault Weapon' ban is nothing more than a political move at best and a foot in the door to further bans at worst.

And one other thought exercise: Suppose in a world where you could magically make guns disappear altogether so that nobody had them, would you prefer that reality to the current reality?

I actually think that a world in which no one had firearms would be more dangerous for many people, especially women. I also think that next month, we'd be talking about banning swords.

[PizzaSHARK]

Why is it that on a topic of banning assault weapons, everyone that is apparently against is arguing against the strawman of banning all guns? It is intellectually lazy to perpetually equate banning weapons like this to banning all guns.

And one other thought exercise: Suppose in a world where you could magically make guns disappear altogether so that nobody had them, would you prefer that reality to the current reality?

Because "assault weapons" doesn't describe any gun. Just like "instruments of war" doesn't describe one.

Because, just like SOPA, it's a poorly-worded bill put together by people that have no fucking clue what they're talking about, and also like SOPA, only idiots are agreeing that it's a good bill.

[Deleted]

I don't care about laws in the UK. I hear people that live there say things like "If you beat up someone that breaks into your house, then you will be the one that goes to jail". I would never want to live there, but if people are fine with having to be limp wristed under their government then that is their choice. So I don't really understand why you guys are so interested and pushy about our laws here that allow the same level of defense that our government and law enforcement bodies employ. Unless you are pissy because your elders were too cowardly to be responsible for their own defense and you want everyone to be the same way.

Well you're basing all of that on wrong information in the first instance. We're not pushy about your laws, this is an international discussion forum, we're allowed an opinion on the situation over there as much as you are allowed to make things up about us.

[Reeve]

Two things,

1)Norway has a vastly different culture than the United States.

2)Norway is bordered by by Sweden and Finland, the United States of bordered by MEXICO so for every gun they picked up in the US, 3 would makes it way across the border to be sold here. And to be honest, we have enough, do-it-yourself people here that they could and would start making their own due to statement #1.

With which I leave you with...

Guns aren't chemically addictive substances.

[PizzaSHARK]

I actually think that a world in which no one had firearms would be more dangerous for many people, especially women. I also think that next month, we'd be talking about banning swords.

I'd be pushing for the banning and/or regulation of MiracleGro, PVC piping, styrofoam, kerosene, and gasoline.

[Masark]

Pot's banned, too. Doesn't mean it ain't piss-easy to get hold of some.

Marijuana grows on a plant. I haven't seen any gun trees lately.

[Deleted]

May I ask why Americans are so close minded when it comes to gun control?

America is a nation with one of the highest educational standards in the world, the highest number of college educated adults in the world and a nation whose scientific and technology ability has led the world for the last 60 years (if not more).

Forgive the blunt and potentially insulting question, but how can you be so stupid about gun control!?

[Deleted]

Unless you are pissy because your elders were too cowardly to be responsible for their own defense and you want everyone to be the same way.

Calling "our" elders cowards won't make you're arguments any better. I also like the way that people legitimize gun ownership by saying "Yeah well we need them protect our family... If it wasn't for guns the king of England could walk right in here and start pushing you around." No go on and explain to me, and my cowardly european forefathers, who of the psychos killing innocent people acted in self defense?

[Moadar]

Well you're basing all of that on wrong information in the first instance. We're not pushy about your laws, this is an international discussion forum, we're allowed an opinion on the situation over there as much as you are allowed to make things up about us.

If its untrue I take it back, but its based off what I have seen posted by brits on this forum and others.

[Deleted]

Calling "our" elders cowards won't make you're arguments any better. I also like the way that people legitimize gun ownership by saying "Yeah well we need them protect our family... If it wasn't for guns the king of England could walk right in here and start pushing you around." No go on and explain to me, and my cowardly european forefathers, who any of the psychos killing innocent people acted in self defense?

That day is coming, better get ready for "The revenge of the redcoats!"

[ddark]

May I ask why Americans are so close minded when it comes to gun control?

America is a nation with one of the highest educational standards in the world, the highest number of college educated adults in the world and a nation whose scientific and technology ability has led the world for the last 60 years (if not more).

Forgive the blunt and potentially insulting question, but how can you be so stupid about gun control!?

I think many Americans aren't willing to be ruled by fear and don't feel like their rights should be dictated by the poor choices of others.

[Fugus]

Firstly, apologies - I was lazy in my quoting and bridged your quote with the one you were replying to.

However, criminality is generally a last-resort. The average street criminal won't have the know-how to dismantle a security system quietly in the dead of night. Also, since (if I was a criminal) I'd much rather take my chances trying to out-run the owner of a property than I would the law - which, if you bungle a robbery on a house with an alarm system, will be on scene within minutes. The criminal will more likely attack the house without the alarm system, and I'm basing this assessment on the estimation that most burglars aren't ex-military Recon so don't A>H occupants prior to breaking in. He'll also have no idea whether the occupant is armed, so invariably 'tool himself up for any eventuality'. Ergo, take a gun.

I'm basing this on the situation in the UK - the only people that bear arms (generally speaking) are farmers and hunters. So that raises a three-fold response from me.. Firstly, Burglars don't generally carry guns because they've no requirement to. They know no house they break into will have a gun. Secondly, robbery is about property acquisition, most violent crime that happens within dwellings is from someone you will actually know - they'd know you have a weapon and likely escalate their equipment for the job accordingly. Thirdly, I don't know if there's any evidence to suggest, here atleast, that farmers are less likely to suffer a burglary or break in because they carry weapons.

No hard feelings on the mistake, I knew what you were thinking when I saw the response and I would be the same way.

And things here in the US are a bit different from the UK. Here, if your home is broken into, chances are they will be armed regardless as a just in case. Sure most of them will wait till you are away before they break in and only use the gun as a last resort, but many of them have changed and actually wait for you to be home when they get there that way they can make sure they can get access to everything no matter where it is. And the thing with the security systems, it really isn't that hard, they are getting smarter and that is something that you can learn from google, many of the better security systems actually have built in wireless now since that became just too well known.

Long story short, they have easier access to guns than legal owners already. I know that as I am legally able to own them but even I can get them easier illegally than I can going to the store and doing the paperwork, just costs a few hundred dollars more, hell, I can get military grade weapons that way too. In my life, between me and my friends, I have had people try and break into my house once at gun point (I didn't let them in though with family inside, just sat outside for 10 minutes playing dumb like I couldn't get inside till they got scared of the passing traffic and left, door wasn't even locked), I have had 2 of my friends shot in their own front yard from guys trying to get in cause one of their roommates actually had money so they had decent stuff inside and one of my friends had people actually get inside his house, knock him out and one of them even wanted to shoot them but the other 2 gunmen wouldn't let him.

Trust me, out here in the US, you need to have a way to protect yourself or you can become a target to anyone who knows you aren't defended. Even my 78 year old grandmother have a revolver in her house as a just in case and she lives in a quiet area.

---------- Post added 2012-12-17 at 11:57 AM ----------

Guns aren't chemically addictive substances.

Neither is Marijuana but still doesn't stop them. If they want it and are willing to break the law to get it, they can and if the demand is high enough, the black market will provide it.

[Bakis]

If refusing to deal witht he gun problem the only thing left is to deal with the huge poverty, inequality, healtcare and other socioeconomic issues that make so many people snap. That would be the better option obviously cos those are the ones with the biggest impact but it will never ever happen.
Status Quo and more deaths, natural selection one might say in the end.

[Moadar]

Calling "our" elders cowards won't make you're arguments any better. I also like the way that people legitimize gun ownership by saying "Yeah well we need them protect our family... If it wasn't for guns the king of England could walk right in here and start pushing you around." No go on and explain to me, and my cowardly european forefathers, who any of the psychos killing innocent people acted in self defense?

Let me explain the use of the word cowardly. It is much easier to sit back and "let the government handle it" than it is to take personal responsibility. No (sane) person wants to have to fight for their lives, or be solely responsible for saving another persons. People don't like to get their hands dirty, they would rather call on the government to do it for them. Until the government can guarantee my safety, and they no longer need fire arms then I will continue to need them as well. People in the military and police are not superior in any way to a common man and thus entitled to wield weapons over the people funding them.