What Is Your Position On Gun Control ?

[Jguy101 0]

Just wondering what the position tended to be here...

 

I'm an NRA member, so naturally, I'm against it.

Edited November 19, 2005 by miCRoSCoPiC^eaRthLinG (see edit history)

[Xaine 0]

I'm for gun control. I just don't see the sport in hunting animals with a gun or the need to protect myself by having a gun in the house. And I believe that the right to bear arms in the second amendment was taken out of context. From my point of view it refers to the maintainence of the state militia. But that's just me. A somewhat liberal asian guy.

[Jguy101 0]

Well, let me just give you a little example.

 

You're sleeping in your hosue one night, and you wake up and hear some violent psycopath trying to break into your house. Of course, you could call the police, but they usually don't get there until the resident in this type of situation is dead, unless the resident does one thing: defend themselves with whatever means necessary. That is why law-abiding citizens should have guns.

[Xaine 0]

And without gun control what would keep people who are not law-abiding citizens from obtaining guns? What if that psychopath you mentioned about had a gun, thanks to the lack of sufficient controls on guns?I think we both agree that limitations and restrictions should be put on guns, judging from your post above. But I still believe that a lot of people are underestimating the destructive power that a gun has. One shot will kill you. This isn't the Matrix or some action movie or game where you can get hit as many times as you want before you die. Oh well. At least we can both agree about the law-abiding citizen part.

[NilsC 0]

Gun control, its a hot topic and it will always be biased by the the views of the person making the statement.

 

There are grey areas where gun control will be seen as something of a bad thing if you anti gun and good if you are pro gun.

 

Carry permit, if you are a law abiding citizen you only carry you gun in the area legal for you to carry guns. As a criminal you don't care if it's legal to carry or not.

 

If you have a gun and carry it for your whole life and never fire a shot to protect you or someone else. Then someone may say "Why carry in the first place". My answer is I rather carry a gun for the rest of my life and never need to use it than to be in a situation where I can't defend myself.

 

Question to Xaine, what would you do if someone threatened the life of a family member and you if you had access to a gun. Would you pick up the gun and shoot to defend the innocent person or would you stand there watching while that person was gunned down? Would you pick up a knife to defend that person? maybe a baseball bat or a rock?

 

Most people will never need a gun to defend their own life or the life of another.

 

If all guns where outlawed, who would still be carrying guns and where would the guns come from. Do you think criminals will leave the "illegal gun at home" when they go to rob you?

 

I am Pro gun, pro the right to carry. And I will defend myself.

 

As for hunting that is another issue. It's a free country, you don't have to hunt. Or should we put the rule in place that If we don't agree with something it should be outlawed. Because if that is true I think "Xbox" should be outlawed.

 

And as you said in another post:

"I pledge alliegance to the flag

of the United States of America

and to the republic

for which it stands,

one nation, under God

indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

=[

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think Liberty and justice for all can only be protected if you have the means to enforce it.

 

Xaine, it's not an attack on you or your beliefs. I'm stating my beliefs and responding to your statement.

 

Peace

Nils

[Xaine 0]

In response to your first sentence.

I agree with it. I am from S. Korea, and there is very strict gun control there. Even policemen rarely carry guns. Our citizens don't really make a fuss over the need or the right to carry a gun. Possession of an illegal weapon, and then you're just in jail and in S. Korea there is no such thing as bail.

We even live right next door to N. Korea, where there is a communist army over 3 million strong, and the S. Koreans don't really cry for the right to possess a gun.

Surely you would need a gun when the red army is marching down Seoul more urgently than when a single person who may or may not be in possession of a lethal weapon threatens a loved one.

 

So America really doesn't make much sense to me.

 

Question to Xaine, what would you do if someone threatened the life of a family member and you if you had access to a gun. Would you pick up the gun and shoot to defend the innocent person or would you stand there watching while that person was gunned down? Would you pick up a knife to defend that person? maybe a baseball bat or a rock?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

A valid question. If in that situation, I doubt I would have the courage to attack another human being with a deadly weapon, even to protect a loved one. And I doubt many people would. Maybe a baseball bat. Just because a shot kills, and a person can probably take a couple of twacks with a large wooden stick.

 

Yeah I know it isn't personal. =]

This exchange of ideas is good really, it reminds you that there are different people out there, with different backgrounds and different opinions. Thanks for your complete response.

[NilsC 0]

Xaine, I grew up in Norway during the cold war. We were less than 10 years after WWII and growing up I was introduced to guns as a way of life. In Norway there are (was) a minimum of one rifle per family. Every man after his military service was issued the rifle so he would be armed in case of war. (The "was" statement is because I'm not sure what the rules are now, it's a long time since I was there)

 

I do believe the murder and crime rate in Norway is one of the lowest in the world. I'm not saying that is because of the guns but because it's common knowledge that everyone have the means to defend them self.

 

If I lived in an area like s. korea and I had the "right to carry arms" I would, and that goes for any country I was living in. If it's illegal I would follow the rules and not carry or own a gun!

 

BTW, on the hunting issue! do you eat meat? if you do then you should approve of hunting. Same if you have a leather coat or shoes made out of leather.

 

Don't you think life is better for a moose or deer that run free on the range or in the woods enjoying life until the day it dies of natural cause or a hunters bullet. The opposite is a cow or sheep or a pig that are penned up their whole short life until they are slaughtered for food. Is that a better way of dying than from a hunters bullet after a satisfying life.

 

If you eat fish, then you are breaking the rules also, a hook is to the fish as a bullet is to the deer. Unless you fish catch and release and that can be constituted cruel and unusual punishment to the fish.

 

Here is a kicker. In two hours and 4 minuter serial killer Michael Ross will be put to death in a prison less than 3 miles from me. Do you think I shed a tear, no I don't. If any of the girls he killed had a gun to defend them self with and had shot the bastard we would have been spared the media circus we see traveling down the road to cover the execution of "poor" Michael. He is getting what he should have gotten a long time ago.

 

I take my hat off for the supreme court who lifted the stay and are sending him to the needle.

 

God may forgive him for his crimes, our job is just to get him there on time.

 

I did go off topic there but I'm listening to the meadia and are watching all the "news" crews setting up for the show.

 

Nils

[MajesticTreeFrog 0]

For my senior thesis in college as a Psych student, I did a study about arguments involving gun control and their effect on people's opinions. What I found was sad. The quality of the argument, either way, had basically no effect. There were some trends in the data that were even more alarming, but since I had a small data set, they were not statistically significant(or weren't there and were a hicup of the data). In any case, the one KNOWN thing was that people basically don't think anymore when it comes to guns. They pick a side and go with it for other reasons. Even creating the study was hard for those reasons. Its sad really. Gun control or not is not what we should be talking about. It should be about what are ALL the different things we can try and affect to lower crime. For instance, a waiting period keeps people who are angry and want to go buy a gun in a fit of anger to kill someone from doing so, while not being a huge inconvenience to gun owners.Everything is the middle ground. Frankly, I think guns are mainly irrelevant. The problem is that people have a need for them at all, for defence or for crime (I am not saying that you can magically end ALL crime, just that much crime is motivated by reasons that CAN be dealt with).For instance, violence rises in poor areas, even if gun ownership rates stay constant... Hmmm, lets see. There are cultural things going on in poor areas, economic things in poor areas, and educational things in poor areas that could all be the REAL causes of violent crime.THOSE are what we should be dealing with.

[teraslasch 0]

I am for gun control. Being able to buy guns off the shops on the streets is an extremely dangerous thing. They should not allow the use of guns for self defense as it is so dangerous.. =/.. Imagine a robber buys a gun from a shop and robs that shop instantly after getting his gun.. scary.. and having crazy people carrying guns around is totally scary.. imagine a bad student who doesn't like his teacher, he can just take out his gun and threaten his teacher.. OMG.. this is scary.. they should ban the use of guns for civilians

[NilsC 0]

It's my last post in this topic, it's one of the topics you are for or against and whatewer the other side say will not change your mind.

 

If guns are outlawed, only outlaws have guns

 

And to the angry person looking to buy a gun, he'll not wait the waiting period. He'll go on the street corner and buy one. (Did prohibition work? no alcohol sold in the US during that time?)

 

If you knew that everyone around may carry a gun, maybe the teachers should have to carry guns the same way policemen do. If they did carry guns maybe we would have less school killings.

 

More Guns Less Crime

If you look at the statistics on states with a "Shall Issue Concealed Carry" as opposed to "Discretionary Concealed Carry" and states with "No Concealed Carry" you will see that the murder and rape rates are higher in the Discretionary and No consealed carry states.

 

A law abiding citizen with a concealed gun can ruin a criminal's day. The more concealed guns in a community, the more a criminal is apt to go elsewhere, or seek another line of work.

 

One cannot directly measure the criminal's perception of the numbers of guns in a community. It is also hard to measure the actual number of guns being carried. One can learn the number of conceal carry permits that have been issued in an area. That is what John Lott measured. He found that the more concealed gun permits issued, the fewer crimes committed. If this isn't quite "More Guns Less Crime," it is certainly cause to issue more conceal carry permits, and to encourage those with the permits to carry.

Drugs are illegal, it kills milions of people. Who have drugs, criminals and they sell it with no regard to the law.

 

Outlawing guns is not the answer. Educate everyone in the use and handling of a gun should be mandatory and be a part of the education system.

 

Nils

[MajesticTreeFrog 0]

And to the angry person looking to buy a gun, he'll not wait the waiting period. He'll go on the street corner and buy one. (Did prohibition work? no alcohol sold in the US during that time?)

 

If you knew that everyone around may carry a gun, maybe the teachers should have to carry guns the same way policemen do. If they did carry guns maybe we would have less school killings.

 

 

Outlawing guns is not the answer. Educate everyone in the use and handling of a gun should be mandatory and be a part of the education system.

 

Nils

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well, I don't know about where you live, but guns are not nearly so available as 'on the street corner'. Criminals(long term ones) may know where to get guns on the side of the street, but random white collar angry at his wife for cheating does not. The period is to let him cool down. It doesn't make things worse, but it might make things better.

 

As for the study you posted, I am aware of it, it was part of the stuff I looked at for my research. Results from this study and others are inconclusive, and often the studies have rather fatal flaws, or are only accurate for a few years(at which point the trend reverses). This is on both sides of the debate.

 

THIS IS ALL SECONDARY. Guns are not the be all end all of the solution or the problem. On both sides, they are a symptom. The real issues are the ones not being debated which is sad.

 

That said, I agree with you Nilsc, education is always the answer. However, it doesn't have to always be guns. For instance, instead of country line dance being taught in schools (I am in NC), they should teach aikido or tai chi or some other martial art. Correct teaching of martial arts is more than moves, it involves teaching awareness of a situation, and avoiding situations where violence may occur.

 

Like I said, the real issues/solutions are not being debated. You should have a separate poll option: intelligent gun management.

[Jguy101 0]

Even if they do teach Karate or something like that, it's not realy that much of a fight against a gun.

 

And, "Intelligent Gun Management" has a different emaning for everybody. For me, it's to allow guns, except requiring a license to own fully automatic weapons (like now, you need a retailer's license), and possibly have gun safety in schools, as Nils mentioned. For others, that means banning all guns and leaving everybody defenseless, depending on the police, who usually don't get to the scene of the crime until somebody's dead.

[MajesticTreeFrog 0]

Even if they do teach Karate or something like that, it's not realy that much of a fight against a gun.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

A good martial arts school won't just teach techniques, but also how to read a situation and keep out of trouble to begin with. The best way to win a fight is not to get into one.

 

Even if you had a gun, if you fought and both were good shots then you would both be dead. That still isn't a good solution. Far better to find ways to not have guns involved at all.

 

 

On the other hand, good 'gun management' to me means training people so that there aren't any accidental deaths. There are currently quite a few in the US, so even that would make things much better. Correct education also involves teaching legal gun owners how to store guns so that they don't fall into the hands of criminals or young people who might do something stupid(see the comment about accidental deaths....).

[adamsgi 0]

Coming from the UK, where you cannot protect yourself with guns (it is illegal) I don't see a problem with gun control. I must admit, the latest events in Minnesota show a perfect argument for why there should be tighter gun control in the US.What it comes down to is that Guns don't kill people, the people who use them do. You have a catch 22 situation in the US - anyone can own a gun, which makes gun crime much easier. This means people want guns to protect themselves, and so guns become even easier to obtain, and so gun crime is bound to increase.How would you feel if the gun you had kept in your house to protect your family was taken by your child to kill someone who was bullying them? Who would be responsible then? You, your child, the bully.....Gun crime is on the increase in the UK, mainly due to the illegal gun trading that goes on. However, much of this behaviour seems to have been "imported" from the US, with British kids forming clans and giving themselves "Gansta" names, emulating the rap culture.It's a shame that people feel the need for guns, but until crime is tackled, people will try to justify that need.

[Shogi 0]

I'm pro-gun control because clearly anything that can kill needs to be watched closely.The problem is though, that people who are killing people with guns are the ones not following the laws in the first place. The gun registration and all of that is all well and good, but the problem is, only the law abiding citizens actually register their gun.Criminals buy their guns on the black market or whatever, so they never register. What we really need to do is stop the illegal sellign of guns. that way people whio intend or are likely to kill can't get guns. Beefing up gun laws only affects those that follow them in the first place.Another thing that neds to be stressed is gun-education. I'm not saying everyone needs to know how to use a gun, but we should teach kids how not to shoot themselves or their friends. I'm for gun locks aswell, soley to stop accidents.One posible solution i thought of would be not allowing regular citizens to purchase live ammunition. only those with a hunting license or law enforcement can purchase real bullets. everyone else should buy rubber bullets that dont kill but can still be used for recreation. rubber bullets still work at the shooting range, and nobody dies.I'm a bit of an idealist and i hope that some day guns are all together wiped out, at least in the use of killing. i sitll find guns to be really cool.