• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Gun Control

Reverend Rick

Frubal Whore
Premium Member
We wouldn't need so much gun control if we weren't so quick to use them.
Here Lies the problem. We should never have to use a gun for self defense period.

Purex, this is a well thought out post, and I agree with the spirit of it.

The people who would be affected by gun laws are not the people who are causing the problems or quick to use a gun.

On another note, if criminals are using assault rifles in crimes, the police have had the need to install high powered automatic rifles in the trunks of cruisers to respond instead of just having a pistol to defend themselves.

On that note, a private citizen could argue the same need except American citizens are not required to demonstrate a need for ownership of these types of weapons.

Law abiding citizens should be trusted with these weapons. Those weapons are legally acquired and responsibly kept. The owners and these weapons are not the root of the problem. People are not legally acquiring weapons and selling them to felons who are committing the crimes, controlling the legal weapons would not change a thing.
 

PureX

Veteran Member
Here Lies the problem. We should never have to use a gun for self defense period.

Purex, this is a well thought out post, and I agree with the spirit of it.

The people who would be affected by gun laws are not the people who are causing the problems or quick to use a gun.

On another note, if criminals are using assault rifles in crimes, the police have had the need to install high powered automatic rifles in the trunks of cruisers to respond instead of just having a pistol to defend themselves.

On that note, a private citizen could argue the same need except American citizens do not need to demonstrate a need for ownership of these types of weapons.

Law abiding citizens should be trusted with these weapons. Those weapons are legally acquired and responsibly kept. The owners and these weapons are not the root of the problem. People are not legally acquiring weapons and selling them to felons who are committing the crimes, controlling the legal weapons would not change a thing.
The problem I have with assault weapons is that if they are out there, in the hands of responsible people, some of them will be stolen or will be sold to the wrong people, and will end up in the hands of lunatics who want to kill as many people as they can in an insane orgy of murder/suicide. Assault weapons are designed to kill lots of people in a hurry, which is exactly what these lunatics want to do with them, and I am NOT buying the argument that somehow, magically, in the hands of civilians, they are less effective at killing people then other kinds of weapons. I realize these are rare events, but they are frighteningly deadly events and they are happening more and more.

On the other side of the coin, we have no need to own these weapons. There is no civilian use for them except as play-toys, and the only civilians who want to own them are exactly the kinds of people we don't want to have them. There may come a time in the future, when we do need to begin to arm ourselves against an oppressive government or an abusive military, but that time is not now. What is of our time, are these lunatics who want to die in an orgy of murder/suicide. And so to help address this problem, I believe we should completely ban assault weapons, and enforce that ban in earnest. This will not eliminate all assault weapons, or stop all lunatics from getting hold of them, but it will eliminate many, and it will stop some from getting hold of them. And if it's your wife or child's life that is saved as a result, I don't think giving up that deadly play-toy would seem like such a huge sacrifice.

And keep in mind that I am not in any way advocating that we ban all fire arms. In fact, just the opposite. I believe that every citizen has a right to both OWN AND CARRY a hand gun if they wish. My only goal for gun control is the same goal as we have controlling any other potentially deadly machine. That is that society must insist that those who do wish to own and carry a fire arm must be properly trained and tested and licensed so that we can be reasonably assured that they can do so responsibly, same as we do with any other dangerous machinery. That training and testing will be more stringent than with some machines, and less stringent than with others, and will be more stringent with some guns than with others.

In the end, the goal is to keep the guns out of the hands of drunks, drug addicts, emotionally unbalanced people, criminals, and the lunatics. And it's perfectly reasonable to ask the general public to make some sacrifices in pursuit of this goal. Guns are very dangerous machines, more so than most, and they require significant controls. That's just the way it is.
 

PureX

Veteran Member
The bolded above gives me reason to ignore every single sentence you type from here on out. You seriously believe the only people who are going to buy an automatic weapon are "morons"? If I had the money I would buy an automatic weapon, does that make me a "moron" as well?
If you want to spend money that you don't have on very dangerous weapons that serve no logical purpose or need, but that endanger yourself and your fellow citizens, then yes, you are what I call a moron.
 

Reverend Rick

Frubal Whore
Premium Member
Purex, we are not that far apart on this issue. The exceptions are, I believe if someone came into my home and stole an assault rifle and something happened in town, that would be partially my fault because I failed to secure my weapon. The mall shooting happened because someone failed to secure their weapon.

Carrying a concealed weapon is great, unless you leave a hand gun in your car to be stolen because you cannot go into a post office, school or other restricted area with it and have to leave it behind.

Here gun control is causing more risk. I find it amusing that while people have no problem with the police having weapons while some of them are very young and inexperienced with weapons, they then have a problem with former military people who do have experience and training with weapons carrying them. Airline pilots are a prime example.

As for the assault rifle ownership thing. I never have thought that we would need them to protect us from our own government. The men and women coming for us (for example) would be the police or military and these would be American men and women that would be the sons and daughters of someone and more than likely a person I know living in a small town.

I cannot see taking up arms against my own government.

What is silly is thinking that everyone could wait to buy these firearms later. What is even more silly is believing that owning them would give you any better chance of winning a battle against overwhelming forces.

Why do we really need them? We don't except to prove a point that we do have a second amendment right. For me, it is like a baton twirler keeping her baton when she is old and does not even use it.
 

McBell

Unbound
does one honestly believe that a ban on automatic weapons is going to make all the automatic weapons just 'poof' disappear?
A common public misconception persists that the assault weapons ban restricted weapons capable of fully automatic fire, such as assault rifles and machine guns. Fully automatic weapons, however, were unaffected by the ban, and have been continuously and heavily regulated since the National Firearms Act of 1934 was passed. Subsequent laws such as the Gun Control Act of 1968 and the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986 also affected the importation and civilian ownership of fully automatic firearms, the latter fully prohibiting sales of newly-manufactured machine guns to non-law enforcement.
Source

In the United States of America, the protection against infringement of the right to bear arms is addressed in the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution. Most federal gun laws are spelled out in one of the following:
In addition to federal gun laws, most states and some local jurisdictions have additionally imposed their own firearms restrictions. See Gun laws in the United States (by state).
Source

 

PureX

Veteran Member
does one honestly believe that a ban on automatic weapons is going to make all the automatic weapons just 'poof' disappear?
Did you see anyone make that claim? If not, then who are you addressing, here? And the fact that the current laws are a mess only underscores the need for comprehensive changes in our gun control policy and laws.
 

Reverend Rick

Frubal Whore
Premium Member
Purex, the government cannot solve everything. Guns are out there and many are in the hand of criminals who are not going to cooperate with your agenda.

Turning the heat up on the people who are not causing the problem will not only not help the situation, it will hurt it by making stubborn gun owners criminals for the first time in their lives.

Would you be happy with that? Liberal attitudes about law abiding gun owners is no different than racist attitudes about segregation removal in the past. Hate for blacks may be trumped this time just because a person holds on to a freedom they have had for generations and has never caused a problem.
 

Reverend Rick

Frubal Whore
Premium Member
Lets take this to it's logical conclusion. Criminal are causing all the problems, law abiding gun owners are not. Draconian gun laws would require gun owners to forfeit their expensive weapons and not be reciprocated for their expense.

You tell me what problem is created here.

1. Some law abiding citizens would turn their assault riffles in.

2. Some would keep them and become criminals. Great just what we need, more criminals.

3. Some would recoup their costs and sell them on the black market. This would in effect take guns out of safe hands and into the hands of the highest bidder. The former assault rifle owner now has done a terrible thing, but if you come to his house, he is a law abiding citizen now, on paper.

No assault rifles in his home no sir.
 

McBell

Unbound
Did you see anyone make that claim? If not, then who are you addressing, here? And the fact that the current laws are a mess only underscores the need for comprehensive changes in our gun control policy and laws.
No, I have not heard anyone make that claim.
The question is directed directly at you.
I did notice how you failed to answer it.
 

Apex

Somewhere Around Nothing
If you want to spend money that you don't have on very dangerous weapons that serve no logical purpose or need, but that endanger yourself and your fellow citizens, then yes, you are what I call a moron.
You are assuming someone who would buy an automatic weapon would have no idea how to use it. You cant just go buy it on a whim. And the only people who are going to fork out the money to do so are those who know what they are doing. It is possible to own a weapon and be safe with it. As for having "no logical purpose or need", I could agree with the "need" but when has our society ever cared about actually "needing" something when we buy it. Its purpose is recreation, a perfectly valid purpose.
 

PureX

Veteran Member
Why do we really need them? We don't except to prove a point that we do have a second amendment right. For me, it is like a baton twirler keeping her baton when she is old and does not even use it.
But that seems a mighty silly reason to keep a dangerous weapon around, that could be stolen and used to do great harm to you, your family, or someone else's.

As to the other instances you mentioned, it is clear that no form of gun control will ever be perfect. And the people who choose to own and carry a gun will have to be responsible enough to keep them secured. Even wearing a gun does not insure that it can't be taken away and used against you. And in truth, I suspect that not that many citizens would choose to carry a hand gun on their person once they were fully aware of the responsibilities and hassles that come with that. But I do feel we have that right, if we are willing to accept the responsibilities that come with it.
 

PureX

Veteran Member
You are assuming someone who would buy an automatic weapon would have no idea how to use it. You cant just go buy it on a whim. And the only people who are going to fork out the money to do so are those who know what they are doing. It is possible to own a weapon and be safe with it. As for having "no logical purpose or need", I could agree with the "need" but when has our society ever cared about actually "needing" something when we buy it. Its purpose is recreation, a perfectly valid purpose.
Such pointless "recreation" is not a valid reason to endanger one's self and one's fellow citizens. And automatic weapons pose a threat to everyone. Owning any fire arm is dangerous, but some fire arms have a legitimate purpose that offset the threat they pose. Playing Rambo, and plinking cans as "recreation" is not a legitimate reason for society to accept the danger that such weapons pose. And whatever thrill you'd get from it doesn't justify your asking your fellow citizens to take the risk with you.
 

PureX

Veteran Member
Lets take this to it's logical conclusion. Criminal are causing all the problems, law abiding gun owners are not. Draconian gun laws would require gun owners to forfeit their expensive weapons and not be reciprocated for their expense.

You tell me what problem is created here.

1. Some law abiding citizens would turn their assault riffles in.

2. Some would keep them and become criminals. Great just what we need, more criminals.

3. Some would recoup their costs and sell them on the black market. This would in effect take guns out of safe hands and into the hands of the highest bidder. The former assault rifle owner now has done a terrible thing, but if you come to his house, he is a law abiding citizen now, on paper.

No assault rifles in his home no sir.
We could buy them from the citizens and give them to the military. I expect it would involve some losses across the board, and some idiots would insist of keeping them. Which would make them criminals, and would get them in very serious trouble when they're finally found out. But in the end, a lot of these weapons would be taken out of circulation, and like I said, if it were your wife or child that was saved because some nut bent on murder/suicide had to use a pistol instead of an AK-47 you'd be only too happy to turn that assault weapon in.
 

Reverend Rick

Frubal Whore
Premium Member
Purex, I believe the question is, why do you think making assault weapons illegal will stop criminals from having them?

As far as guns being stolen, any collector or gun business has a safe on par with large department stores or small banks.

The comment you made earlier about gun take aways, if the gun is concealed correctly, people cannot steal what they don't know about.

I would like to make a comment about the recent mall shooting.

The guns original owner did not keep it locked away and did not even know it was missing. This shooting had time to be prevented. The shooter was bragging and showing the weapon to his friends. Here was another chance to prevent this senseless shooting.

Last but not least, when everyone was hiding in the mall, I wonder how many of the patrons wished they had a side arm or how many stores wished they had a competent person working for them that could have resolved the problem. In this liability conscience society, people might want to consider that it would have been fortunate to have lived through the shooting in the first place before worrying about liability issues.
 

PureX

Veteran Member
Purex, I believe the question is, why do you think making assault weapons illegal will stop criminals from having them?
I have been answering that question.
As far as guns being stolen, any collector or gun business has a safe on par with large department stores or small banks.
No they don't. Someone broke into a rural gun shop near hear just a few months ago and stole a whole bunch of guns. I don't think they got any automatics, though. There wasn't even an alarm system. And I'm sure there are hundreds of gun shops just like that one around the country. Maybe thousands.
The comment you made earlier about gun take aways, if the gun is concealed correctly, people cannot steal what they don't know about.
True, but a gun they don't know is there is not much of a deterrent, either. By the time you have to pull it out, it may be too late. Whereas if it were on your hip, for all to see, you might have avoided the need for using it all together.
I would like to make a comment about the recent mall shooting.

The guns original owner did not keep it locked away and did not even know it was missing. This shooting had time to be prevented. The shooter was bragging and showing the weapon to his friends. Here was another chance to prevent this senseless shooting.

Last but not least, when everyone was hiding in the mall, I wonder how many of the patrons wished they had a side arm or how many stores wished they had a competent person working for them that could have resolved the problem. In this liability conscience society, people might want to consider that it would have been fortunate to have lived through the shooting in the first place before worrying about liability issues.
It just goes to show that we are irresponsible with guns. Ridiculously so, and this is why we need serious gun control. We need people to decide that they either want to take on the serious responsibility of owning and/or carrying a gun, or not, and then get rid of it. As it is now, we have millions of them just lying around waiting for some drunk, dope head, hot head, or lunatic to grab it and shoot someone. And this is exactly how most of the people who die by guns get killed. It's not the hardened and determined criminals that are killing us with guns. It's our own stupid selves killing each other out of plain negligence, stupidity, and carelessness.

Those large malls SHOULD have some armed security around. Any place where lots of people gather should have some armed security these days. But waiting until the lunatic is in the mall and armed is the wrong time to be practicing gun control. The whole idea is to make it a lot harder for him/her to get the guns in the first place. But to do that, we're going to have to make them harder for US to have them, too. Because we're the irresponsible ones who are letting these nuts get hold of our guns.
 

yossarian22

Resident Schizophrenic
No they don't. Someone broke into a rural gun shop near hear just a few months ago and stole a whole bunch of guns. I don't think they got any automatics, though. There wasn't even an alarm system. And I'm sure there are hundreds of gun shops just like that one around the country. Maybe thousands.
If they have any automatics, there has to be a safe, or their operation is illegal. Anyhow, anecdotes on both sides in this case.
True, but a gun they don't know is there is not much of a deterrent, either. By the time you have to pull it out, it may be too late.
A bullet is a great deterrent however. It also may not be too late.
It just goes to show that we are irresponsible with guns.
I'd say that this shows the sheer stupidity of people.
As it is now, we have millions of them just lying around waiting for some drunk, dope head, hot head, or lunatic to grab it and shoot someone. And this is exactly how most of the people who die by guns get killed.
Where did you get these numbers from?
It's not the hardened and determined criminals that are killing us with guns. It's our own stupid selves killing each other out of plain negligence, stupidity, and carelessness.
And this conclusion comes from? News reports?

A bit off topic, but...
I find it quite sad that this only becomes an issue when people wind up getting shot. It is also quite telling about how society reacts to a disaster. There has to be a reason behind what just happened. No way could a guy just steal a gun and shoot people with it. There has to be a flaw in our laws.
Just look at any disaster report. Hurricane Katrina was caused by global warming. Never mind that such storms randomly occur. 9/11 must have been some government conspiracy. Its impossible for anybody else to have done it.
People seem unable to accept randomness in the world
 

PureX

Veteran Member
I lived in Chicago for many years. And I read the Chicago Tribune most days of the week. We always had a copy of the paper laying around at my job, and I usually would buy the sunday paper at home. In all those years I've read many stories about people getting killed with guns. And I can tell you how it would break down throughout the year.

In the fall, when the kids were first going back to school there would be a drastic increase in gang shootings. They were fighting to establish dominance around the school, I guess. And they seldom actually hit the people they were aiming at. Most of the time they would hit non-gang bystanders, who were also kids. This would go on for a couple of weeks, until the cops figured out the hot spots, and the gangs figured out who's on top, and then it would subside.

There would also be a sudden rise in gun violence and deaths in and around the month of June. And the reason for this is that the weather begins getting hot in Chicago in June, and people living in the poorer neighborhoods don't have air conditioning. So they begin to hang out on their porches in the evening. They drink, and they argue with the neighbors on the next stoop, and their gang-banger kids clash, and out comes the guns. This is the time of year when people shoot their best buddy, their neighbor, their wife, son, parent, whatever. And it's always over some ridiculous petty grievance, and almost always alcohol and/or drug fueled. In this same category are the bar flies who get to fighting, and on goes home or to their car and comes back with a gun, and shoots up the bar. These weren't weather related, though. they could happen any time.

Then there are the disgruntled lovers. These are almost always men, who upon finally realizing that the love of their life is not the fantasy love that they made up in their heads, decide that they must kill them in some sort of tragic act of vengeance. Sometimes, if the girlfriend has kids, they will kill the whole family. This would happen probably three or four times every year.

Then there were the home invasions that end in someone getting killed. The vast majority of these were done by junky neighbors, and were usually committed against old people. Junky-boy would break into the old lady's house next door because in his addled mind, he has imagined that she has some hidden stash of money, and he's so wasted that he forgets that she's probably home. When she catches him in the house, he decides he has to kill her because of course she knows who he is. So he kills the woman to cover up a silly B&E, steals $20 from her purse, and goes and gets high. He gets caught, thankfully, but what a waste. These idiots sometimes use guns, but usually not. Being junkies, they can't hold on to anything of any value, including a gun. So they tend to kill with whatever they find handy. If they find a gun, though, they will use it and then sell it.

In 23 years of living in Chicago, I don't recall an instance of a hardened criminal planning a crime, carrying it out, and killing people in the process. There was a horrible robbery of a chicken joint, where all the employees were killed, 6 of them. But when the killers were caught, they turned out to be a couple of local high school kids who had never done anything like that before or since. There were many armed robberies, of course, but when the criminals are sober, and plan the crime, they rarely ever actually fire their guns.

The only crimes I recall that involved automatic weapons were gang-banger drive-by shootings. But the bangers have constant look-outs as part of the normal way they do things, so such drive-by shootings would tend not to be all that successful. They were more likely to hit a bystander than their enemy gang members.

The bottom line, though, was that the vast majority of killings involving guns were the result of drunks, junkies, hot heads, and nuts getting hold of gun (often they bought them, themselves) and shooting each other, or the neighbors, or their lovers or even their own family members. Most of the people shot and killed in Chicago in any given year knew the people who killed them. They were not killed by plotting criminals. They were killed by really bad spur-of-the-moment decisions made by family, friends, and neighbors that were warped by drugs, alcohol, and rage.

And in almost all of these cases, if the guns had not been right there, so easy to pick up and pull the trigger in that moment of stupidity, the killings would never have happened.
 
Top