Is owning Guns good or bad?

[Reverend Rick]

There are thousands of gun laws on the books and the problems persist. Gun laws solve nothing. More of the same is a non solution. You cannot legislate all your problems away.

 

[PureX]

There are thousands of gun laws on the books and the problems persist. Gun laws solve nothing. More of the same is a non solution. You cannot legislate all your problems away.

That's because the laws we have are stupid, inconsistant, and irrational. You're trying to justify having no laws on the fact that some bad laws aren't working. Does this really sound reasonable to you? Think about it for a minute.

 

[PureX]

I didn't read all 11 pages of this thread, so I appoligize if I am repeating what has already been stated, but to blame guns on deaths is just rediculous. If people didn't have access to guns they would just starting killing each other with knives, swords, crossbows, and stones again the gun is just an implement.

Try reading this one: Post #135
"...Yes, but none of these options are even remotely as easy, fast, or effective as a simple hand gun. Many, many, many violent deaths would never have occurred if the killers had to use a knife, or a ball-bat, or their fists to commit the crime. Human beings are difficult to kill using these methods. They scream, they run, they fight back, and one or two 'applications' of a knife, bat or fist will not usually kill a person. The killer would have to chase after them and apply their deadly force multiple times..."

 

[UnTheist]

A gun is an extremely cheap (as in takes almost no skill) and easy way of killing someone. Using a knife, your fist, or a metal rod isn't as easy to kill. I think we should make the gun laws much more strict, but I'm not sure exactly what would make the laws better.

 

[Reverend Rick]

The misconception is that criminals obey the law. I never said gun laws were bad, I said they don't work. Making more laws ignores this fact.

We are talking about people who kill. The punishment for this crime is the highest punishment you can have. Still, people kill every day. To blame the guns and make more gun laws is ignorant.

The only people who would obey the new laws are not causing the problem.

 

[PureX]

The misconception is that criminals obey the law. I never said gun laws were bad, I said they don't work. Making more laws ignores this fact.

You keep repeating this, but it makes no sense. The laws we have now are inconsistent and irrational. That's why they don't work. Yet you seem to be proposing that we should have no gun laws at all, and that somehow this will be better, because the laws we have now aren't working. This isn't even rational.

We are talking about people who kill. The punishment for this crime is the highest punishment you can have. Still, people kill every day. To blame the guns and make more gun laws is ignorant.

The guns are making it much, much, much easier for people to kill. In fact, they make it so easy that many of the killings that happen in this country wouldn't have happened if a gun was not readily available. If we remove that ready availability, we can save many lives in the future.

The only people who would obey the new laws are not causing the problem.

It's NOT ABOUT DISOBEYING LAWS, IT'S ABOUT THE EASY AVAILABILITY OF THE GUNS. Idiots are idiots regardless of the laws. That's not the point. The point is to keep the guns away from the idiots. If the idiots don't have a gun in their pocket, their glove box, or their night table when they're having a moment of idiocy, a lot of people will not be killed that are being killed today, because the guns are everywhere. It's not that hard to limit the availability of guns, so that the idiots can't so easily find one when they're determined to behave like an idiot. And it's not so hard to figure out who the idiots are, either. All it takes is some common sense, a little effort, and the commitment to do it.

 

[Reverend Rick]

You keep repeating this, but it makes no sense. The laws we have now are inconsistent and irrational. That's why they don't work. Yet you seem to be proposing that we should have no gun laws at all, and that somehow this will be better, because the laws we have now aren't working. This isn't even rational.
The guns are making it much, much, much easier for people to kill. In fact, they make it so easy that many of the killings that happen in this country wouldn't have happened if a gun was not readily available. If we remove that ready availability, we can save many lives in the future.
It's NOT ABOUT DISOBEYING LAWS, IT'S ABOUT THE EASY AVAILABILITY OF THE GUNS. Idiots are idiots regardless of the laws. That's not the point. The point is to keep the guns away from the idiots. If the idiots don't have a gun in their pocket, their glove box, or their night table when they're having a moment of idiocy, a lot of people will not be killed that are being killed today, because the guns are everywhere. It's not that hard to limit the availability of guns, so that the idiots can't so easily find one when they're determined to behave like an idiot. And it's not so hard to figure out who the idiots are, either. All it takes is some common sense, a little effort, and the commitment to do it.

If you never sold another gun again in this country, we have a 100 year supply already out there. Do you believe you can disarm all the bad guys? The only thing you would accomplish is taking guns from honest law abiding responsible citizens.

Why don't you just admit that you would delight in removing every weapon on the planet if you could.

What the anti gun movement fails to understand is that their home is safe not because they have a gun, but because they MIGHT have a gun.

Make all guns illegal and only criminals will have guns. You are powerless to change this fact and want to take it out on the legitimate law abiding citizens that have a constitutional right to own firearms.

 

[PureX]

If you never sold another gun again in this country, we have a 100 year supply already out there. Do you believe you can disarm all the bad guys? The only thing you would accomplish is taking guns from honest law abiding responsible citizens.

Man! You're really stubborn! *smile* We don't have to disarm all the bad guys. We couldn't even if we wanted to. But it's not the bad guys that are doing most of the killing, it's the idiots. It's the drunks, and the junkies, and the hotheads and jilted lovers, acting on a moment of extreme stupidity and emotionalism. And these people CAN be kept away from guns. Most of them are too lazy and stupid and drunk or high, or whatever, to get a gun if getting one were made difficult. And as for all the guns out there, we could just offer money for them, say $40 or so - enough for someone to get on a good drunk or buzz, and many of the very idiots we want to get the guns away from will sell them right to us, cheap. We can also make their getting caught with one very expensive, so that even idiots would think twice about keeping one, when their sober.

Now, on the other hand, we can use your logic and say that since there are so many guns around, we should just throw up our hands, and do nothing. But then we could say this for all sorts of things, couldn't we? I mean, there's certainly lots of illegal drugs around, so why not just throw up our hands and make them all legal, too? And since we can't stop criminals from committing crimes, why have any laws at all? Right? I mean, if our laws against rape aren't stopping women from being raped, then we may as well legalize rape, right? Isn't this your logic? If the laws aren't working, then we should eliminate them?

Why don't you just admit that you would delight in removing every weapon on the planet if you could.

I have no interest in banning guns, at all. I WANT people to have guns, and to CARRY them, too. But I only want responsible, law-abiding citizens to have them. And I only want people to carry them who know when and how to use them, safely and legally. And I don't think that's all that difficult to achieve. All we have to do is identify the idiots, and keep them from getting hold of guns. I know that we can't do this 100% of the time. But I'm betting we could do it most of the time, and it wouldn't be all that hard.

What the anti gun movement fails to understand is that their home is safe not because they have a gun, but because they MIGHT have a gun.

I have no idea what the anti-gun movement thinks. I don't think you do, either. And it doesn't matter, anyway, because America is not going to ban all guns. And there is no need for us to.

Make all guns illegal and only criminals will have guns. You are powerless to change this fact and want to take it out on the legitimate law abiding citizens that have a constitutional right to own firearms.

Make everything legal and there will be no more criminals. So what? This is just silly semantics. There will still be many people killed, robbed, raped, tortured, and God know what else. That's why I keep repeating that this isn't about the laws, and criminals. It's about the availability of deadly weapons to idiots. It's about common sense.

 

[Reverend Rick]

You keep saying that I don't want any gun laws. I never said that. You seem to think that gun laws are substandard. You cannot buy a firearm if you are a felon, domestic violence offender, or have a history of mental incompetence. Instead of passing more laws, lets try and enforce the ones already on the books.

The biggest problem this country has with guns is gangs who run around doing drive by shootings. Ammunition is what needs to be controlled. Most people have a firearm in a lock box and have a box of ammo for it. They have a lifetime supply because they are not shooting up the place. The gangs would run out of bullets and would not be able to sling lead around harming innocent children.

 

[PureX]

You keep saying that I don't want any gun laws. I never said that. You seem to think that gun laws are substandard. You cannot buy a firearm if you are a felon, domestic violence offender, or have a history of mental incompetence. Instead of passing more laws, lets try and enforce the ones already on the books.

The whole approach is wrong. Basically, we're relying on the gun buyer to tell us that he shouldn't be able to buy a gun. This is of course stupid and irrational, which is why it's not working. Also, there are a lot more idiots out there than those we are currently screening for. So they're slipping through the net even if the net worked.

I think the way to approach this is to license people to own and carry guns. And we should tailor the licensing process to match the responsibility. By this I mean that anyone should be allowed to own and carry a gun as long as they can show that they can do so responsibly and safely. And the way for them to show this, is to go through a rigorous training program similar to those that police officers go through, that involve legal training, psychological testing, and field training. And these licenses should have to be renewed once a year. I think this would go a long way in weeding out the idiots, while enabling responsible citizens who wish to own and carry a gun the training they need to do so safely and responsibly. I can guarantee that if all gun-owning and carrying citizens were this well trained, criminals would be thinking VERY carefully about committing crimes against random citizens. Every fifth of sixth citizen would effectively be a trained "lay policeman", and the criminal wouldn't know who is who.

The biggest problem this country has with guns is gangs who run around doing drive by shootings.

Gangs are a problem, but they certainly aren't America's biggest gun violence problem. Far, FAR more people are shot by their friends, neighbors and lovers than by any drive-by gang-bangers. Gang-bangers are hardened criminals and they will require special effort to control. The only way to deal with them is to impose much, much, tougher sentences for criminals who commit crimes using guns.

Ammunition is what needs to be controlled. Most people have a firearm in a lock box and have a box of ammo for it. They have a lifetime supply because they are not shooting up the place. The gangs would run out of bullets and would not be able to sling lead around harming innocent children.

Types of guns and types of ammunition should both be very closely controlled. But in the and, it all comes down to keeping the guns away from the idiots. I think that if we would focus on this goal, we could go a long way toward achieving it.

 

[Booko]

Do you think owning guns is good or bad. (generally).

It depends on where you live and what you might reasonably use it for. Generally speaking, I think owning a gun is morally "neutral."

Would you personally ever own a gun? why?

I've owned several guns over the years. Our one functional gun at this time is a Ruger bull-barrel .22 -- not suitable for protection and only useful for shredding paper targets.

The other guns I've owned over the years were used for hunting.

Is an armed populace good or bad? Does it protect against despotism?

One wonders how far the Revolutionary War would've gotten without the populace here having guns...

 

[Booko]

yes i'm sure many people thought that until they stabbed someone. Like people who own guns but never intend to use them, but some of them do!

Well, let me put it to you this way, jmaster:

There are times when I carried a handgun and times when I carried a knife. I would've been raped 3 times, robbed twice and who knows maybe killed as well had I not been carrying something at the time.

I won't be giving up my right to bear arms any time soon, thanks.

 

[Booko]

my argument has nothing to do with gun laws, but simply fewer guns mean fewer gun related crime, regardless of how lax or strict that countries law is.

Oh yeah, just like making tougher drugs laws in this country has done so much to reduce the amount of illegal drugs available here.

:biglaugh:

Do you have any idea how big this country is and how difficult it is to patrol such huge borders?

It's really nice for some dude on a tiny island to make such pronouncements about how we can keep firearms out of the hands of criminals in this country. All we have to do is change some laws.

Thanks for the comedy....

 

[Booko]

There should be only one law regarding guns........illegal!

I'll keep that in mind the next time I'm living somewhere where my nearest neighbor is 5 miles away and the nearest cops over 60 miles away. If someone comes after me, hey, I'll just call 911...and wait an hour until the cops can get there.

Got many places like that in Ireland?

 

[Booko]

"Every little situation" That might explain the problem, if the government doesn't think guns are dangerous and contribute to the amount of people shot dead in america every year, then why should the public?

Actually, the problem here is that you seem to have failed to understand the diverse nature of this country. There's a reason many gun laws are handled at the local and state level.

There's a big difference between living in NYC and Montana, and gun laws reflect this difference.

 

[Booko]

Perhaps the problem in the US is that because of the second amendment, some people will only look so far as the right to own a gun, and in an era where abdication of responsibility for ones actions is rampant - not just in the US - they fail to accept that with that right comes a lot of responsibility.

You raise an interesting legal angle here, QTR. I'm firmly of the belief that anyone owning a gun should be trained in its use and what constitutes legal use (which really revolves around trying everything to *avoid* using a gun for self-defense).

However, what could we do if someone cannot pass a licensing test? To deny a craven idiot gun ownership probably wouldn't pass muster when it comes to being constitutional.

 

[Quoth The Raven]

Try reading this one: Post #135
"...Yes, but none of these options are even remotely as easy, fast, or effective as a simple hand gun. Many, many, many violent deaths would never have occurred if the killers had to use a knife, or a ball-bat, or their fists to commit the crime. Human beings are difficult to kill using these methods. They scream, they run, they fight back, and one or two 'applications' of a knife, bat or fist will not usually kill a person. The killer would have to chase after them and apply their deadly force multiple times..."

Not necessarily...there was a bloodbath involving a couple of hairdressers in the country town where I used to live. Two women dead at the hands of someone with a knife. As near as it could be worked out, one cowered in the corned in abject fear while the mudered stabbed the other repeatedly and then moved on to her. This went on in a salon in what would be a reasonably busy street. Not a peep was heard by anyone and after, the murderer just exited the building and disappeared.
From memory they still don't know who did it.

 

[Booko]

There's also the way the government is constructed. I can't say I know exactly how things work where you are, but here - as well as the US from what I gather - we have areas of federal responsibility and state responsibility. The states tend to get a bit testy when the feds interfere in their areas of jurisdiction.

That's exactly how it works here...though in some areas you'll need to add another layer of local gov't as well. Especially here in the South, the counties do things that in other regions would be handled at the state level.

My county has a 7-day waiting period for buying a gun, but it's a small trip to the neighboring county where there's no waiting period. That makes a waiting period pretty pointless.

 

[Quoth The Raven]

I think the way to approach this is to license people to own and carry guns.

You don't have gun licenses? Even when guns were readily available here we had to be licenced.

 

[Booko]

yes but now he has two ways of killing you, or he can sell the gun to someone who might use it, one more illegal gun in circulation.

I've known lots of gun owners over the years. I don't know a single one that kept a gun in the car.

Don't believe everything you see that comes out of Hollywood.