Escapecraft

What are y'alls views on this issue. I was reading an article on the New York Times that was talking about guns in the hands of civilians and it made me wonder what ya'll think. I commented on it and wrote this:

"In my view, criminals will get guns anyway so we might as well let civilians bear arms as well. In a situation when a murderer or drug dealer shows up at your house and threatens your family and kids, it hurts to be helpless in that situation. You can consider me a liberal independent but I do not agree with taking away civilians guns."

In other words, while making owning guns illegal will help reduce violence, it will not have an overall great effect on it because no matter what you do, just like there are always drugs, there will always be violence. What are y'alls views on this?

Well given the existence of this thread I'm guessing there are a decent number of people on the site who share your stance.

Personally the idea of civilians owning guns terrifies me. I'm glad I live in a country where it's not the norm. I don't like the idea that any drunken argument, personal grudge, or misunderstanding has the potential to escalate to lethal force at the drop of a hat.
I'm also not convinced that gun ownership reduces violent crime. Do you have any sources for that?

asi1998 wrote:making owning guns illegal will help reduce violence

>implying criminals obey laws
>implying someone who wishes harm upon someone else will not circumvent the law to achieve their goal
>implying implications

Firearms are incredibly easy to acquire, illegally or not. I go to class every day of the week with teenagers who illegally carry firearms on their person - sometimes even on campus. I know very few people who own guns that acquired them legally. Anti-gun laws could possibly deter an incredibly lazy criminal from getting his hands on a gun, but anybody with a sliver of determination will get one anyway.

'Muricans! Maybe you could be gun free like England...(insert fancy number here)% of deaths in USA are from guns, we only has 2-5 a year mostly...

Iron_Fang wrote:'Muricans! Maybe you could be gun free like England...(insert fancy number here)% of deaths in USA are from guns, we only has 2-5 a year mostly...

41 according to this map, compared with 9,146 in the USA. Although it's worth taking those figures with a grain of salt. They don't account for the differences in population.

aflycon wrote:

asi1998 wrote:making owning guns illegal will help reduce violence

>implying criminals obey laws
>implying someone who wishes harm upon someone else will not circumvent the law to achieve their goal
>implying implications

Firearms are incredibly easy to acquire, illegally or not. I go to class every day of the week with teenagers who illegally carry firearms on their person - sometimes even on campus. I know very few people who own guns that acquired them legally. Anti-gun laws could possibly deter an incredibly lazy criminal from getting his hands on a gun, but anybody with a sliver of determination will get one anyway.

Afly, I agree with u on this. When I said help reduce violence I meant that the difference would be very small in murders or not.


@ everybody else I meant no debate with this thread, i just wanted to see your views.

asi1998 wrote:@ everybody else I meant no debate with this thread, i just wanted to see your views.

This is a subject most people are very passionate about no matter what their position is. Even if you meant "no debate" I cannot see how you'd think debate wasn't going to happen, especially since you're still part of it.

I'm of the viewpoint that guns don't kill people, people kill people. The only time a gun will ever kill someone is if it is intentionally fired at someone, or the person handling the gun is a complete moron. I think the best option is allowing firearms, but requiring that gun owners take a fairly short class on gun safety and laws. I'm not sure if it's already like that or not.

Similarly to laws passed prohibiting marijuana use, I honestly don't see the purpose in making firearm possession illegal. If someone truly wanted to get their hands on a pistol, it's entirely possible for them to do it with or without a law prohibiting them from doing it legally. Bills passed that "prohibit" guns from being owned generally don't stop most people from having a gun, just instead gives law enforcement another reason to send a fine in the direction of the person in question.

The way I view it, people can still easily get their hands on weaponry, with or without a law in effect against it. With that said, what good would the law do if it's not effectively stopping people from owning firearms? It all just seems to boil down to another reason for police to make money off of people who are going against this law, and it just doesn't sound right to me if a law is only in place for government agencies to make more money off of people.

Sti_Jo_Lew wrote: I think the best option is allowing firearms, but requiring that gun owners take a fairly short class on gun safety and laws. I'm not sure if it's already like that or not.

Sti, in California, it is already like this. In fact, in California you have to PAY for a background check to get a rifle (at 18), PAY for a background check to get a pistol (at 21), and PAY to have a firearm safety course for any pistol/handgun, AND take an Additional test to have a Concealed Weapons Permit, which are only given to a select few. Basically the California government wants you to bend over in front of them.

I legitly bought my Ruger 10/22 (because honestly what gun lover DOESN'T own that gun), costed me about $140 sticker, but $200 after background check/tax. Oh, and if you have ANY felony on your record, it is 2 YEARS for every bullet you have in a loaded gun. Whereas I know homies that own AKs that they picked up for 150-200$, friggin CHEAPER than my legal .22 cal pimple shooter. rageface!

I personally believe there should be no paperwork to own guns, as in Oregon state, my uncle up there owns a RV park, and literally has taken rent in the payment of guns and it is perfectly legal up there. Also, I like Nevada's law about personal defense. It basically states that if you have no way to get out of your home (apartment w/ 1 door, invader in living room) , and you feel threatened (he has a knife, you have a gun) , you can legally shoot and kill him on the spot. Where , in california, if i shoot a home invader junkie trying to rob my tv to go buy some smack, most likely I'm the one going to prison. stupid cali laws are stupid.

That being said, there are just too many freaking illegal immigrants in California ruining it for the rest of us.

Invunarble wrote:...It all just seems to boil down to another reason for police to make money off of people who are going against this law, and it just doesn't sound right to me if a law is only in place for government agencies to make more money off of people.

>this
gov. wants money , doesn't care about your personal safety, especially if your poor in this state.

TLDR;
give everyone guns, get a gun, for reasons like thishttp://www.costamesaca.gov/modules/show ... entid=8886
that's the city i live in currently, and its about 15 square miles ......

Personally, I'm very against gun ownership. Call me an idealist, but it just doesn't sit well with me, the idea of everyone having tools specifically designed to kill eachother with ease. That said, I don't think banning gun ownership in the US is a good idea, given how much you yanks seem to love your guns I can't see it being very popular, and there's a metric shitload of guns in your country.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog ... -list#data
Thought this would be relevant, looking at England & Wales statistics vs US, England & Wales has 0.07 homicides by firearm per 100,000 people compared to America's 2.97. That's over 42 times as many.

Britian doesn't see too much gun crime. Instead the criminals got inventive and use knives, poison, acid and more in their attacks.

As an interesting note. The purpose of the 2nd amendment (Right To Bear Arms) isnt for the protection of yourself, your family or your property from criminals. Instead it is to allow the people to form an armed militia to protect yourself from the actions of a hostile state either domestic or foreign.

I only posted those statistics because it was mentioned earlier, I can't be bothered to research other types of murder and things.

Gun laws in the UK are much easier to uphold than gun laws in the US, due to the UK being an island. If we can't stop drugs, criminals, and immigrants from crossing the US-Mexico border, we can't stop guns. I'd like to be able to defend myself if some crackhead breaks into my house, instead of calling 911 and hoping they show up in time.

I really wouldn't feel comfortable living in a place where civilians are allowed to carry guns. I don't even think most law enforcement should be allowed to (and they don't here). People are generally idiots, and not to be trusted. They're far too vulnerable to emotional and mental instability, and sudden impulses.

And the argument that criminals will get guns anyway if they want them has no weight whatsoever. They're going to do it anyway, so let's just make it easier for them? And it won't even be the case most of the time. If you have a gun, you have the means - the temptation is there. If you don't have a gun, you'd have to go out of your way to get one. That leaves plenty of time for potential killers to reconsider exactly what it is they're about to do, and hopefully realise that it would all be a big mistake.

am all for being able to own guns. First off, for hunting animals. Second, Target practice for fun. Third, for protection. Example: a burgaler breaks into ur house and has a knife and is comming at you; it would be alot better to defend urself with a gun than a baseball bat in my opinion. I TOTTALLY THINKS THAT CIVILIANS SHOULD BE ABLE TO BEAR GUNS. Like asi said the criminals are gonna get guns anyway (through the black market, makeshift guns, etc.). Also0 as sti said if some "crackhead" breaks in i want to protect my self and my family ---> (when i grow up)

Guns should be ownable, but their use tightly regulated.
That is all.