gun rights

February 23, 2008, 3:36 AM

Okay, I cannot BELIEVE this one has not been started yet. I shall do the right thing and start it. As we all know, the United States is a very gun-happy society. This is reflected in the hideous rash of shootings we've just experienced, the last of which left five students dead at an Illinois college.

What do you think about gun control? Do we need more of it? Less of it? Better screening process? Oh, and in response to the shootings: do you believe that more guns would make it better? For instance, if everyone had a gun or students began carrying guns, would it be safer?

I'll post my long angry rant about gun control later :{D

February 23, 2008, 3:53 AM

Quote:

For instance, if everyone had a gun or students began carrying guns, would it be safer?

Mutually Assured Destrucution
it might make the person carrying the gun feel safer but, they arent safer really. also more guns means its more that people will be killed/shot in the crossfire.

i know the US constitution, or one of its amendments guarantees the right to bear arms.
But FFS move on, the constitution also says negroes arent 'real' people and that they are worth 3/5 of a white person.
the constitution doesnt even allow women to vote, yet they cling to that archaic document as their justification for carrying around an instrument which the sole purpose of it is to kill things.

i could go on, but meh

February 23, 2008, 6:48 AM

The problem with guns is not in having them, but in using them. Most people aren't trained to use guns. They just think that by having a gun, it makes you safe, but people get afraid at the wrong times and sometimes might not aim properly, shoot the wrong things, or not even shoot at all. I know that not everyone who owns a gun is that inexperienced at using one, but if a gun were that easy to obtain, then I wonder how it is that they aren't as easy to use as people make them out to be.

In most other places, a gun is used for hunting or collecting, but the reason for (at least the typical household consumer) buying a gun is rarely ever for protection. Most of us who don't live in the States are perfectly content with security alarms or other means that don't involve guns.

February 23, 2008, 7:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Placebo

i know the US constitution, or one of its amendments guarantees the right to bear arms.
But FFS move on, the constitution also says negroes arent 'real' people and that they are worth 3/5 of a white person.
the constitution doesnt even allow women to vote, yet they cling to that archaic document as their justification for carrying around an instrument which the sole purpose of it is to kill things.

Um, that's what little things called "amendments" are for.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Angelus-Mortis

The problem with guns is not in having them, but in using them.

No wai!

Quote:

Most people aren't trained to use guns.

Okay, first off, alot of states require you to take a course in gun safety when applying for a gun permit, I know mine does. Secondly, it's not that hard to use a gun....you turn the safety off, aim it at something, and pull the trigger. I'm pretty sure every child learns how to do that with little toys.

Quote:

They just think that by having a gun, it makes you safe, but people get afraid at the wrong times and sometimes might not aim properly, shoot the wrong things, or not even shoot at all.

Um...kay. When do you EVER hear on the news about school/mall shootings being caused by someone who's paranoid and shoots at the wrong people? Never, that's when. All these shootings that have been cropping up in the past year were by people with serious mental issues who wanted to kill other people, not people aiming badly because they were afraid.

Quote:

I know that not everyone who owns a gun is that inexperienced at using one, but if a gun were that easy to obtain, then I wonder how it is that they aren't as easy to use as people make them out to be.

But they ARE easy to use....I guess you haven't used a gun before.

Quote:

In most other places, a gun is used for hunting or collecting, but the reason for (at least the typical household consumer) buying a gun is rarely ever for protection. Most of us who don't live in the States are perfectly content with security alarms or other means that don't involve guns.

Wrong again. It typically IS for protection. Teachers, especially, keep trying to work things out with schools so that they can carry guns to school. They don't wanna be the next victim at a school shooting, they feel safer having a gun on them so if they DO get a disgruntled emo, they can stop him before he kills alot of kids. And I know if I lived in a big city like Chicago, Memphis or LA I'd want to carry a gun around.

What "other means" are you talking about, mace or tazers? Ever seen them be used on a guy drugged out of his mind? They don't do shit. True, they're not an every day occurrence, but instances like that are when you'll be thinking "I really wish I'd gone for that gun permit..."

February 23, 2008, 7:33 AM

I have a serious, serious problem with gun control today. Gun control, in its current state, is so pathetic. Semi automatic and, increasingly, automatic weapons are readily available to those willing to shell out the cash and go through a very weak background check. The background check is absurd. They check criminal records and ask questions such as, "have you ever been institutionalized?" Here's a bloody newsflash: not everyone who is mentally unstable is institutionalized. Have any of the mall or school shooters been institutionalized? The answer is a resounding no.

Why is there a need for such heavy artillery? I honestly ask that question. I don't think anyone can give me an answer that satisfies me. Do you need an AK47 to hunt deer? I honestly don't think so. Those types of weapons have one purpose: killing other people. Why should weapons like these be available to the public? There is absolutely no justification.

I HATE the argument, "but if everyone carries a gun, then we'll all be safe!" No, that's the stupidest thing I've ever heard. That's like trying to cure AIDS with more AIDS. The result will only be more injuries and deaths. What if someone has a terrible temper and acts without thinking? Accidents happen. Fights happen. With more people carrying guns, more deaths would happen. Everyone wants to be a cowboy. Not to mention, if everyone believes that everyone else is carrying around a concealed weapon, they're more likely to shoot first, in self protection if they feel they are being threatened.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Angelus-Mortis

The problem with guns is not in having them, but in using them. Most people aren't trained to use guns. They just think that by having a gun, it makes you safe, but people get afraid at the wrong times and sometimes might not aim properly, shoot the wrong things, or not even shoot at all. I know that not everyone who owns a gun is that inexperienced at using one, but if a gun were that easy to obtain, then I wonder how it is that they aren't as easy to use as people make them out to be.

In most other places, a gun is used for hunting or collecting, but the reason for (at least the typical household consumer) buying a gun is rarely ever for protection. Most of us who don't live in the States are perfectly content with security alarms or other means that don't involve guns.

...Okay, um, guns aren't betatrons. They're relatively simple pieces of equipment. You point at something you want to kill, and you pull the trigger. It's not a difficult concept. With semi automatic weapons, you can pull the trigger and fire several times at your target. And guns ARE easy to obtain. If you don't have a criminal record, walk into your local Walmart, fill out a form, and congratulations, you have a gun. Or, alternatively, if you have a lot of money and do have a record, just bribe someone, and congratulations, you have a gun. Getting a gun is ridiculously easy, especially in certain parts of the United States.

February 23, 2008, 2:39 PM

Heh, this reminds me of my Teachers Allowed to Carry Weapons in School?

Anyway, I do believe that background check is flawed in so many ways...yet, we also can't dismiss the fact that a person doesn't have to have a background (history) in order to commit a crime. It always has to start somewhere. So really, background checks are invalid and useless at times. Sure it's a safety precaution, but my point is that even if someone is "clean", buys a weapon...who's to say that the person is intent on killing people or not?

That is one of the reason why I don't believe that gun control is secured enough, if at all. It is entirely up to the individual, not some easy-process like background checks.

February 24, 2008, 12:32 AM

Exactly

While more thorough background checks should be implemented, it's impossible to tell if a person has mental issues or not. Actually (correct me if I'm wrong here), that guy who shot up the Illinois campus was a perfectly nice guy and nobody figured he was capable of something like that...he just hadn't been taking whatever medication he was on.

There's no way to account for that when doing background checks. Sure, you can see if the person is on medication, but there's no way to monitor them. And if you saw they were on meds and thought they were too much of a risk and decided not to sell them a gun, they'd blather on about their right to bear arms. It's quite the predicament, really.

March 7, 2008, 2:25 AM

To cut to the chase, gun control . Only I am taking it to a new spin . I am not reporting on the right, if you should be able to bare arms. No, I am skeptic of this, (below)

Consider, most people say people control guns, and guns do not control people. I want to argue that guns do control people. I need sources, and general opinions for my report. If you are willing to participate please leave any creditable information, if you have any aside from your name (not needed but real name would be nice). Perhaps you are a police officer, or have a PHD , I do not know if it is the case , please share any creditability . I just want a straight forward survey though. You do not need to be ubber creditable.

The question is foggy because it is established by a whole paper. Do fire arms control situations ? Is there conditioned properties to a fire arm that apply to all men and women alike. When buying a gun is there an certain image ...embedded in the experience of owning a gun , made by man? With all the movies, and TV do guns control people ? Is any fire arm unique to an individual or is every fire arm realized as the same thing as any other , not hunting rifles here I think we all know that is a bit different. The same type of weapon that kills , self defense etc. Does the knowledge of a fire arm ,and conditioned preaching of a fire arm and its purpose reach out to the buyer when he buys one. Do individuals buy fire arms , or do "sheep" ?. Has society created an image ? Deeply reflecting , what is a fire arm? Why is there fire arms ? What is a fire arm ? Does the fear created in needing a fire arm matter even less than the ideas surrounding owning one? The majority of people buying them, the popular reasons behind it do those out rule indepent thought and in the end create a stereotypical image of fire arms ? Is a fire arm a conditioned response or trigger.Can you separate the individual conscious of logic from the majority . when considering the buyer here? Or is everyone that buys a fire arm experiencing a trigger , a stereotypical image, and giving into a conditioned response ? Do fire arms control people ?

Hope this is enough to get started. I am a bit drifty , I tried.

March 7, 2008, 2:31 AM

you could talk about the power of the NRA, and lobbying senators etc as to the best of my knowledge automatic rifles can be bought, although they serve no purpose for hunting and designed to kill people pretty much.

so articles about the NRA would backed up your view