Ban all guns (part 2)

That's it? That's you idea of logical critical thinking?..... REALLY?


You make bold proclamations and then fail to support them? Amazing! You said: "I must rebut Reivers awful assessment post haste!", but then made no (that's zero) effort to logically present your so-called "rebuttal". Do you honestly call this critical thinking?

 

Your source for this allegation?

 

Gun control is something this country has needed for a countless number of, and no one seems to have a reasonable answer to this dilema or at least an answer that both sides of the political spectrum can agree too. The second ammendment may give us the right to bear arms, but this ammendment is very archaic and comes from a very different time period. Back when this ammendment was relevant, there was no police force in place to protect us. This ammendment was also put in place incase of an invasion which at the time America was a very weak nation and needed all of it's citizens to be able to fight and protect themselves from foreign countries invading and the Native Americans. I believe that no one in this country should be able to own a gun unless their profession may require them to use one. In my opinion guns provide a false sense of security allowing us to believe that we are more safe, when in reality guns are the leading weapon in murders and burglaries. Of the 16,000+ murders in the United States back in 2008, about 10,886 were a result of firearms, which is about 67%. Guns do not deter crime they only encourage more violence. Without any gun control laws taking affect, the statistics show us that most murders occur through the use of guns. We all know that crime will still continue to exist even if there was a ban on all guns, but it would do more good than it would harm. Lets say that guns were banned and all the 10,886 citizens murdered were still alive today. So many families were affected and lives were changed forever because of guns that were used inappropriately to kill other human beings. There needs to be a purpose for guns besides killing other people. Most gunowners in america say the primary reason for owning one is for self-defense, and protecting their family and homes. There are safer alternatives, such as a loud alarm system, or maybe even owning a dog that would prevent and deter most home invasions, keeping your family safe, and wouldnt have to result in someone ending up dead. Guns can be owned by those people who work in a profession that would require the use of them such as a police officer. These men and women in the police force have gone through extensive training and background checks to make sure they are responsible with the weapons they use. By owning a gun you are sending a message that you do not trust the police force to protect you, when that is their job, and what they have been trained to do. How many lives lost is to many before we come to an agreement and decide to ban the sale and use of all guns in this country.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I believe that we should not restrict the rights to own guns. Maybe in a sense when it comes to assault rifles unless they are active shooters and it is their hobby but people should be able to own handguns. I strongly believe this mainly out of self-defense. I have read and seen many instances where people have said they had a family member die because they didn’t own a handgun and couldn’t defend themselves because it was illegal where they lived. I believe that if you restrict ownership of guns that it really wont solve to much crime. You know there are people out there that have a million ways of being able to attain guns. That would leave all those people who plan to rob or even kill people with guns and leaves everyone else hopeless and defenseless. It’s just like how they obtain illegal drugs and everything else. You know they will be able to get guns just as easily so why not just let everyone be able to have one in case a burglary or something of that content occurs? To me it makes complete sense. It even says in the second amendment that people have the right to bear arms. We shouldn’t be changing what the constitution talks about. Like I said earlier I do agree with restricting the rights to own very high powerful weapons such as assault rifles and maybe even some automatic handguns like a glock. Statistics have shown that death rate has decreased with the presence of firearms. This fact alone should be a deciding factor in whether or not to constraint gun control. Yes I do see the possible side affects of owning a gun. What if your child finds it accidently shoots it? What if they person owning has mental issues? Well to that I say if someone has mental health issues then they should not be aloud to own a gun. That doesn’t exclude the rest of the world though. To answer the child finding it question, that just falls on the person owning the gun. They know to keep it on safety and to put it in a safe and secure spot that is out of reach for children. I really don’t see any valid argument to restrict gun laws to a point where normal citizens can’t own them. It doesn’t make any sense when you think about. People need protection, and yes this is an extreme measure but the world we live in today calls for that. Every 14 seconds a U.S. house is broken into. Sixty percent of the time the house is occupied while it is occurring and thirty eight percent of the robberies are committed with a gun. Now for me I know I would want to be able to have the protection if I felt like I needed it. You never know what could happen when someone breaks into your house. That’s just my two cents though.

 

Gun control is something this country has needed for a countless number of, and no one seems to have a reasonable answer to this dilema or at least an answer that both sides of the political spectrum can agree too. The second ammendment may give us the right to bear arms, but this ammendment is very archaic and comes from a very different time period. Back when this ammendment was relevant, there was no police force in place to protect us. This ammendment was also put in place incase of an invasion which at the time America was a very weak nation and needed all of it's citizens to be able to fight and protect themselves from foreign countries invading and the Native Americans. I believe that no one in this country should be able to own a gun unless their profession may require them to use one. In my opinion guns provide a false sense of security allowing us to believe that we are more safe, when in reality guns are the leading weapon in murders and burglaries. Of the 16,000+ murders in the United States back in 2008, about 10,886 were a result of firearms, which is about 67%. Guns do not deter crime they only encourage more violence. Without any gun control laws taking affect, the statistics show us that most murders occur through the use of guns. We all know that crime will still continue to exist even if there was a ban on all guns, but it would do more good than it would harm. Lets say that guns were banned and all the 10,886 citizens murdered were still alive today. So many families were affected and lives were changed forever because of guns that were used inappropriately to kill other human beings. There needs to be a purpose for guns besides killing other people. Most gunowners in america say the primary reason for owning one is for self-defense, and protecting their family and homes. There are safer alternatives, such as a loud alarm system, or maybe even owning a dog that would prevent and deter most home invasions, keeping your family safe, and wouldnt have to result in someone ending up dead. Guns can be owned by those people who work in a profession that would require the use of them such as a police officer. These men and women in the police force have gone through extensive training and background checks to make sure they are responsible with the weapons they use. By owning a gun you are sending a message that you do not trust the police force to protect you, when that is their job, and what they have been trained to do. How many lives lost is to many before we come to an agreement and decide to ban the sale and use of all guns in this country.

 

I believe that guns should be legalized and available for purchase. I know it sounds wicked but the violence around the country would decrease dramatically. Of course, people should be highly educated about the weapons before they are allowed to purchase them. They would have to take a series of classes to learn how to properly use and store the weapons.
People don’t understand that criminals will end up with guns and use them no matter what the law says. Criminals will be criminals. If normal people had weapons too, they would be able to defend themselves properly. If guns were completely illegal, then only criminals would have guns to use. Making more laws hurts all of the law-abiding citizens and gives benefits and unfair advantages to all of the criminals. Anyways, it is protected by the second amendment for all citizens to possess guns if they choose to. The second amendment was created to prevent all people citizens from becoming subjects of a king like in Great Britain. Calling 911 doesn’t work because by the time they arrive, the victims most likely have already been assaulted. For example, say an innocent guy named Bill accidentally upsets the mafia. He goes home and eats dinner with his lovely family as usual. He’s about to go to bed when a guy named Michael Bonatelli is waiting for him is his bedroom. If there were weapons in his house so he could protect himself and his family, he could have lived through the situation
With all of the fantastic examples aside, I will now mention the straight facts. The people who have concealed carry permits are the people to least likely use the gun in a violent manner. The majority of violent crimes with guns are by people who either steal them or buy them on the black market. Most citizens don’t realize that people with concealed carry permits aren’t the ones who commit the crimes. That’s the common belief that people who own guns legally are the ones that do the damage. That is why if all guns were legalized, proper training and education should be mandatory.
Another reason why citizens should be allowed to own guns is that if the government ever started to oppress the people, there would be no way to defend ourselves without any weapons. Even though the government has a lot more advanced equipment, it wouldn’t be a total disaster if the citizens were properly armed. The United States government could change from a representative democracy to a military dictatorship. Without the security of a free state, nightmares like this could happen. For example, in 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From the time of 1929 to 1952, about twenty million people were gathered up and exterminated. These people were unable to defend themselves. The same thing happened in China when they established gun control in 1935. Twenty million people who were politically against the government were rounded up and exterminated. Gun control obviously does not protect the citizens from oppressive governments.

 

I have taken looks at both sides of the topics and I have chosen to be for gun rights. I believe that this is definitely the way to go. I believe that we do not need to ban guns completely. We just need to regulate what types of guns are sold and to whom. There a few main points that I would like to bring up in this post. The first is that many people own guns for recreational purposes and just because people commit crimes with guns does not mean that people who collect guns and use them to hunt game for sport should be punished. If you are going to ban guns because they are used to killed people, you may want to ban knives, ropes, rocks, and automobiles as well. Guns do not kill people, people kill people. If a man wants another man dead and guns are banned, he will find another way. Guns are also a great form of self-defense. People argue the situation that, if people have guns on them, they are going to be more tempted to use them. Why not use the situation of a person about to get mugged by a man with a gun in an alley. If that person does not have a gun as well, they are going to be seriously hurt. They may be able to call the police, but by the time they get the situation is already going to have taken its course. If the person being mugged had a gun armed on themselves for self-defense, there is a better chance that he would make it out of that situation well and alive. A situation that shows how guns can be useful is one about a robber going to rob a house. If a robber has suspicion that the people in a house are armed, the chances that he is still going to rob that house goes down significantly. Gun control also goes against the second amendment of the United States Constitution, the right to keep and bear arms. If a society’s people are not allowed to arm themselves, the chance of a dictatorship rising becomes more likely.
The gun control issue is more about rights than anything else. It is the argument of whether people should be able to wield guns for defensive purposes or even for recreation. Most people who own guns are not going to kill people in aggression. If a person really wants to kill someone, they will do it without a gun if they have to. Even if guns are made to be illegal, it will still be generally easy for people to acquire them if they want to. The point is that most people who are for gun rights are not criminals and are not intending to harm people. They are the ones suffering for what the criminals have done. This is why I am for gun rights and against gun control.

 

i dont know if this was brought up, but Canada has less crime than America Yet we both have a ratio of 1:1 on gun ownersip, and population. The reason is, because less fear mongering goes on in Canada. Just watch Canadian news, compared to US news... Remember Canada has more registered Gun owners per capita, than the US

NFA CANADIAN GUN OWNERSHIP NUMBERS

CANADIAN POPULATION


NCIS BACKGROUND CHECKS RELATED TO GUN PURCHASES Make sure to read the note at the bottom...

US POPULATION

Take the data as you will. but the truth is in the numbers...

 

Gun control support is at the lowest it has ever been before. In 1959, the percentage of people supporting new gun laws was at 60%. Recent polling shows that today, 26% of people are in support of gun control. What is causing this decrease? “Instead, pollsters say the trends may reflect a growing acceptance of guns and support for the Second Amendment,” says Jack Cafferty of CNN (Cafferty, “Why is gun support at record lows?”). I’m not sure this could be the reason. Why would people accept the Second Amendment more when there are still people on the street being shot? Maybe people are just starting to believe that these bans aren’t working. No matter what the laws are, criminals will still use weapons. But speaking of crime, I’m also not sure that the crime rate is a reason for this decrease in support either. The crime rate has actually decreased since 1995 and it is looking like it will continue to fall. When it comes down to it, people just like having freedom. The less bans we have the more space we have to do what we want. Isn’t that the American dream? It seems that Americans are just never fully satisfied. Also, Americans like guns. There is no denying that. The amount of shoot-em-up video games in the United States seems innumerable. Kids and adults today seem to have a fascination with buying and using guns, whether it is electronically in video games, or in reality. Hunting is a sport that plays a big role in gun control. The use of guns in recreation gives people a legitimate excuse to own a gun. Limiting on the rules and laws on operating those weapons could lead to increase of the crime rate in America, but isn’t guaranteed. Limiting rules and restrictions may not do anything at all. But another angle to look at gun control is the fact that if people have own guns in their houses for protection. Families or individuals that feel that they need a gun to defend themselves from potential danger should have the right to do this. But if laws say that anyone can own a certain type of gun, then they can possibly go into the hands of potential criminals. In this sense, I feel like gun control support should be higher. The crime rate is going down and the demand for guns for the use of protection should not be as high. If the crime rate were to be higher for instance, then support should have a decreasing correlation.
There is no exact reason why the support for gun control has and still is decreasing, but there are a few theories that can explain it. Some people think that gun laws don’t help decrease the crime rate, Americans love their freedom, and the safety of having a gun in one’s home has a reassuring feeling. The answer is quite possibly the combination of all these theories.

 

I'd go with crime trends (with that leading to a distinction between subjective and objective risks) and the success of pressure groups motivated by hindering well-being improving policy

 

Lolcatz - That is an interesting viewpoint that you have pointed out. Many times people overlook the media and the psychological message it conveys on it's viewers. By portraying that American society is constantly in threat of violence by use of guns it has in fact helped to increase the gun violence in this country. If the media focused more on good spirited issues instead of the main headlines of who got murdered on the news last night, Americans wouldn't constantly feel the threat of home invasion, and perhaps it might lower the gun violence in this country.

 

Greataxe and Reiver - I support Reiver's argument against Greataxe. The use of worldwide analysis wouldn't be sufficient in determining the amount of gun violence in this country. There are too many variables that would affect the data if we were to compare gun control and violence measured from different countries. Economic and social variances play a part on the gun violence in every country and many of the countries in this world differ completely from the United States, that's why I believe it would be pointless to include other countries data when talking about the issues associated with guns here in America.

 

ShelbySimpson- i completely agree with what you said about the people who use guns for recreational purposes. It is very unfair for people to limit guns to people who use them for a hobby and enjoyment. Hunting is very popular in the U.S. and many people would be very dissatisfied if guns were taken away from them. They are not the ones killing people either so they are doing no harm.

 

Johnny- i also agree with the fact about where you talked about people with conceal and carry permits. I hinted towards the same thing in my post. What those people are doing is just protecting themselves from the people who use guns wrongfully. The people who use guns wrongfully are usually the people who got them illegally or like you said on the black market.

 

My apologies. I would have responded sooner but I assume you were going to leave your troll post and then disappear, as you have with all your other posts. But let's pick up where we left off.

My claim is that your position is unsupportable.

Your attempt at a response is to state "militias can have gun, not people"

Now, feel free to support this position with any form of evidence, historical fact, or law. As I am feeling gracious and because I doubt your abilities to do so, I will help you out a little. Please read, Heller v. District of Columbia as well as McDonald v. Chicago.

Also, in an attempt to forestall your response that "but but, the supreme court was wrong" I would like to point out the following:

It appears that every single justice on the supreme court believed that the Second Amendment is an individual right. lol

 

gjpotta123- I agree with you that Americans just like having the freedom of owning guns and doing what they want. Whatever it is, we usually like having the government off our back and as far away from our affairs as possible. I also agree that hunting and home protection are valid reasons to own a gun and that criminals will still have weapons if the government makes stricter laws.

 

Cowboykiller93- Although I agree with you that when the 2nd amendment was created it was a very different time period, it’s still needed in today’s society. Yes, America was very weak then and not now, but things can always change. In twenty-five years, the U.S. could be in a fragile state and in need of individual citizens to step up and fight. If the 2nd amendment was disposed of, the government would have every right to do anything to the citizens and no one could protect himself or herself.

 

The evidence does suggest a link between gun ownership and watching cop shows. Subjective risks are an important element of preferences, with that subjectivity easily increased through fear effects

 

Hi Mr Jonny, I am on your side ha ha! Sometimes that is difficult to tell especially when I take artistic license like I did below in the first part of my reply to you!

Anyway a note. Then I do a brevity snip like this; >>>>>>>>B Snip<<<<<<<< etc I am just trying to use less bandwidth. Thanks for your gun friendly reply!

=========================================================

Again I mostly agree but the fact is that COMMON SENSE tells us that we would rather be armed if a nut or three is slithering into our bedroom window intent on home invasion. Thanks for your post!

Rev A

 

Hello Foghlai, I bolded what I consider one of the most important aspects of your reply. Yes the SCOTUS did indeed vindicate what we pro freedom anti gun control citizens have been saying for decades! God created firearms for the citizens! God bless the United States Supreme Court Justices and every USA citizen that would NOT give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, BECAUSE they deserve neither Liberty nor Safety!**

** Corrupted B. Franklin quote by me ha ha~

Rev A

 

I take the data for what it is, the Common sense TRUTH arrived at by real world facts! It's not a twisted, spun by raw numbers and stats opinion peice (ie pro gun control) masquarding as truth.

Oh the photo? A standard plug of me shooting at a range sans range masters, better for full rock and roll fire! Haha...sadly that day I had no full auto weapons and just had fun with my old mossy riot gun....Budda budda byeeeeee guys....





The last is an avatar I am working on..no I am not underwater its done with a mirror, no not the usual suspects smoke and mirrors, just mirrors ~

Rev A

 

Ha, ha!!! Now that&#8217;s some stats I can live with! They actually make sense! Great post gjpottra! Yeah I can dig it daddy Oh (I am bringing back 50's beatnik speech, I love the stuff!)...

Rev A

 

My theory is that the amont of crime in any given area can be predicted by: the people (ethnic demographics), their culture and moral values. Crime is also controlled by the degree it is enforced by punishment at a given time.

Economic (poverty) factors are not significant, otherwise crime, reflected in homicide rates would have been highest during the Great Depression, and now---and it is not. Poor people with high moral values will be less likely to engage in violence, than wealthy people with little in the way of morals. This is evident by the actions of so many rich and famous sports stars.

You believe it is "pointless" in include crime statistics from outside the US to prove your points. This means the theories you believe in don't work well in the real world. As America becomes more multicultural every day, I feel it is important to know how the rest of the world works.

If you believe in Reiver's theory that "more guns=more crime" then you must ignore all of the facts that prove this theory to be false---his theory does not work in every state in the US, let alone every country in the world.

 

I have a lot of similar points that you had. I agree that gun control should be limited. I also have the similar thought that criminals will be criminals and use whatever weapons are at their disposal. I also like that you provided detailed examples from other countries about their issues on gun-control. The only thing I don't like about that is that the types of people in other countries are different from the ones in the United States.

 

I don't have a theory. I have an evidence-based approach that seems to be beyond your comprehension