Well we don't necessarily know that ISIS terrorists with guns mowing down civilians are bad. Who are we to make that judgement? Maybe a civilian shooting back in self defense is actually the bad guy?
Do you have some sort of system that differentiates good and bad people? Please tell.
...Seriously? No of course there's no such sys… moretem but a normal person can do a lot of good with a weapon. And kindly tell me do criminals or terrorists get those guns legaly? No they don't so why disarm your own citizens and do not allow them to protect themselves?
We both know if guns were readily-available there would be even more victims. It's simply impossible to know who is 'good' and will use a gun simply for self defence, even so, it doesn't always gaurantee it can remain in their hands.
In those cases? The numbers of people killed would be lower since someone would kill those bastards. Also I explained that matter and my take on it few posts below. Anyone with even minimal criminal record would be unable to legally purchase a gun.
Issue is in the USA the fact people have guns doesn't prevent mass shootings. USA has proved that despite we have the largest gun per capita in the world, it doesn't prevent mass shootings. It doesn't stop them, it doesn't deter them.
Normally it only takes a few minutes for one person with a AR-15 with a 100 round magazine to fire that entire magazine at a room of people. Even if someone has a 9mm pistol in their jacket, they would be insanely out gunned, definitely if the attacker is smart and using at least a Kevlar vest let alone other means of armor which that Theatre shooting that happened a few years back the attacker was decked out in armor.
The concept is flawed in short. For someone to go out to their car and grab something out of their trunk to compete and return, odds are good security guards or police likely wouldn't be far behind. That is if they have the balls to begin with, it's easy to have a gun, much harder to face danger and use it yourself.
Also it put it into perspective. I think officially last year or was it the year before that? I do not exactly remember, but officially guns are the leading cause of none natural deaths in the USA, going above automobile accidents. Sure they claim most of those are suicides but the statistics are also nasty being the successful chance of dying by a fire arm when attempting to commit suicide are almost absolute, when by other means people are often less successful, and eventually have a change of heart realizing how stupid they were when they survive. Guns do not provide that possibility even when it's a suicide attempt, blow your brains out 99.9% chance you're dead after the attempt.
Over all. Having lots of guns is nothing but feel good medicine with a negative out come.
In the past I used to believe that only police officers and soliders should have access to a gun but right now I'm firmly pro-gun since my s… moreociety have one the lowest idex of guns per 100 people in Europe.
The fact is that police will be always too late if something bad happens and a good person with a gun can save a massive amount of life's.
But that also need to be strictly regulated. So no guns for people with even mininal criminal record and they should be available only for people over 24 years old. Also those should only be a hand guns, there's really no need for people to have assult rifles.
So Yay
I live in Ireland, so I don't really understand the gun issues in America, but personally, I do think someone has the right to a gun. But, a… moret the same time, there should be serious restrictions in place, so no one with a criminal conviction or mental health issues can get a hold of one.
EDIT: Fixed something.
It's nothing compared to the issues in the United States, though. But yeah, gun crime is increasing, at least in Dublin, anyway, with the gangs and dissidents republicans.
Normally it only takes a few minutes for one person with a AR-15 with a 100 round magazine to fire that entire magazine at a room of people. Even if someone has a 9mm pistol in their jacket, they would be insanely out gunned, definitely if the attacker is smart and using at least a Kevlar vest let alone other means of armor which that Theatre shooting that happened a few years back the attacker was decked out in armor.
that why I wrote handguns only, in US people went slighty too far with their arsenals. There's no need for such fire power for common citizens. Also would you like to be defenseless when a wack job like that enters the room? One precise shot might save many life's.
The concept is flawed in short. For someone to go out to their car and grab something out of their trunk to compete and return, odds are good security guards or police likely wouldn't be far behind. That is if they have the balls to begin with, it's easy to have a gun, much harder to face danger and use it yourself.
Still police would be too late as you have read, numerous times in Europe....
Also it put it into perspective. I think officially last year or was it the year before that? I do not exactly remember, but officially guns are the leading cause of none natural deaths in the USA, going above automobile accidents. Sure they claim most of those are suicides but the statistics are also nasty being the successful chance of dying by a fire arm when attempting to commit suicide are almost absolute, when by other means people are often less successful, and eventually have a change of heart realizing how stupid they were when they survive. Guns do not provide that possibility even when it's a suicide attempt, blow your brains out 99.9% chance you're dead after the attempt.
Well people who what to commit suicide are going for the most effective and probably painless way to it's not gun's fault, would you blame ropes that people use to hang themselves?
Also weren't few of the lagest gun massacres in US in so called ,,gun free zone?"
Issue is in the USA the fact people have guns doesn't prevent mass shootings. USA has proved that despite we have the largest gun per capi… moreta in the world, it doesn't prevent mass shootings. It doesn't stop them, it doesn't deter them.
Normally it only takes a few minutes for one person with a AR-15 with a 100 round magazine to fire that entire magazine at a room of people. Even if someone has a 9mm pistol in their jacket, they would be insanely out gunned, definitely if the attacker is smart and using at least a Kevlar vest let alone other means of armor which that Theatre shooting that happened a few years back the attacker was decked out in armor.
The concept is flawed in short. For someone to go out to their car and grab something out of their trunk to compete and return, odds are good security guards or police likely wouldn't be far behind. That is if they have the balls to begin with, it's easy to have a gun, much harder t… [view original content]
Put it this way. Where are all these "Gun" toting conceal and carry folks when the lead starts flying? Nearly every single state has such laws now. You'd think crime would go down, mass shootings would go down, oh and you'd constantly hear stories of heroic citizens jumping out to save innocent lives in a time of danger. oh wait, rarely happen regardless if they're armed or unarmed.
Oh I forgot, privately owned businesses, companies and even stores do not allow these weapons on their property. Walmart I think last year finally allowed people to carry in their story but they have to be followed by security the entire time. Making the Conceal and Carry laws kind of useless in a practical sense. lol
Normally it only takes a few minutes for one person with a AR-15 with a 100 round magazine to fire that entire magazine at a room of people.… more Even if someone has a 9mm pistol in their jacket, they would be insanely out gunned, definitely if the attacker is smart and using at least a Kevlar vest let alone other means of armor which that Theatre shooting that happened a few years back the attacker was decked out in armor.
that why I wrote handguns only, in US people went slighty too far with their arsenals. There's no need for such fire power for common citizens. Also would you like to be defenseless when a wack job like that enters the room? One precise shot might save many life's.
The concept is flawed in short. For someone to go out to their car and grab something out of their trunk to compete and return, odds are good security guards or police likely wouldn't be far behind. That is if they have the balls to begin with, it's eas… [view original content]
You sure? Right Wing and Left Wing are often on the same side, it's just right wings are often blinded by propaganda released by the NRA, and Manufacturers who don't want their gun sales hurt. When Obama became president they threw out so much propaganda saying he would take their guns away mean while saying "Oh better get these AR-15's while they last, soon they will not allowed anymore." Obama elected, oh nothing happened. Next Election, it repeated all over again.
So when you hear conservatives say we need responsible gun laws, and then liberals say we need better gun control they're often talking about the same thing. Just different lingo, and wording. It's those hand full of political leaders who are paid under the table to say out landing statements "They will take your guns away." And then propaganda, like TV commercial magazine adds, etc etc etc paid for by the NRA who in turn is paid by Manufacturers that has created a SPLIT that doesn't exist. Because they don't want any restrictions of any kind, they want to be able to sell fire arms freely to any idiot that has the money to buy them. Makes them more money. Money is the driving force of the entire debate.
So even common sense laws, and responsible gun laws do not get put in place because of that fear, a fear created by the NRA, and Manufacturers. A fear that shouldn't exist... but does. We've had common sense gun laws since the 1800s. The NRA has been pushing to unravel it all, because why? Gun sales. NRA is no longer an organization by people who love guns, but is now controlled by wealthy special interest to sell their own agenda.
One side of me says, there needs to be much stricter rules to gun ownership and actual crackdowns on criminal purchases.
The other side of me says fuck guns entirely, they're just not worth it.
EDIT: Shit, forgot some words. Sorry.
To clarify about Title II, it's part of the National Firearms Act and it currently regulates machine guns, short-barreled rifles and other arms without a sporting purpose.
It's perfectly legal for me to buy an M-60 in the US, but I'd have to jump through some hoops first. A ton of paperwork must be filled out, including a background check and all that good stuff. I also have to pay for a non-transferable $200 tax stamp. The government processes the paperwork and the gun I want to buy is registered within several months. Very, very few crimes have been committed with weapons purchased this way. I think they can be counted on one hand.
Why not extend that system to "assault weapons" without a sporting purpose instead of banning them outright?
I oppose gun control from the left, but it isn't a key issue. Honestly both sides of the debate disgust me. On one side, we have the NRA, … morewho do a good talk about rebelling against government tyranny, yet slavishly gush about counter-terror programs and lobby congress incessantly. Conservatives also couldn't care less about minority gun-owners. Where were the "muh liberty" people when the Black Panthers were disarmed?
On the other side, you have Feinstein and the Brady Bunch, who resurrect their moronic "assault weapon" bans after every shooting. Their criteria for bans are based off notoriety and what kind of accessories the gun has. For instance, I own a military style assault weapon, with "evil features" like (gasp!) a pistol grip and flash suppressor. If an assault weapon ban came into effect, all I'd have to do is break down my gun and put it in a plain rifle stock. There's absolutely no functional difference.
If the governm… [view original content]
EDIT: Oh... I didn't put in "One side of me." I forgot to add in me to the sentence. Shit! Sorry for the confusion! And rudeness. (this is the last edit)
You sure? Right Wing and Left Wing are often on the same side, it's just right wings are often blinded by propaganda released by the NRA, … moreand Manufacturers who don't want their gun sales hurt. When Obama became president they threw out so much propaganda saying he would take their guns away mean while saying "Oh better get these AR-15's while they last, soon they will not allowed anymore." Obama elected, oh nothing happened. Next Election, it repeated all over again.
So when you hear conservatives say we need responsible gun laws, and then liberals say we need better gun control they're often talking about the same thing. Just different lingo, and wording. It's those hand full of political leaders who are paid under the table to say out landing statements "They will take your guns away." And then propaganda, like TV commercial magazine adds, etc etc etc paid for by the NRA who in turn is paid by Manufacturers that has created a … [view original content]
Put it this way. Where are all these "Gun" toting conceal and carry folks when the lead starts flying? Nearly every single state has such laws now. You'd think crime would go down, mass shootings would go down, oh and you'd constantly hear stories of heroic citizens jumping out to save innocent lives in a time of danger. oh wait, rarely happen regardless if they're armed or unarmed.
Hiding? Like any sane being would do when the shooting starts? No one said that when you have a gun you have to jump headfirst into danger. and like I've been trying to explain to you it's better to the armed in face of danger than not.
Oh I forgot, privately owned businesses, companies and even stores do not allow these weapons on their property. Walmart I think last year finally allowed people to carry in their story but they have to be followed by security the entire time. Making the Conceal and Carry laws kind of useless in a practical sense. lol
How's that's relevant? Look I see that you have issues with people owning&carring guns but if the law allows it then so it be. If the people decide to ban guns then so it be too. Let's end this discussion here.
Put it this way. Where are all these "Gun" toting conceal and carry folks when the lead starts flying? Nearly every single state has such… more laws now. You'd think crime would go down, mass shootings would go down, oh and you'd constantly hear stories of heroic citizens jumping out to save innocent lives in a time of danger. oh wait, rarely happen regardless if they're armed or unarmed.
Oh I forgot, privately owned businesses, companies and even stores do not allow these weapons on their property. Walmart I think last year finally allowed people to carry in their story but they have to be followed by security the entire time. Making the Conceal and Carry laws kind of useless in a practical sense. lol
Well we don't necessarily know that ISIS terrorists with guns mowing down civilians are bad. Who are we to make that judgement? Maybe a civilian shooting back in self defense is actually the bad guy?
EDIT: Oh... I didn't put in "One side of me." I forgot to add in me to the sentence. Shit! Sorry for the confusion! And rudeness. (this is the last edit)
I believe that law abiding citizens with no violent criminal record have the right to own a gun. And there should be a mandatory background check and a licensing process to own one. However, more deadly guns like assault rifles should not be legal to sell or own.
I vote yes to guns. The problem with guns is not weapons themselves. The issue is the human condition. People have been murdering each other long before guns and gun powder. Here's a fairly famous quote from Albert Einstien that pretty well sums up both sides. " I do not know with what weapons WW3 will be fought." "But I am certain that WW4 will be fought with sticks and stones!". It's a quote that has stuck with me. I interpet it's meaning this way. We (the human race) have and will always fight and kill each other. Sadly,this is our nature. We can make great strides in reduceing how effectively we kill. But to me,logic dictates that as more cruel. No one wants murder. But it still occurs at high rates without guns. Sure there are short term drops in murder rates when guns are banned. But the stats I've seen,indicate "normalization" of the rates,if quality of life has not improved over time. Phh(Exhales) To sum it all up,"Fortunes Forcast Lucky Charms" We need inner peace or any ban is pointless! Rant over!
Comments
Well we don't necessarily know that ISIS terrorists with guns mowing down civilians are bad. Who are we to make that judgement? Maybe a civilian shooting back in self defense is actually the bad guy?
Issue is in the USA the fact people have guns doesn't prevent mass shootings. USA has proved that despite we have the largest gun per capita in the world, it doesn't prevent mass shootings. It doesn't stop them, it doesn't deter them.
Normally it only takes a few minutes for one person with a AR-15 with a 100 round magazine to fire that entire magazine at a room of people. Even if someone has a 9mm pistol in their jacket, they would be insanely out gunned, definitely if the attacker is smart and using at least a Kevlar vest let alone other means of armor which that Theatre shooting that happened a few years back the attacker was decked out in armor.
The concept is flawed in short. For someone to go out to their car and grab something out of their trunk to compete and return, odds are good security guards or police likely wouldn't be far behind. That is if they have the balls to begin with, it's easy to have a gun, much harder to face danger and use it yourself.
Also it put it into perspective. I think officially last year or was it the year before that? I do not exactly remember, but officially guns are the leading cause of none natural deaths in the USA, going above automobile accidents. Sure they claim most of those are suicides but the statistics are also nasty being the successful chance of dying by a fire arm when attempting to commit suicide are almost absolute, when by other means people are often less successful, and eventually have a change of heart realizing how stupid they were when they survive. Guns do not provide that possibility even when it's a suicide attempt, blow your brains out 99.9% chance you're dead after the attempt.
Over all. Having lots of guns is nothing but feel good medicine with a negative out come.
But Ireland has a huge issue with gun crime
It's nothing compared to the issues in the United States, though. But yeah, gun crime is increasing, at least in Dublin, anyway, with the gangs and dissidents republicans.
Yay, my AR15 and Century Arms AK have yet to hurt anyone. Unless I go buy those baby heat seeking bullets that the NRA sells on the down low.
Only with mandatory background checks, then I'm alright with people owning guns.
that why I wrote handguns only, in US people went slighty too far with their arsenals. There's no need for such fire power for common citizens. Also would you like to be defenseless when a wack job like that enters the room? One precise shot might save many life's.
Still police would be too late as you have read, numerous times in Europe....
Well people who what to commit suicide are going for the most effective and probably painless way to it's not gun's fault, would you blame ropes that people use to hang themselves?
Also weren't few of the lagest gun massacres in US in so called ,,gun free zone?"
Put it this way. Where are all these "Gun" toting conceal and carry folks when the lead starts flying? Nearly every single state has such laws now. You'd think crime would go down, mass shootings would go down, oh and you'd constantly hear stories of heroic citizens jumping out to save innocent lives in a time of danger. oh wait, rarely happen regardless if they're armed or unarmed.
Oh I forgot, privately owned businesses, companies and even stores do not allow these weapons on their property. Walmart I think last year finally allowed people to carry in their story but they have to be followed by security the entire time. Making the Conceal and Carry laws kind of useless in a practical sense. lol
One side of me says, there needs to be much stricter rules to gun ownership and actual crackdowns on criminal purchases.
The other side of me says fuck guns entirely, they're just not worth it.
EDIT: Shit, forgot some words. Sorry.
You sure? Right Wing and Left Wing are often on the same side, it's just right wings are often blinded by propaganda released by the NRA, and Manufacturers who don't want their gun sales hurt. When Obama became president they threw out so much propaganda saying he would take their guns away mean while saying "Oh better get these AR-15's while they last, soon they will not allowed anymore." Obama elected, oh nothing happened. Next Election, it repeated all over again.
So when you hear conservatives say we need responsible gun laws, and then liberals say we need better gun control they're often talking about the same thing. Just different lingo, and wording. It's those hand full of political leaders who are paid under the table to say out landing statements "They will take your guns away." And then propaganda, like TV commercial magazine adds, etc etc etc paid for by the NRA who in turn is paid by Manufacturers that has created a SPLIT that doesn't exist. Because they don't want any restrictions of any kind, they want to be able to sell fire arms freely to any idiot that has the money to buy them. Makes them more money. Money is the driving force of the entire debate.
So even common sense laws, and responsible gun laws do not get put in place because of that fear, a fear created by the NRA, and Manufacturers. A fear that shouldn't exist... but does. We've had common sense gun laws since the 1800s. The NRA has been pushing to unravel it all, because why? Gun sales. NRA is no longer an organization by people who love guns, but is now controlled by wealthy special interest to sell their own agenda.
To clarify about Title II, it's part of the National Firearms Act and it currently regulates machine guns, short-barreled rifles and other arms without a sporting purpose.
It's perfectly legal for me to buy an M-60 in the US, but I'd have to jump through some hoops first. A ton of paperwork must be filled out, including a background check and all that good stuff. I also have to pay for a non-transferable $200 tax stamp. The government processes the paperwork and the gun I want to buy is registered within several months. Very, very few crimes have been committed with weapons purchased this way. I think they can be counted on one hand.
Why not extend that system to "assault weapons" without a sporting purpose instead of banning them outright?
EDIT: Oh... I didn't put in "One side of me." I forgot to add in me to the sentence. Shit! Sorry for the confusion! And rudeness. (this is the last edit)
Hiding? Like any sane being would do when the shooting starts? No one said that when you have a gun you have to jump headfirst into danger. and like I've been trying to explain to you it's better to the armed in face of danger than not.
How's that's relevant? Look I see that you have issues with people owning&carring guns but if the law allows it then so it be. If the people decide to ban guns then so it be too. Let's end this discussion here.
Of course they are. Recently a muslim burned a guy's bike and the owner beat the bastard up, guess who now have a case in court....
LeftLogic
Oops. =3
It's not my day today. xD
Scary stuff.
I believe that law abiding citizens with no violent criminal record have the right to own a gun. And there should be a mandatory background check and a licensing process to own one. However, more deadly guns like assault rifles should not be legal to sell or own.