Guns, Guns Guns

[heavenseeker]

the problem with limiting them to small guns is that those can be conceled easier and some one could sneak a small gun into a public area way to easy

[Winchester]

heavenseeker,

Cops don't stop crime. They come to draw the chalk outline after the fact. Haven't you heard of home invasions?

[heavenseeker]

fyi it is imposable to stop crime

[chris]

I'm an adovcate for Pacifism, being one myself. But, I would not take away the rights of those who could protect their home from invaders. If killing ever solved anything I would own a gun, but I can't see it happening.

Other than that I'm not too much a game hunter fan either. If you kill it, eat it. If not, then don't kill it there isnt a reason to. But, I wouldn't go as far to that all guns should be removed from households. That's robbing people of their freedoms.

Edited June 12, 2006 by Convert4888

[Paladin D]

Simple fact: If you ban guns, the criminals will still find a way to get a hold of them. Only difference is, the civilians will not have that same protection.

[Guest T-Bone]

[quote name='Winchester' post='1003634' date='Jun 12 2006, 04:40 AM']
heavenseeker,

Cops don't stop crime. They come to draw the chalk outline after the fact. Haven't you heard of home invasions?
[/quote]


[quote name='heavenseeker' post='1003863' date='Jun 12 2006, 10:33 AM']
fyi it is imposable to stop crime
[/quote]

What I think Winchester is saying is that it is not the job of the police departments to stop crime, only to investigate after the fact.

[heavenseeker]

oh and even though they do more investigation that stopping it from happening it is their job to try to prevent it from happening in the first place.

[Socrates]

[quote name='heavenseeker' post='1002770' date='Jun 10 2006, 08:03 PM']
it was important at the time yes but now days it is not. the army of the time was made of these otherwise civilians which had little to no training.

as far as the need for guns as defence from attackers goes. Most attacks and violent acts are made by a civilian with a gun, so if guns are regulated to hunting and made so you have to be registered as a owner then your reasoning for needing guns for defence is defeated.
[/quote]
The [b]right to bear arms[/b] was conceived of by the founders as an inalienable right of American citizens, which was why it was made the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights. It is considered a citizen's [b]right[/b], not just some temporary measure until we got a bigger standing army.

The American founders conceived the new nation as a land of free and self-sufficient citizens, who would be able to defend themselves against attackers, and against a tyrannical government if need be, not as some overbearing totalitarian nanny-state.

And how on earth would gun-ownership be "regulated to hunting"? Would gun-owners have to take an oath never to use their gun in self-defense? And murder (with a firearm or by any other means) is already a crime, so this kind of becomes a non-issue.

If guns were outlawed from civilians, a strong black market in firearms would grow up, with more accompanying crime. The lawless would still find ways to obtain guns, while law-enforcement would be bogged down fighting an illegal gun trade. The vast majority of gun-owners in America are law-abiding citizens. It would be tyrannical and unjust for the government to take away their constitutional rights to gun-ownership and self-defence in the name of stopping violent crime. Crime-fighting should focus on the criminals.

As far as self-defense goes, firearms do have a powerful deterrent effect. As the old saying goes: "God created all men. Colt made them equal." Firearms allow physically weaker people, such women and the elderly, to defend against attackers.


[quote name='heavenseeker' post='1004108' date='Jun 12 2006, 05:34 PM']
oh and even though they do more investigation that stopping it from happening it is their job to try to prevent it from happening in the first place.
[/quote]
That would require an enormous overbearing police-state, with cops posted on every street-corner, in every shop, around every home. Hardly the "Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave."

[heavenseeker]

i didnt say they did a good job of it but that is what they are for.

if they were only ment to investigate then we woul only have the CSI teams

[Socrates]

[quote name='heavenseeker' post='1004189' date='Jun 12 2006, 07:03 PM']
i didnt say they did a good job of it but that is what they are for.

if they were only ment to investigate then we woul only have the CSI teams
[/quote]
Would it not make more sense to allow citizens to defend themselves, rather than overburdening our police forces with an impossible and unnecessary task?

[heavenseeker]

there would be less crime if guns were restricted to the police and then rented out for hunters during hunting seasons because if you havent figured it out but most crimes and violent attacks involve a gun

[Winchester]

Actually T, that's not what I am saying at all, but thank you. The fact is, we do not live in la la land, or in other countries like Canada or the UK. We have guns, and criminals have them. We can what if, but we have to apply these answers to real life.

Heaven,
Hunting weapons are more powerful than other weapons. How would you implement this?

[Guest T-Bone]

[quote name='heavenseeker' post='1004194' date='Jun 12 2006, 06:13 PM']
there would be less crime if guns were restricted to the police and then rented out for hunters during hunting seasons because if you havent figured it out but most crimes and violent attacks involve a gun
[/quote]

And if all guns magically disapeared, would all the violent criminals start hugging and singing koom-ba-ya? Or would they find other tools for thier trade?

[heavenseeker]

thats why we need stricter laws like the UK. They have such a low crime rate because the only people alowed to have guns are their equivilant to the FBI and their armed forces. They dont even give their police officers guns.

as far as hunting weapons go they should only be alowed to be used by licensed hunteres during hunting seasons and have to be rented from the county.

if you take away what is used in crime then the reason to have that very same object for defence reasons also goes away.

[Guest T-Bone]

Does the UK have a lower crime rate?

cite please...

[Norseman82]

[quote name='T-Bone' post='1004232' date='Jun 12 2006, 09:16 PM']
And if all guns magically disapeared, would all the violent criminals start hugging and singing koom-ba-ya? Or would they find other tools for thier trade?
[/quote]

Bingo.

As the Federation ambassador said in Star Trek V: "We forbade them weapons, they made their own". And the father of someone I used to date was murdered with a table leg - across the street from a police station in broad daylight!

Heavenseeker, how do you propose to get rid of all the guns already out there? Do you think all the Latin Kings and Gangster Disciples and people with their meth labs are going to go down to the gun turn-in center accompanied by blueirds singing sweet songs like in a Disney movie and everything will be happy happy joy joy in saecula saeculorum? No, I'm not naive. We've had a moratorium on handgun registration in Chicago since April 1982. Did that turn Chicago into a crime-free paradise?

No, the answer more along the lines of what Giuliani did in New York: when a crime was committed, trace the gun and see if there was any illegal dealings going on and then go after illegal gun dealers supplying the gangbangers and put them into jail after milking them for as much intelligence data as possible.

[heavenseeker]

i never said it would work or that it could even happen. all a am saying is that all of your arguments for guns originate from the fact that they are needed for protection and that the people they would be used to protect you from are most of the time other people with guns. i dont know where you came to get the idea that i said it would ever be pausable expesaly in america where so many people already have them and the NRA can play such a big factor.

[Guest Rick777]

[quote name='Paladin D' post='1003917' date='Jun 12 2006, 11:29 AM']
Simple fact: If you ban guns, the criminals will still find a way to get a hold of them. Only difference is, the civilians will not have that same protection.
[/quote]

Prohibition comes to mind.

One cannot just ban guns.

[Franimus]

It's kinda like how all the countries are getting nuclear weapons...
We try our best to stop more countries, especially the more dangerous ones, from getting nuclear technology, but we have it ourselves, and have quite a bit. There haven't been any nuclear wars yet because everybody knows that if they use nukes against someone else, everybody else will nuke them.
I think it's the same for small arms. If we encourage more civilians to get guns, everybody's gonna be scared to use them in a bad way since they know anyone else around is gonna have a gun to shoot them with. The only thing you have to worry about now is the suicidal guys. Fortunatly, we haven't really had any suicidal countries yet. But I am actually serious about getting everybody and their brother to carry guns around with them. Of course, at places like pools, you'd have to have guards. Also they should plaster the streets with "YOU WON'T GET AWAY" posters.

[chris]

Exactly, they will just smuggle them back into the country and then transport them back into the hands of worthless criminals via black market. Its the same way every day in almost every neighboorhood in American with drugs and alcohol. And Prohibition is a perfect example of what happens when you ban a freedom. It always seems to find its way back into the people, illegally.

Edited June 13, 2006 by Convert4888