You are here

Guns?

Okay, here is a "Food Fight" one.

Are you for or against the legal ownership of guns...as in currenly legal.  You can get a special licence to carry conceiled, and machine guns if you want.  Or you can own just about anything.

I myself am a gun owner, and would fight tooth and nail to keep that right as I don't want my guns taken away, mainly because my shotgun is a family heirloom, passed down from my grandpa, to my mom, and to me, and has his name enscribed on it, and one day I will pass it down to my son who I hope will pass it on to his children, so on so forth.

Also I think guns help to deter crime, and I am glad to know it is there in case someone is breaking down my door!  I plan to teach my son all about it from an early age so that he knows about it, what it can do, how to use it safely, just like I was taught from an early age.

How do you feel about this?  I don't hunt, nor do I really agree with hunting, but to me guns are for personal protection.  

Hey doesn't Alex remind you guys of asleep on a sunbeam? Annoyingly philosophical to the point where it just plain nonsense... I get bored reading it... We need to stay on topic

You are not the first person to say this.

0 likes

Haha, the right to "bare" arms? I will back that, I'm wearing a tank top. :D

0 likes

Haha, the right to "bare" arms? I will back that, I'm wearing a tank top. :D

Have you seen those shirts that say "right to bear arms" and there's a bear in a tank top, showing its arms? As in, bear is the adjective of arms? They make me giggle. Annnnd, I'm the most immature person on vegweb.

0 likes

Have you seen those shirts that say "right to bear arms"

A funny one I saw said, "Support your right to arm bears". It had a bear with an assaut rifle.

0 likes

Have you seen those shirts that say "right to bear arms"

A funny one I saw said, "Support your right to arm bears". It had a bear with an assaut rifle.

Listen to this

(From the movie Open Season)

Paul Westerberg - Right To Arm Bears

Who got it? Who's got it? We got it!
It's the right to arm bears
It's the right to arm bears
Well my dear, let's show 'em some fear, and see who easily scares
It's the right to arm bears
Mr. Bruin, what you doin'?
Mr. Buck, you takin' aim
We're going to be the party
And they're going to be the game
It's the right to arm bears
It's the right to arm bears
The Constitution is an institution
Changing our ambition
The solution now is obvious:
Ban all the ammunition
Hail to the Chief with a shotgun in his teeth
It's the right to arm bears
Mr. Hunter, eyes are mighty red
It's the right to arm bears
Whose going to eat you when you're dead?
It's the right to arm bears
Caught in the headlight, see who's going to fight
It's the right, it's the right to arm bears

0 likes

I was about to get really annoyed because it was looking like that Alex guy hijacked my thread and was turning it into another pointless political debate.  Ugh, that guy is so long winded!  He has no idea how to get to the point.  Doesn't he have a job, or a life outside of internet forums?

Anyway.

About the person who feels it is wrong to show and teach kids about guns, I politely disagree with you.

I think if you hide guns from children, it will be come the "forbidden fruit" and they will seek them out.  If, however, you are open and show your children the guns, show them exactly how dangerous they can be if not used correctly, and teach them proper gun safety, then they won't really care.

I shot my first gun when I was 9, grew up around them, always lectured about gun safetly to the point that I would just roll my eyes.  I was a common practice for me growing up to hear gun shots in the back due to my parents "plinking" (shooting coffee cans and milk jugs full of water).  I couldn't care less, I knew where to avoid going, and did my own thing.  I just believe that being open with kids and teaching them right from wrong at all ages is very important.

It is similar to teaching a 5 year old about drugs and cigarretts.  Like they always say, it is never too early to teach your child to say "no" to drugs.  I believe the same is true for gun safety

0 likes

I think if you hide guns from children, it will be come the "forbidden fruit" and they will seek them out.  If, however, you are open and show your children the guns, show them exactly how dangerous they can be if not used correctly, and teach them proper gun safety, then they won't really care.

I shot my first gun when I was 9, grew up around them, always lectured about gun safetly to the point that I would just roll my eyes.  I was a common practice for me growing up to hear gun shots in the back due to my parents "plinking" (shooting coffee cans and milk jugs full of water).  I couldn't care less, I knew where to avoid going, and did my own thing.  I just believe that being open with kids and teaching them right from wrong at all ages is very important.

This is similar to me....I grew up around guns, my dad was the manager of a gun store my whole childhood, he taught me how to shoot a gun at 7 (I cried the whole time) and we had guns lying all over the house.  My dad still has guns stashed in the weirdest places in his house.  I always found it amusing.  But we knew not to touch them.  The fear was instilled in us at a very young age.  You touch it, you get your ass beat.
So guns have never been a big deal to me.  My dad really wants Andy and I to get a gun.  I'm not opposed to it, they're just so damn expensive. 

0 likes

I'm not a fan. Yes, there are some people who are highly responsible gun owners, but for every so many people who would never raise a firearm against another person, you get a couple of crazies who show off, or practice poor safety, or don't lock them up properly, or are just plain dangerous.

I've never understood the rationale: okay, you're sensible and you lock your gun away from your kids. Someone breaks into your house, you can't get to your safe in time. Useless. Plus of course defensive weapons are frequently turned on their owners, and actually having a weapon on you makes YOU seem more dangerous to any intruder or person challenging you. They may react accordingly.

Or you shoot someone who breaks into your house. Then what? No matter how people shrug and say they could do it, I'm pretty sure that would screw you up for quite some time. Can't really take the moral high ground when you shoot a teenager who broke in on a dare. I think guns tend to offer a false sense of security: that said, I'm British so my mentality tends towards, "Oh, those Americans and their guns!" ;)

This. I live in NZ. I have never seen a hand gun or a machine gun or any firearm other than a farm rifle in real life, and the incidence of deaths and injuries from guns here is very very low. I don't believe that gun  ownership is a deterrent to crime, I believe that the more guns there are, the more guns will be used and the more people will get hurt.
America's gun culture scares the s*** out of me, I would not feel safe there at all.

0 likes

America's gun culture scares the s*** out of me, I would not feel safe there at all.

As someone who has had to hide the firearms of my stepparents to keep them from attempting to kill my pets and possibly themselves, I can assure you it isn't safe in the least.

0 likes

Legality of guns = more easy to obtain = lots of lovely columbine type goings on. In the UK, guns aren't easily obtainable and we have low gun crime in comparison to the USA.

There are other means of warding off an intruder, other countries are able to, so why can't the USA do it?

0 likes

America's gun culture scares the s*** out of me, I would not feel safe there at all.

Your emotions are completely irrational, and are contradicted by history and economics (i.e. the game theory), if not simple common sense.  What you advocate is a complete monopoly on power by the government - an institution that has outright killed hundreds of millions of people in the 20th century alone!

When everyone has free speech that's called freedom.  When only the government has free speech that's called a dictatorship.  But the right to protect yourself is even more important than mere speech, if they can just shoot you for saying something they don't like!

Any country with a disarmed helpless populace has its head in the guillotine, and the chord may be pulled on you at any time!

Legality of guns = more easy to obtain = lots of lovely columbine type goings on.
In the UK, guns aren't easily obtainable and we have low gun crime in comparison to the USA.

No, you have it absolutely backwards.  Please think and research before you speak, will you?  Columbine type events happen precisely in places where there are no guns -- like schools and gun-restricted military bases -- because no one is able to fight back.  Criminals will always have guns.  Duh!  Did you expect the perpetrators of Columbine to magically be unable to enter the gun free zone in their school?!  The only thing your legislation ensures is that their victims will be helpless!

Areas of USA where crime is lowest have the highest rates of individual gun ownership and least restrictions, while areas where crime is highest have the most gun control.  When gun laws are tightened, crime goes up.  When gun laws are loosened, crime goes down.  Every single time!

0 likes

I find it pretty funny when people think owning a pistol puts them on the level of the government/military (come on, like you could fight off a SWAT) or even an armed robber (who has the element of surprise, and probably of experience).

If weapons are freely available, that just shifts the tyranny from the elected officials to the wealthy elite. We go from a nanny state to feudalism. Yeah, that's SO much better. Weapons and violence won't overcome crime and warfare. Gun culture is pointless vanity - you can't honestly expect to make the world a better place by filling it with machines of death and destruction.

0 likes

I find it pretty funny when people think owning a pistol puts them on the level of the government/military (come on, like you could fight off a SWAT)

It's not about "fighting them off", it's all about raising the cost of tyranny to make it economically infeasible.  Mandatory Solzhenitsyn quote:

"And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?... The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin's thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! If...if...We didn't love freedom enough. And even more – we had no awareness of the real situation.... We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward."

Even a pistol in every home would make a major government crackdown a lot more difficult.  Of course a couple of gas-operated selective-fire assault rifles are even better.  ;)

or even an armed robber (who has the element of surprise, and probably of experience).

And the solution you propose to that is what, waiting for the police to pick up your corpse?

Millions of people have been successful at defending themselves with firearms, and the mere possibility of someone in the house being armed is an effective deterrent from the crime ever taking place at all.  The armed robber is at a disadvantage because he doesn't know the layout of the house, how many people are in it, how many are armed, etc.  Armed robbery only pays if you know the people inside aren't armed - then it's a slam dunk as long as you can act fast enough to avoid the police.

If weapons are freely available, that just shifts the tyranny from the elected officials to the wealthy elite.

Everyone has equal negative Rights, including the Right to Life.  The richest person cannot kill the poorest and get away with it - and that's not some feel-good slogan, that's a natural economic fact that emerges in a free market.  If Bill Gates gets away with killing a homeless bum today, he might come after you next, therefore it is in everyone's best interest to unite and stop him.

Furthermore, even in a 100% free society most people would delegate their self-defense rights to professionals, that is neighborhood security guards and other private defense agencies, with substantial spill-over and trickle-down benefits for society as a whole.  It is in the best interest of some rich guy you've never heard of to help catch the burglar in your neighborhood, lest that burglar affects the insurance costs at his bank or comes after him next!

We go from a nanny state to feudalism.  Yeah, that's SO much better.  Weapons and violence won't overcome crime and warfare.

The "nanny state" is a form of feudalism adapted to milking as much wealth as possible out of a modern serf, who is able to function in sophisticated service-oriented economy of the 21st century.

Gun culture is pointless vanity - you can't honestly expect to make the world a better place by filling it with machines of death and destruction.

You are experiencing magical thinking.  You somehow believe that if only Mommy Government and her enforcers had absolute power then the world would be perfect.  That is stupid for two reasons, the first being that people criminal enough to want to hurt you are also criminal enough to want to hurt you with weapons that are on Mommy Government's "no no" list.  Even more importantly - power corrupts.  While an all-powerful government will not slaughter you outright, it will only keep you around for as long as you're useful.  It can do anything it wants to you and you will not be able to resist.

0 likes

But guns aren't only for protection, or hunting, they are just fun too.

They are a toy, a very dangerous toy that must be delt with extreme caution and care...very similar to a car as a matter of fact, or a drill, or a hammer...

Anyway my point is, there is much to be said for blasting the H#$% out of a coffee can with a 12 gauge pump action shot gun and pretending the entire time it is your bosses head, or your test paper that you failed, or something similar.

*BANG* *chu-chink* *BANG* *chu-chink*...so forth.

Great stress relief.

Also there is skeet shooting or clay pigeon shooting which is extrememly fun but very hard.

You can't illegalize EVERY thing that is "deadly".  If you did that, knives, cars, pencils, pillows, ladders, you name it would have to be illegalized, heck even sex!  Guns are tools, like a drill, or a hammer, nothing more.  Guns don't kill people, people kill people.

eta:  Hey Alex guy, please limit  your responses to 50 words or less please, you are way too long winded!

0 likes

Legality of guns = more easy to obtain = lots of lovely columbine type goings on.
In the UK, guns aren't easily obtainable and we have low gun crime in comparison to the USA.

No, you have it absolutely backwards.  Please think and research before you speak, will you?  Columbine type events happen precisely in places where there are no guns -- like schools and gun-restricted military bases -- because no one is able to fight back.  Criminals will always have guns.  Duh!  Did you expect the perpetrators of Columbine to magically be unable to enter the gun free zone in their school?!  The only thing your legislation ensures is that their victims will be helpless!

Areas of USA where crime is lowest have the highest rates of individual gun ownership and least restrictions, while areas where crime is highest have the most gun control.  When gun laws are tightened, crime goes up.  When gun laws are loosened, crime goes down.  Every single time!

No, I don't have it backwards. The boys obtained the guns pretty easily thanks to the ability to sell guns easily and to get a gun licence at ridiculous ages in the USA. So take that condescending tone and shove it up where the sun don't shine. It's clear you're unaware of how easy someone can get a gun in your country. Any teen can get into their dads gun cabinet and woo, columbine here they come!

You do realise that criminals can get guns that are stolen, right? Or they just down right own them in general.

Your countries gun crime is despicable and you think it's because of gun control? It's because of the fact that practically anyone can get a gun so easily, be it from the stolen or just applying for one. Even in illinois you can get a gun license as a baby, that's how ridiculous your country is.

You don't need a gun to defend yourself, our country has proven that, and proven that inability to obtain guns easily = less gun crime. Your average criminal is usually someone who was normal before hand then just turns to a life of crime for whatever reason. Because very few citizens in the UK own guns, any of those who do turn to a life of crime tend to opt more for a knife which is legal to own over 21. Hence why knife crime is high here.

As I said before, if other countries can do it, why the hell can't yours?

0 likes

Thank you, ruziko.

And SQ, I understand the stress relief, but it is indeed a very dangerous toy. I think I'd be more stressed out by the idea of having something bitey and scary and death-ey in my hand than I would be relieved by demolishing a can. Diff'rent strokes, I guess. :P

Alex, if I'm being hippy-dippy, I'm sorry you don't appreciate idealism. I don't expect Mommy Government to take care of me. I expect myself to take care of others, and maybe a couple other people to care for some others, and maybe those others to take care of each other while we're at it, and keep working at it from there. But in a culture where you don't know if breaking into someone's house will get you shot, you can't know that knocking on someone's door won't get you shot.

And I disagree with your statement that it would be in the interests of the wealthy to protect the destitute and homeless. It'd be in their interests to kill them off so they wouldn't take up space. The end. Those who produce/are economically viable kill off the slackers, and society as a whole is a more efficient, streamlined machine. In fact, doubly so because those left alive will be working extra-hard to prove their merit objectively against the achievements of the top earners. The bottom of society gets culled off like thinning a herd of deer. Survival of the fittest and all that.

0 likes

I recieved an email recently that in Austrailia they had this massive gun illegalizing thing happen.  Not sure of the details, but they banned guns, and as a result, crime and murder had a sharp increase. 

Something I found:

"It is a common fantasy that gun bans make society safer.  In 2002 -- five years after enacting its gun ban -- the Australian Bureau of Criminology acknowledged there is no correlation between gun control and the use of firearms in violent crime.  In fact, the percent of murders committed with a firearm was the highest it had ever been in 2006 (16.3 percent), says the D.C. Examiner.

Even Australia's Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research acknowledges that the gun ban had no significant impact on the amount of gun-involved crime:

In 2006, assault rose 49.2 percent and robbery 6.2 percent.
Sexual assault -- Australia's equivalent term for rape -- increased 29.9 percent.
Overall, Australia's violent crime rate rose 42.2 percent ( :o).

At the same time, U.S. violent crime decreased 31.8 percent: rape dropped 19.2 percent; robbery decreased 33.2 percent; aggravated assault dropped 32.2 percent.

Australian women are now raped over three times as often as American women.

http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=17847

0 likes

America's gun culture scares the s*** out of me, I would not feel safe there at all.

Your emotions are completely irrational, and are contradicted by history and economics (i.e. the game theory), if not simple common sense.  What you advocate is a complete monopoly on power by the government - an institution that has outright killed hundreds of millions of people in the 20th century alone!

When everyone has free speech that's called freedom.  When only the government has free speech that's called a dictatorship.  But the right to protect yourself is even more important than mere speech, if they can just shoot you for saying something they don't like!

Any country with a disarmed helpless populace has its head in the guillotine, and the chord may be pulled on you at any time!

see that's not even true, because police don't carry guns in our country either.  As Theo said, you just don't see guns here at all other than on farms, and we live in a country where every murder that takes place is news, not a statistic.   Your overexaggerated hyperbolic talk of dictatorship and government oppression just doesn't apply in our, or any other case, in terms of people engaged in this conversation.

Calm the f*ck down and go stroke your own gun, if you must, but your belittling of everyone else's ideas and opinions is going to get you nowhere here.

0 likes

Calm the f*ck down and go stroke your own gun, if you must

Oh, that's naughty. Mind you, it'd probably calm him down some ;)

0 likes

Pages

Log in or register to post comments

More Posts Like This