DAOTD: gun control edition

[Ender_rpm]

Well, of Americans of European Ancestry anyway. 'course, not sure our northern neighbors have a much better record, so...

[collinwho]

On a personal note, I think guns are for pussies. I mean, how tough do you have to be to intimidate somebody with something that's as simple to use as an instant camera?

 

 

I would think that the majority of gun-owners (and definitely all responsible gun-owners) don't use guns as a means of intimidation. In fact, I bet the majority of them would prefer the general public doesn't even know that they have guns (particularly handguns). Guns are a last resort in issues of self-defense for most people. Most of those used for intimidation are likely owned illegally, and no amount of regulation of legal items is going to stop the flow of illegal items.

 

I am not a gun-owner. But I definitely support the right to bear arms and protect oneself for all responsible adults.

[Jugghaid]

The FBI's Crime in the United States estimated that 66% of the 16,137 murders in 2004 were committed with firearms. That's only the murders, that doesn't count the people who were only wounded or crippled.

 

 

And if we didn't have guns, they would kill with knives or baseball bats or rocks. A murderer is a murderer. It's been going on since long before the invention of gunpowder.

 

 

Just because some people are responsible with their guns doesn't mean that everybody else, and unfortunately for you gun-lovers, a few bad apples do indeed spoil the whole damn bunch.

 

 

So we should outlaw cars because some people drive drunk or like assholes and kill thousands of people a year?

 

 

If guns are not regulated you'll end up having more and more Columbine or Virginia Tech type incidents, and gun fan or not, I'm sure we all agree that nobody wants that to happen ever again.

 

 

Guns are regulated. However, you will notice that people who generally commit crimes such as murder don't really tend to follow laws and regulations anyway. So how exactly is making gun ownership going to change anything?

 

 

 

On a personal note, I think guns are for pussies. I mean, how tough do you have to be to intimidate somebody with something that's as simple to use as an instant camera?

 

 

Don't know. I've never intimidated anyone with a gun, with a knife, or with my fists. I have defended myslef at certain times, but never intimidated anyone. The real problem here is a {censored} happens to get hold of a gun. Not that people with guns are pussies. You are looking at it ass-backwards.

 

 

 

For all of you gun lovers, I've got a question. And I'm not trying to poke fun or get a rise out of you. I'm serious. What is it about guns that you love so much? I just don't get it, so please explain it to me. Is it the power of the recoil as it runs up your arm? Is it the smell of the gunpowder as it burns through the air? Explain it. I'm curious.

 

 

Target shooting involves skill. Much like throwing darts, just with a lot more oomph. There are shooting competitions. It's fun. Pretty simple. I don't think that the majority of gun owners think their dick is bigger because they have a gun. I think that goes back to a {censored} owning a gun. If there were no guns, that {censored} would have a knife or a longbow or a mace. He'd still be a {censored}, he'd still bully people, and there would still be murder in the world.

 

Your statements are just as stupid as if I was to say "All Candians are pussies because they DON'T own guns. They don't have the stones to handle them properly, they're scared of them."

[thelurker]

Lets take the case of the liquor store hold-up. Say, as it is now, the robber goes in to rob the store. He shows his gun and, through intimidation, gets away without firing a shot.

If we're lucky, and he's not out to prove what a big, bad guy he really is.

Now lets say everyone in that store has a gun, and he knows it. Is he just going to not rob it?

He is much less likely to try, as I'll explain below.

If he were afraid of the consequences of such a serious crime, why would he commit it in the first scenario? So given that he would rob it either way, how's he going to do it without getting killed? The most logical way would be to just walk in and shoot.

Actually, the most logical way would be to wait for fewer people to be there, I'm a little shocked at what you consider "logical".

It's not worth the risk of threatening people if you know they might just shoot back, so he should just take them out right off the bat. What was a potentially un-violent encounter in the first scenario becomes necessarily deadly in the second.

Again, A doesn't follow B. Also, it is much harder to shoot several people in several locations than it appears to be in a video game. If everybody else in the store is armed, and the first shot rings out, every one of them has the same target, while our soon-to-be-dead perp has several targets, all alert to his intentions.

Giving everyone guns doesn't take the deal off the table. It just raises the stakes.

For the perp. It improves the odds for the victims.

Crime would still be present, it's just that crimes will become more deadly force oriented when they do happen.

Yes because ball bats, tire irons, crow bars, knives and chains certainly aren't "deadly force" capable.

Now for the explanation. Criminals rob stores because, by and large, the consequences of doing so are delayed, impersonal, and uncertain. Delayed because the store owner has to wait for the police to come, impersonal because it is likely the store owner cannot directly identify him, and uncertain because, if he's ever caught, there are chances that he won't actually get punished.

Arm the people in the store, however, and the situation changes. It is now immediate, personal, and certain. His action can meet with immediate (and dangerous) consequences, something he may be unable to avoid. It is personal, as there is no mistaking who the threat is, and what he's doing, and it is, while not guaranteed certain, far more so than if he could get away.

As for being for "pussys", when a 5' 2" woman can scare off a 6'2" man bent on assaulting her, which one is the {censored}, smart guy?

[catphish]

Tonight, if i wanted to, I could make a few calls and get pretty much any drug I wanted, even though they are illegal.

 

I think if guns we're made illegal, and I wanted to get one to kill someone, that I would be able to get one without too much trouble.

 

So, only people who were willing to obey the laws would be unarmed then.

[walkerci]

The FBI's Crime in the United States estimated that 66% of the 16,137 murders in 2004 were committed with firearms. That's only the murders, that doesn't count the people who were only wounded or crippled. Just because some people are responsible with their guns doesn't mean that everybody else, and unfortunately for you gun-lovers, a few bad apples do indeed spoil the whole damn bunch. If guns are not regulated you'll end up having more and more Columbine or Virginia Tech type incidents, and gun fan or not, I'm sure we all agree that nobody wants that to happen ever again. On a personal note, I think guns are for pussies. I mean, how tough do you have to be to intimidate somebody with something that's as simple to use as an instant camera? For all of you gun lovers, I've got a question. And I'm not trying to poke fun or get a rise out of you. I'm serious. What is it about guns that you love so much? I just don't get it, so please explain it to me. Is it the power of the recoil as it runs up your arm? Is it the smell of the gunpowder as it burns through the air? Explain it. I'm curious.

 

 

That 66% statistic is out of context.

The real questions are:

 

1) How many of those murders were committed with illegal guns?

Probably > 90%. Many of the guns used in crime are "Saturday Night Specials" which are illegal for anyone to possess. Do you really think that people who are already committing a felony by owning an illegal gun will simply turn them in to the police if ALL guns were outlawed?

 

2) How many murders, rapes, assaults, burglaries, robberies, etc were prevented because a citizen was protecting themself with a legal gun?

 

3) How many crimes were deterred because the criminal knew that there was a better than 50% chance that his intended victim was armed and that he might die during the commission of the crime?

 

4) I have heard that in states that have enacted right to carry concealed weapons laws, that the violent crime rate has actually fallen.

If memory serves, Florida was one of those states.

 

5) The police can't be everywhere, all the time.

In my experience, they are never nearby when you really need them.

 

There is a very high probability that the number of people murdered, wounded, or crippled would be an order of magnitude higher if guns were banned outright.

[hi.flyer]

...1. To ensure Liberty by providing a bulwark against tyranny in the form of an armed citizenry, much like compulsory longbow practice helped the English to mitigate the excesses of absolute monarchy ...

 

 

I don't buy this. I understand that this is one of the original intentions for the existence of the right to bear arms, but there is no longer parity between the armament of the citizenry and that of the government. If 'The Man' so desired, he could bomb/gas/etcetera the {censored} out of us, no matter HOW many d00d sw33t guns we had.

[Jugghaid]

I don't buy this. I understand that this is one of the original intentions for the existence of the right to bear arms, but there is no longer parity between the armament of the citizenry and that of the government. If 'The Man' so desired, he could bomb/gas/etcetera the {censored} out of us, no matter HOW many d00d sw33t guns we had.

 

 

And 10 guys with Winchester 30.06 rifles could take out the power structure that would do that in no time.

[sunburstbasser]

 

I don't buy this. I understand that this is one of the original intentions for the existence of the right to bear arms, but there is no longer parity between the armament of the citizenry and that of the government. If 'The Man' so desired, he could bomb/gas/etcetera the {censored} out of us, no matter HOW many d00d sw33t guns we had.

 

I don't know; seems that the Iraqis are doing a pretty good job of keeping our own military at bay armed with mostly small arms and IEDs. And if the Iraqis can do it, you can BET that a bunch of pissed off Americans could do it.

[zachoff]

Don't make guns illegal. That's dumb. I think they should be pretty regulated though. Kind of like getting a pilot's license or CDL or something like that. Training should be required, background checks should be required, you should have to flash your gun toting license to get into gun shows, etc.

 

--edit--

 

Oh, and carrying an illegal firearm should have greater punishment... That and weed should be legal. Then you wouldn't need a gun to protect your weed anymore.

[bassred]

Lets look across the pond wher ethe criminals have guns (illegally) and the cops don't.. how much good does it do when a Bobby says "stop, or I'll say stop again...." the criminals have the upper hand.

As stated earlier, if a robber goes into a liquor store today, he can pretty much write it off as an easy $$$ gig, most store owners tell their staff o hand over the oney, that's what insurance is for. SO he gets some extra scratch and a bottle of Hennessy, probably a lot of thugs around who look like him, so he'll never get caught.. If he does get caught, because the system is so full and f*cked up, he'll get a year or two, which will be wriiten off as 60 day's on watch with a probabtion officer (who he will never go see).. so you see, the judicial system is failing us every day by not locking up and punishing those who commit 'small' crimes like robbery... so if the thug were locked up, he might 'learn a lesson' instead, he knows it aint no big thang...... Now, if the store clerk had a gun, he would be facing a higher crime, beyond brandishing a firearm you get into pretty serious territory, firing a gun, shooting someone, killing someone... that's a rap that won't get him out of the whole so quickly..... SO I'd say if he knoew the store clerk had a gun, he would think twice (or more) before trying to rob it, because the stakes are higher, and nobody likes to be shot at. (I'm sure you can agree).

I've been around Pussies who didn't respect GUns, I've had guns )loaded and cocked ) pointed at my head because someone couldn't win a fight, and resorted to that BS. I've also seen the boxes of illegal guns that gangbangers have, and they don't care about what kind of danger they may be causing. (when I asked if I could hold the Tech 9, because I had never seen one in person, I picked it up and checked the chamber, there was a bullet in the chamber, I gave the kids a good talking to about 'what if it had gone off and you'd killed one of your freinds...' needles to say I didn't buy anything from them, I was actually just there with a friend who was trying to score some weed.)

If you ban them or outlaw them or whatever term you wnat to use, the criminals are still going to have them, and that's where the problem is. Joe Citizen who owns a firearm and has it registered and goes to the range every so often is not causing any major risk to society, and if Joe Citizn (J C) can stop a robbery or murder with his legal weapon, so be it, the cops obviously aren't reliable in every situation.

It's a right, granted to us by the government.

Cars are a responsibility, no one can argue that the government can't stop them from (legally) owning, registering and driving a car.. plenty of folks (read Mexicans) drive around every day without the proper registration and insurance and they cause all sorts of headaches for those legal drivers who they hit and run from, so even regulation doesn't keep the bad seeds from causing harm.

whatever your experience has been with guns, it obviously has left you jaded, and if someone breaks into your house and shoots you, I will be sorry for you, seems that kinder-gentler thinking doesn't quite get the job done.

[mmb]

And 10 guys with Winchester 30.06 rifles could take out the power structure that would do that in no time.

 

I like the .308 round better than the 30-06. Less recoil, about the same trajectory, and near the same energy delivered on a soft target. For distance, 7mm Mag.

 

Although, I did shoot a qualifying with a M1 and open sights. Nice rifle.

 

And my guns have killed fewer people than Ted Kennedy's car.

[Undead Sycip]

Bonoman is a milquetoast who turns into a man as soon as his computer boots up.

Go back to jerking off to oldivor's picture threads.

[hawkhuff]

On a personal note, I think guns are for pussies. I mean, how tough do you have to be to intimidate somebody with something that's as simple to use as an instant camera? For all of you gun lovers, I've got a question. And I'm not trying to poke fun or get a rise out of you. I'm serious. What is it about guns that you love so much? I just don't get it, so please explain it to me. Is it the power of the recoil as it runs up your arm? Is it the smell of the gunpowder as it burns through the air? Explain it. I'm curious.

You wussie canucks just won't get it if anyone tries to explain it.

Guns are fun to shoot, the recoil is great as is the boom from the expoding powder, not to mention the smell and the rest that makes up the ambience of the firearm. It is also a safety device from the ever encroaching government and criminals and I am not sure which one is worse.

You typical anti-gun nuts always have the same old droll. However, it's not the gun that kills, it the person using it. It's like blaming poor grammar and spelling on your pencil.

Speaking of guns and murders. I just heard on the news that Baltimore Md now has had 176 murders virtually all from guns.

My question is what does one do about the gangs that run the streets of the democrat dominated mayors and city council offices? There are more deaths in the streets of the USA urban areas than there are soldier deaths in the Iraq/Afghanistan Wars. This patty cake BS the wat we treat gangs and other career criminals must stop. But still they come. Another question. Do you think all the gang guns are legally possessed by their owners? Hmmm?

Ya know, instead of the dems/radical leftists being soooooooo concerned about our troops x2 they should look to their own REAL seats of power where the streets are in chaos and too many innocent citizens are getting caught in the crossfire. And still they do nothing but yap about all the injustice in the world when they refuse to recognize and clean up the {censored} in their own back yards.

Yeah, yeah and we should outlaw guns. Bono, why don't YOU try to disarm the gangs? You sound as if you have a solution so let's hear it. Outlaw guns will further disarm the public at large and puts one at the mercy of gangs, scumbag criminals AND the government. Great plans.

[zachoff]

..snip..

 

 

The pro-gun crowd always has the same argument too, man. The difference is we know what's going on right now with guns being legal. What we don't know is what would happen if guns were illegal. It could (and I have a feeling it would) turn out like prohibition, but it could turn out to make fore a more peaceful society.

 

I'm not for making guns illegal. Quite the contrary. I like freedom, and freedom is the ability to choose without fear of law or imprisonment. I do think they should be pretty heavily regulated. They're a tool. A tool for which the primary use is killing things that live.

[Bonoman]

Okay all you haters of me! Go you! Now learn how to read.

 

Nowhere in any of my posts did I say that guns should be banned or made illegal in the United States. I said that they should be regulated more firmly, and I'll add to that by saying that illegal guns should be punished more harshly for both the dealer and the guy caught carrying it. I'm all for your right to arm yourselves if that's what you think you need. Go ahead. Just keep 'em locked up safe and tight so you don't end up with a dead child in your house because he thought it would be fun to play cops and robbers. I'm sure that nine out of ten of you gun enthusiasts will agree with me on that, and as for that other one... Well, good luck to ya.

 

Jugghaid, I want to thank you for explaining to me the thrill of shooting. You're the only one who actually did that, and like I said when I asked it, I wasn't trying to provoke; I was really curious.

 

As for all of the personal attacks on me, go ahead. Your small words don't bother me as much as your small minds do.

 

----------

 

*edit*

 

Thanks Hawkhuff, too, for at least taking my questions seriously. I expect the personal attacks from you as that's part of our natural banter.

 

My solution? Crack down on the illegal guns, make the sentences stiffer, put more police into the problem areas of your cities, and allow the FBI to conduct sweeping raids on suspected gang activity. That's what we've done here and gun crime, which was on a serious rise over the last couple of years, has finally started to drop again.

[decipher_bass]

The problem is that no matter how difficult the government makes it to get a gun, with extensive background checks, waiting periods, testing, the people who want a gun to commit a crime with it are going to get a gun from someplace else, the black market, the blue market, the gray market. The government gun control comes into play with people like the virginia tech guy, someone with no criminal connections who, if he had been denied a gun at the gun shop and then put under watch because he tried to get a gun, he wouldnt have been able to be stopped. Gun control stops the guy who freaks out on his wife and is able to buy a gun and shoot her in a fit of rage because there is no waiting period( at least not in my state)

[zachoff]

The problem is that no matter how difficult the government makes it to get a gun, with extensive background checks, waiting periods, testing, the people who want a gun to commit a crime with it are going to get a gun from someplace else, the black market, the blue market, the gray market. The government gun control comes into play with people like the virginia tech guy, someone with no criminal connections who, if he had been denied a gun at the gun shop and then put under watch because he tried to get a gun, he wouldnt have been able to be stopped. Gun control stops the guy who freaks out on his wife and is able to buy a gun and shoot her in a fit of rage because there is no waiting period( at least not in my state)

 

 

This is where I pipe in and say imprison illegal gun owners and get all of the drug possession/using offenses out. Committing a crime to get drugs or committing a crime while under the influence of drugs is one thing... Just using or being in possession of is another. The former should be punished. The latter should be overlooked. With guns, I figure you're more apt to do something bad with an illegal gun than you are with an illegal quarter sack of weed.

[Psilocybin]

I like the .308 round better than the 30-06. Less recoil, about the same trajectory, and near the same energy delivered on a soft target.

 

 

 

I love my 30-06. All the deer/elk I've harvested were with that rifle. Being that I'm a gun own and not a gun collector, there is no need for me to own another rifle besides my .22s.

[Bonoman]

With guns, I figure you're more apt to do something bad with an illegal gun than you are with an illegal quarter sack of weed.

Unless you count eating too much popcorn while watching Robot Chicken as bad...

[zachoff]

Unless you count eating too much popcorn while watching Robot Chicken as bad...

That just makes me pay more medicare for your non-gun-toting popcorn eating fat ass!

[Bonoman]

That just makes me pay more medicare for your non-gun-toting popcorn eating fat ass!

My ass is not fat! That's it! Now I'm offended!

[hawkhuff]

Okay all you haters of me! Go you! Now learn how to read. Nowhere in any of my posts did I say that guns should be banned or made illegal in the United States. I said that they should be regulated more firmly, and I'll add to that by saying that illegal guns should be punished more harshly for both the dealer and the guy caught carrying it. I'm all for your right to arm yourselves if that's what you think you need. Go ahead. Just keep 'em locked up safe and tight so you don't end up with a dead child in your house because he thought it would be fun to play cops and robbers. I'm sure that nine out of ten of you gun enthusiasts will agree with me on that, and as for that other one... Well, good luck to ya. Jugghaid, I want to thank you for explaining to me the thrill of shooting. You're the only one who actually did that, and like I said when I asked it, I wasn't trying to provoke; I was really curious. As for all of the personal attacks on me, go ahead. Your small words don't bother me as much as your small minds do. ---------- *edit* Thanks Hawkhuff, too, for at least taking my questions seriously. I expect the personal attacks from you as that's part of our natural banter. My solution? Crack down on the illegal guns, make the sentences stiffer, put more police into the problem areas of your cities, and allow the FBI to conduct sweeping raids on suspected gang activity. That's what we've done here and gun crime, which was on a serious rise over the last couple of years, has finally started to drop again.

I like you Bono, even if you're a gay canuck

Actually your solution might, in fact, reduce it, but that's just not good enough. Here in the US we just turn them back out to the streets. Prison and crackdowns mean nothing to the gang scum. We do too much patty cake treatment of scumbags here and in the middleast. Besides with our pourous borders do you really think guns won't be running in and out of the US and Canada? Canada has a more open border policy than the US, if that's possible.

[Jugghaid]

Don't make guns illegal. That's dumb. I think they should be pretty regulated though. Kind of like getting a pilot's license or CDL or something like that. Training should be required, background checks should be required, you should have to flash your gun toting license to get into gun shows, etc. --edit-- Oh, and carrying an illegal firearm should have greater punishment... That and weed should be legal. Then you wouldn't need a gun to protect your weed anymore.

I agree about the mandatory training.

[bbl]

I believe current gun laws are fine.

However, if I needed a gun by my bed to "feel" safe, I'd either (1) move, (2) seek counseling, or (3) both. Everyone has that "well, you can't be passive, because I know this one guy who..."

Yeah, I know someone who was hurt in a car accident. It won't prevent me from driving a car. And speaking of cars, using them as an analogy is poor because cars are designed to transport people and things, not to kill and maim, as guns are.

You can't apply blanket statements to gun owners, imo. They represent a cross-section of society. Some are very reasonable, level-headed individuals. Some of them are criminals. Some of them don't feel safe and believe having a gun makes them feel safer. This group I worry a litte about because (1) they over-emphasize the relatively rare exception of having someone's life threatened by another, and (2) under-emphasize the exception of accidental gun deaths.

You can't have it both ways - 99.9% of us will live happy, safe lives without needing a gun. Personally, I'm not going to add the risk of having a gun to protect myself against that 0.01% chance of needing one.

Ramble over.