How do my fellow escapists feel about guns? (The real kind)

[Treblaine]

My stance on guns is similar to my stance on repeat threads:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.146207-Poll-Fun-control#3329136

The right to bear arms is a term that gets tossed around a lot when debating gun control laws. It was put in the constitution when guns were inaccurate had an ammo capacity of one and took two minutes to reload. How do you think it should be implemented today?

The first Amendment was made back when the most advanced media technology was a hand cranked printing press. So is the First Amendment equally as irrelevant? I mean you could easily site the negative influence of Nazi propaganda if you felt so inclined.

Are you saying the First Amendment should not protect violent video games because they didn't have video games back in 1791 when the US Bill of Rights was ratified?

It is quite clear what the spirit of the 2nd Amendment and 1st Amendment are, which are not limited to 18th century technology.

 

[Treblaine]

If the right to self defence is a basic human right then I see it as contradictory to deny civilians any right to firearms and/or the right to use them in self defence.

It's no good to say I can go fisticuffs with hardened thugs who mean me harm when as hardened criminals they'd always have the advantage after leading a life of violence. Not to mention regardless of weapon prohibition they can arm themselves with effective weapons from knives and clubs to black market firearms. Guns level the playing field, favour those on the defensive.

funny thing: i live in a country where guns can only be obtained when you have a license (well, outside of black market). yet there are no madmen having shootouts at my local school/neighbourhood, nor in my country in general. there has been only 1.

yet when i look at news from the united states... but i'm sure the nine-year old girl from arizona would agree with you, free guns for everyone!

Care to say WHICH country you come from? You are being awfully vague and I can't tell if you are missing out critical details.

"yet there are no madmen having shootouts... there has been only 1. "

You argument defeats itself, to spite strict prohibition there has still been mass killing with guns. What about those victims? Who could have protected them? You also admit your country has an arms black market, that presumably only those with criminal intention would use.

 

[Firia]

When I start living alone, I'll probably just get a Tazer. Guns aren't fun for me to shoot, plus a Tazer would do away with all the nasty killing business if I never needed to defend myself.

Don't fool yourself; a tazer is classified as "less than lethal, but totally still dangerous. Its effects on the body are still a risk. It's just not at the same level as firearms.

 

[Pyode]

would you guys rather be in a fight where you are fighting 7 people and everyone involved (you and them) has a gun or where everyone uses fists?

I would much rather be shot then beaten to death by 7 people. So yea... I'd rather we all had guns in that particular scenario.

 

[tweedpol]

Come on guys, stop saying stuff about what the Founding Fathers wanted or did: you've managed to ignore quite a lot of what they wanted before! They wanted a secular democracy!

...do you really think the guy who breaks into your house to steal your tv wants to slip upstairs and kill you? How many break-ins do you think end in deaths? I assure you he knows how much more likely he is to be caught and sent to prison for the rest of his life if he kills someone. You start keeping guns in the house to defend against burglars and the only result is the burglars will start bringing guns...

...would it be easier for them to buy a gun very illegally from the black market due to pesky gun control laws, or to go and steal it from the Hensons' [certified: sane] next door?

I would argue the idea that we don't have a secular democracy...

Honestly, I'm not too clear what your saying here.. are you supporting gun legislation or not? The idea that burglars will get into a gunfight expecting resistance is absurd .They know if they kill anyone, the police will crack down on them far more than a simple robbery. Besides, its easier to get a black market gun than a stolen one, another comment has a link to the statistics on that so look... can you clarify your statement fore, the argument comment you made is unclear.

I think my stance on guns should be very obvious; did you read my post? What you have said is exactly the point: burglars don't want to kill you, that tends to get them into trouble! Everyone saying that they would be killed by people breaking in if they didn't have their guns seems to miss this point. Criminals will only carry guns themselves if they're a) easy to get hold of, and b) if they will be confronted by civilians with guns. Neither happens in a place with good gun control.

Additionally, it is folly to compare statistics in certain ways: Different State laws on guns are somewhat circumvented by the fact that you can get between states reasonably easily. Anyone saying crime rates rise after gun control is tightened should a) not get their stats from pages with titles like 'bob's gun counter' or 'NRA-ILA' and b) look at what those stats mean: does pickpocketing rise? Do violent shooting murders rise? Like I said, people look at it the wrong way: if everyone has guns, the criminals will make sure they have the best guns and know how to use them, not the other way round! When knives are the best weapon around, sure the bad guys have knives, but I'd prefer that to be honest, they won't be able to kill people nearly so easily, nor on a whim, or by accident.

I'd rather have a high crime rate consisting of non-violent crime (I'd pay an Ankh-Morpork style levy to the thieves) if it meant there weren't so many murders...

Oh yes, and sorry about the secular democracy, but I am wary of a country with 'In God We Trust' on its money, where a huge amount of opposition to the president genuinely revolves around whether he's a Muslim, when a former President said that God told him to invade another country, where teaching Creationism alongside Evolution is genuinely considered... I'll say no more because it's irrelevant, I just thought I should clarify.

Also, Switzerland etc have high gun ownership because everyone does military training, knows how to use them and their consequences, it's fairly incomparable, and it is nigh impossible to get guns in Switzerland and take them to say, Germany.

Want stats? look here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence Please note IT'S PER 100000 PEOPLE! NOT RAW DATA. WE KNOW DIFFERENT COUNTRIES HAVE DIFFERENT POPULATIONS.

 

[SL33TBL1ND]

You see, the only reason you that most people have for guns is self-defence. There's a problem with that argument, which is that with guns being more available, more criminals have guns, so you need a gun for protection. If you look here in Australia, where I've never even seen a gun store, nobody needs a gun for protection. Why? Because it's so damn hard to get your hands on one, eliminating their need.

I only know one person who has a gun, and he has it purely for sport. In my view, no civilian should have the right to own a gun, much less hold one. Way less problems all around.

 

[tweedpol]

You see, the only reason you that most people have for guns is self-defence. There's a problem with that argument, which is that with guns being more available, more criminals have guns, so you need a gun for protection. If you look here in Australia, where I've never even seen a gun store, nobody needs a gun for protection. Why? Because it's so damn hard to get your hands on one, eliminating their need.

yes this guy gets it, it actually isn't the case that if people aren't allowed guns only criminals will have them, because they don't obey the laws. I could go out and get Marijuana quite easily, that's against the law, (heh I'm glad no one actually knows me because my friends would chuckle at the idea of me being streetwise enough to know where to get pot, but dammit, if I wanted to I'd know who to ask!) but I couldn't get a gun, though they're also illegal. There's no market for them, because no one else has one, because they don't need them, so there's no market for them... It's a virtuous circle.

 

[SL33TBL1ND]

You see, the only reason you that most people have for guns is self-defence. There's a problem with that argument, which is that with guns being more available, more criminals have guns, so you need a gun for protection. If you look here in Australia, where I've never even seen a gun store, nobody needs a gun for protection. Why? Because it's so damn hard to get your hands on one, eliminating their need.

yes this guy gets it, it actually isn't the case that if people aren't allowed guns only criminals will have them, because they don't obey the laws. I could go out and get Marijuana quite easily, that's against the law, (heh I'm glad no one actually knows me because my friends would chuckle at the idea of me being streetwise enough to know where to get pot, but dammit, if I wanted to I'd know who to ask!) but I couldn't get a gun, though they're also illegal. There's no market for them, because no one else has one, because they don't need them, so there's no market for them... It's a virtuous circle.

Well thank you very much. I just wish America would stop whining about school shootings and restrict guns.

 

[Carnage95]

In Singapore, the only people with guns are the military and police.

As far as I know, the crime rate here is really low. It's either people smuggling/or using drugs, theft, etc. It's all petty crimes. We never had a case of shootings here. I'll admit I am ignorant on this sort of subject though, but I will try my best to understand here.

I would be really cautious if everyone around me was carrying a gun. Countries like America, I'll say that they should be stricter with their gun laws. From reading some posts, I have the assumption that anyone can easily get a gun license and own a gun. I'm pretty much okay if you're a hunter and I know that no hunter will be so irresponsible with such a dangerous tool. (Unless you're a crazy person) I agree with one or two of the posts in this topic, saying that it's not the gun that kills. It is the people who use them that kill others. It's true no doubt.

I guess in countries that allow guns, banning them all together will take decades probably. Even so, criminals will definitely find ways to obtain guns. If not, they will get knifes or other objects to kill. I think I should stop and think a little deeper and research a bit more.

Err... please excuse my ignorance.

 

[Doomsday11]

Simple question. I live in Australia, where our murder rate (per person) is about one 90th (around 0.11) of the US rate. Most of the first world also has a murder rate around the same as Australia. Americans (as in US - Canada has about the same rate as Australia) kill each other at a rate that the rest of world find unimaginable.

So why is that the case? The fact that we don't have guns, and it is nigh impossible for a criminal to get his hands on a gun here (obviously gun controls won't work if you can just drive to the next state and buy one there - they work in Australia because they apply federally)? Or is the US just culturally barbaric?

Personally, I'd go with 'the guns'. If you prefer 'the US is culturally inferior' as an explanation, then be my guest...

Ummm sorry to say this mate but you can buy guns you just need a permit there are plenty of ranges around oz that you can go too quite happily(as a civilian)and shoot at however the main difference from the USA(its the same in Briton as Australia)is because the gun owners don't make a big deal about it and are thoroughly checked by the system for the irresponsible,the crazy and the strange making the murder rate is so much lower.

 

[meowchef]

Tons of fun to shoot with friends.

 

[MGlBlaze]

However, i did buy my girlfriend a gun for personal protection at her apartment and once when we were having an argument she did pull the fucking thing on me.... at that point i began to have second thoughts about the right to carry.

WHAT.
That's not a problem with the right to carry, that's a problem with the person holding it. Did she get proper training, or are you just allowed to go buy a firearm where you life? Pointing a gun at someone who you're having an argument with isn't acceptable.
"Never point a gun at anything you do not wish to destroy."
If it wasn't loaded that still doesn't matter, because you're supposed to always assume the gun is loaded and that there is either no safety or that the safety is broken.

I live in the UK, and even I know that.

If I were you I'd have second thoughts not about carry rights, but her mental state and status as your girlfriend. This is a problem with the individual, not the law as a whole. Just me.

 

[InsanityBaronOfAtrocity]

It should be completely legal to carry a concealed handgun in the UK. Provided people are checked out it's all good.

"ZOMG BUT DEN CROMONOLS CAN GET GUN!"

Criminals already have guns, that's why I want one. This is not a difficult concept.

 

[awmperry]

Tazers do kill people tho? I mean it's electricity, that shit kills.
(nothing compared to a handgun i just felt like bringing it up)

Tasers generally don't - in fact, they tend to be less dangerous than many other weapons. Certainly I'd rather be hit by a Taser than a baseball bat, for instance.

As for the question, it seems to me that it is in two parts; self-defence and guns themselves.

My view is that everyone has the right to defend themselves in whatever way gives them a fighting chance against an attacker. And as the criminals get to pick their targets, they're not going to choose a 6'5" bloke like me if there's a 5' pensioner to pick on instead - and to be honest, if they do come up against me, they're likely to be coming armed, and then it doesn't matter if I'm bigger.

The key thing is this: if you're attacked by someone else, your job is to survive. If violence can be avoided, great - but if it doesn't, that's the attacker's choice. And if it does come to violence... if you're fighting fair, you're doing something wrong.

Here in Sweden, you're really not allowed to carry anything for self-defence; alarms and paint sprays are just about acceptable (although I once heard a local politician say alarms should be made illegal because "at that volume they could cause serious damage to hearing"), while anything else - knives, batons, mace - is completely banned.

In essence, my view is that violence should always be a last resort - but the right to defend oneself against attack is absolute, and if an attacker tries to injure or kill me I have the right to use force to prevent that. I hope I never need to - I don't want to have to kill someone, I've never even been in a real fight - but attacking someone is always the attacker's choice, and thus their rights are secondary to their victim's.


As for my views on guns, I enjoy shooting, I enjoy the mechanical and technical aspects of them, and I believe that they are a legitimate means of self-defence.

 

[kommunizt kat]

I see that some people are forgetting, guns don't kill people, people do

 

[macfluffers]

Oh boy, another gun thread. I'd love to read through ten pages full of logical fallacies on both sides of the gun control debate, but I'm tired, so I'll just provide the bullets of my POV.

What I believe is that all people should have the right to self-defense, and therefore, on principle, not statistics, firearms should be legal and available. However, I believe that screening checks for purchasing firearms should be stricter and more thorough than they are at the moment. People should need licensing to own, and a separate one to carry. Furthermore, the weapons available to civilians should be limited within reason. High-capacity rifles and shotguns have no non-military need, and the same goes for submachine guns and automatic weapons. There is no need for them for self defense (a regular shotgun or pistol should be good enough), and for hunting you would rarely need more than a few rounds per mark, unless you're batshit insane and you're hunting bear or wolf (in which case, a better scope and a nice hiding place are more useful than a high-capacity rifle).

We should consider that violence comes not from the availability of weapons, but the culture. The US has a violent culture by itself, and banning guns would only cause militia groups to turn into terrorist cells. Also, Switzerland has an incredibly high gun-ownership rate, but its gun crime rate is extremely low. Crime and gun ownership are not correlated as much as some people think it is.

Consider the nations with the strictest gun control policies: Japan, the UK, and Australia. Notice a pattern? They're all island nations! They have control over smuggling much better than countries connected to continents. As such, criminals will have a harder time getting guns if there is a gun ban in those countries, which is one of the reasons gun control has worked there. Compare that to America, which is fortunate to have Mexico as its neighbor. With a drug war raging on, it's incredibly easy to get smuggled weapons into the US. Because of that, criminals in the US will always have guns until border smuggling ceases.

The last thing I want to say is that people shouldn't say things like "Americans are barbaric", because that's just uneducated. There are large factions in America that want gun control. Furthermore, we're not all rednecks who shoot people for stepping on our lawn; plenty of gun owners are responsible. It's just that you don't hear about the responsible ones because they don't shoot people for stupid reasons.

 

[FiveSpeedf150]

I think that guns are pretty awesome. (National Rifle Associate Life Member checking in).

One of the reasons I love living in America is the level of freedom we have. Some crime would be prevented without legal access to guns, I can't argue completely against that (although in the USA to purchase a gun you must go through a background check, etc, something that many people conveniently ignore). Still, our belief is that it isn't right to infringe on the rights of the vast majority of gun owners (completely law abiding citizens) because of what a few crazy assholes do.