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

[th3xile]

snip

Hey man, don't get me wrong. It's not like I'm saying "GUNS! GUNS FOR EVERY POCKET! LETS GIVE GUNS TO ANYONE WALKING DOWN THE STREET DERPHERP DERP." However, I believe that every house should have a gun for self defense, and if people can prove they're responsible then go ahead and collect, hunt, and such

 

[direkiller]

PS- France's gun ownership rate is 23%. America? 25%. Yeah, such a huge difference. /sarcasm

In France, guns are only allowed for hunting. You can't buy a shotgun or a desert eagle or something non-hunty.

Shotguns are mostly use for hunting(some states prefer you use them over rifles for hunting deer because the slug doesn't go as far if you miss)

 

[direkiller]

[quote="spartandude" post="18.257099.9666973were banned or had much tighter restrictions about carrying them and using them.
and im not going to deny that gun crime is going to dissapear if guns were more restricted but if other countries are any indication it would significantly reduce
/quote]
http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=1933
http://reason.com/archives/2002/11/01/gun-controls-twisted-outcome
(both Auzzy and UK crime rates whent up after banning guns)


also why is my captcha an advertisement for Toyota(it asked me what was Toyota repar program program and has Toyota logos stamped all over it)

 

[anian]

Well the very first post of this thread should have been an inidication of what wrong with guns owners in the US.

I'm pretty sure most people haven't actually read the 2nd amendment and just use a quotes that they think helps the arguments. It doesn't protect (well at least it's not designed for it and it was designed 200 freakin' years ago) your right to carry guns and if you read it all the way through, you'd find out how arhaic it is. It is more about protection against the English than it is for a right to stockpile.
But I guess that is the major problem with people. Why isn't there a movement and more organisations to buy books for children or don't buy a gun, buy yourself the amount of books you could buy for a gun and change your goverment and fix the problems of your society, then you wouldn't need so many guns.
I'm pretty sure in Switzerland more people have guns than in the USA, but why is there less crime and less gun killings - because people are more educated about them, most of them are trained to handle them. From what I've seen you don't even have an IQ test for owning a gun, and you know what? You should.
Or if not that and you're worried about police not being effective, then go and buy your local policeman a gun and maybe go on patrols with them or just agree on visiting rights so you can see your pet on the weekends.

And if you want a sport, at least buy a bow and arrows or something where you actually do more than pull a triger in the right direction. Or go play soccer or tennis or swimming.

 

[CanHasDIY]

A) just mentioning historical fact as it is relevant to the conversation, I.e. the first thing most dictators do is disarm the populus.

B) the UK may not have a lot of gun crimes, but that doesn't mean that they are free from violence, either. Ever hear of a group called.the IRA? They terrorized Brits for decades, using not guns but explosives. Also, consider.the recent rash of subway bombings. Not to say that more lax gun laws would have prevented either, but to say that countries that have standing arms bans are inherently safer is just plain not true.

C) again you miss the point; While China might not have a lot of gun crime, it is by no means a safe and happy place to live, evidenced by their abysmal record of treating their citizens like slaves. But hey, maybe slavery is your thing, I dunno.

D) as far as I can tell, no 'gun nut' started 'flaming you'd until after you started calling those who disagree with you 'half-wits' and 'retards.' Your false indignation has been duly noted.

NOTE: don't blame me for butchering your post, blame the Android platform.

 

[Gordon_4_v1legacy]

A gun is a tool, a series of interlocking mechanisms and a chemical reaction used to obtain an effect. It is also however, a very singular tool: its purpose to put a piece of fast moving metal into the bodily area of something else.

Guns are for killing people, that's what they were designed for. They are a distillation of man's experience with war, almost to an art form.

As such, a gun should be treated with the utmost respect:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIG_Sauer_P226

I did some research on pistols about a year ago because I would like to become proficient in their use: and this is the one I selected. There are potentially 13 human lives at risk if you mis-handle this weapon; including your own.


Now I'm ambivalent about guns; if you don't want to own one, then don't. That said, I can't see a good reason to restrict the honest and intelligent citizen from owning one.


The TLR version, they're dangerous but useful tools, treat them with respect.

 

[RandyRedCat]

The gun is just the modern sword, you can make it out to be a beautiful work of art, a marvel of ingeniuty, creative and culturally resounding but it will only ever have on purpose, to kill, a spear can be used to hunt as well as bow, an axe can chop wood and the shield will shy off attack but the sword/gun only has one sole purpose, it's existence can never be justified or maintained in a perfect world, but the world is run by people and by natural causes we are all idiots so long live the gun I reckon.

Plus, people, don't think having a gun levels the field or can be used to prevent people from going on rampages by shooting them down.

The Port Arther massacre claimed 8 victims within the first 10 seconds of open fire, the time it takes to react to such an un-precedented and shocking situation is just not natural to human beings, merely because Americans justify ownership down to human right does not mean nature intends their existence, they are machines of human creation with no other purpose to kill other humans, the pinnacle of our decadence, no matter what you might think.

 

[Aur0ra145]

The gun is just the modern sword, you can make it out to be a beautiful work of art, a marvel of ingeniuty, creative and culturally resounding but it will only ever have on purpose, to kill, a spear can be used to hunt as well as bow, an axe can chop wood and the shield will shy off attack but the sword/gun only has one sole purpose, it's existence can never be justified or maintained in a perfect world, but the world is run by people and by natural causes we are all idiots so long live the gun I reckon.

Plus, people, don't think having a gun levels the field or can be used to prevent people from going on rampages by shooting them down.

The Port Arther massacre claimed 8 victims within the first 10 seconds of open fire, the time it takes to react to such an un-precedented and shocking situation is just not natural to human beings, merely because Americans justify ownership down to human right does not mean nature intends their existence, they are machines of human creation with no other purpose to kill other humans, the pinnacle of our decadence, no matter what you might think.

That is the best avatar I have ever seen. Shiner is my favorite!

 

[RelexCryo]

It causes more trouble than it might help prevent crime.

Handguns are used to stop/prevent about 200,000- yes, two hundred thousand- animal attacks every year. That may seem like an improbably large number, until you realize that there are over 300 million Americans living in this country, and this country is the size of Europe, which is considered an entire continent in it's own right. When Canada made it illegal for civilains to carry guns, the number of deaths by animal attacks, such as bears and wolverines and moutain lions, increased dramatically.

Sounds like what you need is skilled hunters with rifles. Not a handgun in the hand of every random city slob, who'll never see an animal outside the zoo.

The problem with this is that many Americans live in Rural areas. Carrying a rifle/shotgun everywhere is inconvenient, and we would prefer not to mass slaughter animals just because they might be dangerous. On top of which, even if we did slaughter every predator who lives in a 20 mile radius around every city, people who go hiking and fishing in the woods would still be at risk with without the ability to defend themselves. We prefer to have the freedom to go into wilderness when we feel like it, and carrying a rifle/shotgun everywhere is inconvenient.

As for "City Slobs," when Michigan passed right to carry laws in 2000, the crime rate got lower, despite the recession. This has consistently happened with pretty much every state/city that has done this.

 

[101flyboy]

Guns.............are guns. I don't really feel anything about guns specifically. I do, however, believe that in most circumstances that they just obviously cause more trouble than need be. Outside of hunting for food, crime fighting/fighters, absolutely necessary circumstances, I don't see any need to have a gun.

 

[Zykon TheLich]

Well, I feel the UK's gun laws prior to the 1987 Hungerford massacre were fine. Semi automatic rifles and shotguns as well as handguns being legal to own but with very strict registration laws. The strict laws and low ownership rates meant that guns were never really an issue in terms of either causing or preventing crime, the changes just meant a few gun owners had to get rid of weapons, although there are certain loopholes.
I would love to own a Lee Enfield and in theory I could but it's quite a long drawn out and expensive process to get all the paperwork and other things necessary to own one.

 

[CanHasDIY]

Well, I feel the UK's gun laws prior to the 1987 Hungerford massacre were fine. Semi automatic rifles and shotguns as well as handguns being legal to own but with very strict registration laws. The strict laws and low ownership rates meant that guns were never really an issue in terms of either causing or preventing crime, the changes just meant a few gun owners had to get rid of weapons, although there are certain loopholes.
I would love to own a Lee Enfield and in theory I could but it's quite a long drawn out and expensive process to get all the paperwork and other things necessary to own one.

We've got a similar rule on automatics stateside; basically you can get a permit for damn near anything, provided you don't mind surrendering a bunch of other rights (privacy, freedom from unwaranted search/seizure). I do wish they'd make an exception for antiques...

Also... Enfields are pretty sweet, but procuring ammo is a bit of a challenge in the US... I would much rather get one of these:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1918_Browning_Automatic_Rifle

...Fer 'deer huntin'... WAGOOSH!!!

 

[Andrew_Waltfeld]

You guys can say its for self defence and that if there were more restrictions on guns criminals would still get them because they brake the law any way and blahh blah blah

compare the amount of gun murders from the USA to places like UK, France, Australia, Canada and such, you know that places with gun restrictions and suddenly America doesn't look so good

Good sir, if your going to compare the UK Crime rate, compare it a state, or scale Americans 307 Million to the UK's 61 million. Your trying to compare a population that is 5 times smaller than the USA? Sorry but no.

For Comparison:

America: 307 Million

United Kingdom: 61 million
Canada: 33 million
Italy: 60 million
Australia: 22 million
Sweden: 9 million

I could go on but the populations just keep getting smaller and smaller.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_tot_cri-crime-total-crimes

If comparing populations, you could make the argument that the UK is more violent than the USA. With our population of 300 million - 11,877,218 crimes committed.

Yet with the United Kingdom we have a population of 61 million has a total crime rate of 6,523,706 .

Yeah sure in the UK people don't get killed by guns as often, but you have crime up the ass in other areas. You have a crime-rate of HALF (150 million people equivalent) of America. To be honest, that is shocking.

When comparing other crime rates (In scale mind you) we have a total of 1,246,096 car jackings. Divide by 5.

We now have a total of: 249,219.2 car jackings.

Uk's: 348,169 car jackings

Assaults for the UK: 723,886

United States: 2,238,480 / 5 = 447,696 Assaults.

Burglaries: 2,151,875/5 = 430,375 for the US.
United Kingdom: 951,418 Burglaries (that's over 100% more than the US) <== why is this 200% of America's?

Hell, Look at Germany crime rate for Burglaries (population of 81 million): 1,055,812. They have roughly just over 1/4 of our population but they have half of our burglaries. If you combine both the United Kingdom and Germany (Population total of 141 Million): You have 2 million Burglaries. 2 million and not even HALF our population?

----------------------------

And just to show America isn't perfect - but really while guns are a issue, they aren't a issue as you make it out to be.

United Kingdoms Rapes: 13,395

United States Rapes: 95,136/5 = 19,027.2

United States Murders: 16,204/5 = 3240.8 Murders
United Kingdoms Murders: 1,201 Murders


You can really point out fingers, but honestly even in scale - America is not that crime ridden as people seem to think, they just forget that we have a population 5 times everyone else if not more.

United Kingdom/Germany have troubles with Burglaries, car jackings etc. We have trouble with murders and gun killings. Everyone has their own issues and I can tell you with such a large population that America is - I doubt the statistics would change much nation wide if guns were banned. To be honest, was planning on moving to the UK eventually - family/relatives and all, don't think I will anymore. Don't want people jacking my ****.

 

[Zykon TheLich]

We've got a similar rule on automatics stateside; basically you can get a permit for damn near anything, provided you don't mind surrendering a bunch of other rights (privacy, freedom from unwaranted search/seizure). I do wish they'd make an exception for antiques...

Also... Enfields are pretty sweet, but procuring ammo is a bit of a challenge in the US... I would much rather get one of these:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1918_Browning_Automatic_Rifle

...Fer 'deer huntin'... WAGOOSH!!!

The UK does have an exception for antiques, that's one of the loopholes. Weapons made before 1917 and weapons of historical significance are exempt from the handgun, 4+ shot shotguns and autoloader rifle ban. I don't really know if automatic weapons are covered by that, probably not.

 

[Wapox]

if ever I feel it neccesary to have a lethal weapon in the house, I'll get one. if I see no reason to have, then why have one?.

 

[Del-Toro]

I'm shocked and horrified and what I'm reading. The only person who seems to be making a clear point is Azrael The Cat. Guns are designed to kill. Guns are incredibly effective at this job. Do you really want tools designed to kill freely available on your country's streets? I don't.

Shootings don't occur at an NRA meeting or gun club because why would somebody turn on their fellow gun-nut? If nobody has guns, it's a fuckload safer than if everybody does. All it takes is one jittery nutjob...

I thought these forums were meant to be vaguely intelligent... fuck if you guys haven't proved it otherwise. Holy shit...

Smart people are allowed to disagree with bleeding heart liberals, and the escapist is a videogame magazine, so the intellectual capacities of those who post in the forums on it`s website will vary from intelligent people to people who get (at least act as if they are) genuinely offended when people disagree with them.

 

[Feildin]

@ CanHasDIY Check this link, Ohio Ordnace Works makes a ATF approved Semi-Auto reproduction. Long and the short of it took some engineering to make it non-convertible to Fully Automatic.
http://www.ohioordnanceworks.com/Firearms/OOWExclusiveFirearms/1918A3_SLR.rif

 

[orangeban]

Well the very first post of this thread should have been an inidication of what wrong with guns owners in the US.

I'm pretty sure most people haven't actually read the 2nd amendment and just use a quotes that they think helps the arguments. It doesn't protect (well at least it's not designed for it and it was designed 200 freakin' years ago) your right to carry guns and if you read it all the way through, you'd find out how arhaic it is. It is more about protection against the English than it is for a right to stockpile.
But I guess that is the major problem with people. Why isn't there a movement and more organisations to buy books for children or don't buy a gun, buy yourself the amount of books you could buy for a gun and change your goverment and fix the problems of your society, then you wouldn't need so many guns.
I'm pretty sure in Switzerland more people have guns than in the USA, but why is there less crime and less gun killings - because people are more educated about them, most of them are trained to handle them. From what I've seen you don't even have an IQ test for owning a gun, and you know what? You should.
Or if not that and you're worried about police not being effective, then go and buy your local policeman a gun and maybe go on patrols with them or just agree on visiting rights so you can see your pet on the weekends.

And if you want a sport, at least buy a bow and arrows or something where you actually do more than pull a triger in the right direction. Or go play soccer or tennis or swimming.

On your point about Switzerland.

1) Your right, most of the men in Switzerland (and feel free to correct me on this, I may be wrong) are meant to own a rifle as all men are meant to be part of their miltia.

2) But, they actually have the highest gun related murder rate in the world (Again, I think). Now I say this is because you have it that, say, you get in a massive argument with a drunk friend or perhaps you have a fling with his girlfriend. This bloke then, in a fit of intoxicated rage, returns home and retrieves a rifle and starts lining up the sites with your head.

Here in Britain it's incredibly tricky to get a gun and most people who go on massacres are not that intelligent. The guy who shot all those people in Arizona? His gun was totally legal and it's fair to say if that was Britain theres a good chance he'd not have been able to get a gun legally or ilegally (I talk about Britain not knowing the difficultys of getting a gun in the USA legally or illegally)

Handguns should most definetly be illegal. If your hunting use a shotgun, protecting yourself from bears get a rifle/shotgun. Handguns are far to easy to hide.

 

[bbad89]

Regarding self-defense, I don't need a gun; I've got several combat knives in my room, and one under my pillow. So if anyone comes house-calling they will be on the recieving end of one.

As for guns, I think America are morons for carrying them around; they cause more problems than they solve. The police I can accept, but civilians? No thanks. I wouldn't want any of my neighbours keeping guns in their house, especially where I live.

The second amendment was made after the Revolution, where the government had become abusive. The second amendment was not made just for personal self defence, it is also there in case of government abuse.