People should stop protecting guns

[M-E-D The Poet]

I'm getting sick of ludicrous arguments I keep hearing about guns
Wether you're pro-guns or anti-guns I wish to put a few facts straight that everyone with a sane mind can understand.


1 Guns aren't "safe" guns are tools intended to harm, there is no other purpose for a gun than to wound or kill.

2 People may kill people but people with guns kill them a whole lot faster.

3 The general consensus everywhere but the United states of EUHMERICAH is that guns are bad and one should not be able to own, this does not however mean that Americans shouldn't be able to choose whether or not they're allowed to own guns.

4 The fact that when you ban guns there will still be guns on the street is not an argument to hide yourself behind, however making it more difficult for the average Joe to own a gun and limiting the influx of guns into the open world is a valid argument against it. (quote me on this and I will elaborate on the subject).

5 A shotgun in a secured gunsafe in your home is a defense weapon, semi-automatic/automatic weapons and pistols aren't.

6 A pistol securely fastened on your body is a defense weapon if you're out on the street, a shotgun or semi/automatic weaponry is not.

7 Hunting rifles in woodland areas are a yes, hunting rifles in the suburbs or the city are a No-No.


Any arguments to add, anything you wish to discuss ?
Be polite,calm and respectful about it.


[sub]the poster of this thread neither condemns nor accepts guns[/sub]

 

[Not G. Ivingname]

Another one?

Did you really need to bring up your criticisms in a new thread, instead of posting in one of the 1,232,532 other gun threads currently lurking around on this site? You really want to debate about it, why don't you got to the R&P section? Otherwise, this thread is very redundant as compared to many, many other active gun threads.

As for your points...

1. Am I really harming a paper target or clay pigeons if I go out to the range and shoot them? Recreational shooting leads no harm to anybody, as long as you follow basic gun safety and the instruction of range master.

2. Most people who get shot live to tell the tail. 80% of people who are not shot once in instantly fatal places (heart and the head) live to tell the tale. The ones who die, die because they bled out.

3. Appeal to Popular Belief.

4. Or can lead to situation where the "average joes" are disarmed, while all the crooks, who's purchases of firearms are NOT reported to anyone, wouldn't be disarmed. See spike in crime in DC after pistol ban.

5. Why not? If I shoot someone invading my home with an AR-15, a colt .45, or a 12 gauge, why is one self defense and one isn't? While shotguns, in most cases, can be better home defense weapons, but not in all cases. Shotguns are fairly heavy, and have a large amount of kick to them. Older people with health problems may not be able to lift a shotgun up to defend themselves, or the recoil my hurt them. My father just had open heart surgery, and in his present state, the recoil of a shotgun might KILL him. A pistol would not be a problem.

6. I will have to agree, although people who commit crime with shotguns and rifles are used in such a low percentage of crimes I don't see much reason to ban the practice.

7. See #5.

 

[BrassButtons]

1 Guns aren't "safe" guns are tools intended to harm, there is no other purpose for a gun than to wound or kill.

Some guns are made for target shooting. Also, I believe the main purpose of machine guns is not to wound or kill, but to create suppression fire.

3 The general consensus everywhere but the United states of EUHMERICAH is that guns are bad and one should not be able to own, this does not however mean that Americans shouldn't be able to choose whether or not they're allowed to own guns.

The US isn't the only country that allows it's citizens to own guns.

5 A shotgun in a secured gunsafe in your home is a defense weapon, semi-automatic/automatic weapons and pistols aren't.

6 A pistol securely fastened on your body is a defense weapon if you're out on the street, a shotgun or semi/automatic weaponry is not.

What makes one type of gun a self-defense weapon and another type not? Doesn't that depend on how the gun is used? After all, a baseball bat is a self-defense weapon if that's what I keep it around and use it for.

7 Hunting rifles in woodland areas are a yes, hunting rifles in the suburbs or the city are a No-No.

Your list of facts is reading suspiciously like a list of opinions.

 

[DarkRyter]

It doesn't matter whether guns are safe. It doesn't matter whether guns have any use in self defense, recreation, or crime. It doesn't matter whether they kill people.

What matters is that Americans desire to own firearms. And the ownership of firearms does not trespass upon the rights of those who do not desire to own firearms.

This is America. I am an American. I've never owned a gun in my life. I don't really want to. But I will not allow my freedom to be stifled by cowards.

 

[M-E-D The Poet]

1 Guns aren't "safe" guns are tools intended to harm, there is no other purpose for a gun than to wound or kill.

Some guns are made for target shooting. Also, I believe the main purpose of machine guns is not to wound or kill, but to create suppression fire.

3 The general consensus everywhere but the United states of EUHMERICAH is that guns are bad and one should not be able to own, this does not however mean that Americans shouldn't be able to choose whether or not they're allowed to own guns.

The US isn't the only country that allows it's citizens to own guns.

5 A shotgun in a secured gunsafe in your home is a defense weapon, semi-automatic/automatic weapons and pistols aren't.

6 A pistol securely fastened on your body is a defense weapon if you're out on the street, a shotgun or semi/automatic weaponry is not.

What makes one type of gun a self-defense weapon and another type not? Doesn't that depend on how the gun is used? After all, a baseball bat is a self-defense weapon if that's what I keep it around and use it for.

7 Hunting rifles in woodland areas are a yes, hunting rifles in the suburbs or the city are a No-No.

Your list of facts is reading suspiciously like a list of opinions.

1 suppression fire? you do know that is still to harm, don't tell me that you're the guy sitting behind a machine gun in ww1 ww2 or any war or combat situation after that sitting behind a machine gun going "well heck if I shoot into the air they'll probably get scared and retire from progressing"

3 Not in the way the U.S does, not in civilized countries at least.

5/6 Gun experts and research has shown those are the most effective tools, indeed it is an opinion that it's the most sensible use but a short sanity check should help you out here :

What does a shotgun do? or in gun terms what is it's power? as opposed to your machine gun solely being there for suppression the shotgun would solely be there for stopping power/incapacitating your assailant.
A handgun/pistol would in the home defense case be much easier seen to have use of excessive force or be susceptible to accidents.

Now in the reverse case, being assailed in the street (if it ever may happen at all) you will need more freedom more agility and more precision, where the shotgun for home defense is meant to be one blast and over with the handgun/pistol in the street is rather to not harm others and be able to defend or attack over a longer range.

If you want me to look up the studies I'll be glad to but I'm sure some escapist gun-users can back me up here.


7 if you want to argue that point 7 is an opinion I will have to recline into shelter if everyone thinks like you.

You mean to say you think it's logical/sensible/normal/adequate for someone to have a hunting rifle in their apartment?

 

[Rawne1980]

People should stop protecting guns

But the childr... er... guns, yes guns, need our protection.

Why doesn't anyone ever think about the chil... er.... guns.

 

[Vault101]

I belive in the overall scheme of things Guns have less value than Videogames

sure I'm biased but with certain peoples stupidity I really dont care

 

[M-E-D The Poet]

Another one?

Did you really need to bring up your criticisms in a new thread, instead of posting in one of the 1,232,532 other gun threads currently lurking around on this site? You really want to debate about it, why don't you got to the R&P section? Otherwise, this thread is very redundant as compared to many, many other active gun threads.

As for your points...

1. Am I really harming a paper target or clay pigeons if I go out to the range and shoot them? Recreational shooting leads no harm to anybody, as long as you follow basic gun safety and the instruction of range master.

2. Most people who get shot live to tell the tail. 80% of people who are not shot once in instantly fatal places (heart and the head) live to tell the tale. The ones who die, die because they bled out.

3. Appeal to Popular Belief.

4. Or can lead to situation where the "average joes" are disarmed, while all the crooks, who's purchases of firearms are NOT reported to anyone, wouldn't be disarmed. See spike in crime in DC after pistol ban.

5. Why not? If I shoot someone invading my home with an AR-15, a colt .45, or a 12 gauge, why is one self defense and one isn't? While shotguns, in most cases, can be better home defense weapons, but not in all cases. Shotguns are fairly heavy, and have a large amount of kick to them. Older people with health problems may not be able to lift a shotgun up to defend themselves, or the recoil my hurt them. My father just had open heart surgery, and in his present state, the recoil of a shotgun might KILL him. A pistol would not be a problem.

6. I will have to agree, although people who commit crime with shotguns and rifles are used in such a low percentage of crimes I don't see much reason to ban the practice.

7. See #5.

it's not just a "gun" thread, it's a neutral thread about some of the more rather silly points people try to make.

1 that does not mean guns were designed to kill/harm and denying that will not make it go away

2 This was a point on the fact that people seem to deem that either the gun or the person is responsible for the killing, not on "how many bullets does it take to kill a man" as your reply seems to imply it to have been about.

3 Or a non-american having talked to thousands of non-Americans in his life all of the same belief?
That's why the word general consensus is there.

4 Arming your entire population is what lead to this in the first place, now before you turn ace attorney on me and scream OBJECTION! I will have to point you to Europe where gun-crime is down and there is no real cry for the government to fully legalize gun ownership (whilst they do try to get marijuana legalized).
Must we then argue that the U.S.A is a much more brutal less civilized country for it?
I don't know.
But until a proper study is done the comparison to the rest of the comparable western world will have to do and that comparison says "No sir taking guns away from the common folk will not mean that gun crime will be heavier than it already was"

5 the use of a handgun/pistol is indeed also self defense BUT may lead to more accidents or you being overpowered by the gunman.

Would you rather pit your father or grandfather against a vicious assailant equally wielding a gun with a weapon that takes precision and facing struggle in being disarmed or would you prefer him to hold if he can a shotgun that will probably scare the assailant off anyway?

You see I could be a cruel opponent in this discussion and argue that I don't think your father would be fit to wield even a handgun and might harm himself in the same way or that an elderly person may not possess the accuracy of a younger person leading them worse off in the long run.

7 so you think the guy in flat B on the 6th floor in New York City(I'm not familiar with individual state laws on gun-ownership but I have to find something to compare it to) has all the same reason for having a rifle in his flat as the guys who live in whatever mountain/forest surrounded town you can think off ?

 

[M-E-D The Poet]

People should stop protecting guns

People should stop making these threads.

Any reason why this warranted its own thread? Rather than posting it in the multitude of other threads we have floating around here?

This argument is completely pointless, since pro-guns people will continue to use slippery-slope fallacies, and anti-guns people will continue to use false equivalence fallacies.

No minds are ever changed, and no one ever gets anywhere.

/thread by the second post. Somebody get this guy an internet, he's earned it.

OT: Seriously? What do you possibly hope to gain by making this thread?

Education by respectable discussion.

and any "extra" insight in the matter would always be a positive thing

 

[BrassButtons]

1 suppression fire? you do know that is still to harm, don't tell me that you're the guy sitting behind a machine gun in ww1 ww2 or any war or combat situation after that sitting behind a machine gun going "well heck if I shoot into the air they'll probably get scared and retire from progressing"

First, I notice you ignored my comment about guns designed for shooting targets. Are you conceding this point, then?

Second, the goal of suppression fire isn't to cause harm, as evidenced by the fact that suppression fire can be considered successful even if nobody gets shot.

3 Not in the way the U.S does, not in civilized countries at least.

Goalposts aren't supposed to move.

7 if you want to argue that point 7 is an opinion I will have to recline into shelter if everyone thinks like you.
You mean to say you think it's logical/sensible/normal/adequate for someone to have a hunting rifle in their apartment?

If someone lives in the suburbs, but goes hunting on the weekend, where should their hunting rifle be? Something tells me most people store their hunting gear at home, including their rifle.

 

[MammothBlade]

Sigh, another political post in the off-topic forum.

Guns can protect themselves, don't worry about it.

 

[Thaluikhain]

5 A shotgun in a secured gunsafe in your home is a defense weapon, semi-automatic/automatic weapons and pistols aren't.

6 A pistol securely fastened on your body is a defense weapon if you're out on the street, a shotgun or semi/automatic weaponry is not.

Forgoing the usual argument, this could do with more airtime. There's quite a large number of gunowners that say that a shotgun is the best weapon for protecting your home, and that a pump action weapon makes a nice scary sound when pumped.

A pistol is more or less required if you are going to conveniently carry the thing round in public, though.

...

There are relatively few automatic weapons legally in civilian hands in the US, registration stopped in 1986, and was difficult before that.

Also, most handguns are semi-automatic (with the exception of revolvers, multiple barreled or single shot handguns).

 

[M-E-D The Poet]

1 suppression fire? you do know that is still to harm, don't tell me that you're the guy sitting behind a machine gun in ww1 ww2 or any war or combat situation after that sitting behind a machine gun going "well heck if I shoot into the air they'll probably get scared and retire from progressing"

First, I notice you ignored my comment about guns designed for shooting targets. Are you conceding this point, then?

Second, the goal of suppression fire isn't to cause harm, as evidenced by the fact that suppression fire can be considered successful even if nobody gets shot.

3 Not in the way the U.S does, not in civilized countries at least.

Goalposts aren't supposed to move.

7 if you want to argue that point 7 is an opinion I will have to recline into shelter if everyone thinks like you.
You mean to say you think it's logical/sensible/normal/adequate for someone to have a hunting rifle in their apartment?

If someone lives in the suburbs, but goes hunting on the weekend, where should their hunting rifle be? Something tells me most people store their hunting gear at home, including their rifle.

1. In as much as wooden swords are the equivalent of that and we don't allow people running around with katanas and zweihanders in the public space yes.

Because sir that's the only comparison I can draw and would defeat the entire discussion altogether I should think.
3. oh you mean like likeminded countries should follow similar rules?

7. How about storing your gun in a gunsafe in the town where you go to hunt? I mean sure it will be a menial task but no much more than going into a store to buy drinks whilst you're out there.

 

[M-E-D The Poet]

it's not just a "gun" thread

it's a neutral thread

In order: it is, it isn't.

And it's in Off-topic, rather than R&P. Not to mention it's a new thread. If you wanted to discus what those "other people" say about guns, you should have discussed it with them. Making a new thread citing "something" apparently "somebody" has "said" is just weaselling words and making a groundless statements.

would you please stop the picture spamming there's no need for it.

And they aren't groundless statements if you wish for me to back these up I will.

PS: next time reply in a mature way please, this picture spamming just makes you look foolish.

 

[Xangba]

FFS, another. Okay been avoiding them but this is ridiculous. Nothing you have to say will add anything to this.

Guns are a tool intended to harm? Yeah we have a lot of tools intended to do harm. Whoopdee doo.

Everywhere except America hates them? Switzerland would like a word with you. Big time.

A semi-automatic weapon in a storage area is less of a home defense weapon than a shotgun?

Living in an urban area means you would never just drive to a hunting area with your rifle?

And for the love of god the restriction of them is impossible in America. You can't point to another country that has very tight gun laws and say "Look at them! They do it!" because in that country guns have not been as widespread as they are in America. They are everywhere. If someone wants one, they will get one.

See, I can make a list of my views too. Spoiler alert, what I say won't persuade you to what I believe. Good talk

 

[ohnoitsabear]

I have a few things that I've wanted to say on this topic, and this is as good a place as any to do it.

A vast majority of people that own guns or use them on a regular basis have never hurt somebody with them or been hurt by one. It's not like hundreds of people are dying because of guns on a daily basis. Now, I know that this in itself doesn't justify guns being legal, but it seems like some people think that people in the United States are quickly killing themselves off with guns, which simply isn't the case.

A gun is perfectly safe if the person using it follows basic gun safety and isn't deliberately trying to hurt someone with it. Of course, there are going to be people that are idiots with guns, and there are going to be people that will use a gun for harm, but that doesn't mean a gun can't be used safely. In fact, basic gun safety isn't even very difficult (Basically, don't point the gun at something you don't want to shoot, even if you know it's unloaded. It's as much about habits as anything else).

Even if guns are banned in the United States, there still will still be guns. There are way too many guns in the country for it to be otherwise. Additionally, having guns be legal makes it much easier to control their distribution. It makes it easier to know who has guns and to prevent people from obtaining guns if they really shouldn't.

Nobody should own a gun unless they've proven they know how to use it safely. There are a not insignificant amount of people out there that buy a gun to use for self protection that have no clue how to use it. In that case, having the gun around will only make things worse if they were to try to use it for protection.

Basically, I do think there should be more gun control, but I think that outright banning guns in the United States is simply unfeasible, and will cause a whole host of other problems.

 

[DoPo]

PS: next time reply in a mature way please, this picture spamming just makes you look foolish.

As opposed to weaselling words and fighting strawmen? Yeah, I'll take the pictures any day. And I don't want you to back these up - why would I? That's not advancing things for anybody. Fact is - you should have taken it up with whatever those nebulous "people" are instead of making this thread. You've accomplished nothing by not addressing them directly.

 

[crimson sickle2]

1 Guns aren't "safe" guns are tools intended to harm, there is no other purpose for a gun than to wound or kill.

What about to scare people away from my stuff, I prefer to use fear instead of violence.

5 A shotgun in a secured gunsafe in your home is a defense weapon, semi-automatic/automatic weapons and pistols aren't.

6 A pistol securely fastened on your body is a defense weapon if you're out on the street, a shotgun or semi/automatic weaponry is not.

So shotguns at home are fine, but I have to keep a part of my skin out on the street with a gun strapped to it instead of bringing it inside? I suggest an edit.

Overall though, stop setting other people to your standards and never use "civilized countries" as an example, it comes off as rude and unsophisticated.

 

[BrassButtons]

1. In as much as wooden swords are the equivalent of that and we don't allow people running around with katanas and zweihanders in the public space yes.

...What? The issue here is whether or not guns are made solely for causing wounds and killing. Are you arguing that a gun made for shooting targets is designed for killing?

Because sir that's the only comparison I can draw and would defeat the entire discussion altogether I should think.

If the claim is "guns are made for wounding and killing" then any example of a gun designed for a different purpose is sufficient.

3. oh you mean like likeminded countries should follow similar rules?

I mean your initial claim was false, and trying to pretend you were making a different claim in order to avoid being wrong is dishonest.

7. How about storing your gun in a gunsafe in the town where you go to hunt? I mean sure it will be a menial task but no much more than going into a store to buy drinks whilst you're out there.

Why not just store it in a gun safe at home? You haven't actually given a reason why this is bad. So long as the gun is kept locked up and unloaded, what's the problem? Again, your "facts" read suspiciously like "opinions".