Poll: Guns and you!

[CrazyMedic]

I am fine with guns but there are some thing you have no reason to own, so basically anything that isn't automatic(if you have served in the military for more then a year you can have full auto maybe) supressed weapons and things like 50 cal sniper rifles.

 

[Freshman]

But is it not possible that the total number of gun crimes committed would be lowered because criminals would get caught with possession of guns in public? It's kind of like saying laws enforcing action against crimes are useless because criminals will do whatever they want.

And there are plenty of "what if" situations. What if it was illegal to carry a firearm anywhere in public and the perpetrators of that mall massacre were arrested before they even arrived? What if a proper licensing program found they had a history of violence or mental instability? What if someone in the mall at the time just chucked a bottle at their head, taking action the same way that woman says she would have?

What if the criminals put the gun in their pocket?

 

[Mcface]

The options are too broad.

we need a "allow all rifles and handguns, ban explosives"

 

[MrNickster]

I live in Australia and I think we have it done right. You need a license, a training course, a specific type of gun cabinet to keep them in if you intend to keep them at home and a reason to own any kind of gun (Self defence is not an accepted reason). Civillians with the appropriate license and traning have access to pistols, rifles and shotguns. No machine guns, explosives or flamethrowers at all.

 

[YouCallMeNighthawk]

I think weapons should only be allowed in the publics hands if the barrells have been filled or something. So they are just to look at and admire.

 

[MrNickster]

I live in Australia and I think we have got it done right. If you want to own a gun, you need to have the correct license, a training course in its safe use, a reason for owning it (Self defence is not an accepted reason) and if you intend to keep them at home, you are required by law to have the correct cabinet/safe to keep them in. Civillians with the appropriate credentials have access to revolvers, semi automatic pistols, rifles and shotguns-No automatic weapons, explosives or flamethrowers.

EDIT Double posted, whoops

 

[Blue_vision]

But is it not possible that the total number of gun crimes committed would be lowered because criminals would get caught with possession of guns in public? It's kind of like saying laws enforcing action against crimes are useless because criminals will do whatever they want.

And there are plenty of "what if" situations. What if it was illegal to carry a firearm anywhere in public and the perpetrators of that mall massacre were arrested before they even arrived? What if a proper licensing program found they had a history of violence or mental instability? What if someone in the mall at the time just chucked a bottle at their head, taking action the same way that woman says she would have?

What if the criminals put the gun in their pocket?

What if a cocaine dealer puts cocaine in his pocket? Are we going to legalize cocaine just because it can be concealed?
I'm pretty sure it's illegal to have several kilos of explosives in your van: just because it can't be immediately be seen doesn't mean it isn't worth enforcing. It means that when a cop pulls over the van and finds it turned into a giant bomb, he can call for backup and arrest the guy before he blows up town hall. But it's not like we give ordinary citizens the right to pull drivers over and check their car for explosives, does it?

I'd honestly like to know how many shootings there have been that simply could have been prevented by stepping up gun enforcement versus the number of shootings that have been prevented by a bystander pulling out their gun. That let alone the number of shootings that have been prevented by a bystander pulling out their gun, resulting in no injuries.

 

[L-J-F]

Gah couldn't help myself:

If your beliefs can fit on a bumper sticker, think harder.

If you complicate your beliefs so much people can't understand you just so you look "deeper" and "smartererer" then you're a pretentious .... yeah you get the picture. Nothing wrong with being succinct.

 

[loc978]

I like the way things are in America... to a point. I'd actually prefer us to have to take classes and have licences to own any weapon that it's not legal to hunt with. I've met too many idiots who owned handguns and antique military rifles they had no idea how to use or store safely. As an experienced firearms instructor, going shooting in the mountains and seeing the way some people behave makes me cringe... and occasionally dive for cover.

 

[The Lunatic]

Living in a country where guns are illegal for the most part, I only have one comment on the matter.

Gun Crime? What's that?

 

[Koroviev]

Gah couldn't help myself:

If your beliefs can fit on a bumper sticker, think harder.

If you complicate your beliefs so much people can't understand you just so you look "deeper" and "smartererer" then you're a pretentious .... yeah you get the picture. Nothing wrong with being succinct.

Who's advocating such unnecessary obfuscation? There's a distinct difference between being succinct and repeating sound bites.

 

[BrionJames]

I think the process of purchasing a firearm should be a bit more thorough, as well as that for a concealed carry permit. People should and do have a right to defend themselves.

 

[tawmus]

If it wasn't guns it would be some other instrument of violence. Crossbows, bladed weapons, I think its naive to think that removing a tool would restrain our propensity for violence. If someone wants to commit violence, human ingenuity seems to thrive in that department.

Maybe you reduce gun related deaths. I would like to see the stats of gun related murders versus other types of murders. Compare them to places with strict gun control, no control, and limited gun control.

 

[Koroviev]

Double post, sorry.

 

[Klarinette]

I believe they should be outright banned for citizens.

Honestly, when does a citizen need a firearm?

Right?
The thought of the people around me having guns is horrifying. It's not like we have bears around here... why do we need them?

 

[nofear220]

Don't ban anything.
Guns are awesome.

how bout a mental exam for people before they are allowed to have guns though?

 

[Slimshad]

The problem with firearms isn't their destructive capacity, it's their 'user friendly' interface. Anyone can fire a gun, and any competent person can make one, so you cannot ban firearms without erasing the memory of guns ever existing. The only reason the entire human race is not dead yet is because of the exclusiveness and difficulty to create atom bombs. It is a condition of our race to be violent and brutal, because we will always abide by the Law of the Jungle. Banning guns would have not saved that dog, but reducing the creation of them can help. Unfortunately, a lot of people would be out of work, and a lot more people will be angry that you are limiting their "defense"

It is my personal belief that we should restrict the sale of handguns to the public, because honestly there is very little use for them in a defensive situation. If a criminal breaks into your home with a gun, and you have very little time to think or react, a shotgun is almost guaranteed to injure the criminal if you so much as point it at them. A glock .44 is not a guarantee, and is used plenty more for the assistance of criminal activity than a shotgun, merely because you can conceal the weapon more effectively.

So why are handguns open to the public? Perhaps some of you can enlighten me, because I just don't know.

 

[Berethond]

Don't ban anything.
Guns are awesome.

how bout a mental exam for people before they are allowed to have guns though?

See, that's fine. You're not banning them is the point.