Poll: There is no justifiable reason for civilians to own modern weapons.

[The Hairminator]

But is it worth this?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

What's up with the Finnish gun suicide rate?

Finland has the highest suicide rate in the world, I think.
I have no idea why, since it's not a bad contry.

 

[Nuke_em_05]

I really hate to de-rail things or make unrelated comments, but seriously?

"Even with typos"?

I summarised (Or paraphrased?) - in agreeing with you - my similar ideas on the subject. "Even with typos" was a cliche thing to put there, I didn't think about it much, I regret it. If you think I padded my post with deliberately flowery language, you're wrong, I was trying to use an analogy, or metaphor, because I understand stories better than hard facts.

Forums are frustrating places for me sometimes.

I completely understand frustration with forums. They are not the most efficient medium of communication.

I understand that you regret the line. Cliché, satire, sarcasm, and intent really, are among things lost in the written word. Anything written, especially as a lead-in, is most likely going to be taken at face value. Any time I see a comment on typos or grammar, especially about posts where they didn't have a significant impact on coherency (be they my own or another's), it sets a bias for me against the commenter.

That bias was... reinforced by the phrasing of the meat of your comment. That is, I find commenting on typos pretentious, as I do the use of flowery language. I understand the metaphor, how the need for violence and destruction is a branch of our society, and that focusing on symptoms or objects is like cutting off the fruit or secondary shoots off the main branch, leaving the source to sprout again. I also understand that you were in agreement, using your own metaphor. The part I got hung up on was the vocabulary. So I apologize for focusing in on that alone in my response.

As I said, I completely understand frustration with forums. I write things that are interpreted differently than I intend, and interpret posts differently than they were intended. Then, of course, there are the masses of pretentious jerks, and I end up assuming it of as many if not more than assume it of me (though the assumptions of me may not be altogether inaccurate).

 

[Tears of Blood]

Not really. You say gun owners rarely use their guns to kill people in the US, but they do so much more than in other similar countries (i.e. your gun owners kill more people with their guns than our gun owners).

You say gangs are a bigger problem there, but we have gangs here and they are not armed with guns, which makes them less dangerous (stupid violent kids are not well connected enough to get illegal weapons and too closely monitored by police to be able to hold on to them. Not a big surprise.).

You say you put criminals in jails as needed, but you happen to have the biggest amount of people in jail in the western world.

I don't see how the right to bear arms is helping you in any of those issues, frankly. I see it hurting. Education to prevent crime would make the right to bear arms hurt America less, but it wouldn't make it good.

The right to bear arms was created in a time when a rifle was a weapon of war. When a government could not opress a population with hunting rifles because war was waged with hunting rifles. Today, the arms protected by your constitution are completely irrelevant to warfare (note that even insurgents fighting against the US in wars are using automatic weapons, which are not allowed in the US, either). It's a stupid argument, and as outdated as the Constitution that originates it.

No, registered gun owners very rarely kill people around here. Just look up the statistics for it. Back in my Senior year of High School, I did a research project for Sociology class on Gun Control. The last time it had happened at that point was in the early 90s, and it was considered self-defense.

All I can really do is stand behind what I know. When I learn that there are more homicides when gun control laws are beefed up, then I oppose gun control.

 

[sunpop]

Limiting people to bolt action wouldn't be the worst thing simply because they are slower. Letting people have fully automatic guns and any kind. or an assault rifle is stupid. Why would anyone need a gun that can dump an entire clip in under a minute I cannot say. Personally I never saw a deer in the world that requires at least 30 bullets in it to bring it down.

Limit the best guns to the military and police for crime would be a whole hell of a lot different if your average guy tried to rob a bank with a bolt action while the cops are outside with high powered sniper rifles and fully automatic guns.

The constitution in America says we can have a militia too but somehow I know people would piss and moan if I decided to throw one together and go on patrols.

Now the best part is that I can have a rifle sitting in the back window of my car for all to see but god forbid I have a sword anywhere in that car, or a knife or a baton or any kind of melee weapon because I could hurt someone with one of those if I caught them. -.-

Oh also they need to give everyone a shotgun for free just in case of a zombie Apocalypse.

Why would criminals obey gun laws while robbing a bank? Laws don't stop guns from being sold and used they just force them to be traded underground in criminal markets alongside drugs and peoples. I am pretty sure the gun laws are pretty strict in India but Pakistani terrorist were still able to rage war in the streets of Mumbai for sixty hours before being put down by the police and army of India. Gun violence is just the cost of having the freedom to bare arms just like having talk show hosts call gynecologists who perform abortions baby killers and urging violence I mean action to save all the children they don"t give a damn about.

Gun laws wont stop all criminals of course there will always be a way just look at Americas attempt at prohibition. It does however lower the availability to have guns and yes some places have strict laws but people are running around with assault rifles but there are also places like Japan and England that have laws against gun ownership and manage to keep gun violence down quite a bit.

The real point is there's no need to make such fast and powerful weapons available to the general public. We can allow people have guns but you can at least limit the availability of the better guns to slow down crime some. That way the constitutional right to bear arms is not infringed but we have restrictions in place to keep people somewhat safer.

Just remember I say this about American gun laws as far as other countries I don't know much about there gun laws.

 

[o0oMetalHeado0o]

2 things

1 welcome to the escapist
2 i hope you stay a while because intelligent posts like that are what we need around here

Thank you sir

 

[Shynobee]

and dont bring up that "if guns are outlawed, only outlaws would have guns" the fact is thats already the case... kinda. a disturbing percentage of homicides are done with stolen weapons

But that IS the case!!!

Almost every time a city/area outlaws guns, gun crimes sky rocket!
Coincidence? I think NOT!

 

[Rigs83]

Spoiler: snip

[

Limiting people to bolt action wouldn't be the worst thing simply because they are slower. Letting people have fully automatic guns and any kind. or an assault rifle is stupid. Why would anyone need a gun that can dump an entire clip in under a minute I cannot say. Personally I never saw a deer in the world that requires at least 30 bullets in it to bring it down.

Limit the best guns to the military and police for crime would be a whole hell of a lot different if your average guy tried to rob a bank with a bolt action while the cops are outside with high powered sniper rifles and fully automatic guns.

The constitution in America says we can have a militia too but somehow I know people would piss and moan if I decided to throw one together and go on patrols.

Now the best part is that I can have a rifle sitting in the back window of my car for all to see but god forbid I have a sword anywhere in that car, or a knife or a baton or any kind of melee weapon because I could hurt someone with one of those if I caught them. -.-

Oh also they need to give everyone a shotgun for free just in case of a zombie Apocalypse.

Why would criminals obey gun laws while robbing a bank? Laws don't stop guns from being sold and used they just force them to be traded underground in criminal markets alongside drugs and peoples. I am pretty sure the gun laws are pretty strict in India but Pakistani terrorist were still able to rage war in the streets of Mumbai for sixty hours before being put down by the police and army of India. Gun violence is just the cost of having the freedom to bare arms just like having talk show hosts call gynecologists who perform abortions baby killers and urging violence I mean action to save all the children they don"t give a damn about.

Gun laws wont stop all criminals of course there will always be a way just look at Americas attempt at prohibition. It does however lower the availability to have guns and yes some places have strict laws but people are running around with assault rifles but there are also places like Japan and England that have laws against gun ownership and manage to keep gun violence down quite a bit.

The real point is there's no need to make such fast and powerful weapons available to the general public. We can allow people have guns but you can at least limit the availability of the better guns to slow down crime some. That way the constitutional right to bear arms is not infringed but we have restrictions in place to keep people somewhat safer.

Just remember I say this about American gun laws as far as other countries I don't know much about there gun laws.

Knife violence has increased so much in Britain the police have to wear knife proof jackets and London is a city under constant cctv monitoring. I don't like the idea of having to live under a constant watch by cameras no matter who is behind the monitor. As for Japan 10,000 people "disappear" every year with little or no investigation. Japan on the surface appears to be a model society but the Japanese mafia, Yakuza, have a terrifying hold on it. I have only read excerpts but the book "Tokyo Vice: An American Reporter on the Police Beat in Japan by Jake Adelstein" paints a disturbing portrait of how insidious organized crime is in Japan. Here's a link [http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=120237244] to an interview with the author on NPR.