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

[Arkhangelsk]

Well, when the burglars who've smuggled weapons in to rob us, what will we do?

 

[ssgt splatter]

Of course, don't be stupid. When the day comes that a foreign power invades the U.S., we'll have the somewhat necessary firepower to fend them all off. (MW2 reference)

*snip*

The defense rests

Truly, this is a proud day for mankind. *salutes*

Uhh, oeeeeeewwwww-kay. Did this guy just fall in love with the Gears of War universe or did he just do it for the hell of it?

 

[TIMESWORDSMAN]

this is a new link i have put on having read, and replied, to the topic about the 8 year old shooting himself with a Uzi submachin gun.

that got me thinking, and i can't think of a single valid reason for civilians to own modern weapons (thats any gunpowder weapon which is not muzzle loaded) that can outweigh the often fatal results of mistakes, accidents, and malicious criminal activity thanks to easy access to lethal weaponary.

i appreciate its written into the american constitution, and i don't want a argument about whether that is still valid, because it doesn't matter. its as part of the american psche now as mcdonalds and weed, so lets navigate around that and focus on whether anyone can justify the contiued use (and abuse) of dangerous and lethal weaponary

Now if want to talk about Mashine Guns, Uzies (Uzis? Uzie?) or Sniper Rifles then I'm all for disallowing them to the average citizen, but modern weapons also includes things like Hunting Rifles and Shotguns.

Now I don't know about you big city types, But out here in the country hunting is one of the most beloved sports.

I'm not a fan myself but I do know that my local economy would be decimated if Modern Arms where banned.

I myself prefer Fishing.

 

[Velocirapture07]

Ugh....you people never cease to amaze me. Of course civilians have a right to own almost all weapons save for heavy weapons like anti-tank launchers and such.

After you've all happily given your guns away, don't come crying to me when your government decides to go 1984 on you and take away all the freedoms you may or may not currently enjoy.

The civilian militia is the basis of the (U.S.) 2nd amendment. The minute leaders and rulers decide they're not afraid of the electorate and feel they can gain more power without consequence, they will.

Enough of this pansy, guns cause tragedies, crap. There are a lot of other things that can hurt people and cause horrible accidents. It's called life.

 

[HotFezz8]

I think civilians should be allowed to own all kinds of guns, but not allowed to keep ammo on the same premises. If you use them, I reckon you should be able hire an ammo locker at gun range or something.

I think civilians should be allowed to use any non-lethal or non-crippling weapon (i.e. stun gun, bean bag shotgun etc) in the correct legal circumstances.

why do you need a gun at all though??

and what possible legal circumstnces could call for the use of a small non lethal armoury at home?! thats like saying "yeah i own a knife, but i would only stab someone in a legal setting, cause its not meant to kill people"

 

[Velocirapture07]

I've always thought that the right to bear arms was a way to keep our government in check, shold they ever go the way of totalitarianism we would have the means to overthrow them.

Thank you.

 

[annoyinglizardvoice]

Civilians should be able to have own Basic firearms such as Bolt-action Rifles and Shotguns. They should not be able to own Semi or full automatic weopons. Justification is for use in work (farming, hunting ect) and recreational.

Works for us down here in Aus.

I can see the sense in that. No sane, smart civilian has any use for a full auto.

I'd much rather see people with swords than guns. More obvious, harder to do something stupid and you can actually parry with them.

 

[Layzor]

Zombies.

 

[randomsix]

Of course not, the idea that anyone should be able to have guns and whatnot to 'protect' themselves is a stupid idea.

Why else would America have such a high gun crime rate? Cause everyone has guns, duh. Why are the gun crime rates so low in Britain? Cause NOBODY (policemen included) have guns.

So you're saying if I brought a gun to Britain, I could basically rob all of the stores and banks with little resistance? Yeah, come at me with that bat, and I'll remove your head.

Oh, boy. I can't wait for summer!

People always forget when comparing Britain to the US that Britain doesn't have a border with mexico that just begs for things to be smuggled over it.

 

[HotFezz8]

Should civilians have access to modern weaponry? Yes.

Should an 8 year old be allowed to go to a gun show and shoot an uzi? Fuck no!

what is the difference? ultimatley this will happen if you let the populace loose with weapons.

 

[Grampy_bone]

Eh, more people die from falling down stairs than from accidental gun deaths. Should we outlaw stairs? Stop the stair menace! End the tragedy!

Gun fatalities make the news because they are sensational. Where I live they passed laws allowing people to carry concealed weapons (actually the law already existed, they just changed the details of it a little bit). All the alarmists predicted bedlam in the streets and schoolyard massacres... which never happened.

I don't mind waiting periods, background checks, registrations, mandatory gun safety training, etc (in fact I'm a big fan of this one, I HATE it when people to not follow gun safety!) You need a license to drive, so too should you be licensed to go armed. Most people don't need guns per se, but what kind of person lives such a spartan life where they only own things they absolutely need? Furthermore I think all people have a fundamental right to protect themselves; indeed this was once common sense.

 

[lvl9000_woot]

What makes governments so special that they should have thousands of people armed with them but "civilians" should be completely denied access to them? Governments are made up of people and their actions. They're not magic.

I agree.

We should have the same firepower. Why?

pimppeter2:
I'd like to see what you're going to say when the Zombie Apocalypse comes

And maybe to overthrow an evil and corrupt government...maybe.

But even if the gov allowed us access, all they'd need to do to keep it out of our hands is make them really expensive.

 

[goldenheart323]

remove guns, and the only ones with guns will be those that break the law. A criminal is less likely to attack those who are armed, a person with no means of self defence is a much easier target.

Admiral Yamamoto

Just Prior to Pearl Harbor

"I would never invade America, there will be a gun behind every blade of grass."

I find the whole idea of having to own a weapon stupid.
Seriously, what do you need a freaking shotgun for at home? If someone breaks into your house you're better off just calling the cops anyway.

no, your fucking dead long before the cops arrive.

Great post. Awesome quote from the admiral. I never heard that before. I wonder if he changed his mind or was ordered to attack anyway.

I think some people think we don't need guns because they've had the pleasure & convenience of living in a stable society with a government that respects human rights, as well as not had a violent crime committed on themselves or a family member. They forget that governments change over time, and calling the police isn't some kind of magic pause button that prevents anything bad from happening while you wait for them to get there.

If I understand the gun control people correctly, it all boils down to saving children's lives, and criminals not having guns. Well,
1)Why should a careless parent cost someone else their ability to defend themselves from an attacker? (And why do some of you think we live in a near utopia where that happens so infrequently as to be a laughable reason to have a gun?)
2)What makes you think criminals (especially in America,) would find it nigh impossible to get a gun once they're banned???



And why do some people think the argument for guns equals the argument that every single person will end up with a gun?

That previously posted link to Penn & Teller's gun control debate was very good. Especially Part 3. If you don't want to watch it all, just click the link to get to Part one and skip to Part 3. It pretty much sums the whole thing up.

And I agree that this post will grow so fast that keeping up with it will become a chore rather quickly.

 

[Spleenbag]

I think it's very simple, really. Criminals will obtain guns no matter what, so allow civilians to level the playing field, no? Civilians, at least where I live, do not have access legally to assault weapons or automatic weapons.

It's already been brought up that your poll is using loaded words, but I won't speak on it any further.

 

[Mr.Pandah]

So...just because some dumbass left his Uzi out on the kitchen table and not properly locked up in a gun cabinet of some sort, I should lose my right to bear arms? Fuck that.

I see it as Darwinism anyway. If your kid(or anyone) is dumb enough to pull the trigger at themselves, or a friend, they deserve to die anyway.

I hate people.

Edit: I also forgot to add that most "assault" weapons (whatever the government deems as an assualt weapon nowadays) are usually banned anyway. So...why this kid had a fully automatic Uzi is beyond me (if that is in fact what he had). Most guns that are automatics, are toned down to Semi-Automatics which make them legal to own.

 

[Agayek]

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

I refer you to a rather famous quote from Benjamin Franklin:

"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

 

[mafyapenguin94]

Double post.

History has shown that an armed populas has no chance agaisnt its own governments military force. What makes you think that a much of civilians will be successful?

Uh what? The Revolutionary War would like to have a word with you my friend.
OP: Most, if not all of my arguments here have already been stated. I am all for having an armed populace to protect us from criminals and the government.

 

[HotFezz8]

people so far all we have been able to come up with for the question: what reason to people have to keep firearms that out weighs the lethal consequences are:

hunting (debatable, if you want to hunt for skill, use a bow and arrow. and i still don't think your desperate urge to kill something is adequate enough reason to keep a weapon in your house)

defending yourself (well it should be perfectly acceptable for everyone to walk around with a GPMG then is it? fuck sake thats what the police are for. and generally it is safer if the criminals think someone is unarmed, they are less likely to walk in shooting and be calmer. also if their is a criminal who has a gun, what situation would you rather your wife and child were involved in? he walks in armed, everyone is unarmed and noone acts like a hero, or he walks in armed and some miserable cretin with no experience lines up and unloads?)

taking down the goverment (WHAT?! ... WHAT?! clearly whoever posted that lives on a mountain and says the moon landings were faked. the last time a armed populace tried to overthrow the goverment was; the IRA (who succeded in killing thousands, most of them civilians, and failed) the kurds in iraq (who suceeded in killing and getting killed thousands, most of them civilians, and failed) oh and the dafur uprising (still progressing, current count, 300,000 dead. still rising). there are only armed violent uprisings in third and second world countries. on this continent we have DEMOCRACY. the goverment gets too mad, you riot till they get rid of their head of state and change, then loose the next election. i.e. Margret Thatcher)

oh and zombies (for fuck sake whoever started that needs a spanking.)