Question for people Pro-guns....

[marche45]

Also, how does making guns illegal stop CRIMINALS from getting them? Really, I'm dying to know.

Also, also, whom to trust with my life: myself, who knows how to operate a firearm safely and responsibly; or an incompetent police force? I don't think the decision is a hard one.

Well, that's a pair of stupid arguments if ever I've read them. And I just have. From you.

Firstly, it isn't CRIMINALS who do most of the killing with guns in America. Angry, depressed teenagers massacring their classmates, lone psychos shooting up movie theatres, dumb kids accidentally blowing each others' -or their own- brains out "playing" with daddy's gun- that's the easy-to-prevent problem that you wring your hands over but apparently don't really CARE enough about to bother stopping. The pro-gun lobby make it EASY for people to be killed with guns -not necessarily by criminals, but by ANYONE- and then act surprised when people die.

Secondly, you just stated that the police are completely incompetant and can't be trusted while private citizens are completely trustworthy enough to be allowed to have their own gun based on... absolutely nothing except your own hyperbole. I'm not even going to bother arguing against that, I'm simply going to point out that you said it and hope you realise how moronic it was.

lolwut?Someone who who murders in cold blood(Therfore commiting a crime) is not a criminal?
Alot of teenagers that do use guns to kill people are in gangs and acquire them through illegal means.
Also,i suppose you have statistics to back up your,to put it frankly,ludicrous claims that criminals aren't doing most of the killing?
P.S:Your kids shouldn't have access to your guns in the first place,thats the parents fault.

 

[Madgamer13]

How about we take this thread in a slightly different direction.

The recent Dark Knight massacre happened in America right? Surely at least one person in that packed audience had a concealed carry license and was packing heat, why wasn't the crazed gunman shot down immediately by the fifty thundering dispensers of justice, on the first dying wail of the innocent?

Surely they were ready for this sort of thing, gun culture and all.

To expand and make it relevant to the discussion, does having legalised carry laws such as America's constitutional rights, actually prepare those permitted to carry for situations calling for such power?

 

[yeti585]

The only reason for thinking guns are needed, as far as I can tell, is if you think you need to kill somebody for some reason with them.

Guns are also used for sport. There are a lot of people who like hunting bucks with a rifle. The United States (of America) expressly gave citizens the right to "keep and bear arms" so that if the government started stepping on toes and shoving it's nose in places it shouldn't, the people would have the power to change that. The founders of the United States didn't want the citizens led around on a leash, but many citizens are.

When was the last time gun ownership actually did anything for the general population's political power, out of interest? Because the place seems to be pretty messed up right now, and yet the politicians are in as secure a position as ever; there's absolutely zero chance of any violent uprising any time soon, and if there was it wouldn't help anything.

The argument of 'criminals can get them anyway' I can somewhat understand, but this one about guns acting as protection against the government is just completely outdated at this point.

It's outdated because some of the exact things it was trying to prevent happened. Taking guns from the public is the government overstepping it's bounds and creating a state that is even more secure for them.

 

[kickyourass]

My question has always been, if the cops in the UK don't have guns, what do they do when they go after someone who DOES? That's always puzzled me a bit.

As for gun control, with handguns and hunting rifles I see little problem with (as long as there is a reasonable amount of rules) since there are practical reasons for a normal person to have those, namely self-defense and hunting. Anything else, well unless they're living in close proximity to a warzone I can't think of a single justification why a civilian would need ANYTHING with an automatic setting or bullets stronger then a hunting round.

 

[godofallu]

Owning guns is like voting. Sure it seems like everyone else in the country is retarded and shouldn't be allowed to vote, but we all know that there shouldn't be just 1 guy who decided who gets to vote or not.

Hell the only way to make a situation like that worse would be to stop all voting. Just let the government monitor itself.

 

[illas]

Because Americans suddenly become stupid the instant someone utters the word "freedom".

Seriously, in my experience, Americans will defend and protect almost anything no matter how dangerous, ridiculous, or unfair it is simply on the grounds of "we're the land of the free and people must have the right to do x/y/z".

Rational argument, decades worth of statistics and common sense have minimal relevance.

Did you actually stop to read some of the posts in this thread?
They were actually well thought out.

"Well thought out" does not equal "objectively correct". People can think and argue all they like, but if they refuse to consider perspectives and statistics which contradict their opinion, they're essentially acting as their own echo chamber rather than actually engaging in an informed debate. Notably both the "pro" and "contra" gun camps do this.

My initial post was tantamount to saying that there is minimal correlation between how much people think about these things and how correct they actually are. People have firm opinions on such issues and aren't willing to deviate (regardless of whether or not doing so would be in their best interests).

Proof-reading this post I feel like a character out of Aaron Sorkin's "Newsroom".
Fuck.
Disregard everything I said

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

For one reason, because things like this [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheshire,_Connecticut,_home_invasion_murders] happen. Good thing the police were there to prevent the rape and murder of a woman and two girls! ...wait, no they weren't.

But yeah. Let's say that, by some miracle, a law was passed tomorrow to where every last law-abiding citizen had to turn in all of their weapons and ammunition, and did so. What would that get us? At least twenty or thirty years of living in fear as unarmed citizens and a vastly overstretched police force had to deal with a criminal crowd who knew that any law-abiding citizen they chose to go after wouldn't have a gun. Add to that an exceptionally porous border with Mexico (through which it is ridiculously easy to smuggle human beings, let alone weapons) and that country's almost comically corrupt police departments, bad (or desperate) cops on this side of the border selling confiscated guns back to criminals... not only would guns not "magically disappear" overnight, but it's likely that they never would.

But we could depend on other countries to look at the chaos and say "So sorry, chaps, but this is the price you have to pay to become civilized like us!".

 

[ReadyAmyFire]

Out of curiosity, do you have the same two certificates as we do over here? A Shotgun certificate for any Shotguns with a capacity of 3 rounds or less, and a Fire Arms Certificate for everything else? (which is rather more difficult to get)

That's exactly how it works, although to be honest it's quite commonplace to remove the restrictor from the magazine to bring the capacity back up. It just screws out. Not as bad as some of the dodgy gunsmithing I've seen and heard about over the border though. Like a homemade pistol which fires 4 gauge cartridges

 

[Paradoxrifts]

Do you think those problems do not exist in the US? Your pig population is confined in relatively easy access territory, i.e. where everybody is. Our pigs on the other hand, well this is a picture that could come from my friend?s plot of land and there is only one road on his land-

Texas, eh?

So according to Wikipedia that's 25,674,681 people spread over 268,581 square miles of countryside. That's a cute effort.

My home state of Queensland alone measures 668,207 square miles of land, but in comparison only contains 4,580,700 people. And that doesn't even include the top half of the Northern Territory or the greater portion of the state of New South Wales, which both suffer from the presence of wild pig populations. The Northern Territory covers some 520,902 square miles of land and contains 229,675 people, while New South Wales is our most densely populated state at 7,303,700 people and is still bigger than Texas at 309,130 square miles. Other states have smaller feral pig populations as well, but nowhere near the range and depth of invasive penetration that is recorded in the states I have previously mentioned.

Australia, well Australia, she's a big place, mate. The states I mentioned alone cover an area of 1,498,239 square miles, five times larger than Texas, and still contains half the people who live in your state alone. Australia itself covers 2,967,910 square miles, could fit Texas within it's borders elven times and still, still, has less people standing on it than your state alone.

The information on the current ranges of feral pigs in Australia is widely available over the internet, as is the information regarding the highest human population densities. If you do so care to do your research, that information shows that the range of wild pigs just doesn't significantly overlap with that of Australia's densest areas of human settlement. Your argument also ignores the fact that anyone who has 'need' of a gun is still free to apply for a firearms license, reasons for which can include pest control, hunting, target shooting, or collecting.

There are restrictions on who can own what, and for what reason they can own it. Yet any primary producer who requires a semi-automatic rifle with which to conduct pest control should normally be well within their rights to get one. A lack of guns is simply not the problem, Australia is simply just too damn big for hunting to work like it very well might where you're from.

Not that I'm saying that your state isn't a good size or anything. I'm sure it's pretty big compared to your immediate neighbors.

 

[Virus0015]

Gun crime (along with knife crime etc.) should not be made distinct for 'regular' crime, the tool is very often not the root cause of the crime.

What you should be looking at is the overall murder/rape/whatever you please rate in the US compared to the UK, which will most likely be higher. The prevalence of guns can not be definitively identified as a major contributing factor, hell one could argue that they don't contribute at all.

I believe that the legal status of firearms in America has very little impact on crime rates. Prove me wrong.

 

[Wadders]

Out of curiosity, do you have the same two certificates as we do over here? A Shotgun certificate for any Shotguns with a capacity of 3 rounds or less, and a Fire Arms Certificate for everything else? (which is rather more difficult to get)

That's exactly how it works, although to be honest it's quite commonplace to remove the restrictor from the magazine to bring the capacity back up. It just screws out. Not as bad as some of the dodgy gunsmithing I've seen and heard about over the border though. Like a homemade pistol which fires 4 gauge cartridges

Ha! yeah I've heard of people (i.e. dodgy scally types) doing that. To be honest, I cant blame them, it makes semi-auto shotguns that much more fun when you have an extra 2 or 3 cartridges!

And that pistol sounds awesome. Dangerous, and likely to break your wrist. But awesome nonetheless.

See, this is why I don't understand people who hate guns or a scared of them; they are so much fun :-(

 

[SilverUchiha]

Here is my stance on guns. Making them illegal will result in the same problems drugs have while they're illegal. People who follow the rules won't have access to them while people who are willing to break the rules will be able to get them. they might go to jail for having them, but while they have the guns, they can do a lot of damage, and more so because people don't have any way to really fight back against a guy shooting up a place.

To take a recent event for an example, had someone else in the theater in Colorado been legally carrying a gun, then the bastard who was shooting up the place might have been stopped sooner, before we hit a 50 total injured and 12 dead, perhaps reducing it to little more than one.

Are guns the solution to every problem? No. But I think to simply write them off as devices that have to be illegal because of what a small percentage of people are willing to do is stupid. That'd be like making cars illegal because there is a series of hit-and-run incidents where a large number of people get killed. Punishing everyone by banning guns is just a bad idea on the whole. Perhaps better regulation is needed, but certainly not a ban.

 

[Aesir23]

I really have no issues with civilians owning guns as long as the appropriate measures are in place to prevent the wrong people from getting guns. What I do have a problem with in regards to guns in the U.S. is the TYPE of guns are made available the average joe. Obviously criminals will get their hands on guns in one way or another, but allowing greater ease of access to something like assault rifles only exacerbates the problem. Either that or it just means a greater amount of casualties when you have a civilian that goes nuts and decides to massacre a group of people.

I'm not even going to bring up the gun violence rates between the U.S. and my own country because you have way too many variables influencing it. Culture, ease of access, population, etc.

 

[The Funslinger]

The question is this: I live in the UK, where firearms are illegal

Guns aren't illegal in Britain. They're restricted.

I own a shotgun, for example. Admittedly, a double barreled one, however, my uncle keeps a semi-automatic eight round one. This is because we keep 3000 acres of moor, and there are often vermin that need to be dealt with.

And I have literally used my gun to help Patrick Stewart. So, yeah.

While I don't really want to start a debate, I'm just going to say, since removal of guns from society is impossible (criminals still acquire guns via illegal means) then the better solution would be for every household to have firearms, or better yet, people to have carry weapons. This would be a massive public deterrent. Even somewhere like the USA, the chances a potential shooting/stabbing/mugging victim is carrying is extremely low.

An example I use is Switzerland. It is unique to Europe in that households are legally required to keep firearms.

EDIT: WAIT. MISREAD MY CHART xD

 

[Eldrig]

How come the UK policemen don't carry guns? If they have to respond to a 911 call and it escalates, wouldn't they need to be able to defend themselves and nearby civilians?

We have Armed Response Vehicles containing the equivalent of SWAT teams on patrol in major cities. It's just the standard police constables and PCSOs that don't carry firearms. With the exception of Nottingham, where I believe the rank-and-file carry handguns due to gang violence.

Also OP: You are not making enough allowances for the cultural differences between us and the Traitorous Colonial Separatists.

Is... is it Robin Hood's gang?

 

[RicoGrey]

For the record, I am an American and I also do not know what a gun sounds like outside of video games and movies. No real opinion on gun ownership though.

 

[Jake0fTrades]

The majority of gun crimes in the U.S. are not committed with legally owned/obtained firearms.

 

[The Tibballs]

After reading all the US Pro-Gun nuts on the net saying shit like "we need less gun control" or "this wouldn't have happened if there were more guns/gun owners". I've decided to change my stance on the whole issue.
I now believe that there should be more guns in US not less and that at the age of 16 all US citizens should be given a gun and canister of nerve gas (randomly selected from a bag or something).
My reasoning is this, if some people having guns lowers crime then everyone having guns and nerve gas will stop all crime... right?? The best part is that if it doesn't work and people start gassing and killing others all willy nilly, it'll be okay because it'll mostly only be Americans dying. As a result of this the collective IQ of the planet would sharply move upwards.