Guns! Pro/Con?

[TetsuoShima]

I doubt this topic will gain much traction, considering the low visitor count and people's interests, but I still wanted to give it a try and poll for people's opinions and possibly their explanation of those opinions.

The options mostly speak for themselves:

1. Everything legal: people are even allowed to walk around with guns while visiting the super market
2. Lax regulation: mostly all guns are allowed, but are not to be shown visibly in public places and you can't have a criminal record, .... , some more of these 'lax' rules
3. Strict regulation: automatics are all illegal, all other guns are only available on a licence basis and only for self defence in-house, and shooting practice at the shooting range. No guns in public places (aside from the shooting range).
4. Completely illegal: nothing goes, if you own a gun that can harm a person in any way (aside from clubbing him with it), you're committing a felony.

So? Anyone care to share an opinion?

[maybrick]

I know a lot of people are either heavily anti or pro gun in my country, but I'm pretty indifferent about it. I was given a .22 by my gun nut father in law for home protection, but all it does is sit on a top shelf completely unloaded and with a lock on the trigger. So it's pretty much useless in that situation. I guess I'd feel safer if there were no such things as guns, but since they do I'm not going to waste my time worrying about it.

[TheDormin]

I'm fine if people want to own and collect them and even if they feel they need to protect their homes but there has to be a limit/regulation.

I'm sorry but I don't think you need an AK-47 to protect your home even if you think the King of England may return one day. 

[USWhoFan]

Guns, guns, guns!!!

I love'em!

[Exterus]

Perhaps it's because I live in a relatively low-crime neighbourhood in a country with a fairly low crime rate, but I see no reason for a private citizen to own a gun. Well, hunters own hunting rifles, but nothing beyond that. I suppose it would be good to have one if a crazed meth junkie broke into my home with unreasonable violent intent, but in these parts that happens so rarely that I don't see it as a justification for widespread gun ownership. The potential for accidents and abuse is too great.

Though I admit that in more violent regions of the world, other priorities apply.

[Ulysses]

Very Anti Gun here....by having legal guns you are basically having your criminal being more heavy armed than if there was a anti gun law.  In recent years we see madman both in europe but more commonly in the states committing mass murder, just because they have a screw loose. 

I can not possibly see any legal justification for a forms of guns, especially semi automatic rifles and countries that have these as a so-called "legal weapon" are complete nuts, and please dont give me that "right to arms" crap.

[TetsuoShima]

I'm completely dumbfounded by the fact that everybody seems completely oblivious to the fact that shooting guns is actually an olympic sport...

[Ulysses]

Not nearly as dumbfounded as seeing people thinking having a gun is a good thing and something to brag about as a fashion icon.  But then if they see in real life how much damage a gun/rifle can do they might kinda re-consider.
Posted on: September 20, 2009, 11:45:16 AM

I know a lot of people are either heavily anti or pro gun in my country, but I'm pretty indifferent about it. I was given a .22 by my gun nut father in law for home protection, but all it does is sit on a top shelf completely unloaded and with a lock on the trigger. So it's pretty much useless in that situation. I guess I'd feel safer if there were no such things as guns, but since they do I'm not going to waste my time worrying about it.

pmswl a .22 wouldnt do that much damage, try a 7.62mm

[TetsuoShima]

Most guns with that calibre wouldn't do a persoan much good in virtually any real life situation a civilian could find himself in. (unless they suddenly go insane and want to kill or wound as many people as possible before getting taken down themselves, and even then firing a gun with such a calibre might not do too much killing, since firing such a gun accurately takes quite a bit of practice, of course, maybe it might be a well trained nut, hahaha, you never know).

I'll state my own personal opinion:

If guns are strictly regulated, they won't do more harm than (at maximum) 1% of the harm cars do every year. I'm talking about harm that comes from accidents etc. I'm not talking about purposefull illegal acts of violence with guns, as people who want to commit such acts, can do them just as well without access to legal guns. If we had to make every object illegal that can do a lot of harm in the hands of someone commited to do violence, we may as well give up civilization as a whole.

[Finabair]

Making guns illegal is insane. All that will happen is that honest citizenry will be completely incapable of defending themselves against criminals who could give a rat's behind about what's legal and what's not.

[maybrick]

Making guns illegal is insane. All that will happen is that honest citizenry will be completely incapable of defending themselves against criminals who could give a rat's behind about what's legal and what's not.

Sorry, but I really have to call into question this rather widespread belief. Yes, the bill of rights gives all Americans the right to bear arms, but unless you have a permit to carry (which few most likely don't) then about the only place you're legally allowed to have them is on your own property. Unless there's a home invasion your guns aren't going to do a heck of a lot of good against the criminal element. Most crimes dealing with guns take place OUTSIDE the home. Owning a gun is NOT going to stop that madman gunning down people at your supermarket, and if you pull a gun guess what? You're just going to confuse the cops as to who the real bad guy is. Give one example of an armed citizen who stopped a crime from taking place and someone could probably give one, maybe two, examples of where a citizen was killed with their own gun when it was ripped away by an (up until then) unarmed assailant.

Just sayin'.

[TetsuoShima]

LOL, well, if that actually happens (the gun rippin'), then the person in question probably wasn't fit to carry a gun anyway. Personally, I don't see why people should be allowed to carry guns without first doing some sort of exam and getting a licence, while you do have to do that to be allowed to drive a car.

On the other side of the spectrum, we have an incident in the Netherlands, where the police took away the guns from a stormtrooper in a life rpg because 'it looked to real' (it was a toy gun, mind you)...

[Ulysses]

Making guns illegal is insane. All that will happen is that honest citizenry will be completely incapable of defending themselves against criminals who could give a rat's behind about what's legal and what's not.

Its quite obvious that America's laws on Gun are just pathetic and don't work, how many mass killings have gone on over there? we had the crazy sniper situation, a country that allows the legal sale of sniper riles is just asking for trouble.  You can hardly justify owning one of these for the so called self-defence.

Then you have the crazy idiot that ran aound his college campus playing rambo....there are that many instances that happen in the states due to there stupid/dumb gun laws all in the name of there so called out of date "right to bear arms"...ok so how about "the right to not get shot dead".

and the americans wonder why they get a bad rep in other countries, Its quite simple my view is

No Fire Arms Should be Legal
Only the Armed Forces & Law Enforcement agencies should be allowed fire arms

While it wouldnt stop gun crime it would make it harder and reduce the amount of attacks/Murders

[TetsuoShima]

That is the least logical reasoning I've ever read in my entire life Ulysses. By that standard, we should make driving cars illegal for everybody except professional drivers, it would reduce the amount of traffic accidents by an insane amount too.... *sigh*

[MrDad]

Its quite obvious that America's laws on Gun are just pathetic and don't work, how many mass killings have gone on over there? we had the crazy sniper situation, a country that allows the legal sale of sniper riles is just asking for trouble.  You can hardly justify owning one of these for the so called self-defence.

Then you have the crazy idiot that ran aound his college campus playing rambo....there are that many instances that happen in the states due to there stupid/dumb gun laws all in the name of there so called out of date "right to bear arms"...ok so how about "the right to not get shot dead".

and the americans wonder why they get a bad rep in other countries, Its quite simple my view is

No Fire Arms Should be Legal
Only the Armed Forces & Law Enforcement agencies should be allowed fire arms

While it wouldnt stop gun crime it would make it harder and reduce the amount of attacks/Murders

If it works for guns, it should work for other social evils.  Alcohol should be prohibited also.  It would make it harder to be an alcoholic, reduce drunk driving to negligible levels and banish the health risks associated with it, like cirrhosis of the liver.  I don't see any downsides.   It's not like like otherwise productive and law-abiding citizens might ignore a law with which they disagree and certainly criminals wouldn't even dare break such a law.  It's even ridiculous to consider the idea of a black market enriching a criminal organization beyond imagining.  The possibility of such an organization becoming powerful enough to subvert justice and the political process of a country is ludicrous.  There is no way anything like this could ever happen.  Come to think of it, this would work for drugs also.  I think you're on to something, Ulysses.