Gun Control

[Combs]

Please explain why we couldn't live without guns...

 

[MaRdYC26]

We have to hun-...Oh wait, there's a ... SUPERMARKET FOR THAT!

 

[Memphology]

So we can protect ourselves, and you say "it will stop criminals from getting them"...NOPE!!! Just like everything else in the world, criminals will still get what they want, it its guns. People need protection.

 

[ASUFan22]

It's pointless in Arizona at least. I'm pretty sure I saw on that stupid laws website that you can only defend yourself with the other person's gun.

 

[The Captain]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Combs @ Apr 11 2007, 08:46 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Please explain why we couldn't live without guns...</div>Well, obviously we could live without guns. We could live without many things. Sports, television, cars, cell phones, etc. But that doesn't mean you take them away.<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>We have to hun-...Oh wait, there's a ... SUPERMARKET FOR THAT!</div>Yeah, and how do you think it gets there? Oh Yeah.They shoot them!!With GUNS!Guns are used for many things.1. Self protection2. For getting food3. Sport4. HobbiesThat should be a good starting point. Attack away gentlemen.

 

[Something-To-Say]

Dude, you're missing the point austingriz. If nobody except perhaps police had guns, then you wouldn't need to worry about being shot. And if you were attacked, they'd be close so you can ID them if you want, instead of being shot in a drive by with no chance of revenge.

 

[The Captain]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Something-To-Say @ Apr 11 2007, 09:25 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Dude, you're missing the point austingriz. If nobody except perhaps police had guns, then you wouldn't need to worry about being shot. And if you were attacked, they'd be close so you can ID them if you want, instead of being shot in a drive by with no chance of revenge.</div>How are you going to make that happen Einstein? Criminals will still get them no matter what. Smuggle them, make them, buy them off the streets, whatever. That leaves Joe Average without guns, Joe Criminal with guns. I don't really give a crap if I can ID them. It won't heal me or bring me back to live.

 

[Something-To-Say]

.... But you have like a 10x greater chance of NOT dying if they are forced to attack you close range than if they can just blast your face off.

 

[The Captain]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Something-To-Say @ Apr 11 2007, 09:33 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>.... But you have like a 10x greater chance of NOT dying if they are forced to attack you close range than if they can just blast your face off.</div>But the point is they will still be able to blast my face off, yet I will have absolutely no chance, because he has a gun and I don't.

 

[Combs]

So your defense is that CRIMINALS will be able to get guns no matter what. My response to that is not if we allowed them too. The market for an illegal gun would be a small one. So small the prices would be out of most criminals reach.Not to mention that even if a FEW had them, it would completely minimize everything. You can't eliminate everything completely, but you can try your hardest to. Lives will be saved no doubt. So is hunting, and hobbies enough cause to not save lives and make the world a better place? I don't think so.You don't need a gun to protect yourself. Get a stun gun. Get a baseball bat. Get something else if somebody breaks into your house...

 

[Something-To-Say]

It's kinda like marijuana. If we lifted the ban, it'd just be crazy and widespread like guns. But putting laws on it stops the people like myself who say 'not really a point in breaking the law for that'. We could use the metal of the guns to make something else <strike>like a nuclear bomb</strike> useful.

 

[BrewCityBuck]

I'm in law enforcement so I have to be for gun control. I don't like guns but it's a reality. I pretty much agree with Timothy McVeigh's stance on weapons/gun control.

 

[The Captain]

[quote name='Combs' post='332558' date='Apr 11 2007, 09:47 PM']So your defense is that CRIMINALS will be able to get guns no matter what. My response to that is not if we allowed them too. The market for an illegal gun would be a small one. So small the prices would be out of most criminals reach.Not to mention that even if a FEW had them, it would completely minimize everything. You can;t ever eliminate everything complete, but you can try your hardest by it. Lives will be saved no doubt. So is hunting, and hobbies enough cause to not save lives and make the world a better place? I don't think so.You don't need a gun to protect yourself. Get a stun gun. Get a baseball bat. Get something else if somebody breaks into your house...[/quote]The market for a gun would be a huge one. How would it not be? It's an easy way for a robbery or break-in. Criminals eyes would be lighting up if there was a gun ban. There would be more break-ins due to there is no fear of the homeowner wielding a firearm.Here is an article that is interesting to me.http://www.keepandbeararms.com/newsarchive...p;articleid=409

When one asks a gun control supporter why they support additional gun laws they will undeniably answer that they do so to stop violence, crime, and to ?save the children.? The same thing can be said for gun control groups like Handgun Control, Inc. and the Violence Policy Center. Obviously, these are positive goals, which are shared by this author and essentially every law-abiding citizen in the United States. However, the problem with this position by gun control supporters is that there is no evidence to show that any of their proposed gun control laws have ever reduced crime or violence. Hence, the question must be asked; does gun control equal crime control?

The issue of continued high crime in the aforementioned areas is especially disconcerting when one compares the crime rates in these gun control Utopias to the crime rates in areas that have not gone the route of extreme gun control. In almost all cases, the areas in the U.S. with the fewest gun control laws and also the highest gun ownership rates also have the lowest crime levels. One of the most interesting comparisons is that of Washington, D.C. with its gun bans since the 1970s and the D.C. suburbs in Virginia, which has very little gun control. Even though gun ownership is at a high rate and there are few gun control laws in the Virginia suburbs of D.C., just across the state line where gun ownership is almost non-existent and gun control has reached extreme levels the crime rate is many multiples higher. Some try to turn this argument around in an attempt to blame the crime problems in Washington, D.C. on weak gun laws in Virginia, but the reality is that Virginia with all of its guns and few laws does not have the crime problem that plagues Washington, D.C. and its gun bans. If guns are the problem, then why is it that those areas with the most guns have the lowest crime levels?

If one believes that gun control lowers crime and violence and thus guns are responsible, then these aforementioned facts are counterintuitive to the logic of gun control. This is especially true of the 31 states that have enacted concealed carry laws. Even though groups like Handgun Control, Inc. continually attacked such measures in saying that they will lead to higher crime, ?blood on our streets,? and ?wild west shootouts,? just the opposite has occurred. Those states that have enacted concealed carry measures have seen their crime rates immediately fall and continue to do so at rates in most cases faster than the national average. One of the best examples is Florida. Prior to their enactment of concealed carry laws in the late 1980s, the crime rate in Florida was higher than the national average. However, following the enactment of the concealed carry law their crime immediately began to drop and has continued to do so to this day. In fact, today the crime levels in Florida are considerably lower than the national average. Additionally, the U.S. state with the lowest crime rate, Vermont, also happens to be the state with the fewest gun control laws - and they allow all law-abiding citizens to carry concealed weapons. The simple fact is that those areas in the U.S. with the fewest gun restrictions and highest gun ownership rates also have the lowest crime rates.

 

[the_pestilence]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (The Captain @ Apr 11 2007, 07:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>How are you going to make that happen Einstein? Criminals will still get them no matter what. Smuggle them, make them, buy them off the streets, whatever. That leaves Joe Average without guns, Joe Criminal with guns. I don't really give a crap if I can ID them. It won't heal me or bring me back to live.</div>except for the fact that statistically you're about 5 times as likely to be murdered if you have a gun.

 

[BrewCityBuck]

I'm not letting the government take my guns away.

 

[the_pestilence]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BrewCityBuck @ Apr 11 2007, 08:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I'm not letting the government take my guns away.

</div>hey, what you doin' with my pieces?

 

[The Captain]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (tHe_pEsTiLeNcE @ Apr 11 2007, 10:07 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>except for the fact that statistically you're about 5 times as likely to be murdered if you have a gun.</div>How so?

 

[the_pestilence]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (The Captain @ Apr 11 2007, 08:11 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>How so?</div>that's like saying"Kobe Bryant's jersey number is #24""how so?"

 

[ASUFan22]

I also like guns. Every since I was a little boy my family has taught me about weaponry for that one faithful day that Allah calls upon me to do his duty.

 

[Combs]

OK lets try a different approach.Will more or less people be murdered with a ban of guns?Honest answer please.

 

[BrewCityBuck]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Combs @ Apr 11 2007, 10:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>OK lets try a different approach.Will more or less people be murdered with a ban of guns?Honest answer please.</div> Yes. But it's worth it and it's our right. Less people would die if we banned fast food, but it's something people like.

 

[The Captain]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Combs @ Apr 11 2007, 10:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>OK lets try a different approach.Will more or less people be murdered with a ban of guns?Honest answer please.</div>No.Did you even read the article?It said in areas with gun control, violent crime rates skyrocketed. In areas without gun control, violent crime rates were very low.

 

[Something-To-Say]

lol you stupid dipshits, it's not a yes or no question.

 

[Amare320]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Combs @ Apr 11 2007, 10:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>OK lets try a different approach.Will more or less people be murdered with a ban of guns?Honest answer please.</div>Ah! less people, your average person in Australia dosen't have a gun, I rarely see gun related deaths on the news and it's a fact here that people just don't get murdered as much, I can walk across the road without worrying about getting shot. if america didn't have guns it would just make your country safer by a million times but america being america and that guns have been aloud for many years .. I don't know, it might make things worse if guns were banned, it might get people encourged to use guns more than ever. Gun Control is a problem that America needs to sort out.

 

[The Captain]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Something-To-Say @ Apr 11 2007, 10:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>lol you stupid dipshits, it's not a yes or no question.</div>Yeah, you know what I mean. I'm getting sleepy.

 

[Something-To-Say]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (The Captain @ Apr 11 2007, 08:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Yeah, you know what I mean. I'm getting sleepy.</div>And on the plus side I got the best laugh I've had in like a week. 'will more or less deaths happen?''yes''no':HAHAHA:

 

[Combs]

Your article comes from a bunch of hicks running a website who want to keep their guns.New York and Chicago and DC have more gun laws because the damn cities are crime infected regardless...that's the whole reason why they have gun laws. The gun's will not vanish unless there is a national ban on them.That article is so one-sided and slanted it's not even funny, c'mon you're smarter then that.If you think that a criminal will be more inclined to break into a house, if they know that the person inside doesn't have a gun...then fine. But they are goin in that house to steal something..the world can live and recover from that...and the law can handle that. If you both have guns and he does this, likely one of you are going to die..what good comes from that?A lot of times people kill people when they get pissed off. When the fire inside of them burns them too. We've all wanted to kill somebody..but we dont because we know it's not alright. But if you got a gun in your dashboard it's that much easier to do it. If you gotta call around 10 people, wait a few days, hand over $1000 for it..and whatever..even IF(big if) he's lucky enough to get a gun, chances are the dude is probably gonna chill out after that and hopefully change his mind.Even so the gun will be that much easier to track down. Gun resources won't be many. They could eliminate them quickly. Make stuff penaltys. People will think twice.And BCB, how is it worth it if more people are getting killed? What is so worth it about that? To walk around and hold it and act cool? Or to go in the middle of the woods and kill animals?

 

[The Captain]

And I just want to throw in a bit on accidental shootings.The blame should not be simply placed on guns alone. It's the stupidity and recklessness of the people using them. These instances show that the possessors were not educated about the guns, which resulted in accidental shootings.I myself, learned all about guns and how to use them when I was around 4-5 years old. My dad made sure that I knew that they are dangerous and not to be used recklessly. He showed me how they worked, and even let me shoot a little bit under his guidance. This resulted in me not being curious about guns, and the guns didn't need to be locked up because I knew better.Kids don't say "Hey, let's play around with this steak knife! WEEEE!" (Well, maybe STS.)

They know the knife is sharp and could hurt them. Lots of shootings happen because the gun is looked at as a toy.I personally feel that prior to purchasing a firearm, one must undergo a specific training program that will educate them about their gun. If anything, people should be wanting mandatory safes and education classes than gun removal. That's what I'm trying to say. The guns aren't the problem, it's the people who buy them and use them carelessly. Why should the responsible people be punished for stupidity of others?

 

[The Captain]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Combs @ Apr 11 2007, 10:36 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Your article comes from a bunch of hicks running a website who want to keep their guns.New York and Chicago and DC have more gun laws because the damn cities are crime infected regardless...that's the whole reason why they have gun laws. The gun's will not vanish unless there is a national ban on them.That article is so one-sided and slanted it's not even funny, c'mon you're smarter then that.If you think that a criminal will be more inclined to break into a house, if they know that the person inside doesn't have a gun...then fine. But they are goin in that house to steal something..the world can live and recover from that...and the law can handle that. If you both have guns and he does this, likely one of you are going to die..what good comes from that?A lot of times people kill people when they get pissed off. When the fire inside of them burns them too. We've all wanted to kill somebody..but we dont because we know it's not alright. But if you got a gun in your dashboard it's that much easier to do it. If you gotta call around 10 people, wait a few days, hand over $1000 for it..and whatever..even IF(big if) he's lucky enough to get a gun, chances are the dude is probably gonna chill out after that and hopefully change his mind.Even so the gun will be that much easier to track down. Gun resources won't be many. They could eliminate them quickly. Make stuff penaltys. People will think twice.And BCB, how is it worth it if more people are getting killed? What is so worth it about that? To walk around and hold it and act cool? Or to go in the middle of the woods and kill animals?</div><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Jeremy D. Blanks, Ph.D.Dr. Blanks holds a Ph.D. in Inorganic Fluorine and Analytical Chemistry from the University of Alabama (1995). Currently, Dr. Blanks is a Senior Research Scientist with the DuPont Company, which is the leading R&D company in the world. His research interests include fluorinated electronic gases, sub-ppm level analyses, the destruction of perfluorinated compounds, and general fluorine / halogen related chemistry.Up until only a few short years ago, Dr. Blanks would have been characterized as a supporter of many of the gun control schemes currently being offered. However, through extensive research into the issue of gun control and the effects of such measures, he reached the conclusion that firearm ownership by law-abiding citizens saves lives and lowers the crime rate. He is now a strong supporter of self-defense rights and the 2nd Amendment. In addition to self- defense and science related topics, he is interested in politics, education, history, travel, and the Alabama Crimson Tide. Dr. Blanks is married to Dr. Jian Sun-Blanks, who is also a research scientist with DuPont. They have a three-year-old daughter, Jessica Lonnue Crimson. On a side note, Lonnue is Chinese for "daughter of the dragon" and Crimson represents Dr. Blanks' life long passion for the Alabama Crimson Tide.Dr. Blanks has published over a dozen scientific and technical papers through various journals and he has presented his work on numerous occasions at international scientific meetings. Additionally, he has published several articles on self-defense rights in a number of news outlets. He began publishing articles in the area of self-defense rights with the goal of using his background to focus a scientific light on this complicated and often misrepresented topic.Dr. Blanks has been a professional member of the American Chemistry Society for over a decade and is a life member of the National Rifle Association.</div>Sounds like a full blown hick to me.That's sad that guns are the supposed problem. People look at crime in the inner cities and say, "Hey, they are using guns. Take them away, problem solved."People need to look at the root of the problem rather than the branch. Crime will always be there like you said. Isn't that the problem that should be attacked? Not guns? People want the easy way out.The good result? Bad guy dead, good guy and his family alive.See point #1. Guy takes sword, same result. Guy takes big knife, same result. Guy beats him over with a baseball bat in the head over and over, same result.I agree with stricter penalties with gun crimes. I fully do. Punishes the criminals, keeps the law abiding citizens with guns happy.

 

[Something-To-Say]

Yeah, but aside from Dickface Cheney, how many accidental shootings have you heard of?Remember that story months ago about the guy that shot the kids for egging his car or whatever, and I said 'serves them right' and everyone ripped me? People just turn to guns for every little thing that pisses them off. Guns give them confidence. I doubt there would be as thefts since people can just threaten with a gun, they'd have to use real strength and fight off someone. A former friend of mine used an unloaded gun to threaten some people and steal their stuff once(he's in jail btw), but without guns, you're not going to break into a home as quickly. A national gun ban would reduce crime, death, and other things unseen.