Gun Control, Really?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Woody, Apr 19, 2007.

  1. Woody

    Woody Musical Creationist

    Abother senseless mass murder brings up the issue again. This time on an american college campus.

    Guns have been around sense the revolutionary war in 1776, and there is a constitutional right for americans to bear firearms for their own personal protection. When was personal protection needed more than it is now?

    I personally know a doctor and a dentist that defended their own lives with a hand gun while at the knifepoint of their assailants. They had money, their assailants did not. They did what the police could not do for them -- they protected their own lives by killing their attackers.

    The liberal minded exclaim, "This isn't the wild west anymore!" Oh really, it isn't? Actually it's worse than the wild west. Back then you never heard of serial killers walking into restaurants and randomly shooting people with their guns. There were college campuses back then, and schools too -- and there were guns. So what's changed?

    And here is the real clincher: a nation that can't control its own borders from the steady flow of illegal aliens is expected to control guns with a gun contol law. Like a law really makes a difference for someone that's determined to break it. There is a law here against murdering people.

    Maybe there should be a gun control law in Iraq. That would really solve all the problems there, wouldn't it? :shrug:
    Last edited: Apr 19, 2007
  2. phlogistician

    phlogistician Banned

    Woody, how much cash was your Doctor friend carrying? I'd love to know how much he values human life.
  3. Vega

    Vega Banned

    It's time to develop some smart guns that would not open fire on a target unless it senses a threat!
  4. heliocentric

    heliocentric Registered Senior Member

    The problem with pro-gun logic is, if you follow it to its ultimate conclusion you end up with absolutely everyone, including children bearing arms.

    That's moving in the entirely wrong direction, you need to be moving the other way - taking guns gradually out of circulation.
    Yes you'll always have the odd few who manage to get hold of illegal fire-arms, but if you look at how well illegal gun sales have been quelled in European countries its completely self-evident that it is possible to almost completely take them out of circulation.

    In the long run you end up with less deaths by taking guns out peoples hands, its a complete non-topic really.
    Its only ever Americans in the developed west who ive ever seen atempt to argue against this.
    Ive a feeling this issue is much more to do with bad-habits simply asking becomming accepted as the 'way things' are. Rather than any kind of logic.

    Change is good people, society wont crumble beneath your feet.
  5. i would have shot the mother fucker aswell if i had a gun and he pulled a knife on me asking for my cash,

    why would the doc give him cash knowing he could shoot his ass without bieng harmed? i value decent human life, but why does a robber brandishing a knife threatening your life deserve to not get a few caps in his ass?

    respect to the pistol tottin doc,

  6. that is a very good post/reply.

    i do actualy agree with you even though i want a gun to protect myself! how strange. but you are right america has the highest death rate due to shootings in the west and they also have the most amount of legal guns.

    the government teach people that you need guns because the government makes money from the sale of guns.

    just like smoking the government tells you they are against smoking but they are not they love people smoking and giving them tax money, and people dying off early and not claiming a pension is a nice bonus also.

  7. leopold

    leopold i miss my coco.

    in the "good 'ol days" children took their guns to school.
    i personally remember kids driving their parents pickup truck to school with a gunrack full of rifles, of course nobody blasted up the schools.

    no, what has happened here is that americans have grown into a bunch of mulling babies, a pack of gutless cowards. when these assholes realize americans will fuck them up they will stop this shit.
  8. Buffalo Roam

    Buffalo Roam Registered Senior Member


    No the government doesn't teach you that you need guns, the criminal does that quit well.
    And the fact that the government doesn't have a responsibility to protect you as a Individual speaks for it self, to sue the government you have to get permission from the government to do so, and by case law they have built the law so as to the fact that there is no right to protection by the Police, or the Government, and this is true of every country in the world, so with these laws as facts, do you need a gun? Look around the world, how many people are dieing ever day, and do the Government do any more than absolutely necessary, no and it is ever country that operates in this manner.
  9. Buffalo Roam

    Buffalo Roam Registered Senior Member


    I to remember taking a gun to school to go hunting after classes, I remember me and my friends on weekends walking across the county hunting rabbits, squirrels and grouse and no one even raised a eyebrow, no parents, just us, we could stop by any farm to get a drink, and many the time the wife would give us cookies or fresh bread while we relaxed, and we often left some of the game we killed for them to enjoy for their supper, but the time were different, we were taught responsibility for our actions, and that to have the right to do what we did required taking responsibility for our action, the worst thing that could happen in our lives back then was to be judged not responsible enough to have a gun, and have it taken away for being a jackass with it.
  10. is this just the US government or uk aswell? because i hope that does not include the uk government because we are not allowed to own guns, or carry knives, mace/ cs gas or even a metal pole, or night stick on the street to protect ourselves.

    why do american police say they are there to "protect and serv" then if they are not there to protect anybody.

  11. is it just me or did that last post by buffalo roam strike an image of him looking like elma thudd in your minds ?

    ima huntin wabbits. :)

  12. leopold

    leopold i miss my coco.

    no, not really.
    try killing a squirrel in a tree at 50 yards with a shotgun and see how much it reminds you of "elmer fudd".
  13. nietzschefan

    nietzschefan Thread Killer

    Well From what I've read on Thomas Jefferson, the intent for the "right to bear arms" was for people to organize militias and defend the country from attack. Also to put down an oppressive federal government ;)

    I guess hunting too back then.

    Rifles are required for all these objectives. I am the strongest advocate for free rifle use. I strongly believe rifles=democracy.

    Pistols however are, truely secondary arms for warfare. You have to truely be an expert to be able to seriously compete in a firefight beyond 50 feet. They are for picking on people without them and very close combat and little else.

    In Canada we have very tight restrictions on pistols. Even rifles, you now have to take a course in safety. Pistols are for target practice(sport) only. Not allowed to hunt with them. All weapons must now be registered(previously only pistols but liberals made longarms registered too - to the bill of 2 billion dollars+a whole new government dept!). Pistols found on even a legal owner better be locking in the trunk of the vehicle and a MAP to the gun range, showing the route from home to the gun range CLEARLY marked. If you are outside this route you are charged with violating the gun law.

    None-the-less, we had a guy in Montreal do a mass killing(actually mass wounding - only killed 1) at a college last year. He did in fact appropriate his weapons legally(though did have some knives/hand weapons which were illegal).

    There seems to be a polarization to this issue. All or none. The answer must lay in between. I do not like the gun laws in Canada, for the most part the punish and are costly to the law-abider and simply ignored by the criminal. Due to the proximity to some of the most open gun lawed U.S states(Love Alaska LOL), criminals have easy easy access to guns(and cheaper).

    Speaking of Alaska, the State with NO restrictions on weapons. Anyone know if they have a problem with "guns"? I know they DO have a fair number of suicides even for it's small population, no mass killing.

    I think that it IS too easy to get a handgun in America. It's rediculous frankly. At least a waiting period in all states, jeez.

    These mass killings will still occur and more often as people become more and more cogs in the machine, less morality taught to them, basically more abberance in the general population.

    We in North America, need to take a page from Japan and teach morality in the school system(even a basic "the right for you to extend your fist ends at my nose"). Some kids are clearly not getting it at home.
  14. leopold

    leopold i miss my coco.

    the problem here is that banning guns will not ban murder. guns just makes the process a little easier and somewhat cleaner. if you don't believe me then ask your friendly neighborhood IED maker.
  15. Buffalo Roam

    Buffalo Roam Registered Senior Member


    By law ever state in the nation has a waiting period.
  16. nietzschefan

    nietzschefan Thread Killer

    I agree, the media seems to be pointing the finger everywhere and trying to say "We must make it impossible for this to happen", which is in fact, not possible. Watching CNN I'm startled to see how many are wanting to be able to put people in jail simply for what they THINK. WTF is this the minority report movie becoming reality? That between CNNs run-on commercials for drugs and the litany of sideeffects mumbled at the end of commericals. Things that make you go "Hmmmmm".
  17. leopold

    leopold i miss my coco.

    unless the law recently has been changed texas will sell you a gun on the spot.
  18. nietzschefan

    nietzschefan Thread Killer

    I thought I saw on CNN the propaganda network, that the shooter just had to wait in the store while his background check cleared. I mean 2 week - wait for you guns, waiting period.
  19. Buffalo Roam

    Buffalo Roam Registered Senior Member

    leopold99, yes I just checked it out and there are several states that do sell on the spot, but for some reason I thought that there was a federal requirement to have a waiting period.
    But what good would a waiting period have done, the guns were purchased long before Cho went on his temper tantrum. and would have been cleared for purchase because the was no court ordered commitment, or criminal act that would have disqualified him from the purchase, and as it was shown he was intent on doing this act so he would have found the weapons needed to carry out the act be they Guns, Explosives, or Chemicals, recipes for explosives and chemicals are on the internet for anyone who wants them.
  20. travis

    travis Registered Senior Member

Share This Page