I saw a bumper sticker once that said "Blaming guns for killing people is like blaming spoons for making Rosie O'Donnell Fat." |
|
I know. The "Guns don't kill people, people kill people" sentiment is ridiculous. Maybe it is the person killing the person, but having an AK-47 makes the job much easier. I personally think no one except law enforcement should be allowed to own a gun for actual use (i.e. for historical purposes or a collection, with no ammo is fine). |
|
I saw a bumper sticker once that said "Blaming guns for killing people is like blaming spoons for making Rosie O'Donnell Fat." |
|
[23:17:23] <+Kaniaz> "You think I want to look like Leo Volont? Don't you dare"
If we didn't have guns then we'd go around kicking each other's heads in instead. That and I guess once you invent something you can't "univent" it - i.e. we've made guns so might as well give them out than make (impossible) attempts to take them away. |
|
So basicly people are not allowed to defend themself them? If a criminal has a gun the only way you have a chance of living is if you have a gun. Its as simple as that. 99% of the time a police officer won't be around to help you. So you either defend yourself or die. |
|
Have you seen Lord of War? One of my favorite quotes from the movie is: |
|
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.”
- Voltaire (1694 - 1778)
The difference between what we do and what we are capable of doing would suffice to solve most of the world's problems.
- Mohandas Gandhi
As I said I am against anyone owning a gun, even for self-defence, but since if no innocent citizens owned guns then criminals would have way to much power, getting rid of guns is impossible. What I would like to see is people having to pass much stronger checks before owning a gun. Also what we really need is a useful law enforcement system. I have a relative in California who was held at gunpoint by some criminals, who were robbing the furniture store she works at. These two people went on a robbery spree lasting over one year, and resulting in well over 100 robberies before being caught. Is that pathetic or what? If the law enforcement spent less time stopping people on speeding, and more time actually stopping criminals we'd have much less of a problem. I mean over 11,000 gun related deaths in America is pathetic, and inexcusable considering the amount of criminals who actually get caught. |
|
I agree with all of you, guns are nasty, but they can't be uninvented. And as long as criminals have it, we have to be able to defend ourselves. |
|
[23:17:23] <+Kaniaz> "You think I want to look like Leo Volont? Don't you dare"
At one hand I do think guns are retarded |
|
Everything works out in the end, sometimes even badly.
Actually not. If trade and manufacturing of firearms is legally restricted, then the price will become prohibitive to all but the wealthiest of criminals who will have to resort Cottage Manufacturers (which exist in great numbers in Pakistan and Afghanistan... where Government does not have the reach or the will to interdict their activities). |
|
But even in Bagdad, where we bust down doors to find weapon piles, with thousands of armed men patrolling the streets, there are still AK-47s available for every Joe that wants one. And to do the same in the US would be heavily protested--comparable to military rule. It wouldn't survive in a democratic society--plus, when such measures are taken, the demand for firearms will rise. Currently, in the US, you're much more likely to be gunned down by a moderately expensive 9mm than a dirt-cheap AK-47. But when people's doors are getting busted down and their guns taken, you'd better bet that somebody, somewhere will jump on in to fill the void, and they'll bring the heavy stuff--no more semi automatics or pistols, we're talking assault rifles and RPGs. There's always somebody willing to arm the populace, and if you give the populace a reason to desire arms, they'll find a way in. |
|
[23:17:23] <+Kaniaz> "You think I want to look like Leo Volont? Don't you dare"
Don't be such a pessimist. |
|
Personally, I find your view much more pessimistic. |
|
[23:17:23] <+Kaniaz> "You think I want to look like Leo Volont? Don't you dare"
The idea of disarming the public is great, but shoot on sight, and capital offence for having a gun is totally unreasonable, and unethical. Gangmembers wouldn't disarm, but instead would buy more guns to protect themselves from the police officers, who are supposed to shoot them. Penalties like a minimum fine of $100,000 and/or 5-10 years (plus an extra year for every $10,000 dollars you can't pay) in federal prison would do the trick just as well in scaring many people people away from a gun. Also, a real law enforcement would be nice. The image of the police needs to be changed from the doughnut eating fatass picking on minorities and teenagers, and stopping them on ridiculous offenses that he would never stop a fully grown white man on, to an image of highly trained people taking out criminals, finding weapons, and helping the community. Think about how useful the police could be if they spent less time stopping people 'cause they're going 72 in a 65 mph zone, and spent more time protecting the public and solving the real crimes. Especially stop crime in the "hood". People who live in high-crime neighborhoods will often buy a gun to defend themselves against the gangmenbers with guns, making more people have guns, making more people buy guns, creating a loop. Lastly, something that would help, is giving double the gun's value to anyone who turns in a gun. This may be expensive for the government, but I know if I owned a gun, i would happily trade it in for some money. |
|
Notice that most gun related crimes are NOT remotely associated with assault weapons. Most encounters are less than five rounds. Yet a huge stick is the high capacity magazines. This looks like good reasoning and because of that, anti gun activist go around preaching that this level of weaponry is not necessary. |
|
Whether it's possible depends on whether people are willing to learn from history. But really, whether it's possible is not as important a question as whether it's preferable. I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone willing to trade the occasional fear of one's neighbor for the constant fear of tyranny and a corrupt, militaristic, government regime. |
|
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.”
- Voltaire (1694 - 1778)
The difference between what we do and what we are capable of doing would suffice to solve most of the world's problems.
- Mohandas Gandhi
So basicly you want a fascist form of government? Luckly for me your in the vast minority when you say that. Most people who want to get rid of guns are atleast well intentioned, and don't promote putting fear back into the population to get them under control. Its nice that you used nazi germany as the example. I doubt you want that form of government but thats exactly what you would get. |
|
|
|
My avatar suggests my opinion. |
|
"Pain is just weakness leaving your body "
Adopted by Dudesuperior
Lucid Dreams: 4
I have an air pistol that uses small yellow plastic pellets. It's very accurate and a stress reliever at times. I can use it indoors with a little gel target. I have a real one as well but I don't really go to the range. |
|
LD's Since Joining: 6
Bookmarks