Nobody should legally have a gun, ever.
Only police, military, and other law-enforcement agents should be able to legally have guns.
Law-abiding citizens can legally own guns--no felons, violent criminals, minors, etc.
Give 'em to everybody. The more guns, the better.
Let everybody have any type of firearm they can afford--if you can buy a .50-cal, more power to you.
Firearms
I just ran across a completely stupid post concerning guns that made me realize that there's no gun control topic here. What do y'all think? What extent should there be on gun laws? What kinds of safeties should be required? What types of weapons (i.e. fully-automatics, etc.) should not be allowed?
Last edited by Sasquatch; 06-24-2005 at 06:57 AM.
No one should own mini-guns and heavy artilary. No assult rifles orlike that. Normal hand guns and rifles should be sufficet. If we need to over throw the government eventually...its not like this stuff would be super hard to come by in this country. When all those types of guns were banned the criminals still got them so it can't be that hard.
Felons and minors should not be allowed to own guns. Other than that, no gun control, whatsoever. Anything goes, assault rifles, grenades, rocket launchers, you name it. Using them, however, is a different story.
Every law abiding citizen should be allowed to carry anything they want. If I want to carry a bazooka, I should be allowed.
Guns don't kill people, people do.
ppl with problems or evil intent shoulld not have guns
It looks like the ground had a sex change.
i have no problem will people owning guns
Anything that keeps guns out of the hands of felons and criminals is fine by me. Banning guns doesn't accomplish that. Letting any John Q. Eyetwitch buy an assault rifle over-the-counter doesn't accomplish that.
The answer sits in the delightfully vague zone of "common-sense gun control". It aint perfect, but it's the best we can do.
Legal for everyone, or if not, the English could enter the USA AND INVADE IT!!!
tis an interesting question. countries like canada which allow people to own guns have low gun crime. but america with similar laws are busy shooting each other on a massive scale. that is to do with the failure of american society though.
but what would banning guns acheive. look at what britain did after dumblane. we banned all handguns. and? people handed them over. well only the law abiding folk. the gangsters and scum kept theirs. which makes no sense. the gun ban wouldn't have prevented dumblane anyway. as thomas hamilton held a handgun illegally anyway. it was an over-reaction.
here in britain now the police have called an "amnesty" on air, imitation and bb guns after some baby got shot and killed in glasgow (where else?) because some neds when they were busy shooting at the local fire service putting out a fire. it caused public out cry. and so whenever a kids gets hit by a air gun pellet instead of being worth a small note in the hidden part of a tabloid paper. now it is splashed on the front page. it's a totally reactionary coverage.
and it's not a real amnesty as all the above mentioned guns are not illegal. so you are free to keep them (like me) if you want. concerned parents basicly handed them over and that was it. it's a total failure. is your local ned going to think even if it was made illegal "i better hand it over so i don't get into trouble" is he heck. he'll keep at and the only people who it has influence on are the people who had no thought of shooting people anyway.
it would fail in america as well in the same. like it failed after dunblane here.
but what is the point of owning a gun? to defend yourself? but the guy robbing your house will probably have a gun as well. so it just become a first to shoot wins scenario. one person will die.#
so why so much gun crime anyway when other countries (look at the swiss for instance) have such a low rate. it's society really. and that isn't gonna be changed for a while. but there's no quick solution.
should guns be banned? yes. is it possible to do so? no. is it logical to do so? no. the way america works and it;s high levels of crime would just not permit it. it would leave the weak defenceless. but in theory a removal of all handguns would be a good thing.
what is not needed though is more than one. or a machine gun. or a sniper rifle. if it is purely to protect your home a handgun will suffice. close quarters combat that is what it was designed for. you do not need an m16. neither do you need a cache. you are not fighting a battle. a simple handgun or revolver will protect your home adequetly. a low gauge shotgun (like the one cobain used) is border line. but there is no need for anything else.
they can't even be used for a revolt. revolts ar now impossible after the first world war. why? tanks, planes and lots of other clever military stuff which noone has in their garage. if you were start a lovely revolt then you just end up with tianamen square.
Legal for every citizen above the age of, say, 21, with no criminal or mental record. Criminals will get their fire-arms one way or the other, mostly by duh, criminal methods. Lunatics... well, those aren't very common, and they'd get access to guns anyway, too.
So, we're left with normal people wanting to protect themselves. Nothing wrong with that - it can even decrease (and does) crimes such as rape, murder, burglary and robbery.
Also, please note - almost all (and I'm talking over 95 percent here, last I checked) of gun-related deaths in the US are accidents, were caused by mis-handling or the mis-placing of guns. Learn how to use 'em safely and how to conceal them so no-one without qualification or approval can get to 'em (like kids), and you've solved nearly all of the gun-related problems.
When fighting monsters, be wary not to become one yourself... when gazing into the abyss, bear in mind that the abyss also gazes into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche
The rightful owner of this Ciddie can kiss my arse! :P
Here in America, our entire culture is based mainly on violence. Extreme violence in the media? A-ok perfectly American. Mother's breastfeeding their babies? AH NO SEX! HUMAN BODY! PROTECT THE CHILDREN! I don't have problem with most gun use, but the lift of the assault weapon ban was idiotic. No citizen needs their own personal Uzi. It's not like that this will stop criminals from gaining them, but it could cut down on the many accidents.
"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here this is the War room"
Agreed. Automatic weapons are much easier to mis-handle.No citizen needs their own personal Uzi. It's not like that this will stop criminals from gaining them, but it could cut down on the many accidents.
When fighting monsters, be wary not to become one yourself... when gazing into the abyss, bear in mind that the abyss also gazes into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche
The rightful owner of this Ciddie can kiss my arse! :P
they tried somethin like that, its called the revolutionary war, but their were only 13 colonies, The colonies still won.Originally Posted by Shadow Nexus
It looks like the ground had a sex change.
He was being sarcastic, link. He was just making fun of people who try to justify gun ownership. (People like me, apparently.)
How would we fight off zombies without guns? Can you tell me that?
[/simpsonsreference]
:monster2: One, AH! AH! Two, AH AH! Three, AH AH!
Posting Permissions
