The Gun Control Debate

[rebeccajo 14]

Denmark and Finland have high rates of gun ownership and low crime rates.

Switzerland and Israel have high gun ownership rates and low homicide rates.

Focusing on gun ownership misses the big picture and doesn't make sense unless you just don't like guns because they're "bad".

I think gun ownership is glamourized. That's my problem with it.

[garya505 2]

Unless you need me there live so you can point your weapon at me.

that's uncalled for.

Why?

Seems to me many of you rise to a vocally violent defense of something that has no purpose other than violence.

But the image of pointing the weapon is distasteful.

Tsk tsk.

so quick to throw away your rights in this, but so quick to also pitch a fit about your rights with the patriot act are you?

You've lost me.

you don't want the 2nd amendment, but you've been awfully quick to speak out about the patriot act have you not?

The Patriot Act is a load of ####### and an invasion of our privacy. Look to my post above for how I feel about the Second Amendment.

You're just upset because Bush is spying on YOU!

[rebeccajo 14]

Unless you need me there live so you can point your weapon at me.

that's uncalled for.

Why?

Seems to me many of you rise to a vocally violent defense of something that has no purpose other than violence.

But the image of pointing the weapon is distasteful.

Tsk tsk.

so quick to throw away your rights in this, but so quick to also pitch a fit about your rights with the patriot act are you?

You've lost me.

you don't want the 2nd amendment, but you've been awfully quick to speak out about the patriot act have you not?

The Patriot Act is a load of ####### and an invasion of our privacy. Look to my post above for how I feel about the Second Amendment.

You're just upset because Bush is spying on YOU!

He'd be awfully bored with the conversation.

[garya505 2]

Denmark and Finland have high rates of gun ownership and low crime rates.

Switzerland and Israel have high gun ownership rates and low homicide rates.

Focusing on gun ownership misses the big picture and doesn't make sense unless you just don't like guns because they're "bad".

I think gun ownership is glamourized. That's my problem with it.

You can thank Hollywood for that, but serioulsy, I don't think that's your only problem with gun ownership.

[Heracles 417]

Denmark and Finland have high rates of gun ownership and low crime rates.

Switzerland and Israel have high gun ownership rates and low homicide rates.

Focusing on gun ownership misses the big picture and doesn't make sense unless you just don't like guns because they're "bad".

Yes. It is quite laughable how people fail to understand cause and effect. Or that guns don't shoot themselves.

[Heracles 417]

You can thank Hollywood for that, but serioulsy, I don't think that's your only problem with gun ownership.

nah never. There is absolutely no link whatsoever to TV and console games being linked to violence. Not...

After all it is the guns that disconnect people from reality. As well as force people to feel that hurting and killing others is an acceptable option; as long as one feels good.

Edited February 15, 2008 by Boo-Yah!

[Miranda&James 8]

Denmark and Finland have high rates of gun ownership and low crime rates.

Switzerland and Israel have high gun ownership rates and low homicide rates.

Focusing on gun ownership misses the big picture and doesn't make sense unless you just don't like guns because they're "bad".

I think gun ownership is glamourized. That's my problem with it.

I believe that it is violence that is glamorized, not gun ownership. In fact, I'd argue that most people look negatively upon it. However, violence is extremely glamorized thanks to TV, Hollywood, music, and the idea that many young men have that war is really cool. Guns are certainly a mechanism to enact this violence and I won't disagree that that is a problem, but I think that saying that guns are the cause is shortsighted.

[Jaseball 0]

The Patriot Act is a load of ####### and an invasion of our privacy. Look to my post above for how I feel about the Second Amendment.

Actually I am right with you there. Just because you mask something with the word 'Patriot,' does not make it ok. Also, just because you are hiding behind the words, "National Security," it doesn't mean the government should be allowed to do whatever.

The only problem is congress is supposed to stop the president from these sorts of things, but they went along.

You have real cause to spy on someone, then fine, go ahead. Just don't try to pretend that what the US is trying to do is not close to what the communist Chinese do with spying on their people and stripping rights as they see fit.

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

But I don't think any kind of weapon that automatically reloads itself, or fires multiple times from one pull, should be available to anyone but law enforcement. As for protecting myself, I'll take my chances with a ball bat or a meat cleaver and leave the heavy artillery to the boys in blue. I don't think people need to own a bunch of guns - a gun isn't the same thing as stamps or coins. They are weapons. One or two should be enough.

This comment shows your ignorance on the subject. I'm not insulting you just pointing out the truth. I don't think you fully understand what guns are available and to who. Guns that ' fires multiple times from one pull' are not that easy to legally own and rarely used in any crime (legal or illegal).

[Heracles 417]

Actually I am right with you there. Just because you mask something with the word 'Patriot,' does not make it ok. Also, just because you are hiding behind the words, "National Security," it doesn't mean the government should be allowed to do whatever.

The only problem is congress is supposed to stop the president from these sorts of things, but they went along.

You have real cause to spy on someone, then fine, go ahead. Just don't try to pretend that what the US is trying to do is not close to what the communist Chinese do with spying on their people and stripping rights as they see fit.

I am still wondering how you propose we catch terrorist without being able to randomly monitor them. I just saw on CNBC how it takes approximately 200 hours and 100 pages worth of work to setup a warrant through the courts. Therefore it would take about 114 years to get permission to monitor about 5,000 suspects.

[rebeccajo 14]

Actually I am right with you there. Just because you mask something with the word 'Patriot,' does not make it ok. Also, just because you are hiding behind the words, "National Security," it doesn't mean the government should be allowed to do whatever.

The only problem is congress is supposed to stop the president from these sorts of things, but they went along.

You have real cause to spy on someone, then fine, go ahead. Just don't try to pretend that what the US is trying to do is not close to what the communist Chinese do with spying on their people and stripping rights as they see fit.

I am still wondering how you propose we catch terrorist without being able to randomly monitor them. I just saw on CNBC how it takes approximately 200 hours and 100 pages worth of work to setup a warrant through the courts. Therefore it would take about 114 years to get permission to monitor about 5,000 suspects.

If it were only one person filing for all the warrants and one judge issuing them, yes. So the argument is non-sensical.

[Alex+R 0]

Sometime, it would be fun to compare old gun control threads to each other and to this one. My bet would be that all the comments would be about the same.

[rebeccajo 14]

Denmark and Finland have high rates of gun ownership and low crime rates.

Switzerland and Israel have high gun ownership rates and low homicide rates.

Focusing on gun ownership misses the big picture and doesn't make sense unless you just don't like guns because they're "bad".

I think gun ownership is glamourized. That's my problem with it.

You can thank Hollywood for that, but serioulsy, I don't think that's your only problem with gun ownership.

I think I answered how I 'feel' a few posts above. There's nothing more honest I can say.

[garya505 2]

Sometime, it would be fun to compare old gun control threads to each other and to this one. My bet would be that all the comments would be about the same.

How's your headache?

[Heracles 417]

I am still wondering how you propose we catch terrorist without being able to randomly monitor them. I just saw on CNBC how it takes approximately 200 hours and 100 pages worth of work to setup a warrant through the courts. Therefore it would take about 114 years to get permission to monitor about 5,000 suspects.

If it were only one person filing for all the warrants and one judge issuing them, yes. So the argument is non-sensical.

So you don't see anything wrong with wasting thousand of scarce resources in the court room but have a problem with computers listening in on people's calls. It is hard enough, almost impossible, to catch someone even if law enforcement had no rules to follow let alone forcing them to build a case for each wire tap. It is actually ####### like this which contributes to this cat and mouse game police play with criminals here. This sort of anti-law enforcement attitude that allows the mafia, organized crime, gangs, child molesters etc to get away with hurting others because they know the authorities have about 1001 rules to follow; rather than actually do their job and catch the bad guys.

Now that I think about it blaming it on guns are just a cheap cop out. The mafia would have been hunted down like rabid animals abroad but not in America. Thanks to people like yourself they are actually protected by their rights. I mean, #### the victim right. As long as we uphold a persons individual right. Pretty much like this killer's right to choose to kill others.

This goes back to my earlier point. The 2nd Amendment is misinterpreted and outdated right, but the misuse of innocent until proven guilty is okay.

Edited February 15, 2008 by Boo-Yah!