The Gun Control Debate

[AtlantiCat 0]

I want to know where are all the responsible gun owners to take out a crazed psycho when something happens? Seems that is always the argument, that they will be ready to protect themselves and others, yet it's only the odd "granny shoots intruder" story tht you hear about. So where are all of the gun owners ready to protect us all...

Last I checked, it was illegal to carry a concealed weapon in Illinois. A gun can only be transported by vehicle with the bullets in the glovebox and the unloaded weapon in the trunk. If I can't carry my gun with me, loaded, I'm not going to be much use in taking out a crazed psycho in a public place.

That's why you hear about grannies shooting intruders. They're allowed to keep loaded guns in their homes.

If we all did it the illegal way, we'd be jailed, regardless of whether or not we potentially saved lives by shooting a psycho. Since we do it the legal way, we're useless unless defending our homes.

Damned if you do and damned if you don't.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Criminals aren't stupid, they're not going to go legally buy and register a .45 then go out the next day to rob a bank or kill someone.

These aren't career criminals who are going on these shooting sprees, killing randomly and at will. Check the records of most these shooters have no prior run-in with the law.

[SteveLaura 0]

[rebeccajo 14]

However, I will share a troubling experience I had. My house was burglarized during XMas and the thieves went through my house and ransacked it, however to this day the only things I see missing are: an air rifle, a .22 rifle, and my shotgun - They specifically took the firearms.

Or a kid takes a legally purchased gun from his Dad's locked gunsafe, loads it, and goes down the street to school and blows up his classmates.

It's so easy for criminals to get guns because America is in love with guns. You can break into a house and the odds are better than 50/50 you are going to be able to steal a weapon.

Wouldn't it be lovely if gun ownership became as socially unacceptable as smoking? You know the way people sneer at you when you light up; separate areas (if any) in restaurants for the smokers; all your friends and neighbors telling you how bad it is for you that you smoke?

Funny - you can't point a cigarette at somebody and it will kill them. But there's all this social stigma.

Whenever it becomes 'unfashionable' or 'unacceptable' to own a gun, we might have a solution to the problem. Until then, gun owners will continue to twist their Constitutional rights in the face of parents of slain children.

[garya505 2]

Gun control means keeping two hands on your gun and hitting what you shoot at.

[britty 1]

I live in VA, but only about 15 mins from DC. Crime in DC is at an unacceptable level, whilst crime here in VA is substantially lower. Whilst there are lots of contributing factors for crime rates, you rarely hear of a break-in in Northern VA, whilst they are ten a penny in DC. Criminals get shot entering homes in VA. They don't in DC.

[britty 1]

I live in VA, but only about 15 mins from DC. Crime in DC is at an unacceptable level, whilst crime here in VA is substantially lower. Whilst there are lots of contributing factors for crime rates, you rarely hear of a break-in in Northern VA, whilst they are ten a penny in DC. Criminals get shot entering homes in VA. They don't in DC.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Gun control means keeping two hands on your gun and hitting what you shoot at.

Gary, if there was a way to prevent that school shooting, would you be in favor of it, even if it included tighter restrictions on gun sales?

[rebeccajo 14]

Gun control means keeping two hands on your gun and hitting what you shoot at.

Gary, if there was a way to prevent that school shooting, would you be in favor of it, even if it included tighter restrictions on gun sales?

This should be a good answer.

[Jaseball 0]

Please keep in mind that in order to get access to my guns a CRIMINAL broke into my home. Also, if I could get a concealed carry license my gun would be with me.

Our gun laws only restrict law abiding folks. Buying a gun, owning a gun, transportation of gun, using guns - there are plenty of restrictive laws out there, but if you are a criminal or a psycho you don't pay attention or care about any law.

How is passing more laws going to help when existing laws are being ignored?

Why are people so concerned with a 'tool,' that can be used for either evil or to save people or defend yourself when it is the person who went crazy or is a criminal that is the real problem.

Also, how many anti-gun people are also anti-death penalty? In the off chance that these psychos live after their rampage, how many anti-gun people want them put to death vs., housing, feeding, paying for medical, etc., for the rest of their lives?

I mean, I really think some people are deluded and believe we are or should be living in a utopia when the reality is very, very different.

[Sister Fracas 5]

I want to know where are all the responsible gun owners to take out a crazed psycho when something happens? Seems that is always the argument, that they will be ready to protect themselves and others, yet it's only the odd "granny shoots intruder" story tht you hear about. So where are all of the gun owners ready to protect us all...

Last I checked, it was illegal to carry a concealed weapon in Illinois. A gun can only be transported by vehicle with the bullets in the glovebox and the unloaded weapon in the trunk. If I can't carry my gun with me, loaded, I'm not going to be much use in taking out a crazed psycho in a public place.

That's why you hear about grannies shooting intruders. They're allowed to keep loaded guns in their homes.

If we all did it the illegal way, we'd be jailed, regardless of whether or not we potentially saved lives by shooting a psycho. Since we do it the legal way, we're useless unless defending our homes.

Damned if you do and damned if you don't.

Yes, exactly...then it shouldn't be used as an argument FOR gun ownership like I have heard in the past.

[garya505 2]

Gun control means keeping two hands on your gun and hitting what you shoot at.

Gary, if there was a way to prevent that school shooting, would you be in favor of it, even if it included tighter restrictions on gun sales?

That's a loaded question. (no pun intended)

The guy was obviously a nut case intent on killing people for whatever reason. If he didn't have a gun he would probably just drive his car into a crowd of people or something.

Did he have a criminal record? Did he have a record of mental problems? How did he get the gun(s) used? Until we know these things, it's impossible to know if gun sale restrictions would make any difference, and what type of restrictions would prevent this type of crime.

I don't believe the tightening of gun sale restrictions that we have done over the past few decades have done much, if anything to prevent such shootings, so I have little reason to believe that more restrictions would do anything either. I'm a strong believer in the right to self defense, and I think the major impact of more restrictions on gun sales would only be to hamper people's ability to defend themselves.

[britty 1]

However, I will share a troubling experience I had. My house was burglarized during XMas and the thieves went through my house and ransacked it, however to this day the only things I see missing are: an air rifle, a .22 rifle, and my shotgun - They specifically took the firearms.

Or a kid takes a legally purchased gun from his Dad's locked gunsafe, loads it, and goes down the street to school and blows up his classmates.

It's so easy for criminals to get guns because America is in love with guns. You can break into a house and the odds are better than 50/50 you are going to be able to steal a weapon.

Wouldn't it be lovely if gun ownership became as socially unacceptable as smoking? You know the way people sneer at you when you light up; separate areas (if any) in restaurants for the smokers; all your friends and neighbors telling you how bad it is for you that you smoke?

Funny - you can't point a cigarette at somebody and it will kill them. But there's all this social stigma.

Whenever it becomes 'unfashionable' or 'unacceptable' to own a gun, we might have a solution to the problem. Until then, gun owners will continue to twist their Constitutional rights in the face of parents of slain children.

There are thousands of items that can be used as weapons. What if a kid takes a kitchen knife and goes to school and stabs his classmates, what if a kid steals his dad's car and then mows down a group of children crossing the street? The list is endless. If a child is so disturbed that he or she is intent on causing harm or death, then there is something wrong with the child, not his father's gun. It is unacceptable to prohibit law abiding citizens from owning guns. I don't give a hoot about social stigmas. I enjoy a cigarette now and again but I don't try and burn people with the lit end ! If someone breaks into my home they cannot access any of my firearms. They are locked in safes, in a locked room. There is one beside my bed however, and woe betide any criminal trying to enter that room.

[Jaseball 0]

I want to know where are all the responsible gun owners to take out a crazed psycho when something happens? Seems that is always the argument, that they will be ready to protect themselves and others, yet it's only the odd "granny shoots intruder" story tht you hear about. So where are all of the gun owners ready to protect us all...

Last I checked, it was illegal to carry a concealed weapon in Illinois. A gun can only be transported by vehicle with the bullets in the glovebox and the unloaded weapon in the trunk. If I can't carry my gun with me, loaded, I'm not going to be much use in taking out a crazed psycho in a public place.

That's why you hear about grannies shooting intruders. They're allowed to keep loaded guns in their homes.

If we all did it the illegal way, we'd be jailed, regardless of whether or not we potentially saved lives by shooting a psycho. Since we do it the legal way, we're useless unless defending our homes.

Damned if you do and damned if you don't.

Yes, exactly...then it shouldn't be used as an argument FOR gun ownership like I have heard in the past.

Actually it is an argument that our gun laws only restrict law abiding citizens and should be changed, so that anyone registered, trained, and checked each year should be able to have a concealed carry license.

I know anti-gun people may also find this hard to believe, but many gun owners are more knowledgeable and better trained than LEO's, unless the LEO is also an enthusiast.

[rebeccajo 14]

However, I will share a troubling experience I had. My house was burglarized during XMas and the thieves went through my house and ransacked it, however to this day the only things I see missing are: an air rifle, a .22 rifle, and my shotgun - They specifically took the firearms.

Or a kid takes a legally purchased gun from his Dad's locked gunsafe, loads it, and goes down the street to school and blows up his classmates.

It's so easy for criminals to get guns because America is in love with guns. You can break into a house and the odds are better than 50/50 you are going to be able to steal a weapon.

Wouldn't it be lovely if gun ownership became as socially unacceptable as smoking? You know the way people sneer at you when you light up; separate areas (if any) in restaurants for the smokers; all your friends and neighbors telling you how bad it is for you that you smoke?

Funny - you can't point a cigarette at somebody and it will kill them. But there's all this social stigma.

Whenever it becomes 'unfashionable' or 'unacceptable' to own a gun, we might have a solution to the problem. Until then, gun owners will continue to twist their Constitutional rights in the face of parents of slain children.

There are thousands of items that can be used as weapons. What if a kid takes a kitchen knife and goes to school and stabs his classmates, what if a kid steals his dad's car and then mows down a group of children crossing the street? The list is endless. If a child is so disturbed that he or she is intent on causing harm or death, then there is something wrong with the child, not his father's gun. It is unacceptable to prohibit law abiding citizens from owning guns. I don't give a hoot about social stigmas. I enjoy a cigarette now and again but I don't try and burn people with the lit end ! If someone breaks into my home they cannot access any of my firearms. They are locked in safes, in a locked room. There is one beside my bed however, and woe betide any criminal trying to enter that room.

So you are saying that since the gun is readily available, the would-be assailant chose it over his Dad's car or a kitchen knife?

That's consoling to me. I mean, since he can spray an entire room in under 1 minute with the gun, I'm feeling oh so much better about that logic.