The Gun Control Debate

[garya505 2]

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.

That's right. I have a friend who is a LEO and his gun is just a tool required for his job. I could easily outshoot him any day of the week.

[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.

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.

This isnt about the gun, or any other weapon for that matter. This is about the child. There is something very wrong with the child. Guns don't kill people, people kill people. I have never woken up and wanted to gun down my co-workers because I am sane, responsible and law abiding. I am protecting myself from the very people that do wake up and decide a killing spree is in order that morning.

[Aymerlu 3]

I wouldn't be upset if guns were banned from this country altogether.

Going to get my flame retardant suit now...

I agree Jenn. Anyone can go on and on saying how they have guns and they are responsible. Good for them, but what about all the other people out there that get guns. Just because you don't have a criminal record doesn't mean #######. How many of the people that have gone out on shooting sprees had a clean record? It's too much freedom and too much freedom will cause nothing but trouble in the long run.

I was listening to the radio on the way to work today and they were saying that the there are stories in papers from other countries saying "looking what the right to own a gun is doing in the U.S." Sad really.

I wonder if peoples view on gun control would change if anyone in their life was directly affected by guns. If your brother, sister, son, daughter, mom, dad, friend was a victim of all this gun violence would they be more for tighter gun control.

[Jaseball 0]

It's too much freedom and too much freedom will cause nothing but trouble in the long run.

I can't believe anyone would write this. Too much freedom? Do you honestly believe our government-the same government that creates enormous debt, is killing the middle class, and spends time on steroids in baseball is somehow going to keep you safer by restricting freedom?

Our society really is whacked out. Maybe it is thinking like this that allows our government to spy on citizens, twist immigration laws into 1-2+ year waiting nightmares to get a fiancee visa, or runs off-shore prison camps where they can keep people for 6+ years without rights or representation.

You can give all the freedom in the world to responsible, law abiding folks and they can live to be 100+ without harming anyone.

Or, you can restrict freedom to the highest degree possible, think max security lock up, and there will be plenty of people able to melt plastic cup lids with matches and forming a shank to stab a guard.

[Ban Hammer 14,272]

Being armed is important during times of anarchy and social breakdown. In the neighborhood I lived in as a teenager in India, the only reason our neighborhood was unscathed during the riots of 1991 was because people in our neighborhood patrolled all night with visible (unconcealed) weapons. I don't have a gun myself but I certainly see the value in making sure a populace is well-armed, for times of social breakdown. Can't happen in the US? Perhaps. But it's possible.

Yup, I do totally agree with this and that raises problems in my head about what to do with gun control. I forgot about this possibility/issue in my last post; and it is by far the most sensible (if not the only sensible) good-enough reason I can think of for everyone to have guns.

All the other reasons: self-protection, personal right, the ability to help others in case some "other psycho" happens to have a gun on the street, collecting, whatever else - they all just have too many holes in them for me to take that seriously. Again, to me it all comes down to the sheer numbers of people who die because of guns every year. And most of these gunmen murderers I'd like to add most likely are NOT actually psychos who would have killed anyway in any means they found to; I think there are tons more people walking around in need of help or just having a really, really bad day that see the ease of picking up a gun, than there are Michael-Meyers style completely satanic and dehumanizing 'enemies.'

But I don't really want to debate the issue since most of the arguments are things people have heard before anyway, I doubt anyone's mind is changed, it's not like I'm in a position to actually pass some sort of law, it's not like I'm an expert on any of this (and thus the other 'side' can very easily just quote each sentence of anything I say and put 'um, no' by it in refutation), etc etc. I guess everyone knows everybody else's position, and beyond that it's doubtful it's going to do any good unless we all go collectively study the entire history and legislation of guns and gun murders and gun benefits. People get too unnecessarily defensive about this topic and I can't really be bothered.

and i was just getting warmed up. oh well, go bow out.

I have been trained in firearms since I was 8 years old by my EXTREMELY responsible grandfather. He absolutely 100% made sure that myself and any other family members that came with him to the range did not touch a single weapon before we had safety drilled into our heads. I am not afraid of guns, I respect them and the power they have to do harm when mishandled. In a perfect world everyone would be responsible and guns would only be needed to hunt for food. The world isn't perfect (big revelation). Guns have already pervaded our society and to ban them at this point would only lead to responsible citizens remaining unarmed while those less responsible in society continuing to own them and use them in terrible ways. I would hope that no one on this message board is stupid enough to think that guns being banned would actually lead to people not having them. This country is too large to scour every household to remove contraband weapons. Sure, future purchases of guns would more than likely reduce crime instances and this is of course a good thing, but I do not believe that it would in any way be that hard for anyone wanting a gun to find one on the black market. Our forefathers saw fit to include in our constitution the right to bear arms, believing that it was necessary for citizens to be able to arm themselves in a time of attack or revolution. There will always be people who want to do others harm, and whether they use guns or another weapon, they will find a way to inflict that harm. It's statistics. Blaming this entire issue solely on guns would be irresponsible.

excellent!

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...

not newsworthy.

The way I see it, the problem with guns is how readily they are available for people to buy. I don't have a problem with people having guns. The problem I have is when anyone can walk into a store and buy a gun over the counter.

I fully understand the right to bear arms and all that but at what point does it infringe on other people's right to be safe where they are? In Philadelphia everyday on the news you hear about someone being shot. Everyday and over the stupidest sh!t. The governor tried to get the state legislature to allow Philadelphia to pass its own gun control laws or something to get the guns off the streets and they turned him down. How many people need to die at the hands of criminals for the laws to change?

incorrect.

Wouldn't it be lovely if gun ownership became as socially unacceptable as smoking?

no

[Ban Hammer 14,272]

Just because you don't have a criminal record doesn't mean #######.

guilty even if innocent? now that's a new one.

[garya505 2]

It's interesting to note how many of the people who want more gun control don't even know the restrictions we already have.

Just a thought.

[Jaseball 0]

It's interesting to note how many of the people who want more gun control don't even know the restrictions we already have.

Just a thought.

Ignorance is bliss.

[rebeccajo 14]

Wouldn't it be lovely if gun ownership became as socially unacceptable as smoking?

no

Well, why not? People find it quite fashionable actually to criticize, ostracize and otherwise harass smokers. Seems to me that is done in the name of minding other peoples business, mostly.

It seems to me you are minding my business when you tell me the rights the framers of the Constitution bestowed upon you are more hallowed than the protection of my child in a public place.

[rebeccajo 14]

*double post - sorry*

Edited February 15, 2008 by rebeccajo

[Chica Yeyé 41]

Wouldn't it be lovely if gun ownership became as socially unacceptable as smoking?

no

Well, why not? People find it quite fashionable actually to criticize, ostracize and otherwise harass smokers. Seems to me that is done in the name of minding other peoples business, mostly.

It seems to me you are minding my business when you tell me the rights the framers of the Constitution bestowed upon you are more hallowed than the protection of my child in a public place.

Problem is sister becca, if I had a gun.... each time someone gives me cr@p about my smoking, I would have to shoot them. And then what would Bren do?????

[rebeccajo 14]

It's interesting to note how many of the people who want more gun control don't even know the restrictions we already have.

Just a thought.

Keep blowing that smoke up your own skirt, Gary. Does it help your justification to own a device that has no other purpose on this earth than killing to believe people who disagree with you have no knowledge of current laws on carrying or purchasing?

You're right. We don't need more laws. What we need is for self-obsessed protectionists to stop believing they need to personally own a half-dozen or more devices because each one of them has a unique and different thumbprint for death.

Edited February 15, 2008 by rebeccajo

[Chica Yeyé 41]

It's interesting to note how many of the people who want more gun control don't even know the restrictions we already have.

Just a thought.

Keep blowing that smoke up your own skirt, Gary. Does it help your justification to own a device that has no other purpose on this earth than killing to believe people who disagree with you have no knowledge of current laws on carrying or purchasing?

You're right. We don't need more laws. What we need is for self-obsessed protectionists to stop believing they need to personally own a half-dozen or more devices because each one of them has a unique and different thumbprint for death.

Amen becca. Amen.

[Sister Fracas 5]

You're right. We don't need more laws. What we need is for self-obsessed protectionists to stop believing they need to personally own a half-dozen or more devices because each one of them has a unique and different thumbprint for death.

Yes, and exactly how well are Jaseball's rifles and shotgun protecting him?

[garya505 2]

Wouldn't it be lovely if gun ownership became as socially unacceptable as smoking?

no

Well, why not? People find it quite fashionable actually to criticize, ostracize and otherwise harass smokers. Seems to me that is done in the name of minding other peoples business, mostly.

It seems to me you are minding my business when you tell me the rights the framers of the Constitution bestowed upon you are more hallowed than the protection of my child in a public place.

The smoker in a public place is affecting the lungs of others in that public place. The law-abiding citizen with a legally-owned firearm in a public place harms nobody, unless he's a criminal or nutcase like the Illinois shooter.

The only way you could keep the guns from the nutcases would be by making all gun ownership illegal, in which case only criminals and nutcases would have the guns they got ILLEGALLY.