Yeah, screw gun control! - Page 2

Show me some numbers that the number of uses of guns for successful, legal self-defense in a given period even remotely approaches the number of accidental shootings and I'll reconsider. I don't know where you live, but I've lived in several cities in the midwest and California that were not beset by groups of rampaging Visigoths that stormed helpless people's homes by night.

They're also much more likely to kill whoever they hit. And although I'm confident in my ability to use a gun responsibly, I know that I'm capable of making mistakes, and so I'd rather not play for keeps. This could end up biting me in the ass in the event that my house is broken into, and I'm home (which I probably wouldn't be), and the intruder is not scared off just by my waking up and getting out the gun (which he probably would be), and he's so intent on murdering me that one of us absolutely has to end up dead (which I don't know why anyone would be), and he's just such a bad motherfucker that regular, small caliber bullets would not be enough to incapacitate him, but would just serve to piss him off more. So basically, given that I have the need, skill and time to defend myself with a firearm, the only way I'd need anything more than a single, moderately sized pistol to do so is if my home is in fact invaded by Jason Vorhees or a Nicaraguan death squad. I'll take my chances.

Well, sorry, but I don't think your plugging bottles has the same social utility as automobiles and basic plumbing.

It's hard to say what crazy people will do; maybe they'll get satisfaction from knitting sweaters out of authentic hobo hair. But over the last decade, with access to both guns and bombmaking materials, they all seem to be choosing guns. But it doesn't matter, because allowing easy access to firearms in order to keep crazy people away from bombs is such a retarded argument that Ted Nugent wouldn't touch it if he was hopped up on crystal meth. You're actually arguing for arming the insane.

...and now see what happens at a university in a country with tight gun control...

See? The easy availibility of guns have nothing to do with school shooting death tolls in the US, nothing at all...

Huh?

See, the main problem is that

1- You have a country that has more guns than people

and

2- Having a culture that is based upon weapon-owning as perfectly normal.

You can rid of certain types of guns, or restrict access to them, the thing is that point #2 is the main problem. It will help to have tight gun control, but a lot of people in the US want their guns, and they have the law to back it up.

Too bad the Founding Fathers never thought about automatic weapons.

This quote is so awesomely stupid. So all crimes are committed with illegally-purchased guns now?

Not all. But, most violent criminals are repeat offenders and would not be able to buy a gun at a gun store (due to the NICS background check, name going on file, and mandatory fingerprinting, which isn't something I'd imagine any would-be criminal, repeat offender or not, would voluntarily subject themselves to. And this is just in a state with comparitavely lax gun laws) on account of their record, so either they buy their guns illegally (which is incredibly easy to do, by the way. Speaking from experience here.) or buy them legitimately from private sellers-- who still, by law, need to go through an FFL. Now, you tell me which is more likely.

Try about 2 million times a year. I've heard numbers as high as 2.5, and low as 1, but I'm going with Department of Justice on this one. As for accidental firearm deaths, they're somewhere below accidental deaths by car accident, drowning, falling, or poisoning. But if you're not willing to take my word for it, there's nothing stopping you from looking it up yourself. Further, accidental firearm deaths could be reduced greatly by some mandatory education on firearm safety. If everybody followed the Four Rules, there would not be any accidental deaths by firearm. And for little kids who don't know any better, that's why you need to lock them the fuck up. Ought to be common sense.

Not really. With proper shot placement the type of round you have doesn't really matter, and what difference does it make whether somebody gets shot with a 9mm JHP vs. a .45 FMJ? None, really. Though actually it sounds like a decent idea: if more people migrate to .45s instead of 9mms for the extra stopping power, .45 ammo would be cheaper and more prevalent. Good news for me, 17$ a box is too damned much.

And stop saying "need" godammit. I shouldn't have to have a NEED for anything I buy, I work for my money and I want to spend it on whatever I please. But apparently having TWO (gasp!) guns is just too much, probably the chances of me snapping and going on a rampage increases exponentially with each new gun I add to my collection. Sounds reasonable.

That was never my argument. One of the requirements for buying a gun is that you can't be fucking insane and I think we can both agree that that's pretty fucking reasonable. I don't know how bombs got into the argument in the first place.

I don't see that as a problem, personally.

Bullshit. If people thought it was perfectly normal I wouldn't be arguing about any of this bullshit. If people thought it was perfectly normal, they wouldn't call the police if a guy walks into a grocery store with a gun on his hip. If it were fucking normal, half the population of this country wouldn't be turning into quivering, frightened little bitches at the mere sight of a goddamned piece of metal.

Yea, they were pretty dense. I guess they just assumed that all technological progress stopped with the invention of the steam engine and lightning rod.

You're saying there are 5,479 legal defense uses by private gun owners every single day in the United States? Linkage, please.

I'd like a citation showing that 150 million people turn into "quivering, frightened little bitches at the mere sight of a goddamned piece of metal."

Yet morons cry like babies and get offended by the very idea of restricting firearms, let alone removing their weapon. There's a difference between having a shotgun while doing your groceries, and having it in your trunk. Yet the result is the same; easy access to weapons. In a few seconds you go get your weapon, if it's not on your person.

That's because half the population of the United States aren't complete retards that are bent on having a "mean of defense" that are of an almost exclusive offensive nature. The fact is: Guns and the US have a story since the beginning, more than any country in the world. It's in your constitution.

Why not go buy a gun for your dog, in case he need to defend himself ?

No thumbs.

That's not an acceptable excuse for a redneck.

Yeah, I was waiting for something along the lines of "And the dog?"

A quick Google search offers much evidence of the skewing of self-defense gun usage numbers. One of the top ones here.

2 million my ass.

http://www.saf.org/LawReviews/KleckAndGertz2.htm
The 2 million was from the Kleck study, so I'll go with a low pick instead:
http://saf.org/LawReviews/SouthwickJr1.htm

Oh, and another redneck comment? Fantastic, I'm done here.

So no citation then.

They're either lying, biased, or just stupid, I'm sure.

Well, I'm going to go the informal route for a moment. Accordng to the conservative end of these estimates, that means just under 1% of the US population stops a crime every year, specifically with a gun. Based on that, about of all the people I've known for the last 15 years, about one in 7 of them should have pulled a Bronson with a gun at some point. In actuality, it's more like 0 in several hundred. Now, maybe the demographics of my experience are really skewed, but where are all of these altercations occurring to balance it out? Are they clustered in the South or the Northeast or something, or in age groups that I don't interact with?

So, yeah, I'm going to go with a little bit of all three. What does it mean that a violent crime is "deterred" by gun ownership anyway, if it's a separate category from armed civilians stopping crimes, and why is there 150% margin of error on it?

First, I suppose it depends on where you live. Second, the type of people you associate yourselves with. Third, I don't know many people, but of those I do know, there are a few who've had to pull a gun. Didn't have to pull the trigger, and I believe that's what they mean by deterrence--the combination of potential victim+gun stopped the crime that would have been commited had said potential victim not been armed at the time. THAT happens a lot more often than people "pulling Bronsons".

(I suppose next somebody's going to tell me that I associate with small-dicked survivalist gun nuts.)

Oh, for what it's worth, I lived in Oregon. A pot smoking hippie blue state. With a lot of gun owners and so little crime it's BORING.

You guys are silly. Guns are good, and they're not going away anytime soon, etc. If guns scare you, I'm sorry, go paint your toenails and try not to think about it, bro. Worst case scenario: Zombies overrun the earth, well, just run them over with your hybrid. I'll be on my roof unshaven and wearing a headband with a life expectancy of: better than you.

Guns are good? That's detestable. Guns make it easy to end the life of another human being. Anything that's readily available that exists specifically for the purpose of killing other human beings should never be considered good.

Alright I'll give you that. I'd get rid of mine if nobody used them, but sadly that's not the kind of world we live in. Ah well, I'm not planning on killing anyone. Good on me.

Guns are inanimate objects, they're neither good nor bad. I don't know how people can get so confused over a fact this simple.

So is anthrax. Let's legalise it!

Does anthrax kill you instantly? It's pretty useless as far as self defense goes... just carrying a bag of it and throwing it in someone's face and all. Bad argument, sir. You sound like one of those looney Pro-lifers. "Well, why not just legalize murder too???" Well, that's just not gonna happen so why even bother being sarcastic about it?

See, I don't even have really strong feelings about gun control; I tend to get involved because it seems to breed really stupid arguments.

Guns are weapons. Weapons are "good" in the sense that they allow you to defend yourself from people with weapons.

Guns absolutely do not have a non-violent purpose. Just because you direct violence at inanimate objects doesn't mean that it's peaceful, or constructive, or whatever term you want to use.

I don't have a problem with guns themselves, I have a problem with people who are so terrified of being a victim of crime they feel the need to arm themselves. There are hundreds of dangers far more likely to happen to these people in everyday life that they probably take no precautions against whatsoever, but the prospect of being a crime victim drives them to arm themselves. I just find it baffling.

Terrified? No, not really. Mostly just people who recognize the fact that there might be someone one day who wants to harm them. Carrying a gun is just a mildly uncomfortable precaution to take, because sometimes shit happens. It's like carrying a spare tire, wearing a seatbelt, or keeping a fire extinguisher around. Sure, the odds are slim, but personally, I'm not a gambling man so I'll put up with the extra weight on my hip, just in case, God forbid, I'll ever have to use the thing.

Sure, there's some people out there who can be kind of... zealous, but they're in the minority. Of course, they get the most attention, so it's easy to see where these stereotypes come from.


Now, my problem isn't with people who don't like guns, that makes no nevermind to me, my problem is with people who try their damndest to make sure I'm unable to defend myself and my family should the need ever arise. Just as it probably pisses you off when the same sorts try to tell you what you should or should not be allowed to say, read, or watch because, who fucking knows, watching Oldboy might make you maul some fuckers with a hammer, or whatever. Y'know?

No. I don't know. Because ready access to guns is not just the mild inconvenience to those who have to carry the extra couple pounds around every day. It's the added chance that one of those people is going to overreact to something that doesn't require gunfire to resolve, or, in responding to a legitimate threat, miss and kill me or someone I care about. And no, I don't believe for a second that private firearm ownership stops a violent crime 4 million times a year. That's just absurd, no matter how sheltered my existence may be.

I'm ambivalent about guns ownership, because the feeling of security they provide is valuable whether or not they're needed, and I'm reluctant to deny the general public access to something just because some people can't be trusted with it. But it annoys me that the anti gun control crowd employs such ridiculous arguments as their first response.

Alright, whatever you say.

Agreed.

I think you all have valid points. I definitely think some people would use their gun in the wrong situation. I'll just say, if I carried one, and someone pulled a knife on me, I'd want them to drop the knife. That's all. And I believe that's all I'd want.

But let me tell you, if it comes down to protecting your family or friends, and you have to shoot a guy, it's going to leave a scar on you. You're gonna have to live with it, whether you shoot or stab or push a guy onto a giant pair of scissors. That's just common sense, sure. But what's worse, being forced to use a gun or watching your family get held up or worse without doing anything about it? That's the kinda of thing some people need to consider. If you don't feel comfortable around guns... I don't blame you. But I do feel comfortable (not so comfortable that i'd grab one at the slightest sound outside)...So, in conclusion: meh.

No it isn't. People don't go fucking insane if there isn't a fire extinguisher around.

And go, as previously noted, fucking insane when others disagree. Guns are fine. I enjoy using them when I get the chance. Gun nuts are weird. Guns are tools; guns are sporting equipment. But in the states guns seem to be regarded, by those who regard them at all, as some sort of flag.

Disagreeing is one thing. Going out of one's way to make sure I don't have one is something else.

Personally while I feel everyone should have the right to protect and arm themselves against harm I would like to see some form of gun control. Or maybe just a shift in attitudes towards violence in our society all together.

Anyway I saw this on-line and thought you guys might get a kick out of it.

I think the United States is a long, long way from banning gun ownership altogether. I do not feel your pain.

So background checks, having my name on file, and being fingerprinted like a fucking criminal isn't enough? I've said it before and said it again, the laws we have already (some 20,000 of them. I'm sure the BATF website has a sample of them, if you don't believe me) would be working just fine if we would actually bother enforcing them.

Perhaps, but it's still trying its damndest to ban anything it can. Apparently it's not "infringing" if handguns and semiautomatic rifles are illegal, because everybody knows the second amendment is there to protect hunters and their .30-30s. Well, either that or allowing the states to have a militia or something, it's a little hazy.

Sounds like bullshit to me. I think you're just a whiny gun nut. Here was my first clue:

You obviously have no sense of perspective. When you say "it's still trying its damndest to ban anything it can," I don't believe you. I think you're just upset because people don't take your silly motto as seriously as you do. I don't care if you can't buy any firearm your heart desires. If I can get my hands on enough firepower to protect myself, and I can, then there's no doubt in my mind you can as well, and more. Like I said, I don't feel your pain.

I'm reminded of the people who quiver at the idea of the US military's prisoners being allowed things like fair trials for fear of being attacked by terrorists, for some reason.

Whiny gun nut? That was below the belt, man. But you're giving me an easy out here, so I'll take it. Tired of this bullshit.

I personally enjoy hunting and target shooting. Since it is legal to own firearms in this country I indulge and am an avid collector. You can't do anything but debate it. :P Carry on.

Others may collect coins and such, but with my firearms I could positively go ballistic and take your precious DVD's and GOLD.

As far as handguns are concerned, a few are in my possession. While I do not wear a holster and frequent public gatherings swaggering like an ass, I do nestle one in my glove box.....because I fucking can and the other reason is simple.

Any criminal can procure a firearm, I don't give a shit how many gun control laws you put into effect. In fact gun control laws make it more lucrative to sell them on the black market. Ammo is the main problem these days...........very expensive.

But then you know this don't you?

I will own them until it is no longer legal to do so.
Then I will make a determination, until then. Moot.

Whatever. I like target shooting too, but I prefer fencing because the targets fight back. I was taught how to hunt in school, and that included firearms, theory and practice, as well as all sorts of outdoor survival training and stuff. Why someone would want to wait around in the cold for the privilege of carrying a dead animal back to the car escapes me, but so does the appeal of reality shows. To each his own.

I don't get the 'because I can' attitude of the gun culture. 'Because I can' was a good reason to go out and get embarrassingly drunk when you were eighteen. The worst of the Molon Labe bunch are like that, times ten.

By stealing your car, for instance.

With a quarter of a billion firearms in the country, it's no surprise. The price you pay for having easy access to firearms is that you have easy access to firearms.

Carry if you want to. If I lived where I could I might too; I have no idea what living in a place where crime is orders of magnitude higher than here is like.

I don't know about the underground firearms business, but I know that ammunition makes going to the range prohibitively expensive. A couple of boxes of .45 rounds and the gun rental makes it a $100 night. If I wanted to blow that much money in a night on a regular basis I'd get a coke habit.

This is the part I don't get. People don't get this protective and macho over their fishing gear or pool cues. If bicycling were faced with becoming illegal people would not 'make a determination', they'd complain to whoever was planning this stupid thing, repeatedly and at length. Why the 'tude?

Fuck that shit. You don't need no gun control. You know what you need? We need some bullet control. Man, we need to control the bullets, that's right. l think all bullets should cost $5,000. $5,000 for a bullet. You know why? 'Cause if a bullet costs $5,000 there'd be no more innocent bystanders. That'd be it. Every time someone gets shot, people will be like, ''Damn, he must have did something. ''Shit, they put $50000 worth of bullets in his ass.'' People would think before they killed somebody, if a bullet cost $5,000. ''Man, l would blow your fucking head off, if l could afford it." ''l'm gonna get me another job, l'm gonna start saving some money and you're a dead man." ''You better hope l can't get no bullets on layaway.'' Even if you get shot by a stray bullet you won't have to go to no doctor to get it taken out. Whoever shot you would take their bullet back. ''l believe you got my property.''

Her father called 911 when he realized who he had shot, police said.


So I guess if he had shot anyone else, he would've skipped the 911 call all together and just given the intruder to his Gimp?

You could always load your own ammunition. Lot of people do that, way cheaper.

As far as the underground firearms business, I can tell you that 40 bucks can get you a handgun that'd run you about 300-500 in a store.

Something we agree on, there.

Touche'! I too enjoy engaging an opponent of equal skill.
However, hunting was never meant to be fair nor a sport, although it has become one.
It was originally a means of survival.


While I have never been given the opportunity to learn the art of fencing I do find it fascinating. I cannot imagine the reflexes and discipline it entails. No public school here would teach a student anything about guns or survival, least of all hunting. Being an avid animal lover I only participate when highways are overrun with homeless mammals & reptiles due to starvation and wildfires. I am the idiot who stops to remove a turtle from the road or dangerously cuts the wheel to avoid a squirrel. I feed and tend all I can afford to....and then the rest must feed and attend to me.


At the present time it is legal to do so. Are you saying you are not part of the "gun culture". You regard it as some nonsensical cult? Not sure of your meaning here.



Not if I have my protection which I might add here, a firearm is my last choice.



I did not fully understand this statement, could you elaborate? Truly.



True. I have personally noticed that ammo has doubled in the last six months here in the USA. Just a sneaky way to disarm America.



No 'Tude.......I regularly contact my congressional Reps on the 2nd Ammend, and make an effort to keep up with bills brewing in congress through C-SPAN. My point was in the event guns were outlawed I would then make the determination to break the law or remain a law abiding citizen. Regards.

So was fencing, once upon a time. Here and now, though, they aren't. They're sports. What of it?

I suppose so, if your life depended on it or if you were an Olympic athlete. I'm not especially disciplined.

I doubt Hunter Ed is taught anymore where I learned it as well. If not for lack of money, then for fear of guns, although that was only a small part of it and it was an optional course and we required our parents' permission. It was a privilege to take that course. It was the only optional course in junior high school that had minimal grade and behavioural requirements: no dumb shits allowed.

I mean many firearm rights advocates have an irrational emotional attachment to the matter. Their guns are their flags. It's weird, quite frankly. No other hobby is like it, not even Furries or Trekkies.

Odds are you won't be in your car when it's stolen. And even if you counter any particular example I come up with, you can't deny that the more guns there are nationwide, the more guns there are available to criminals. That's the price you pay for having such liberal gun laws. If it's a price you're willing to pay, that's fine.

What don't you understand? There's an awful lot of crime in the United States, where I do not live. We don't have the right to carry guns here, and there doesn't seem to be a lot of desire or need to. If I lived somewhere where people felt the need to carry guns, and if I saw their point, I might as well. It wouldn't surprise me if they had a point, because the odds of being victim of or witness to a crime are high as far as I'm concerned, and the odds of a gun involved are enormously higher.

If I saw there was no point, then I'd put it away. It's a tool. I need it, or I don't.


If you say so. This didn't happen in the last six months or in the USA, so I wouldn't know.

I see.

The image of gun owners as panicky zealots hiding in their compounds screaming Molon Labe is quite pervasive, you know. Someone out there isn't doing 2nd Amendment advocates any favours. I can't see the US gun lobby not settling for grandfather clauses in any sort of legislation they allow to be passed, though.