| We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Gun Laws | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: May 16 2007, 02:25 AM (818 Views) | |
| calico131 | May 18 2007, 10:02 PM Post #16 |
|
Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
So there isnt a difference between and unborn child and a person attempting to rob/hurt you or your family? Clearly there is a huge difference. Thats why it isn't hypocritical to be pro-life and still promote the death penalty and disapprove of gun control laws. On one hand you have a cut little baby that doesnt even know the evil of this world, and on the other, you have a man about to rob or kill you. Clearly you can see how it is acceptable to protect yourself from criminals rather than kill innocent ppl becuase you dont want them.
I know my dad has a handgun and a shotgun in his closet, but ive learned how to use it, when to use it, and why to use it. Thats the difference between those that should be allowed to have guns and those that shouldnt. There has never been a misfire or anything in my house, and ive had plenty of drunk people around. Peoples stupidity is not the guns fault, its the peoples fault. Hence the saying "Guns dont kill people, i kill people."
If your commiting a "heat of passion" crime, then your a moron. Its not the guns fault your stupid. Taking away my right to have a gun because there are retards in society doesnt seam very smart to me.
Its just to prove a point. Obviously if ppl you know who are not criminals can get illegal drugs, how would it be any different for criminals to get illegal guns. The analogy works perfectly. Something they make illegal doesnt actually dissapear from the streets, it only dissapears from my house, and the hunters houses, not the criminals house. Gun control laws would spin crime rates out of control. I mean ****, what would stop you from breaking into someones home if you knew they didnt have any kind of protection. Ide show my gun and be free to take whatever i wanted. |
![]() |
|
| Darth Chef | May 21 2007, 03:17 PM Post #17 |
|
Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
There is a town in Georgia where it is a law that everyone must have a gun. No one is shot because no one commits a crime because if they do they get a bullet up their ass. VTU shooting was an example of how rules shouldn't be black and white. |
![]() |
|
| Amasian | May 24 2007, 08:52 AM Post #18 |
![]()
Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Okay, I haven't read what everyone else has posted so please forgive me if I restate an idea. I will be debating on ideas that I have encountered before as well.I think that guns should be allowed with a permit on school campuses as well. Why? Because what happens when some kid comes into school with a gun and starts shooting people? Here is the given situation. A class of 50 students and one person on a rampage feeling like mudering the entire class including the professor. That is 50 people about to be killed. But 2 other students have guns. So, the shooter stands up and kills two kids and then one kid with a gun shoots him and the original shooter dies. How many people is that killed? 3. Versus the 50 that could have been killed if there was not protection. People talk about the risk of having guns at parties. No, I don't support the "put it in a safe" method. I say it doesn't matter. If someone drunk pulls out a gun he is likely to miss anyway because he is drunk. And if he were to have the killing intent the same thing would happen if he had the sharp edges of a broken beer bottle. And then there is the thing about people saying, "No guns! Use tazers!" Well unless your tazer can shoot out beams of electricity or you can dodge bullets and run accross a room faster than a person can pull a trigger then you won't have much luck taking down a shooter. Again another argument versus mine: Some talk about if someone is allowed to carry a gun then there is the risk of them shooting someone. But an even greater risk arises when you can't have a gun and you don't know who has one illegally. If you are criminal enough to killing someone then you are definitely criminal enough to get a gun illegally. Well, those are some of my arguments. Challenge me! ![]() EDIT:
I stated this in my above post if you want to read it but here is what I said in a jiffy! Criminals are criminals and criminals commit crimes. It is a crime to have a gun illegally. Can you draw my conclusion? |
![]() |
|
| OcelotJay-ZNR | May 24 2007, 09:37 AM Post #19 |
|
I am kitteh, hear me purr. =(^_^)=
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I'm not sure that's really to do with guns themselves, rather the society. Guns are forbidden in plenty of societies who are no more worse off because of it. Low crime rates in areas with no guns rather proves the point that it's really not about the protection of individual households, rather a multitude of other things (opportunity, determination, crime rates and of course the society itself). I would muse the problem isn't getting rid of guns, it's the fact American society has grown so dependent on them that it would be like trying to take away a person's arm - or so they perceive it that way. I agree that guns aren't the danger, people are, but for the simple reason that it's a dangerous mentality held by the American people (of course, Americ isn't alone, but that's the subject). When you grow to rely on something you become attached to the point of forming an unhealthy bond, as is usually shown when the discussion of tightening gun control pops up. I'd say the fact that guns are so ingratiated into the mindset of society is perhaps the bigger danger than the guns themselves. ![]() The thing I tend to ponder is why is it typically an arrestable offence to carry, for example, a knife? One could easily put forward the argument that in doing so the individual protects themself from others who might be carrying knives. To use Amasian's phrasing: "Because what happens when some [person] comes into [a public place] with a [weapon] and starts [attacking] people?" I'm more likely to get beaten up or stabbed than shot [here in the UK] but I don't carry a knife on me, despite the fact that the logic people use when defending guns would determine I should essentially do so. |
![]() |
|
| emeraude | May 24 2007, 11:38 AM Post #20 |
![]()
Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
You said, in the abortion thread, and I quote:
You didn't specify what kind of life. You said life. IN general. You can't have it both ways. Either we have the right to kill people or we don't, regardless of their innocence, age, or what they were doing at the time. As well, plenty of innocent people have been shot by trigger-happy gun owners just begging for a reason to shoot someone. Gun control can help stop things like the Virginia Tech shooting. People keep saying that the shooting could have been stopped if another student had had a gun, with minimum killing. Well, if the shooter hadn't had a gun, there wouldn't have even been one killing. And yet, somehow, he got hold of a gun. Yet another flaw in our system, where we allow anyone and everyone to waltz right into a store and buy a gun. |
![]() |
|
| calico131 | May 24 2007, 03:47 PM Post #21 |
|
Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Are you serious? Self-defense and murder are different things. Why is that hard to understand? Yes, everyone has the right to life, but if your trying to take my life, then i am 100% allowed to protect myself or others. Its really not a hard concept. Gun control will not control anything. It will make "virginia techs" happen more often. |
![]() |
|
| emeraude | May 24 2007, 05:09 PM Post #22 |
![]()
Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I don't understand how you come to the conclusion that banning guns will make more people have them and use them for evil. How does that logic work? If there are fewer guns, there will be fewer shootings. It's that simple. If you want a gun so bad, it shouldn't be that big a deal to make a law that at least requires that people undergo a strict screening for a license first. And one could argue that an unwanted child is threatening someone’s life. |
![]() |
|
| calico131 | May 24 2007, 05:56 PM Post #23 |
|
Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I agree that there should be a vigerous process to go through before you get a gun, but making guns unavailable to law abiding citizens would result in more crime. I say this because banning guns would only effect those who actually obey the laws. So people who are using guns for crimes will get guns even if they are illegal. And they will be able to commit crimes without the fear of others having guns for protection. I never said banning guns would let more ppl get guns, i only said different people would have the guns, making them that much more dangerous. A healthy baby doesnt effect the survival of the mother. |
![]() |
|
| deeffg | May 24 2007, 08:49 PM Post #24 |
![]()
Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The problem with guns is that they are tools. And however much you may want to blame the tool, you find yourself blaming an inanimate object. At the same time, people may choose to use a tool such as a gun for destructive purposes. On the other hand, it may also be used for protective purposes. That is where this whole issue about which one is to blame comes into place because, although a person is the only one who can kill a man, a gun can sometimes enable that person to kill. The best solution would be not to blame anyone or anything. Blaming people and things never solved anybody's problems. That being said, placing the blame on someone or something allows us to pinpoint the problem so that the proper solution can be found. Therefore, I propose that people are to blame for senseless killings. A person can kill with anything be it a knife, gun, poison, or even a simple piece of rope. Some choose to kill with guns, and some do not. Removing guns does not save a person's life necessarily because a truly motivated killer will not stop at just a gun. A killer will find alternative methods to enact his crime(s). At least, if other people have guns, they have a chance to protect themselves. Someone will die in the end, but that is the way things must go for a true compromise. That is what a gun is: the ultimate compromise. |
![]() |
|
| Kyman_33 | May 25 2007, 11:30 PM Post #25 |
|
Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I think the best gun control would be to eliminate every single last gun on the earth, and all the blueprints on how to build them and how they work. But, seeing as that is the most unrealistic thing I've ever heard of, and it is probably more likely that I would see a talking dog before I would see that happen, I think guns should be allowed. Can't beat 'em, then join 'em. If they are going to have guns, regardless, then I might as well, too, so that I can get the first shot off.
|
![]() |
|
| Master_Yoda | May 25 2007, 11:32 PM Post #26 |
![]()
"Assasinate the greater and lesser of two evils"
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I strongly believe that getting rid of guns is a good thing...but I doubt it will prevent anything... |
![]() |
|
| Tirak | Jun 20 2007, 09:44 AM Post #27 |
![]()
Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I believe all people should have the opportunity to arm themselves. I believe all people should have to register those guns. I believe all people should have to know how to use those guns. I believe all people should have to be stable to use or own those guns. Anything more is kind of useless. |
![]() |
|
| Atrain Volecuz-ZNR | Jun 20 2007, 11:46 PM Post #28 |
|
Member
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Yeah, I seriously dont think guns should be allowed. The only people who should be certified to use weapons like that should be police and military forces. That's just my opinion though. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Community Chat · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
8:29 PM Jul 10
|



![]](http://b1.ifrm.com/0/1/0/p601690/pipright.png)




I will be debating on ideas that I have encountered before as well.







8:29 PM Jul 10