SRL Archive - Misc. Links and Programs

I have a government and politics and here Gun Rights are my topic for the CBA. Lets see what you guys think.

banning the populace from having guns will do nothing to stop violence.

It's kind of like Marijuana. If you ban it then only the worse/bad(theoretically speaking) people will get it. Which is totally fine in this case.

If you ban guns then good citizens will not have a way to protect themselves and bad citizens will still have guns illegally.

pretty obvious its a stupid idea… =/

Lot's of good info from this thread at MITB:

http://www.moparisthebest.com/smf/index.php/topic,484823.0.html

The Constitution protects people's rights to own them for self defense within their property. I think this is something people would fight for.

I'm a 15 year old kid with a double barrel shotgun, but I don't go 'round shooting everyone's head off. If guns were made illegal, those who really wanted them would still find a way of getting them.

EDIT: Just thought I'd add I'm from England, since I know that gun laws differ everywhere.

From: Echo_
Lot's of good info from this thread at MITB:

http://www.moparisthebest.com/smf/index.php/topic,484823.0.html

Mopar is a redneck.. That is all.

At this point i think trying to implement the banning of guns will be problematic, but the statistics are clear that allowing guns isn't helping anything.

EDIT: and with regards to people defending themselves. Unless you're a police-person who is trained to handle those types of situations, most people regardless of whether or not they know how to use a gun can easily make the situation worse in panic or just panic fire, and not end up defending themselves in reality anyway. Most often, having a gun won't help you in most situations, and afaik if someone breaks and enters and you shoot them, they can sue you, so it wont help there either.

Check the murder rate for Canada vs. the US.

Case and point.

Strongly for.

Lol@ comparing Canada and US murder rates ignoring all other factors involved and saying "because guns are illegal"

From: Nava2
Check the murder rate for Canada vs. the US.

Case and point.

Check the population density and racial diversity of Canada vs the US.

Cut out the large slum areas cities such as Detroit that are filled with lower-class citizens in a large density, and those in gangs etc. The main issue is not with the weapon, but with the population and how it behaves.

I am not pro-guns being 100% legalized; the current system (in NY anyways) is pretty fine. You have to pass certain tests and such to verify you're sane and such. Even CCP you can get (and have), and it works out very well. In my area Upstate, in the non-black neighborhoods, there is never any shooting and almost never any crime.

Comparing two totally different countries with a totally different set of laws/population/government handouts/etc is insane.

I'm a pacifist

in the non-black areas of upstate newyork is getting fairly specific to be actually useful as a comparison.

It's not all about the populace killing each other, but what about in the event of another World War? What do other countries ponder about when they think of invading the United States? I'm sure the thought of every citizen owning a gun really dissuades them from that idea.

I feel safer as a country with gun rights, and personally. I live pretty much next to the "ghetto" and people's houses and cars get broken into and robbed pretty frequently, although I can understand people being afraid of an idiot that doesn't know how to use a gun trying to protect himself or someone else and just making it worse.

Cars kill people too, should we make them illegal? If you look at countries in Africa where people are too poor to afford a car, the accident and mortality rates caused by cars is much lower than the US, obviously the car is the problem and not the idiot driving.

From: josh81193
Cars kill people too, should we make them illegal? If you look at countries in Africa where people are too poor to afford a car, the accident and mortality rates caused by cars is much lower than the US, obviously the car is the problem and not the idiot driving.

No, cars don't kill people, it's the person driving the car that's killing

From: Zyt3x
No, cars don't kill people, it's the person driving the car that's killing

Bullets don't kill people, it's the gunpowder driving the bullet that's killing.

From: footballjds
Bullets don't kill people, it's the gunpowder driving the bullet that's killing.

Gunpowder doesnt kill, its the finger pulling the trigger

From: Yago
Gunpowder doesnt kill, its the finger pulling the trigger

The finger doesn't kill, it's the brain telling your muscle to constrict doing the killing.

My point was and still is, arguing over semantics is ridiculously stupid.

Or just the kinetic energy


And it is the whole system that kills people ;)

From: Dan Cardin
in the non-black areas of upstate newyork is getting fairly specific to be actually useful as a comparison.

I just say that so people don't go "durp NYC tons of crime".

From: Zyt3x
No, cars don't kill people, it's the person driving the car that's killing

That's my point, guns don't kill people, it's the person pulling the trigger that's killing.

I'm all for educating people/stricter background checks.

From: josh81193
That's my point, guns don't kill people, it's the person pulling the trigger that's killing.

I'm all for educating people/stricter background checks.

Ah, I guess "obviously the car is the problem and not the idiot driving." was sarcasm then… My bad.. I'm not very good at spotting it :p

For. The city where I live is a piece of shit, with there being a stabbing incident almost every weekend. When I can get one, I'll have a gun on me at all times.

"The great object is, that every man be armed. […] Every one who is able may have a gun." - Patrick Henry.

:f:

It's not all about the populace killing each other, but what about in the event of another World War? What do other countries ponder about when they think of invading the United States? I'm sure the thought of every citizen owning a gun really dissuades them from that idea.

I'm sure to the soldiers that would be doing the invading, the off chance that a person might have a gun (since i would be willing to bet the ratio of people with guns to nonguns is very skewed towards nonguns) won't deter them in the least. It would be the trained people (police and soldiers) that would give them pause. Oh and our bombs and such. When speaking of actual fighting inbetween countries, you cant really think in terms of guns, you talk bombs.

In terms of cars and guns. They're not really related. Cars are for getting places. When you get into an accident, you have as much chance as getting yourself killed as someone else. So people try not to kill themselves, but suck at driving and do so anyways. You can suck at shooting all you want but unless someone is shooting back at you, the actual shooting part would be hard-pressed to kill you by itself.

From: Dan Cardin
I'm sure to the soldiers that would be doing the invading, the off chance that a person might have a gun (since i would be willing to bet the ratio of people with guns to nonguns is very skewed towards nonguns) won't deter them in the least. It would be the trained people (police and soldiers) that would give them pause. Oh and our bombs and such. When speaking of actual fighting inbetween countries, you cant really think in terms of guns, you talk bombs.

Dan do you live in the US? First I know quite a few "regular people" who you would never think would own a gun but in fact do. I don't really know the ration of those that own and those that don't I'd say its 50-50 due to cities where most don't own a gun. Those that own a gun don't have just one, usually they have 3 or more. Second there are gun clubs all over the place where non-police and trained forces are probably a better shot then those that are in the service.

I agree on your last point though. Guerilla warfare is very unlikely at this point in time, it would be the very last resort.

Meh I put dont care because I dont live in the US so I can care less about their guns but from an opinion.. I believe that no citizen should have a gun unless in law enforcement..

Your gun gets stolen.. then what? A crime is committed by another user with your gun.. then what?
You and someone both own guns, you get into an argument.. and then one of u pull a gun.. the other will definitely pull too and then it matters who shoots first.. you kill him, then someone will wanna get revenge for killing their family member and kill you.. you die.. and your dad gets mad and goes and pulls his gun too..

its the cycle thats the problem.. and ignorance.. you never know when YOU will pull or when someone will pull on you.. so your always gunna have an itchy palm to pull first and say self defense..

From: Narcle
Dan do you live in the US? First I know quite a few "regular people" who you would never think would own a gun but in fact do. I don't really know the ration of those that own and those that don't I'd say its 50-50 due to cities where most don't own a gun. Those that own a gun don't have just one, usually they have 3 or more. Second there are gun clubs all over the place where non-police and trained forces are probably a better shot then those that are in the service.

I agree on your last point though. Guerilla warfare is very unlikely at this point in time, it would be the very last resort.

I really doubt that its 50 50 or anywhere near that. And you may have people that are better shots when shooting targets, but shooting targets and shooting people that are shooting back at you are very different.

From: ggzz
Meh I put dont care because I dont live in the US so I can care less about their guns but from an opinion.. I believe that no citizen should have a gun unless in law enforcement..

Your gun gets stolen.. then what? A crime is committed by another user with your gun.. then what?
You and someone both own guns, you get into an argument.. and then one of u pull a gun.. the other will definitely pull too and then it matters who shoots first..

its the cycle thats the problem.. and ignorance.. you never know when YOU will pull or when someone will pull on you.. so your always gunna have an itchy palm to pull first and say self defense..

I've done my senior paper over Gun Rights. I do understand that guns should be restrained in ways, but not in such a big way it violates our rights as a citizen.
But if you want google something like "Chicago handgun ban" or something.
Basically you can't even walk onto your own porch with a handgun.
Murder rate with handguns jumped over 40% since it =\

its the cycle thats the problem.. and ignorance.. you never know when YOU will pull or when someone will pull on you.. so your always gunna have an itchy palm to pull first and say self defense..

I forgotten the odds, but a criminal is ALOT less willing to commit a serious crime if even the idea of anyone having a concealed weapon is on their mind. Even with a weapon themselves.

I believe that no citizen should have a gun unless in law enforcement..

Law enforcement in our city was designed to arrive on a call (or are supposed to) in around 3 minutes. By that time… Your dead or the crime was committed and done. Unless it was something like a hold up =P

Your gun gets stolen.. then what? A crime is committed by another user with your gun.. then what?

I don't think I've seen a gun under like $100. A lot of states in the US have a "state gun safe storage law" which prevents kids and thieves from getting a hold of these. So I don't believe people just leave their guns laying around. Just saying tho =P

From: Dan Cardin
I really doubt that its 50 50 or anywhere near that. And you may have people that are better shots when shooting targets, but shooting targets and shooting people that are shooting back at you are very different.

While ownership might not be 50-50 over the whole population, I bet the guns vs the populace is still 50-50. Its not hard to share a gun to someone.

Your assuming all trained officers have been in real battle.

I'm sure everyone knows my opinion by now, so I'm not going to mix in this debate. :p

Homicide rates by percentage simply are higher in the US than in countries which do not allow guns / have proper gun control. It doesn't really do anyone any good, except for the people who think guns are cool and therefore want one.

Your assuming all trained officers have been in real battle.

no just that the chances that you have been if you're not a police person or a soldier are very small. and the chances that you have been trained to deal with those situations and have actually been in at least one is a lot higher if you are one are a lot higher. Overall not the main point i was trying to make though.

More guns more shootings. More cars (on road) more accidents. More drugs more users. I'm seeing a pattern here.

Less guns less shootings. Less cars less accidents. Less drugs less users. Point is its 95% of the time true because life happens(accidents[not murders{even though they happen too}]). Now prevention imo is a better topic.

like i said before though. People don't like dying, so they're not going to run into another car and risk death to solve their problems. So cars are less so a problem in terms of more cars, but moreso on the fact that people suck at driving despite not wanting to crash into people.

Strongly for. There is very little crime in my quiet area of NJ, but I enjoy target practice as a pastime.

EDIT: and with regards to people defending themselves. Unless you're a police-person who is trained to handle those types of situations, most people regardless of whether or not they know how to use a gun can easily make the situation worse in panic or just panic fire, and not end up defending themselves in reality anyway. Most often, having a gun won't help you in most situations, and afaik if someone breaks and enters and you shoot them, they can sue you, so it wont help there either.

So Dan Cardin your saying that if I broke into your home and you shot me in self defense that I can sue you? Well I could but in my state I wouldn't win. LOL. In my state if you break and enter someone else's property and there is an immediate danger to your health or anyone else's you are infact aloud to shoot to kill. On the other hand in my state you are also aloud to shoot to wound if you are protecting your property.

I like your guy's posts there very intrigueing to here. Zyt3x I suspected that and Wizzup? I already knew your opinion from a similar thread quite a while back. I wish to limit this please to people in the U.S. Thank you.

From: Death12652
So Dan Cardin your saying that if I broke into your home and you shot me in self defense that I can sue you? Well I could but in my state I wouldn't win. LOL. In my state if you break and enter someone else's property and there is an immediate danger to your health or anyone else's you are infact aloud to shoot to kill. On the other hand in my state you are also aloud to shoot to wound if you are protecting your property.

I like your guy's posts there very intrigueing to here. Zyt3x I suspected that and Wizzup? I already knew your opinion from a similar thread quite a while back. I wish to limit this please to people in the U.S. Thank you.

"Dead men tell no tales."
Officer he was strangling me so i shot him in the head.
gf law suit :p

what state do you live in. I'm pretty sure unless they attack you, they can sue you and win according to the law.

From: Dan Cardin
what state do you live in. I'm pretty sure unless they attack you, they can sue you and win according to the law.

I live in PA. And it all depends.
My friends dad hosts "parties" at his house(gambling). Someone tried to break in.
He went to the cops and he got an okay to shoot anyone upon entry.

Pretty sure its legal to shoot if they're breaking and entering as long as the gun is licensed/hunting.

From: Dan Cardin
what state do you live in. I'm pretty sure unless they attack you, they can sue you and win according to the law.

There's a difference between trespassing and breaking and entering. Here, in Virginia, I'm pretty sure if someone breaks down your door and comes in, you can shoot them, but if your door is open and they walk in, you can't shoot them.

I think the dutch laws are great.

Dutch rules(Something along these lines):
You may own a gun if you are a member from a (sport) shooting club for over 1 year, with no criminal history.

You have to keep the gun inside an safe in your house, the ammo in to another safe. Which are randomly checked by the gov.

No guns outside. You practically go to you jail for that.

No shotguns nor machine guns. They aren't needed for the sport.

So for the sport shooters this would allow them to have a weapon. But cause of all the safes, there isn't much gun theft. Almost no shooting incidents… Winning…

Well he said break in and enters. Not walk in. So I thought Breaking in as in breaking down the door not some douche shooting you when the door was open.

From: Death12652
Well he said break in and enters. Not walk in. So I thought Breaking in as in breaking down the door not some douche shooting you when the door was open.

I just wanted to make it clear that we were all talking about the same thing. :P

I clarified what I meant :D

For: As long as we have A LOT of tests to see if you're not an idiot.