Topic: Guns - page 25. (Read 22194 times)

Gun control.... Why not bullet control?

ANY criminal can go into a gun shop and buy ammo, no questions asked..

Carry both ways. Or carry a realistic fake openly, so you don't look like a soft target, and if a grab is attempted*, all they can get is a club. Bonus points if you weaken the fake so it'll fall apart if unholstered.

*When pressed to show more than one instance of open carriers being targeted for the mythical, guaranteed-gun grabs, naysayers can't.

Yes, actually. Then nobody would know if I were armed or not... of course, I might be carrying concealed even with all those open carries around me, so...

If all those guns were hidden, would you be any safer?

Very true. I addressed this earlier. People absolutely need to be taught from a young age to respect guns. Because we don't use them everyday (probably) it's a little more difficult, but I often compare them to learning how to use a car. If a kid grew up only knowing what he sees about cars on tv, they go fast, blow up, flip over and have the passengers come out unscathed. But most parents teach by example (and then they're later taught more formally) that 99% of using a car is safety, it's safety belts, blinkers, windshield wipers, and maintaining the tires. It's the same with guns. The majority of "knowing how to use a gun" is knowing gun safety, which is about as prevalent in popular media as checking tread depth on tires.

I would live in Calaskawaii.

Licensing is not training. Licensing usually requires training, but all it really is is a permission slip.

Gun training is a form of gun control, i.e. without a license you can't own a gun.

So in reply to a story where a well-raised child responsibly and intelligently used a weapon to defend his siblings, you respond with stories of  mishandling firearms?

That's an argument for gun training, not gun control.

http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/2012/02/jersey_city_teen_killed_in_gun.html
http://www.11alive.com/news/article/243398/3/11-year-old-girl-killed-in-gun-accident
http://abcnews.go.com/US/video/child-killed-mistakes-real-gun-toy-10061613
http://www.kxan.com/dpp/news/texas/girl-9-killed-in-dads-gun-accident

Duh.

This happened a weekend ago in Phoenix:

    ‘A 14-year-old boy shot and nearly killed an intruder who broke into his Phoenix home and pulled a gun on him while he was watching his three younger siblings, police said Saturday.

    The teen and his siblings, ages 8, 10 and 12, were at home alone when a woman rang the doorbell Friday afternoon, Phoenix police Officer James Holmes said.

    The teen didn’t open the door because he didn’t recognize the woman.

    Soon after, the teen heard a loud bang on the door, rushed his siblings upstairs and got a handgun from his parent’s bedroom.

    When he got to the top of the stairs, he saw a man break through the front door and point a gun at him.

    The boy shot the 37-year-old man, who was taken to a hospital in extremely critical condition and underwent surgery. The man was upgraded to critical condition and is expected to survive and be booked into jail within the week on counts of aggravated assault and burglary, Holmes said.

    He said the suspect did not get a shot off. He declined to release his name until he is booked into jail.

    The woman who rang the home’s doorbell got away.

    Holmes hailed the teen’s actions and his parents for teaching the kids to never open the door to strangers.’

Thanks to the guys over at the Silver Circle Underground, where I got this story.

True, but it's one of those "big bad anti-gun control memes" Because pithy truisms are bad, you know.


I'll pass, I find gun maintenance to not only be inexpensive, but also a great "moment of zen".  Now, I agree, having to maintain hundreds or thousands of guns would probably be a little arduous. So, tell you what, let's each limit our gun ownership to 50, OK?

Fuck it! Nuke them all! Mwahahahahaha!

see: http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/end

This is why we need nukes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Exactly! Now let's transfer this back to people and gun-space: I just don't want to maintain a gun! So let's agree on a mutual agreement, that we don't own guns.

Because maintenance is pretty expensive.

I think the argument of seeing equal powers as peacekeeper does not hold: If both sides pile up more and more power the whole system on an absolute scale will become more and more unstable. Finally the tiniest event is enough for the system to go out of control. If both sides abandoned more and more power, the system becomes more and more stable on the absolute scale.

Why would nations who have nukes decrease their number then? Even on mutual agreement?

I didn't say that. But I think the overall probability encountering some criminal with a gun will go down.

My guess is that they are just less desperate.  As soon as the french social security system collapses, I'm pretty sure it will quickly get ugly.


Good point.  Gunned violence is indeed not just a matter of gun regulation.

It's naive to believe that gun control laws will take the guns out of the hands of those who don't care about the laws. I'm sure they won't. They'll just take the guns out of those who care about following the law.

I live in France, but I've grown up in Brazil. Both have draconian laws regarding gun-control, it's hard to tell which government is stricter on the matter. France criminality rates are much lower than Brazil. And I'm pretty sure that this has nothing to do with gun laws. For multiple reasons which I'll not try to speculate here, average people in France are just less prone to initiate violence themselves than average people in Brazil. They are more "honest", we may say. It really isn't a matter of France having better security forces or practices, of that I'm sure. Most buildings here have no security, I'm yet to see electric fences around houses, people carelessly leave their cars to sleep on the street, I see less policemen on the streets here than what I see in my home town in Brazil, private security is almost non-existent etc.


Although I believe the best path to "world peace" is free trade, I'll just quote what I've written above again:


I'm pretty sure that all governments who don't yet have nukes, don't lack them because they "follow the anti-gun-arguments", but more likely because either they aren't capable of building them, or they are afraid of international retaliation - which, by the way, is as hypocritical as the state saying that citizens cannot have guns, only state employees can.

Even then, it might be, that this person is stronger than me (either mentally or physically) and he will take my gun and use it against me. If I had no gun in the first place, it can't be used against me.

Additionally, the more weapons are in people's hands, the more it takes people to care for their own security. It's not just that you have to buy and maintain your weapons (a gun has to be cleaned, oiled, ?!, a knife has to be sharpened...), you also may not sleep, drink no alcohol, take no drugs, because if you did, it might pose you into a situation, where your attacker is smarter, faster or simply awake while you're not.

I think it's all peoples duty to make the world a better place.

No, but with weapon control laws the probability of being attacked by a person with a weapon is far lower. The problem is, that these laws have to be implemented and enforced all around the world, to maximize their effect. It's the same thing with nuke bombs on a nation wide scale: If nations followed the pro-gun-arguments, all of them would need nuke bombs until one nation has more/better nuke bombs. Then all other nations do also need more/better nuke bombs. See where this leads?

Even without guns, people can hurt each other. The problem with weapons is, that they can lead to death or serious injury much faster. And death/some injuries are final. Even more final than a bitcoin-transaction, I think...

I have lived in Europe and it is a relatively peaceful place, America is not. All that peace talk would not amount to much if you are being pistol whipped. I could not support a government that says I can't defend my life.

The argument that we must be armed because we are obligated to replace our government, should it become corrupt, seems extreme.  But our government was founded by extremists fleeing oppression by governments. So how would we fight a modern army with small arms? Well, we would bleed a lot. Just like the FSA in Syria. My whole life I have watched America get it's ass kicked by irregulars with small arms. We would win. I know how alien that is to people around the world who follow the rules because it is a rule.