Topic: Guns - Why do we need them? - page 2. (Read 1694 times)

This is kinda the point. There are a bunch of people who don't believe the way you do. They want guns to protect themselves. It takes law enforcement way too long to get there, and some times they don't get there at all.

Now here is the dillema for you. Are you going to force people who want to own and use guns to get rid of their guns? If so, how are you going to do it? Certainly you aren't going to use guns, yourself, to disarm them. You would kinda be opposing everything you stood for to take their guns from them this way.

So, are you going to hire a bunch of gangsters - usually called the police, or the military - to do your dirty work for you? But if you do, aren't you a bit scared that when they get done removing guns from everyone else (using their guns to force it, of course), that they might come over to your house and rape your daughters and your wife, and kill you? Who is there to stop them, if they have all the guns?

I have never, once seen that happen.

very worried if the weapons are given to civilians, totally agree with friends above that for civilians there are very many misuse of weapons given to him. What happens is that there is more to action than pretentious self-defeating purposes.
it is strongly not recommended for civilians to be able to freely possess firearms, more not very useful than the benefits obtained from weapons that civilians may have.

leave all weapons in any form to those who are already accustomed and tested for their use.
because the police / army will be easily detected if the abuses that occur are compared to civilians.

Guns are actually a good thing. Since they exist, and since they can be so easily made - https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=slam+gun - they won't disappear for a long time.

Besides, guns are the equalizer:

A 250 pound bully can easily mug, rape, and murder a 90 pound teenage girl. But if Girly has a gun, she has a chance... even if Bully has a gun as well.

Sure, there is mace, and pepper spray. But somehow a gun is a far better equalizer.

Yes, I agree with you! from what I see, The guns can change the person who holds it, most of the holders become pretentious and as if he can threaten and make others afraid of him.

It might sound naive, but, I think civilians should not need and are not allowed to have guns.

The difference is this. There are several kinds of government types. Common law, civil law, and religious traditional law types cover most of them.

South America, except for Guyana, is civil law. What the government says is what is done, except if the people complain a lot. And if the government changes just to keep peace.

The fundamentals of the USA common law are that the local 12-person jury rules in every case that is brought. It isn't a requirement that the accuser and accused have a jury. They can let the judge/magistrate decide if they want. And often it is better if they do this.

But Amendments 6 and 7 to the Constitution says that they can have a jury trial for just about any case. And the jury can decide however they want to decide.

For example, let's say the IRS takes somebody to court because he owes $100,000 in back taxes. If the defendant requires a jury trial, the jury can agree with the IRS, or they can cancel the whole thing, or they can rule that the IRS owes the defendant $100,000. Whatever they want. It's called jury nullification - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_nullification.

Jury nullification can nullify laws regarding the current case, and the people on trial. They can almost make new rulings, but only for the case they are jury for. Britain and Canada are similar, as is Australia, and India somewhat. And Guyana, SA, partially.

In all the other parts of South America, where there is a jury, it is strictly controlled by the judge or attorneys. The SA jury is used to make things to be logical, so that in complex cases, it isn't the judge that is the only one trying to figure out the case. Really, I think that the SA jury is selected to appease the people, so the people can't say that the judge was prejudiced.

For a look at the various kinds of governments around the world, see https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/92/Map_of_the_Legal_systems_of_the_world_%28en%29.png.


The point is, in the USA, Britain, Canada, and Australia, you can get away with literal murder IF you can influence the local jury to see it your way.

Btw, in the USA, if a jury decides your case, whatever they rule becomes law in your case, and can't be changed. There is no appeal for a USA jury decision. And it is probably the same in Britain, Canada, and Australia.

Note that Wikipedia sites listed above are overviews. There are other sites that may say things better.

Currently I live in south america. I believe here this kind of jury only applies to a select variety of crimes, those against human life (murder), with exception of guilty crimes. To accuse an authority or a government person is really dangerous if you don't have some media supporting you and putting the case in evidence.

Influence peddling is too strong and these thieves have a lot of lackeys ready to follow their orders.
It's not a democracy at all, especially because you can't have your own gun for a fair price.

The goals of guns are not always to protect, guns are invented in order to KILL. Yes it is really to kill certain people and even animals. There are only few people who using guns to kill animals or what we called modern hunters. Right now, the majority of the people who have guns are meant to kill each other. The world is changing but the humans doesn't, the history will repeat itself and for sure there will be another war that will happen because of the guns and ammos.

Why don't we just regress to spears? There should be no need for stone or iron edge, they can just be whittled down to a point and hardened by putting them over the fire. They work pretty good to stop enemies. Well unless you run into someone with a gun.

Guns! A wonderful piece of engineering, judging from the assemblage of it's many parts and how they coherently function together. Besides, almost all guns comes with a safety. Guns where very much made for a very simple purpose, which is to protect! Though some people use it for hunting but the idea of protection depends on the side you are on. Your always either the shooter or the victim!
Though, its obvious how much damage guns can do in the wrong hands and so, authorities have tried to limit the number of guns on the streets and in the wrong hands but there are several ways by which one can acquire this, using the black market as an example.
Why we need guns...?
Guns have been a war too at which the side with the higher fire power often emerged to win the war though, nuclear and biological weapons have happened to be the other of the day but then, guns in the write hands reduces crime as it instills in criminals the awareness of a security personnel with the an over powering too at hand. It could also be used to defend yourself against criminals.
The biggest problem with guns is when in the wrong hands as it boost the individuals aura and confidence to perform certain acts. It's amazing how much power such object carries. The biggest problem with guns is when in the wrong hands. Else, knifes even does as much damage.

maybe or not if someone holds a weapon versus a person who does not have a weapon, who will die he who has a weapon? certainly not possible. weapons are useful to protect from those who intend evil who have weapons against us, if you do not have it is tantamount to suicide.

Sure guns can be used to feel safe just by having them around. But the more guns are in circulation in an economy the easier it is for bad people to get a gun too. So when the attacker comes with a gun it's a stale mate again. The one who shoots better or is better prepared should win I guess. If you are trained with a gun it might be going in your favor. But how many people own guns without any proper training? And what of the risk that your kids find the gun and start playing with it? There are always news of deadly accidents of unsupervised guns.

In most societies guns are a source of pride for several years whether for hunting, sports or personal safety most gun owners feel it's their personal freedom to have a gun. At an equivalent time violence from gun sources has shaken the state but I feel guns are vital to guard and keep ourselves safe Many use guns to flee attackers.

So, what country are you from? Because Britain, the USA, Canada, Australia, India to a lesser degree, Guyana in South America, and a few other countries have a direct way to stop stupid laws when they get fed up enough. It's the 12-person local jury. But even then, if one takes a government person to court, man-to-man, for harm or damage he caused, he can be made to pay... if the jury believes you.

Most people don't know that they can do this, and how to do it. But it is available to everyone in these countries... if they know the tricks.

Yes, not only authorizing thieves to have access to guns, but also turning a blind eye to their drugs deals and so on...
All the kinds of disgusting practices, injustice and crimes only exist because authorities allow them to happen.
Sadly only very few people are disposed to fight this hypocritical and corrupt system. Most people are coward or corrupt and daydream about reaching a higher status on this putrid system to make its eternal maintenance.

^^^ All that this means is that government authorizes stealing by thieves, and even murder by thieves at times. I bet that if you became real quiet, and sneaked into government offices, you would find that government people are formally and directly authorizing thieves to use guns at times.

Read my post above. There is a very strict gun control policy in my country, what seems to just increase the criminality. Why? Because thieves know innocent people don't have a gun to protect themselves, as the government makes the license process very expensive and complicated.
So these thieves do the crimes they want with the confidence they won't be stopped by their unarmed victims.

I agree not everyone can have a gun, in cases which the person has mental issues, for an example. But it can't be used as an excuse to difficult the whole process for other people.

Financially rich people owns guns for their personal safety but it is not meant for middle and poor class people.

Getting license to own a gun gets differ depends on the country where they are living but it is freely available on blackmarket at every corner of the world even government knows about it but they tell they can't do anything about it.

The whole idea of the people owning guns in the USA, and the 2nd Amendment, is for people to protect themselves from government. This should be the major idea of gun owners around the world.

Back when the USA was formed, all the people who could afford them owned guns. Their mindset was from a stanpoint that guns were the natural thing. The only 2 reasons why many of us don't think that way are:
1. Government protections over the years have seemed to guarantee protection without guns;
2. No training in the realities of guns, and the realities of the slave-making government.

Guns are meant to protect the people for the bad people. Gun control need to be implementing seriously. There are people that own guns without any further license and just buy it illegally. Innocent people have affected because of incorrect used of fire arms. The person handling a gun might also ruin his life unintentionally just because of being angry and not able to control himself. So it’s very essential to know the mental status of the person handling a gun. Licensing a gun(s) to proper person is very important.