Topic: What's your opinion of gun control? - page 163. (Read 450482 times)

The question is, when do we limit guns in government and the military, since it is they who do more bad things to people, using guns, than anyone else does?

And who does the limiting of government and the military?

There is no answer to these questions... at least not an answer that works. The best idea is to give everyone big, powerful guns and lots of ammo, so that people can all protect themselves, and let nature take its course.

People without guns become slaves to people with guns.

Yes, I think that sums up the point of this post.

Stronger gun control laws, logically, are the best way to achieve the greatest good for the greatest number of people. Decreasing violence in movies,TV, video's, music etc. will also help. Any research done on the FBI's common findings, in the last 10 years, regarding USA mass shooters'  personal computer data, books, video's, movie collection, etc. ?

Proposed gun ownership regulations that fall well within the constitution (for starters):
- background checks mandatory at all selling points (including gun shows)
- no private transfers of ownership
- proof of gun safety training
- mandatory interviews and psychological testing
- 3-month waiting period
- mandatory gun locks
- $500 licence fee per gun
- minimum 10-year jail time for all crimes involving guns on top of normal sentencing

Some people can use guns for protections for me opinion or for hunting or other entertaiming things.
But is just stupid that they are people who have gun and do it for bad things.

I agree with you. Guns are really a tools to protect our life. We need to utilize it in a proper way.

Very pro gun here. I think it is one of our absolutely most important rights, in the USA.

heavy control if firearms only restrict availability to citizens who want them for protection of their home; laws wont stop criminals from getting their hands on them at all. itll make it harder, sure, but the laws themselves are incapable of stopping anyone who is willing to go the distance to acquire a firearm from getting one. if someone wants a gun and is both physically and mentally fit to wield one for its intended purpose of defense, then they should be allowed to.

i disagree with the first part of your thoughts, not everyone should be alllowed, only those that are mentally capable of using a firearm for its intended purpose. got anger issues or self control issues? nope, no gun for them.

I personally believe everyone should have guns, at least one in the home. If you check fbi.gov for gun death statistics you will find that the kinds of weapons most gun control people want to ban are things like ARs and 30 round clips. FBI.gov will show you that those kind of weapons are one of the least used in gun deaths, while pistols and shotguns, knives and fist often killing just as many if not more.

If you research the history of gun control globally you will find that many governments implement gun control and then start to abuse power. It's not just about being able to protect yourself if someone comes in your house, when the Law is being unlawful and needs to be regulated(civil war) it will be good to have a gun. Also the common argument that the non law abiding citizens will have them, and that is true. Chicago doesn't allow pistol carry permits and has probably the worst gun violence in the country, same with NYC NYC.

When our civilization falls like 100% of the "worlds most powerful" before us, it will be maybe good to have a gun, maybe it won't matter. I can't see so many reasons to have them, but almost no reasons to not have them...

Further, what do smart criminals do? They figure out safe ways to steal from the people. One of the safest ways is to get into government and limit the methods that people can use to protect themselves.

Freedom of speech is a great weapon. Government is trying to limit it. But it is very difficult to limit something that people can do easily, all the time. It is much easier trying to limit guns.

The difficult thing for us is to keep the criminals in government so that they are all bunched together in one place. Then we need to limit their ability to limit us, without seeming like we are doing such. This way they will think that they are making progress in stealing from us, and we will be able to live our lives reasonably peacefully.

And...the point would be? It actually further supports the right to bear arms. Criminals are criminals for a reason. They don't follow the law. So the left's answer is what here? Make it harder for law abiding citizens to have the ability to defend themselves because the criminals are still going to have the guns. Would have been interesting if they discussed how many of those would have not happened if the victim had a gun to defend themselves. Again the anti gun people prove how failed their logic is.

Other developed countries have far too much violent crime compared to America when you exclude exercises of human rights from America's gun deaths (suicide, self-defense).

Criminals are far too clever and still will get hold of guns.

There is still too much profit involved in drugs fro the gangs to give up guns. This gun issue has been going on for a long time and it requires a huge change in americas gun loving culture. On a per capita basis the US still has far too many deaths compared to other developed countries. I dont know how this will be solved because people on both sides are not budging?

Some High class people use guns as business others for personal purposes. But I think the people who use guns as business will not be affected by this. Why? cause its there business.

And when we talk about high class people i mean the High ranking people in the government. or terrorsits

I think guns are part of society now. One could always argue that carrying a gun is only fair as everyone else might have one. But that circular and recursive argument wouldn't exist if guns simply were illegal.

In any case, its not like in developed countries where guns are legal, there are any more murders, sure more are gun-related, but the overall percentage remains at large the same as countries where murders are being committed other ways.

The only thing which makes much sense is that most of these events are engineered psychological operations.  Happily most of them seem to be hoaxes (no dead bodies) but eventually they are likely to turn into 'false flags' and some might be already (especially those carried out overseas.)  That unfortunate shift would be a legacy of the 'truthers' since it turns out to be damn difficult to stage an event and not have it be full of holes.

As for the 'gun-free zone' location of these events, the operations would be complicated significantly if there were interference by law-abiding concealed carry citizens.  A venue which avoids this eventuality as much as possible makes a great deal of sense.

It is also interesting that the stages tend to be ones which are fairly easy to lock-down.  This allows confiscation of electronics and embarrassing videos/images popping up and conflicting with official narratives (which tend to be built and solidified in the course of the following few days while initial reports often vary significantly.)  When we see people lined up with their hands on their heads exiting locked down zones and the police patting them down, the phones are going bye-bye.  At least that's what I heard reports of from Roseburg.  If one is 'lucky' enough to get video from a 'drill', I would think about extracting the MicroSD and tucking it away into a safe place in a timely manner.  But then again, doing so might get you in a whole heap of trouble so if you want a trouble-free life, maybe just go with the flow.

Who thinks it will be about gun control? Any bets on if we have another active shooter drill tomorrow before the conference to get people to agree with him because they've been terrorized by him into thinking any moment there may be a gun attack?

Video: Obama To Address Nation, SUNDAY, 8 PM; Might it be about Guns?

I support regulation on firearms but you can't impose gun control on criminals coz they will always find ways to get guns no matter what. Guns should be banned to an extent to civilians but gun bans won't just work to criminals.

The hoaxes and False Flags are worse.

I don't know a lot about gun laws being in the UK, but I get the impression that America seems to be a lot worse with gun crime in comparison to Canada. Am I just not hearing about as many stories from Canada or is it worse in America?

At the same time, it wasn't the 2nd that gave that right. The right is inherent in people, by common law (not governmentally defined common law, rather natural common law). The reason why the 2nd, and the whole Bill of Rights exist, is to simply lay it out clearly in the open for government people to see some of their limitations.

All rights are inherent in the people. Government doesn't give, and can't take away any rights except in the case of where one person harms another, or damages his property. In fact, property protection for the individual is the only reason for government to exist at all. The absolute ONLY reason.