|
Guns
Jul 20, 2012 12:14:44 GMT -5
Post by CJ on Jul 20, 2012 12:14:44 GMT -5
With the recent tragedy of the Aurora, Colorado Dark Knight Rises shootings, people are asking again, should guns be outright banned or should there be more limits placed on them?
As always, this will be an introductory post. I will voice my opinions later.
|
|
|
Guns
Jul 20, 2012 12:19:46 GMT -5
Post by Hitotsumami on Jul 20, 2012 12:19:46 GMT -5
People are going to kill people with or without guns. I don't think taking away guns will lower the rate of murder attempts. If anything it'll make smuggling more prevalent.
/i don't know what I'm talking about i have never even held a gun
|
|
|
Guns
Jul 20, 2012 13:51:43 GMT -5
Post by Morcombe on Jul 20, 2012 13:51:43 GMT -5
The only people who should be carrying guns are soldiers and police officers. no one else.
while its true it wont stop psychopaths from killing people it will limit the number of victims if they have a knife instead of a gun.
|
|
|
Guns
Jul 20, 2012 14:14:38 GMT -5
Post by CJ on Jul 20, 2012 14:14:38 GMT -5
I'm pretty much share Hito's view. I live in the only state, Illinois, without concealed carry law, that is a permit to carry a concealed weapon. I am allowed to own a Taser, which I possess at all times on my college campus in order to protect myself or others in the case of an event like this, but that is only because I own a FOID card. I have never used my Taser against a human being. I hope I never will. But I carry it in case something does happen. Evil, in a religious and logical sense, is out there. I wish I could carry a gun in my state, but a Taser will do for now. A concealed carry law might help in the city of Chicago, which already has had last year's murders outnumbered in this year alone. There are still not many hard facts about James Holmes, the shooter of the recent theater murders. It would not surprise me if he did not obtain his weapons through legal means. The only people who should be carrying guns are soldiers and police officers. no one else. I don't want to be coy, but I have to. I wonder if the Americans during the Revolutionary War would have agreed with you on this point.
|
|
|
Guns
Jul 20, 2012 14:24:23 GMT -5
Post by Xero on Jul 20, 2012 14:24:23 GMT -5
There is that old bumper sticker I see from time to time, "Guns don't kill people, people kill people." Regardless, people will continue to kill people with or without guns.
I think in order to legally carry or own a gun, there definitely needs to be training programs (which there are) on how to properly use the weapon as well as an extensive background check and a thorough psychological test.
It is a sad event, a random terrorist event such as this could not have been prevented. The guy was a graduate student with a clean record, so there was hardly any way of knowing he would go off the deep end and do what he did.
|
|
|
Guns
Jul 20, 2012 14:45:01 GMT -5
Post by Kyubey on Jul 20, 2012 14:45:01 GMT -5
I agree with Morcombe on this one, sorry CJ.
I live in Arizona, the gun-happy land of gun loving crazy people who love America and hate those who don't have the same religious values. Lots of people have guns. And what's become of it? People killing each other all the time. My gf lives in a neighborhood that's not so friendly, and she's constantly terrified of all the gunshots coming from just a block or two away. And funny thing is, in those instances, it's never a case of a victim fighting back and prevailing. It's always some bastard using his gun to commit murder. I don't feel safer because of the incredibly loose gun laws, I'm scared out of my wits because any seemingly normal person can go and shoot anyone they want and everyone would shrug and go, "well, people kill people, soooooo..."
Fuck, I live in Tucson, where a year back some prick shot up a politician and several other individuals, including a little girl, at a huge public event. Funny thing is, several people there that day had guns. The fact of the matter is, in the vast majority of cases, guns statistically do very little to prevent tragedies such as this. I wholeheartedly agree that everyone should be able to defend themselves, but guns aren't a really good solution.
Also, CJ, no offense, but I find the notion that the world today is anything resembling America during the Revolutionary War to be hilarious.
|
|
|
Guns
Jul 20, 2012 15:39:48 GMT -5
Post by Hitotsumami on Jul 20, 2012 15:39:48 GMT -5
@ Kylor I think if people outlawed guns, it wouldn't stop those people in your gf's neighborhood of obtaining them through other means if they wanted them. Banning guns would make smuggling insane and may even endanger more people than now. An interesting statistic would be how many people use guns for protection each year Vs how many people use guns for murder each year. If use for protection is higher than use for murder, then obviously guns are helping people protect themselves more than they are being used to kill people. I found some such statistics. 2,500,000 individuals actually use guns to protect themselves every year. Sourceand 8,875 murders are caused by guns each year. SourceSo, clearly, many more people are using guns to protect themselves than to murder people.
|
|
|
Guns
Jul 20, 2012 16:40:48 GMT -5
Post by Kyubey on Jul 20, 2012 16:40:48 GMT -5
As we're talking about smuggling and whatnot, CJ, is that a particularly bad issue where you live? Are smuggling-related crimes and deaths especially common? I honestly don't know, and maybe you could provide some insight on that. Also, is it a terrible problem in countries that outlaw gun ownership? Are there several cases of innocent people who can't defend themselves being shot up all the time? Maybe we should look into that before we get into these scenarios. As for Hito's other point, the gun-related murders I was talking about, to my knowledge, weren't gang related, and the murderers used guns they bought legally. That also goes for the instance I mentioned before where that insane individual shot and nearly killed a politician in the city in which I live, where several bystanders had guns on them, and yet they couldn't save anybody.
Also, I'd hate to go into a hypothetical scenario, but let's just imagine for a second that, in that theater, on midnight, somebody brought a gun to the movies with the intent of not using it at all and just peacefully watching Batman with everyone else. He has no extensive training, and has never been in a serious situation like this before. When James Holmes went into that theater, do you really think it would have helped anyone if that guy whipped out his own gun and started shooting back? After running through the situation in my head, I can only imagine even more panic than there already was, and probably more deaths. The answer to the problem of "guns" isn't "more guns," no matter how you twist it.
Now I'm fine with, say, hunting rifles, or similar weapons, which are big, intimidating, sufficient in cases of home defense and useful for things other than the killing of other humans. I personally wouldn't touch one, but to each his own in that regard, can't make everyone happy. But I see no reason to let anyone carry around firearms that can be carried around in a public space and capable of killing several people at a time.
I don't believe in good and evil in a religious sense, but there are plenty of foolish and unstable folks out there, and honestly, we have no way of telling who they are until the conditions are right for them to decide to start shooting.
|
|
|
Guns
Jul 20, 2012 16:45:43 GMT -5
Post by Hitotsumami on Jul 20, 2012 16:45:43 GMT -5
I'm not saying more guns is the solution.
What I am saying is that without guns, people aren't going to have ways to protect themselves. As I said, many MANY more people use guns to protect themselves than people who use them to murder.
|
|
|
Guns
Jul 20, 2012 17:01:38 GMT -5
Post by Kyubey on Jul 20, 2012 17:01:38 GMT -5
And I'm not saying that absolutely no weapons ever is the solution either. There's just other ways people can defend themselves, if that's really their motive.
|
|
|
Guns
Jul 20, 2012 17:02:33 GMT -5
Post by Hitotsumami on Jul 20, 2012 17:02:33 GMT -5
There are other ways, but I think guns are the best way.
If someone comes up and points a gun at you, pointing a gun back might be the only thing that will make him think twice.
|
|
|
Guns
Jul 20, 2012 17:05:32 GMT -5
Post by Kyubey on Jul 20, 2012 17:05:32 GMT -5
Anecdotal evidence coming through, but in my experience pocket knives were just as effective in protecting lives. Not personal experience, but to someone close to me.
If you can potentially save even one life by denying someone a gun, wouldn't you do it?
|
|
|
Guns
Jul 20, 2012 17:13:47 GMT -5
Post by Hitotsumami on Jul 20, 2012 17:13:47 GMT -5
That is only one example. Millions of people have actively used a gun to protect themselves every year. MILLIONS.
Many, many more times higher than people who use guns to kill.
I'd rather keep guns to help those millions continue protect themselves than to take them away only for criminals to find other ways of obtaining them. That would only increase the number of murders caused by guns, since those original law-abiding citizens wouldn't have them to protect themselves anymore.
|
|
|
Guns
Jul 20, 2012 17:24:35 GMT -5
Post by Kyubey on Jul 20, 2012 17:24:35 GMT -5
But seemingly normal people are still using guns to commit crimes. Your millions of people aren't as effective as you think.
EDIT: You still can't prove that the well-intentioned gun owners actually need firearms to protect themselves or others as opposed to different methods. Especially since you admit you've never personally held a gun before. What I'm saying is it's not worth putting guns in the hands of people who would use them to kill in order to equip people who may or may not need handguns in the first place. Again, I'm perfectly fine with rifles or shotguns to defend ones home.
|
|
|
Guns
Jul 20, 2012 18:07:06 GMT -5
Post by Xero on Jul 20, 2012 18:07:06 GMT -5
Speaking from personal experience, I have had a gun pointed at my face before, and at the time, the only weapon I had was pocket knife in my pocket. Now, I thought about fighting back and taking my chance using the knife, however, I chose not to because I believed the odds were not in my favor (the guy took my friend and I by surprise). Now, if I had a gun on me, I can honestly say I probably would have taken my chance with the gun and used it to protect myself. Can I say this with 100% certainty? No. But I would have been more likely to use a gun than a knife.
|
|