Do you think that the US should change the constitution to ban firearms?

[Raziaar]

I don't really like Firearms. I can understand having hunting rifles, but there is no need for anybody really except the authorities to have handguns, sub machine guns, machine guns and assault rifles. Those aren't for killing animals, they're for killing people, plain and simple.

However, I know banning isn't going to do any good in this country, at this late stage of things. The only thing it will do is remove the guns from the hands of the people who won't use them to unlawfully harm others, as just as with drugs, those who want to get them will get them to kill with them. You can't escape the black market.

That being said, if there was SOME way to completely ban them and have it enforced nearly 100%, i'd be all for it, less worry for me, however that's never gonna happen.

 

[KoreBolteR]

How about banning Taxes, thatd work for me

 

[Steve]

How about banning Taxes, thatd work for me

My mother is from Texas.

 

[Raziaar]

How about banning Taxes, thatd work for me

What'd you say about Texas?

Heh, who am I kidding, say whatever you want. I don't like the state, not beautiful enough for me. I prefer northern states with lots of mountains and pine forests and cooler air :-P

 

[Recoil]

My mother is from Texas.

"I meant those other assholes!"

Btw, some of you don't seem to have read the first post:

Police, hunters, and people that is using the gun for a sport is not included.

 

[Steve]

Oh. Heh. Well...that stuff I said about the constitution still stands.

 

[Tr0n]

What'd you say about Texas?

Heh, who am I kidding, say whatever you want. I don't like the state, not beautiful enough for me. I prefer northern states with lots of mountains and pine forests and cooler air :-P

Damn yankees!

 

[Scotchy]

I always support the Second Amendment. It's Social Insurance. Guns do kill people... they are weapons. But I think the benefits outweigh the negatives. We have higher gun deaths per year in the US for one main reason; Fear. Like Mike Moore pointed out, percentage-wise, Canada has as many guns perhousehold as we do i nthe US but their gun deaths are drastically smaller per year. It's a culture of fear and jitteryness... I blame large cities.

 

[Steve]

Damn yankees!

Yeah, screw that. Cancer Alley is the only place for me.

 

[The Monkey]

You're all yankees! But seriously, how could you not gain on banning firearms?

 

[Tr0n]

You're all yankees! But seriously, how could you not gain on banning firearms?

Nevar!!!

*dies*

 

[Steve]

"You can have my rifle when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers."
-Charlton Heston, AKA God

 

[Scotchy]

Ah. You know, this arguement goes on and on and on... I've been in many of these "should we ban guns" debates and no matter how many points made on either side, no one budges on their opinions. It's a matter of personal importance.

Listen, If banning firearms was more like waving a magic wand that removed all guns and gun factories, burned all things referencinf guns, erased 1000+ years of knowledge of physics and chemistry required to build a gunpowder-powered projetile slinger, and take away people's urges to kil others for what they beleive in or want... THEN I would be for a ban. But as it stands, we have no such magic wand.

Guns dont kill people, people kill people is in fact a very true statement. Much like wrenches, hacksaws, toasters-in-bathtubs and cars dont kill people, the people using them do. I am never for the destruction of a tool; if we stopped tryign to control the distribution of the weapons so much and concentrated MORE on social issues (gun safety education, promoting a society of RELAXATION... gettign more criminals in jail to be buggered on a regular basis... or preventing criminals from performing crimes) I think we would get much better and much more favorable results.

 

[Fat Tony!]

Lets look at it this way. What usage does a gun have: sport, killing people. Now you dont want to be killing people so just stick the gun locked up at a place of sporting and well you would have no other use for it. Protection? bollocks there is no defense in it, it is all offence. You protect yourself but you kill another. Even if someone breaks into your house you shouldnt shoot him, the person is still a human being. Guns are the worst thing invented ever, throw away your gun. Now lets see what can cars do: take you from a to b, transport goods, entertainment from driving, oh oops kill someone, pollute atmosphere. Its not the same thing as gun, a gun is a weapon it kills thats all it does apart from "sport".

Basically i repeated myself too many times so ill just get to the point: there is no good usage for a gun only evil therefore ban! Cops shouldnt have them either, only specialised units.

 

[Tr0n]

Lets look at it this way. What usage does a gun have: sport, killing people. Now you dont want to be killing people so just stick the gun locked up at a place of sporting and well you would have no other use for it. Protection? bollocks there is no defense in it, it is all offence. You protect yourself but you kill another. Even if someone breaks into your house you shouldnt shoot him, the person is still a human being. Guns are the worst thing invented ever, throw away your gun. Now lets see what can cars do: take you from a to b, transport goods, entertainment from driving, oh oops kill someone, pollute atmosphere. Its not the same thing as gun, a gun is a weapon it kills thats all it does apart from "sport".

Basically i repeated myself too many times so ill just get to the point: there is no good usage for a gun only evil therefore ban! Cops shouldnt have them either, only specialised units.

I guess I'll get to the point also:
Come be a citizen in our country before you bitch and complain about our 2nd amendment right (let alone any amendment for that matter).Hell I don't mind everyone debating about U.S. politics, because in turn it does affect the world...but whining about a law that doesn't even effect the worlds policy is a totally diffrent story.I mean sure go ahead and flame america and her world policy...go ahead and complain about the wars we make, but bitching about OUR state laws when you're not even a U.S. citizen is a no no.

Flame away.

 

[Death.Trap]

If someone broke into my house, I would shoot them. No questions asked. Not to kill, but I would maybe take a knee out. Now, if they tried to attack me once they saw I had a gun, then I would shoot to kill.

 

[Top Secret]

Shoot to kill. They say it for a reason. (In the armed forces, granted.)

Besides, if we banned guns, then what the hell would be the plot of 2/3'd of American movies? Can you imagine Boondock Saints without guns? Reservoir Dogs? Heat? They'd all lose their value. Because they wouldn't be believe-able.

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

Even if someone breaks into your house you shouldnt shoot him, the person is still a human being.

This is where you are wrong. If someone is breaking into my house and I am there, he is going to be killed. No one is going to hurt my family, not if I can help it. I don't understand feelings of never killing people because they are human. Never kill an INNOCENT human, some people need and deserve to be killed.

 

[CptStern]

Never kill an INNOCENT human, some people need and deserve to be killed.

who gives you the right to judge? If I'm poor and starving and I break into a store to steal a loaf of bread to feed my family, does that give the store owner the right to take my life?

 

[Top Secret]

who gives you the right to judge? If I'm poor and starving and I break into a store to steal a loaf of bread to feed my family, does that give the store owner the right to take my life?

You could have tried knocking on the door and asking for food, no? And, I give myself the right to judge when someone else puts me into a position to do so.

 

[Raziaar]

who gives you the right to judge? If I'm poor and starving and I break into a store to steal a loaf of bread to feed my family, does that give the store owner the right to take my life?

Nah, we should just lop off one of your hands like they do in the middle east.

Heh, by the way, that wasn't really meant to be political. Just humor.

 

[Eg.]

nobody ever steals to feed their family, thats just a phrase people use to justify crime

most crime is done to get easy cash with out doin work

and if u are starving, go to a soup kitchen or such, they have those nowadays

 

[Tr0n]

who gives you the right to judge? If I'm poor and starving and I break into a store to steal a loaf of bread to feed my family, does that give the store owner the right to take my life?

Ok....you wouldn't need to steal in the first place. :|

 

[AzzMan]

Ermm if someone breaks into my house, threatening me/family/friends, you better believe I'll blow their god damn head off. Better to have to clean up the corpse of some scumbag than one of my loved ones.

 

[qckbeam]

There is a gun problem in the United States- that’s for sure. My next-door neighbor owns something along the lines of 20-30 weapons ranging from pistols and rifles, to heavy duty machine-guns. He’s more than a bit unstable, seeing as how he’s been thrown in jail three times (once for sticking a mans head in a car door and smashing it repeatedly over a traffic incident); his wife is a raving lunatic, he has two incredibly deranged little children, and his nephew, to whom he has entrusted a spare key for the “gun-room”, is a total lunatic as well having shot my own home up quite nicely with BB guns (BB guns my neighbor owned funnily enough) after lobbing a home-made chemical bomb into my pool. This man is irresponsible, he’s served time for assault, he’s threatened to kill his wife, his weapons were used to assault my own home, and still he has an arsenal that’s sizeable enough to warrant adding on an extra room to his home for storage space. The best part of the story is that allowing a nut-job to outfit himself with enough raw fire power to take out the neighborhood is perfectly legal because of that oh-so wonderful second amendment we Americans have (and yes, I’m 100% positive it’s all legit).

Having said that, I’m not for an outright ban because realistically such a measure would stir up so much trouble that we'd have a mini-revolution on our hands…if not a full-blown, all-out war. I know of at least ten people that would take "from my cold, dead hands" quite literally (neighbor counts for three), and my area of the country is generally thought of as quite tame on this particular matter. There is far too much emotion tied into the whole issue; It's something that needs to be slowly and steadily quelled; no drastic moves. The issue does however require serious, and immediate, attention. Some sort of massacre is brewing next door and I suspect the fact that they’ve got a few assault rifles lying around won’t be helping matters much.

 

[Top Secret]

There is a gun problem in the United States- that’s for sure. My next-door neighbor owns something along the lines of 20-30 weapons ranging from pistols and rifles, to heavy duty machine-guns. He’s more than a bit unstable, seeing as how he’s been thrown in jail three times (once for sticking a mans head in a car door and smashing it repeatedly over a traffic incident); his wife is a raving lunatic, he has two incredibly deranged little children, and his nephew, to whom he has entrusted a spare key for the “gun-room”, is a total lunatic as well having shot my own home up quite nicely with BB guns (BB guns my neighbor owned funnily enough) after lobbing a home-made chemical bomb into my pool. This man is irresponsible, he’s served time for assault, he’s threatened to kill his wife, his weapons were used to assault my own home, and still he has an arsenal that’s sizeable enough to warrant adding on an extra room to his home for storage space. The best part of the story is that allowing a nut-job to outfit himself with enough raw fire power to take out the neighborhood is perfectly legal because of that oh-so wonderful second amendment we Americans have (and yes, I’m 100% positive it’s all legit).

Having said that, I’m not for an outright ban because realistically such a measure would stir up so much trouble that we'd have a mini-revolution on our hands…if not a full-blown, all-out war. I know of at least ten people that would take "from my cold, dead hands" quite literally (neighbor counts for three), and my area of the country is generally thought of as quite tame on this particular matter. There is far too much emotion tied into the whole issue; It's something that needs to be slowly and steadily quelled; no drastic moves. The issue does however require serious, and immediate, attention. Some sort of massacre is brewing next door and I suspect the fact that they’ve got a few assault rifles lying around won’t be helping matters much.

This problem has an easy remedy. It's called a pump action shotgun. :smoking:

 

[qckbeam]

This problem has an easy remedy. It's called a pump action shotgun. :smoking:

Nothing like a bit of that old-time ultraviolence to smooth out life’s problems

 

[Top Secret]

Nothing like a bit of that old-time ultraviolence to smooth out life’s problems

I call it the American Equilibrium.

 

[Raziaar]

There is a gun problem in the United States- that’s for sure. My next-door neighbor owns something along the lines of 20-30 weapons ranging from pistols and rifles, to heavy duty machine-guns. He’s more than a bit unstable, seeing as how he’s been thrown in jail three times (once for sticking a mans head in a car door and smashing it repeatedly over a traffic incident); his wife is a raving lunatic, he has two incredibly deranged little children, and his nephew, to whom he has entrusted a spare key for the “gun-room”, is a total lunatic as well having shot my own home up quite nicely with BB guns (BB guns my neighbor owned funnily enough) after lobbing a home-made chemical bomb into my pool. This man is irresponsible, he’s served time for assault, he’s threatened to kill his wife, his weapons were used to assault my own home, and still he has an arsenal that’s sizeable enough to warrant adding on an extra room to his home for storage space. The best part of the story is that allowing a nut-job to outfit himself with enough raw fire power to take out the neighborhood is perfectly legal because of that oh-so wonderful second amendment we Americans have (and yes, I’m 100% positive it’s all legit).

Having said that, I’m not for an outright ban because realistically such a measure would stir up so much trouble that we'd have a mini-revolution on our hands…if not a full-blown, all-out war. I know of at least ten people that would take "from my cold, dead hands" quite literally (neighbor counts for three), and my area of the country is generally thought of as quite tame on this particular matter. There is far too much emotion tied into the whole issue; It's something that needs to be slowly and steadily quelled; no drastic moves. The issue does however require serious, and immediate, attention. Some sort of massacre is brewing next door and I suspect the fact that they’ve got a few assault rifles lying around won’t be helping matters much.

New york? Heh, your area of the country may have less 'gun nuts', but it certainly has far more gun murders.

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

who gives you the right to judge? If I'm poor and starving and I break into a store to steal a loaf of bread to feed my family, does that give the store owner the right to take my life?

That is my loaf, not yours. Perhaps if you're starving, buy some food? If you can't afford it, what did you do to possibly get yourself into that position, and of all possible answers, it's not my problem.

Yes, break in, and you will be shot, and it will be a shot to kill you.

 

[Sprafa]

It's not my problem...

It is your problem, because he will steal from you.

 

[kirovman]

Well if they banned guns, the mainstream criminals would still find a way to get guns. However the gun crime within families and normal life instances would plummet.
I think people should look towards preventing criminals from breaking in. Prevention rather than cure. Fine, electrify your window frames and all that, better than shooting people.

 

[HunterSeeker]

If I broke into somebodys home, and they where likely to have a gun in the house I would be armed with a fully automatic weapon and point in the face of those who live there before they could get the gun.

 

[Eg.]

i think we should just have more laws limiting guns

pistols, shotguns, rifles, are ok, but a light assualt rifle is too much

and they should definetly have heaver punishments for whackos like ur neighbor

i mean i was to get me a .44 taurus magnum with a 50 cal hunting rifle, but thats just for shooting cans and birds at my country house.

 

[el Chi]

That is my loaf, not yours. Perhaps if you're starving, buy some food? If you can't afford it, what did you do to possibly get yourself into that position, and of all possible answers, it's not my problem.

Yes, break in, and you will be shot, and it will be a shot to kill you.

The regard you display for your fellow man is striknig, to say the least. Be uncharitable, fine, but perhaps be a bit understanding?
No, you're poor it must be your own f*cking fault. Sure.

Your last line is so deeply chilling it's unreal. Personally I would only ever see lethal force to be justifiably permissible when the life of you or a loved one is threatened or the possibility of rape etc.
However if you kill someone for trying to steal some jewellery, whilst I'm not going to say that the burglar was a saint, you're worse. I'd convict you of muder probably without a second thought.

If I broke into somebodys home, and they where likely to have a gun in the house I would be armed with a fully automatic weapon and point in the face of those who live there before they could get the gun.

This is how goes it. Gun ownership prevents nothing. If anything it turns a situation far nastier.

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

The regard you display for your fellow man is striknig, to say the least. Be uncharitable, fine, but perhaps be a bit understanding?
No, you're poor it must be your own f*cking fault. Sure.

Your last line is so deeply chilling it's unreal. Personally I would only ever see lethal force to be justifiably permissible when the life of you or a loved one is threatened or the possibility of rape etc.
However if you kill someone for trying to steal some jewellery, whilst I'm not going to say that the burglar was a saint, you're worse. I'd convict you of muder probably without a second thought.


This is how goes it. Gun ownership prevents nothing. If anything it turns a situation far nastier.

Well, I can just say I'm glad the law and majority opinion sides with me then, as it's clear no matter what that you won't agree or understand my feelings. I am not a criminal for defending my family and property.

I may not donate to the largest charities like some of you to feel charitable. I may not be on any donor lists, but I help out in what ways I can. Delivering food to people, giving more than someone needy asks for, I like to think I do a little. If any one of them breaks into my property, they WILL be shot, that's the truth. There's no way to know if they are breaking in there to steal diamonds or if they are there to rape and kill your wife. Either way, my family and I are going to be protected.

 

[Top Secret]

If guns were banned, crime would rise as would goverment spending. You know why? Well, I'll tell you. :thumbs:

I believe you all remember (Because we were all walking around then.) when alcohol was banned from the United States. What happened? The mafia was created/funded. Moonshine. If something is banned/illegal, it's value sky-rockets. So, right now, we have a huge drug problem. Because everyone uses drugs? No. Because our country spends a stupid amount of money try to stop their import. If we were to legalize drugs, we would kill the illegal business. It's that simple.

Now, I know what a lot of you Europeans are thinking. (I think I do at least) and thats: Most of us don't live with guns so it won't be a problem. No-one is going to start an underground business just so your average Joe can have a gun. My response to this imagined reply you've given me, is this: We're Americans. We like guns. Therefor, if applicable, we'll get one.

Now, at this time, our goverment spends... (Is looking up online.) http://www.drugsense.org/wodclock.htm: 19 billion last year on drugs. We're at 20 billion federal and 30 billion state this year.

Now, back in the old days of Moonshine (Think Capone) I'm sure it wasn't that much, but surely, it was damned expensive to stop alcohol importing from Canada. Assuming we ban fire arms, the first thing that's going to happen: about 200,000 Cubans, and about 500,000 Mexicans are going to get a new job. This job will include: Fence hopping, crate moving, boat driving, and ammunition manufacturing. Instead of speed boats full of coce speeding towards wonderful Texas, we're going to get speedboats full of 8 inch shotguns and AK-47's. Since guns are all ready illegal, might as well go all out, no? So, we take 10,000,000 guns away from the American people, pistols, shotguns, rifles, etc etc. And then those are replaced with 500,000 assault rifles. :thumbs:

That is all.

 

[el Chi]

Well, I can just say I'm glad the law and majority opinion sides with me then, as it's clear no matter what that you won't agree or understand my feelings. I am not a criminal for defending my family and property.

I may not donate to the largest charities like some of you to feel charitable. I may not be on any donor lists, but I help out in what ways I can. Delivering food to people, giving more than someone needy asks for, I like to think I do a little. If any one of them breaks into my property, they WILL be shot, that's the truth. There's no way to know if they are breaking in there to steal diamonds or if they are there to rape and kill your wife. Either way, my family and I are going to be protected.

When I said you seemed uncharitable, let me clear something up: I wasn't referring to charity as in donations (be it financial or medical), I just meant your comments seemed so harsh and this idea that if someone's in a bad situation then it can only be their own fault. That's nonsense.
Nevertheless, you do some charitable works and that's more than most so I can't fault you on that. Not that I'd go actively looking for the tiniest flaws to fault you out of spite - just to clarify.

I'm not disagreeing with your right to defend you property or your family, nor am I defending thieves - they're complete wankers and I have very little sympathy for them. That said, it is desperately important one looks at the causes as well as the solutions, but socio-economic factors in crime rates is not the discussion at hand.

When someone breaks into your house, of course it's difficult to gauge what their motives are exactly. In the heat of the moment it's difficult to decide what's "reasonable force."
My point is that, generally you're going to be able to realise "This candlestick to the back of their head may kill them, but it may just knock them out." In that situation, I'd have sympathy for you.
However "This gun is designed with the explicit purpose to cause lethal harm to other people. By using this for the purposes of defense, there is a very good chance that I may kill them." If some thief is, say, rifling through your drawers looking for money or whatever then, as far as I am concerned, you have no right to shoot them unless they then try and attack you.
It's an extremely tough issue and to be honest I doubt very much that either of us will budge on our stance. I think it may very well be "Agree to disagree" o' clock.

 

[KoreBolteR]

This is where you are wrong. If someone is breaking into my house and I am there, he is going to be killed. No one is going to hurt my family, not if I can help it. I don't understand feelings of never killing people because they are human. Never kill an INNOCENT human, some people need and deserve to be killed.

Spot on my friend

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

Here's a good site with lots, lots of statistics, with the sources/studies. A fair and balanced look.

http://www.justfacts.com/gun_control.htm