 |
|
Lincoln
|
|
Yes of course guns are made to kill. They are used everyday to kill or threaten to kill people who are determined to kill you. When the idea of self defense is rdiculed then we are on the way to Orwell's new and better world. The fact is that weapons are used by law abiding citizens to defend themselves from law breakers who will NEVER turn in their guns. If someone can devise a way to rid criminals of guns then there would not be a problem.
The right to bear arms however has to do with the power that the US government has invested in the PEOPLE. If the guns are taken away that is an admission that the people are not trusted with power. In a prison only the guards have guns. Kind of makes you think doesn't it...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lincoln
|
|
In theory anyway the United States is supposed to have a government "by the people, of the people and for the people." If that is the case then who exactly is proposing to take the guns from the people? Are these people "more equal than others"? The issue is not guns it is power. My father who is far from a gun toting radical gave me a 22 rifle a month ago but he kept his hand gun. We discussed the issue and he said it was a matter of principle. He fought two wars to maintain the freedom we enjoy as individuals and not slaves or prisoners and he keeps a gun as a symbol of his rights as a joint owner and participant of this government.
Guns are not the answer but people are skeptical of a government that seeks to disarm them while "they" keep theirs. The "they" is supposed to be us.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Kontiki
|
|
Canada
Aug 2001
time: 00:21
|
|
It amazes me that the pro-gun people actually assume that if everybody was armed, all the time, there would be less crime.
Think a little....
- violent gang crime. They know that if they attack a member of a rival gang, there will be retaliation with guns. Never stops it from happening.
- crimes such as rape. What do you think drives a person to rape someone else? The fact that the victims aren't armed? People that commit these crimes are obviously disturbed in some way, rapes will still happen.
- break and enters/vandalism. Crimes generally not seen by other people anyway, so that's not gonna reduce it.
-white collar crime (eg. corporate). No effect there.
- general attacks against other people. Again, we're talking about a mental state here. If someone wants to be a "bully", for lack of a better term, having everyone armed is just going to up the ante.
-robberies. Do you think that if someone is desperate enough to steal/rob someone, the presence of a firearm on the victim is going to stop the crime? More likely it will be a "shoot before the other guy can" scenario.
In general, the deterrance a firearm offers is only because there may be the possibility of an easier target. If everyone was armed, then it just moves everything to a new and deadlier level.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
JohnM2433
|
|
Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Jul 2002
time: 21:21
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Fez
You people... are something else... forget it... I won't even discuss my opinion with some people who are so misinformed they don't even know what they are talking about. |
This is another thing that bugs me. Not as much as stupid arguments, but still. Name-calling may feel good, but it does not positively contribute to any debate.
Actually, I guess that I'm assuming that the point of a debate is the pursuit of truth. Whereas it seems that for many people, the point is simply to make one's opponent look bad. Obviously, for these people, name-calling may be an effective debating tool.
But from my perspective, it makes sense to follow this rule of thumb: "Attack the idea, not the person." This rule also makes for civil discourse, but I suppose that is an unavoidable side effect. 
For example, in this case, Fez might have shared what he thinks people here are misinformed about, and why, thereby perhaps causing some people to reevalute their opinions. Just saying that people are misinformed doesn't really accomplish anything, debate-wise.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Space05us
|
|
if you take away everyones gun then they'll all start carrying knives
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Par4
|
 |
of Kamehameha's Palace
May 2000
time: 21:21
|
|
quote:
5/6 years ago a man armed with 4 hand guns walked into a primary school in Dunblane, Scotland. He shot dead 16 school kids of the ages 5 and 6, as well as their 22 year old female teacher. |
Well obviously that guy was mentally deranged, anyone who wants to kill school children and their teacher for whatever reason if probably gonna kill someone if not with guns then with something.
There are 2 points to this, and it truely depends on the criminal at hand. Point 1 pro gun control is that if there were no guns and was just a normal guy who decided to go insane one day and shoot a bunch of 1st graders he wouldn't have killed as many if he hadn't had those guns. But then again he could have been a criminal and he would have guns even if they were illegal(it's naive to think that just because they're illegal they are unattainable). There is a second point, which even if all guns were unavailable to him, he would have commited his crime with a machete or baseball bat or something, just chopping or smashing in the skulls of the teacher and the small children. He probably would have killed less, but then again the guns would have been a moot point. It was going to happen anyway.
The same goes for all crimes, it could happen, it might not if there were laws against gun crimes it might happen anyway. It depends on the crimes. Gangs will have guns, and they will trickle down more to petty criminals, you can't stop the flow of guns completely. But some crimes could definately be stopped.
To me it is truely a point of principal. Not crimes, not murders. I want to live in a country where I am free to take whatever drugs I want, shoot whatever guns I want or whatever as long as it doesn't endanger other people. But if I start endangering other people or prove I am a danger to society by killing someone or some such, my rights should be removed. But they shouldn't be removed at birth just because a majority thinks it was better for me.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:21.
Apolyton Time is 00:21. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
08-08-2002 18:12
.
when it broke in the us, oy, was that a pr nightmare...
|