Halt!

Except Farmers.
And their Mums.

Here, take this.

"Everyone and their mums are packing guns around 'ere"
"Like who?"
"Farmers."
"Who else?"
"Farmer's mums."

YES.I LIKE THIS REFERENCE.

when you outlaw something only the outlaws will have them

That's quite the slippery slope. When it's against the law then the outlaws tend to be a very small minority, whose crime remains relatively stagnant (and yes I do know there has been a gradual rise recently, but social and economic turmoil tends to inspire criminality).

However, if the officers are allowed to carry them as a requirement, then the criminals will need to escalate to maintain their 'edge'. Then what we have is a potential arms race between the criminals and the police; allowing the public to be caught in the cross-fire.

when you outlaw something is less probable that an outlaw will have it

Organized crime and anybody willing to buy from organized crime.

Drunk driving causes accidents. Do you want to outlaw cars?

Do you not see a huge lapse in your logic..?

I think he means that only a minority of the criminals will have guns but because it is inevitable

I'd rather have a minority of potential criminals using guns than a majority.

so do I

Because it is inevitable, you shouldn't disarm the victims of insane gunmen. Do you remember the recent shootings at the Dark Knight showings and the one on a New York intersection? The one at the movies resulted in several deaths and over a dozen injured people. The one on a New York city street corner resulted in a total of two shots fired: one by the gunman, one by the man who put the gunman down.

And you don't think it would be better to make it much more difficult for that madman to actually get his hands on a gun? ergo - he doesn't shoot anyone and no-one shoots him?

Here's the thing, if you are crazy or intent on killing people, you aren't going to care where you get the gun from, plus, there is any number of ways of making homemade firerarms(which, by the way, do work), and there are no age restrictions or licenses required for buying ammo, that's ignoring the possibility of buying them on the black market.

In contrast, the possibility of defending oneself with a firearm is damn-near elimenated, as it takes 3+months for the license for long-guns to process, let alone the requirements for public carry and ordinary handguns or concealed carry. I am not saying that no requirements should be placed, just that you shouldn't raise the requirements every time a crazy dude goes on a rampage.

Both are deadly in the hands of those who don't know how to use them. Both are perfectly safe in the hands of those who do, assuming that person isn't crazy or trying to commit a crime with them.

If you are going to say "guns are designed to kill!" or something like that, guess what, you're right! They are also designed for numerous sporting events, and nobody ever gets hurt there! In fact, people are more likely to get injured by a car at, let's say a nascar race, than to be shot or otherwise injured at a shooting competition. Furthermore, unlike cars, guns can be used to prevent gun crimes, while a car-bomb can't be diffused by another car or a person using one. Logically, the car is the more dangerous item.

Again, another huge lapse of logic.
Just because two things hold certain similarities, doesn't mean that a comparison is suitable for the conversation, when those similarities you're thinking of are irrelevant to the topic. A lot of items we can buy are deadly in the hands of people who use them, but they all have varying levels of danger that they can impose against other civilians. But let's just move onto the next point so I can explain my own a bit clearer

Nobody needs military grade weaponry for any sporting event. If there's a sporting event that required the use of small nuclear weapons, and it's a game of who can blow up the biggest chunk of Arizona, would you advocate the legal distribution of nuclear weaponry? Would it make a difference to you if that the nuclear sporting event was completely safe and that there were no victims directly from the sporting event?

Your whole rant about cars is reaching an entire different level of stupidity, if you honestly want me to address it seriously you're going to have to ask me to do so.

What it boils down to is that it doesn't take an advanced criminal mastermind to buy a gun over a counter and murder dozens of people with only a few twitches of a finger with their eyes closed. That's something an imbecile with a chip on his shoulder can pull off, and if we can take guns out of the hands of people like that then that's enough to make me happy.

I love how you went straight from ordinary firearms to nuclear weapons. Because that's totally not an escalation for the purpose of a strawman. I agree, nuclear weapons are over the top. But things like the shotgun I have in my basement certainly aren't. Tell me, why do you think guns should be banned. Also, please don't just say "because a few idiots or madmen can shoot people!" that isn't a sufficient sample size of the gun-owning population to count.

Also, for your information, there are about 84 million civilion-owned guns in the USA. That's tens of thousands of households at least. There are, on average 20 shootings per year. That means that there's about .2% of the gun-owning population that would do that sort of thing. Do you think that that sort of thing justifies total removal of firearms from the population? I don't.

Nuclear weapons are over the top, but guns aren't? They're both used for killing people, and if you want me to, I can invent a sport where people safely use nuclear weapons in a closer environment. "because a few idiots or madmen can shoot people" I dont remember saying that so I don't know what you're referring to. If you're going to use quotes, then actually quote me.

Also, that last statement, you're looking at the wrong statistics. How about we compare United State's gun violence against the rest of the world's for a better perspective of the situation?

No, nuclear weapons have no way of being used in sport, as the fallout alone would cause the deaths of thousands. You seem to lack the concept of scale.

The quotes I used were not quoting you, they were quoting a hypothetical argument. I apologize if that was unclear.

Interesting you should ask about the gun statistics of the US vs the rest of the world! The USA counts it as a gun crime if a gun is so much as shown, regardless if it is used to fire a bullet, used as a bludgeon or used as a means of intimidation. Most European countries, however, only count it as a gun crime if somebody actually fires off a shot and said shot hits the victim. Naturally, given the fact that more crimes are counted in the USA standard, more crimes will be reported as a percentage, the two statistics are thus irrelevant to each-other.

"Would it make a difference to you if that the nuclear sporting event was completely safe and that there were no victims directly from the sporting event?"

Your second paragraph just made me not want to continue this conversation...

To the last paragraph, that's actually the only statistic I'm interested in that puts the issue into real perspective. You don't have to supply it though, I'm done here, I'm going to go post screen shots of crysis 2 in another thread. You can have the last words.

exactly. outlaws.

Who doesn't?

Itallians?

The fuck did you just say?

You heard me.

But...it's Hetalia's Britain...(I know, I know it's England there, but he's referred to as Britain in the anime because he uses the Union Flag)

I fuckin love texas. . .

I wish...

so wearing a heavy coat in England makes me immune to the weapons of the police force...good to know.

I'm pretty sure if you are immune to those weapons they will still beat you up up just shoot you in the leg

well of course your firearm related deaths are gonna be low because Germany is small compared to American and you are pointing out incidents with guns only, I wonder how many incidents Germany have(has?) had as a whole.

We have 340+ million in population. Of course there is going to be more.

If those are in percentages (like I think, but of course can't be sure of), then that makes no difference.

It's too late for us to outlaw guns. EVERYONE already has them. If we where to take all the guns away, the law-abiding citizens would be the only ones who turned theirs in. The criminals who wanted to use them for crime wouldn't, and none of the citizens would be able to do shit to stop them. I would agree if we could make them give theirs away too, but that's simply not the case.

I fail to see how that contradicts anything I have said.

well you are clearly not the sharpest knife in the draw

Where the fuck did I say anything about America?

well i don't know about you but i would say america is a pretty good example of a country where just about anyone can have a gun. did you seriously expect no one to mention america?

I was simply saying how I never even mentioned America in my original post, and then some dude was spouting off about how how Germany's criminal death rate is so much better, and then you come right out and tell me I'm stupid...

well the fact that in germany they have a much lower death rate per capita in gun related deaths in comparison with the usa, a country with very little gun regulation pretty much contradicts exactly what you were saying

u.s has 10.27 firearm related deaths per 100,000 per year. germany 1.57 and u.k 0.46. so yer just sayin...

That made my day xD

In Northern Ireland, all police must carry guns with live ammo..
I guess that's due to the fact that we have more terrorist organizations than the middle east..

You're absolutely right and the special police are called the Armed Response Unit

Yes but America has 311 Million people, the United Kingdom has 62 million If I remember my populations correctly. When you look at all the gun violence in America its really only in Isolated Incidents. The fact that people here so much about it is because the media loves to chastise gun owners.

I believe the police should be allowed to carry firearms in the larger of cities due to the higher amount of gun crime. I don't live in a big city but I have witnessed gun crime and have been threatened with a shotgun my self (I live in a poor area and lots of scousers have moved here they have guns) I think the gun crime problem is only going to get worse

....but it isnt...in anyway...even the mans uniform is wrong.