Gun Control

It's not the guns, it's the people.

Can't ignore the fact that guns make it ridiculously easy for people to commit murders.

If they don't have guns they use bombs/knives.
People have been finding new ways to kill each other for eons.

... you're ignoring the point here

guns being illegal, believe it or not, actually makes it HARDER to obtain these guns.
bombs ARE illegal, which is why you don't see many murders happening with bombs.
Also, guns are just an extremely convenient tool in which you can use to kill someone.
Lets say both guns and bombs were illegal. Which would you use? just pick up a gun and shoot the person? or would you actually set up a bomb to kill him?
you're undermining the fact that the spontaneous emotions of humans as well as the general ease in which a gun could be used to kill someone makes an extremely dangerous combo.

*Lets say both guns and bombs were legal

bombs are illegal but can be easily manufactured
I know this for a fact because I made one myself with fertilizer, gasoline, and a "legally" obtained detonator.
Guns are already flooded in the US, legal, and illegal markets.
Making them illegal means people will own them illegally.

Compare those statistics with every pro-gun and anti-gun country, and you see an extremely strong correlation between availability and gun violence. As if the logic, "make guns illegal, so less people would get them" wasn't enough to convince people.

Well you have to look at the context.

You have to look at the proper context. In Europe, most of the countries are welfare states and in welfare states crime is often much lower than it is in countries that aren't welfare states. You can argue with good reason that USA is not a welfare state and because of that crime is much higher.

Countries like Norway and Sweden have invested much to avoid crime by giving prisoners free education, making a good environment inside the jails and generally making lives better.

With that being said, I am for strict gun control were you have to have good reasons to own a gun at your home. However, the situation is much different in the USA and there is a lot of crime and people should have something that could protect them in their home, like a gun. If one day the American Government becomes more of a welfare state and crimes get much lower, maybe it could get stricter gun control, but its up to them to decide.

tl;dr Ireland and USA are very different. Many European countries generally have good standards of living and helps people away from crime while in the USA its much more crime and that's why some feel safer with a gun under their pillow at night.

No the 30,000 was the amount of death by firearms in the entirety of America, I think the population was around 280m back then.

guns are also completely illegal in mexico.
thats working out fucking great isn't it?
no gun crime in mexico..

I really doesn't matter anyway. It would be impossible to enforce a gun control law because of how many people own guns. Everyone would just ignore it and nothing would change, except that now you'd have a whole lot of people who are criminals instead of a whole lot of people who are responsible citizens who happen to own guns.

There are too many differences to even compare them.

By strict, in all fairness, I assume you're meaning strict by American standard, which wouldn't be strict pretty much everywhere else.

I won't pretend to know completely though, I don't live in America, and couldn't tell you specific laws from specific states.

I heard he had two handguns, a glock, and a rifle in his car that he didn't use.

He used a rifle and had the handguns for backup. He used the rifle which is illegal. Anyways. There are 280 million registered guns in the US. Plus God knows how many unregistered. People aren't going to follow the guns laws even if they are put into effect. Neither people like me who have never harmed anyone with my guns. Nor criminals who want to hurt other people. Doing that will be like telling the ocean to not be wet.

2 out of 3 murders in the US are done on impulse. Simply having a gun in your posession makes you more likely to take someones life in case you totally snap. As such, criminals will most likely still carry firearms as they're connected, but not the average citizen who might kill their cheating spouse or that dick who owes you 10k.

As for the illegal rifle, it was unfortunate that this psycho had one of those, but nobody would've been able to stop him. You can start a killing spree anywhere and nobody will have the guts to shoot back. Massacres don't stop in the US because most citizens just hide their weapons in a drawer in case of emergencies. Most of the times the guns are taken out of the drawer is because of the owner's bad temper.

Availability of guns no matter how powerful is the problem, not the users.

If I wanted a gun, I'd have to fucking SMUGGLE one.
In the US you just have to hop a fucking border.
State laws are fucking irrelevant when guns can be purchased not a stone throw away.
But you are right. Too late to ban them now. There are too many gun owners, illegal or otherwise, and any attempt to take them back would probably start a full on death match.

It's much easier to get a gun in conneticut than ireland, where you would have to smuggle it in overseas.

I live in Toronto, i know many people who own illegal guns. But that doesnt mean they are flashing it around everywhere shooting people

compare canada's gang problem to the US's

true, but we don't just allow just anyone to get one, and to be able to own a handgun you have to have an active gun range membership, and you cant carry one anywhere but to the range and it has to be locked up... just a tad bit safer than any average Joe packing heat.

Indeed.

of course on the internet everyone is a certified expert on everything ever made

Thank christ some people out there have sense.

all you stupid assholes forget about this guy

who has the highest killstreak in history, IN FUCKING NORWAY

why should the actions of a few dictate the majority?

Because this has happened more than once, and each time it happens there is a fucking massacre. Children... Dead... By now, thousands of people have been affected by this, so clearly something is wrong. You make guns illegal and congratulations you're as safe a citizen as the rest of the world, you don't and people will continue to die.

Congratulations for finding one single case of a killing spree in another country, you must be very proud of yourself.... Now compare how many times it has happened in the USA and how many times it has happened in the rest of the world.

People who say guns need to be legal say that if they are legal, then people could have stopped these massacres.

Oh look, guns are legal. As they've been since the 18th century. Oh wow, look at all these horrible tragedies prevented by brave citizens with their legal guns! Look at all these heroic teachers with their guns protecting their students from a tragic, senseless massacre! Look at all the brave movie watchers packing heat who stopped the crazy gunman with a bulletproof vest! Look at the high school students who pulled out their 100% legal semi-automatic pistols and stopped a school shooting before it started!

Oh wait.

"Hell if I walked in on my wife fucking some guy and I had a handgun in my hand I would probably blow them away on the spot." Versus if you walked in on her fucking a guy and you had oh let's say a knife or baseball bat, you wouldn't do anything because it's not a gun. My point being if you're gonna snap, you're gonna snap and you don't need a gun to do it. And before you go pulling out your fancy numbers and statistics I'd like to say that yes I'm aware that the United States has more gun related homicides than all other developed countries combined. What I'm not hearing is anybody coming up with something that would lower murder rates in general.

"Oh my wife is sleeping with another man" *Bang* *Bang* *Neighbor walks in because he heard the noise* *Bang*

3 people dead in under 10 seconds.

"Oh my wife is sleeping with another man, come here mother fucker I'm going to stab you" Gives the guy a chance to either fight back or run.

Some people may be injured but you wont have 3 dead in under ten seconds.



My point is that I could walk in an Airport and massacre 100 people with a fully automatic weapon in under a minute. How far do you think I would go with a baseball bat or a knife, or even a Katana for that mater.

A gun gives you the power to decide if someone lives or dies at the pull of a trigger. With any close quarters combat weapon it's survival of the fittest.

so when someone breaks into my house at night, i should have to give a fair chance to kill me?
and your saying you would actually kill a man, just like that?
WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH YOU?

according to you this should be happening a lot more than it does.

and good luck trying to get an automatic weapon.
it's hardly easy. you stupid fuck.

Congratulations for totally missing the point you moron.

First of all instead of spending all that money on weaponry to protect yourself, you should spend it on making your house safer from perpetrators. Be it sturdier doors and windows, alarms, guard dogs, video surveillance , it doesn't matter.

Second, any man is capable of killing another under the right circumstances. You walk into your home and you find some strange person raping your daughter... I'm 99% percent sure any man would kill that fucker.

Third, hardly easy to get an automatic weapon!? Are you fucking serious?
Besides missing the point of that analogy, you should watch this so you don't embarrass yourself further. www.youtube.com/watch?v=EusUtr3jYAw

In case you didn't watch that... And you probably didn't, the video starts out with a guy opening a BANK ACCOUNT AND GETTING A FREE RIFFLE. And later in the video you see a guy bragging that he has AN M16 FOR HOME DEFENCE, AND WHAT ARE THE OTHER GUYS CARRYING? AUTOMATIC WEAPONS.

So don't give me your bullshit that it's hard to get your hands on an automatic weapons because it's obviously not. Those men shouldn't even have access to that kind of weaponry.

Oh and one of the guys from the columbine massacre was equipped with a 9 mm Intratec TEC-9 semi-automatic handgun, not to mentions the two 12 gauge shotguns and numerous other handguns.

Can you not see that making these weapons available to the general public is a huge fucking mistake?! The Columbine weapons were bought at a fucking Gun Show for Christ sake. Open your fucking eyes!

there's a difference between fully automatic weapons and semi automatic.
you fucking dumbass.
the fact that your using anything that fat piece of fucking shit, Michael Moore, has made in an argument tells me you're dumber than a bag of rocks and not worth arguing with.

THERE IS A DIFERENCE BETWEEN SEMI AUTOMATIC AND AUTOMATIC?!?! YOU DON'T SAY!

Yeah it's convenient to call someone who is 100% rational a dumbass isn't it?

Fuck off faggot.

obviously you have no concept of how difficult it is to buy a fully automatic firearm legally.

>100% rational
luckily stupid fucking people like you have no say in our rights.

I seriously hope you never lose anyone to one of these shootings thanks to your stupid laws... But only something like that will make you change your idiotic views on gun laws.

Now seriously, fuck off.

news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/1440764.stm
here, some actual rationality for you.

Agreed. If I had easy access to guns while in highschool, I would have probably shot up the place. I didn't have access to guns, so it worked.

Gun crime would still exist if guns were banned, but the people who usually have illegal guns are the type of people who shoot their dealers to steal coke, not go in the middle of school and kill everyone.



Also, America has an EXTREMELY high gun crime rate, and yet places that ban guns like certain European countries and Canada have a low gun crime right, yet pro-gun people seem to ignore that fact by saying banning guns wouldn't change anything.

Good anon, you are okay. Have some ice cream

I'm not taking a side on this matter, but one person with a gun can kill a several number of people, while a guy with a knife for instance can be easily stopped after killing one or two people.

Knives=kitchenware, tool in and out of the house
Car = transport
Bat = sport
Gun=designed purely and totally to kill or severely another living thing

I use it to punch holes in my documents from 200 m away.

You missed my point. A shooting is a tragedy, not a reason to get wet about gun control.

Guns aren't perishable.

bullets are.

But bullets are easy to make.

not really. even if you could buy gunpowder legally, you still need to make the shell. also, if you plan for the long run, you can start confiscating or refunding guns to at least get the number going around done so that at least your grand kids won't get shot at school.

The easy thing about them is that shells are reusable, it may not be always practical to pick up your shells after a shoot out with a rival gang but I'm sure people would manage. Plus, just because guns are illegal in the states doesn't mean people wont just try to smuggle them in.

from where? you are the only country with a retardedly overblown gun industry. if you stop producing them and start collecting them, they will be near extinct 50 years down the road.

The same way we get crack, meth, etc...Seriously a lot of drugs get smuggled into america from other countries, people will find a way to do the same with guns.

bitch did i stutter? you are the only country on the whole fucking continent that mass produces guns for the public to kill each other. and even if an infinite amount of guns somehow magically appeared on the other side of the border, so what? control the border and put people in jail for smuggling. the more dangerous it becomes to own a gun in the US the less people will get shot to death.

By the way, america isn't the only country that manufactures firearms.

btw, you are just about the only country that sells them to private individuals in meaningful quantities.

>control the border and put people in jail for smuggling
We already do. People still manage to do it though.

>you are the only country on the whole fucking continent that mass produces guns for the public to kill each other.

And? no matter what there's still going to be guns circulating. What? You really think the police/ATF are going to be going door to door checking to see if you have a gun? Fuck if you're going to get rid of the 2nd amendment, you might as well get rid of this one too, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

how about you think past your nose for once. of course you cannot go from house to house. what you can do is stop producing guns and offer people the possibility to get rid of them legally, as well as confiscate them whenever you come across them in the public or crime scenes or whatever. just because we cannot make them magically disappear overnight does not mean we shouldn't try to get rid of them at all.

btw: the second amendment talks about arms, not guns. this means if you have such a hardon for the 2nd amendment you should be trying to make tanks and nuclear missiles legal.

The problem now is that even if we illegalized them, they guns would be circulated around still. A large number of firearms are here without permission, because of the belief of "Murica." Making them illegal would just cause violence, or make people hoard the guns they have.

It's not about the application of the second amendment. It's about the principal.

we honestly havent fought for freedom since the american revolution but now its more of protecting their home and self

*cough* Civil War was for states rights *cough*

states rights to what?

to be there own states and not follow federal mandates. basically States Rights.

That is the main point of a Confederacy

ya but when we learn about it we side with the north so we say the civil war was to keep the country together

For all those who sided with the North, they sided because they like the Federal Government and there were a lot of troops garrisoned in those states. The Federal Government either had strong ties in those states which would have made those states a bloodbath to seceed from, or only thought of the war as one for Niggers being free. Maryland was about to seceed, but Lincoln sent troops to Annapolis to keep the government from doing so, If Maryland had seceeded, then the capital would have been moved to Pennsylvania.

I think i got off topic.

America hasn't fought a damn war on their own soil in well over a century, they don't need guns

Not quite right. A gun is something that can be used just as easily to counteract violence before it occurs. What you're creating here is a straw man, and being quite disrespectful to the opposing side. Don't get me wrong, OP was obnoxious, but you're being more obnoxious.

i was being obnoxious to make the point that being obnoxious has its obvious counterarguments (exactly as you said). After all, guns definitely can be used as protection, and its all about the person behind the gun. The proper way to deal with it would be to just make the laws concerning guns more strict

You are assuming that they will obey laws. That, ordinarily, is fine, but, in this case, it limits the ability of law-abiding citizens to defend themselves. I agree that making dangerous things illegal many be the route to go by in many cases, but this one is not the right case.

What about murder, i mean people do it anyways

A very good point. If I wanted to kill someone and couldn't use a gun, it is not much of a hindrance.

Or even from America.

Implying the votes of the American people are really every going to do or change anything.

Sad but true.

That's when the people are meant to use their guns to make their votes count. I thought the whole gun ownership thing in the USA was to fight tyranny.

It's simply the right to have arms. You know. One of the few things our increasingly totalitarian government hasn't taken away yet. You don't need guns to kill people, poison, bombs etc. I think its about more than that.

Almost anything of a significant enough weight or sharpness can be used as a tool for killing, I mean bloody hell, you can kill someone with a fucking pencil, there's a wide variety of ordinary household tools that can kill a person, banning one sort of instrument won't solve that, to remove all possible ways of killing a person, everyone would have to be armless and legless.

Then by your argument, since anything can be used to kill a person, why don't we just legalize tanks? Bombs? Grenades? Nukes?!? Because why not? If someone wanted to wipe out an entire city with a nuke, they could just go around stabbing everyone in the city with a fucking pencil. So banning nukes won't solve anything. We should sell them at walmart. Because the man who went around the school and shot 26 people could have just beat them to death with a tire iron.

Never said it was as simple with other tools as with a gun, just stating that guns aren't the only things that kill, also, I'm a fan of the saying "Guns don't kill, people do."

Right. That's like saying hammers aren't the only thing that can put nails through a wall, you could just do it with your face. Very redundant.

ha ha ha. I'm pretty sure you could rip out an artery with your teeth. The jugular seems exposed. You'd have to get rid of those too, but I'm pretty sure you could suffocate someone with your body weight. In that case there is only one solution...

We kill everyone, before they kill anybody.

True, and that's pretty bad.

Misusing a meme, that's a good one

Portugal made every drug legal and suddenly the amount of users fell dramatically and they no longer had a problem with people doing heroin in the street.

It would not help at all, in fact crime and and murders involving firearms would skyrocket.

I'm not on either side of the fence with this argument because guns are a complete non-factor where I'm from but that has to be the stupidest fucking picture to defend your argument with. Crime was not rare in any way, shape or form in Britain, and outside of Northern Ireland cops in the UK very rarely carry firearms, with only a select few units carrying MP5s.

You need to at least back that up before you jump in with it. Here, I'll do it. Kennesaw, Ga passed a law saying that all households must have a working firearm with appropriate ammunition. Gun crime proceeded to drop 89% while the state as a whole dropped 10%. Also, in Switzerland, the same law exists. Same results.

So shit, man, maybe we should make everyone have a gun.

I'd like to see you developping your point, there.

I could as well claim :

You're wrong : banning the weapons would end the hunger problems in Africa.

any facts to back up this retarded claim?

Look at New York City for example. Owning any kind of handgun is next to impossible, yet there are plenty of gun-related murders every year. Taking away guns from innocent people is taking away their protection from bad people. Simple as that.

most gun crimes are gang related, especially in big cities. And especially in very diverse and dense cities like NY. Like, between people who both have guns.
The mere presence of guns increases violent tendencies.

...except a gun will do shit to protect you. statistics tell you the exact opposite: if you buy a gun there is a MUCH higher chance it will hurt or kill someone you know than a stranger.

I did...

k

Every soccer mom thinks they're politicians too.