• Gun Control: Why it is Idiotic
    547 replies, posted
So I checked my email yesterday and one of my close friends sent me an email that made me realize how idiotic gun control is. The email contained some fun facts, so here it is: 1. An armed man is a citizen. An unarmed man is a subject. 2. A gun in the hand is better than a cop on the phone. 3. Gun control isn't about guns, it's about control. 4. If guns are outlawed can we use swords? 5. If guns cause crime than pencils cause misspelled words. 6. Free men do not ask permission to bear arms. 7. If you don't know your rights you don't have any. 8. THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION 9. Those who trade liberty for security have neither. 10. The second amendment is in place in case politicians ignore the others. 11. 65,000,000 firearm owners killed no one yesterday. 12. Guns only have two enemies- Rust and Politicians. 13. You don't shoot to kill, you shoot to stay alive. 14. Assault is a behavior, not a device. 15. Criminals love gun control, it makes their jobs safer. 16. If guns cause crime than matches cause arson. 17. Only a government who is afraid of it's citizens tries to control them. 18. You have only the rights you are willing to fight for. 19. Enforce the gun laws WE ALREADY HAVE, don't make more. 20. The American Revolution would never have happened with gun control. 21. When you remove the right to bear arms you create slaves. 22. Outlawing guns will create an illegal firearm market, just like drugs and alchohol during the Prohibition. Thank you.
Perhaps you could have worded your post better, but I agree with you.
The only problem that occurs without gun control are stupid people, who carry guns to kill people, or leave them out so their kids blow their brains out, or they get shot in the leg because they stick it in their waist. The small percentage of idiots makes guns look bad. I'm no gun freak but I love old guns But those are terrible arguements
I really don't imagine owning a gun would make me any more free. All of the points about guns being morally neutral are just stupid. An atom bomb is morally neutral; it doesn't take away from the fact the world is a more dangerous place with them.
I think it would be much better were gun production and distribution entirely in the hands of state, and the minimum amount required to be produced for the armed forces.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;33706720]I think it would be much better were gun production and distribution entirely in the hands of state, and the minimum amount required to be produced for the armed forces.[/QUOTE] You think the state should have a monopoly over violence? I mean; de facto, they do, but you [I]encourage[/I] it?
Warning, I'm no US citizen, so I might be uneducated in some cases: 1 - Both are citizens 2 - I can imagine this being true in certain cases, but not always. 3 - Is that bad? Would you prefer anarchy? 4 - That would be cool. 5 - That doesn't make a whole lot of sense. 6 - I'm fairly certain you need a some kind of permit to own a gun in the US, I might be wrong though. 7 - Who knows all their rights. You're pretty much saying that 99% of people don't have any rights. 8 - Uh, okay. 9 - If you say so. 10 - Ok. 11 - About 90 did. 12 - And stupid owners. 13 - Well not always. 14 - Ok. 15 - Also makes it harder for them to get access to guns, really. 16 - That makes no sense. 17 - GO ANARCHY! 18 - Hm 19 - Do both! 20 - Okay. 21 - I don't see how, I don't hear about slavery here in Norway. 22 - As if there isn't an illegal gun market already. Also, hell, Norway is doing mighty fine even though nobody (Not even the police) walks around with guns.
To respond specifically to point 15, paul simon, no it really doesn't make it harder for them to get them. I know an ex-gangster who can get a 9mm for $80, the cheapest legal pistol in this country is somewhere around $200, and requires 2 licenses, registration, and government permission to leave your house with it. A gangster buys a cheap-ass gun for $80, and carries it around wherever, not giving a fuck about the laws, and using it for crime. Especially here in Canada, due to the US and its huge gun market, there will always be cheap, illegal guns here, and taking the ability of civilians to defend themselves from those criminals only puts public safety at risk, which the Liberals did in 1995.
That was the worst OP and the worst way to open a debate I've ever had the displeasure to read. On topic, gun control has successfully reduced gun violence in the UK, as shown by statistics. Unfortunately, that gun violence has kinda been mostly replaced by knife violence. On the plus side, we have far fewer school shootings (think: when was the last time you even heard of a school/university shooting in the UK?). I don't think gun control could ever work for the US - it's only really effective if you're dedicated to keeping smuggled guns out of the whole country, thereby denying EVERYONE guns, not just lawful citizens. Also, cultural attitudes are very different (see: the OP).
[QUOTE=paul simon;33706833] 5 - That doesn't make a whole lot of sense. [/QUOTE] It makes sense to me. What he's saying is that a gun is nothing more than a tool, and if you claim that guns cause crime, you might as well say that pencils cause misspelled words. Crime is caused by individuals, not by tools like guns. Same goes for misspelled words I suppose.
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;33706943]To respond specifically to point 15, paul simon, no it really doesn't make it harder for them to get them. I know an ex-gangster who can get a 9mm for $80, the cheapest legal pistol in this country is somewhere around $200, and requires 2 licenses, registration, and government permission to leave your house with it. A gangster buys a cheap-ass gun for $80, and carries it around wherever, not giving a fuck about the laws, and using it for crime. Especially here in Canada, due to the US and its huge gun market, there will always be cheap, illegal guns here, and taking the ability of civilians to defend themselves from those criminals only puts public safety at risk, which the Liberals did in 1995.[/QUOTE] Let me elaborate a bit on 15. If there had been gun control for a while, less guns would have been produced and they would've been harder to get a hold of. So yeah that's what I mean. But starting with this kind of gun control now wouldn't be very effective to begin with as guns last for a very long time. The US has kind of trapped itself because of this, gun control will now without doubt cause harm to those who obey. [editline]13th December 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Boba_Fett;33706974]It makes sense to me. What he's saying is that a gun is nothing more than a tool, and if you claim that guns cause crime, you might as well say that pencils cause misspelled words. Crime is caused by individuals, not by tools like guns. Same goes for misspelled words I suppose.[/QUOTE] Ah, I get it now. Yeah I agree with that point then.
[QUOTE=Turnips5;33706945]That was the worst OP and the worst way to open a debate I've ever had the displeasure to read. On topic, gun control has successfully reduced gun violence in the UK, as shown by statistics. Unfortunately, that gun violence has kinda been mostly replaced by knife violence. On the plus side, we have far fewer school shootings (think: when was the last time you even heard of a school/university shooting in the UK?). I don't think gun control could ever work for the US - it's only really effective if you're dedicated to keeping smuggled guns out of the whole country, thereby denying EVERYONE guns, not just lawful citizens. Also, cultural attitudes are very different (see: the OP).[/QUOTE] That was one of my points Turnips. "If guns are outlawed can we use swords?" Thats whats happening Turnip, people are using knives instead of guns to casue violence. Outlawing guns wont do anything because almost anything can be used as a weapon
[QUOTE=paul simon;33706987]Let me elaborate a bit on 15. If there had been gun control for a while, less guns would have been produced and they would've been harder to get a hold of. So yeah that's what I mean. But starting with this kind of gun control now wouldn't be very effective to begin with as guns last for a very long time. The US has kind of trapped itself because of this, gun control will now without doubt cause harm to those who obey.[/QUOTE] You can remove the tool, sure, but by doing so, you do nothing to address the motivation behind the crime. It's pointless, restrictive and above all, misdirected.
Stupid laws, everyone knows criminals don't use legally bought guns, they are too pricey and far too troublesome to license, the only damage it does is to law abiding people. Most guns here used by criminals (with the exception of those that are stolen) are brought in with drug shipments, it's getting ridiculous. Our Gardai are also ignorant of proper licensing proceeder.
[QUOTE=paul simon;33706987]Let me elaborate a bit on 15. If there had been gun control for a while, less guns would have been produced and they would've been harder to get a hold of. So yeah that's what I mean. But starting with this kind of gun control now wouldn't be very effective to begin with as guns last for a very long time. The US has kind of trapped itself because of this, gun control will now without doubt cause harm to those who obey..[/QUOTE] There's been gun control in Canada since at least the Pistol Registry of 1938, it hasn't stopped gun crime, or illegal firearms getting in the country, just irritated legal firearms owners because they can't buy certain guns. There's about 80 murders in Toronto, my city, every year, and most are caused by illegal guns, specifically handguns, some of the hardest to legally get in Canada, used in gang violence. Gun control has not stopped illegal guns, even with the restrictions further put on in the 1970s and nearly 20 years ago in 1995. Gun crime hasn't stopped, and all gun control has done is make legal gun owners look like evil criminal sociopaths in the eyes of the general public and the media, but thankfully that's changing a bit now, and getting rid of the failed, useless, and over-cost long gun registry here is a good start on reversing the view that firearms owners are evil criminal sociopaths and apparently, according to the friends, family, and victims of the 1989 École Polytechnique massacre, haters of women and supporters of violence against women. Yes, they actually said the conservatives, gun owners, and anyone supporting scrapping the registry that would not have done anything to stop the shooting that killed 14 women apparently now hate women and support an increase in violence against them, which is quite honestly disgusting slander, and they barred conservatives and opponents of the registry from the memorial services for the 14 women who were killed on December 6th, 1989, bringing politics into a situation that should be about remembrance, and potentially barring friends, family, and activists against violence against women from taking part in memorial services.
[QUOTE=ThatIrishSOB;33706572]So I checked my email yesterday and one of my close friends sent me an email that made me realize how idiotic gun control is. The email contained some fun facts, so here it is: 1. An armed man is a citizen. An unarmed man is a subject. 2. A gun in the hand is better than a cop on the phone. 3. Gun control isn't about guns, it's about control. 4. If guns are outlawed can we use swords? 5. If guns cause crime than pencils cause misspelled words. 6. Free men do not ask permission to bear arms. 7. If you don't know your rights you don't have any. 8. THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION 9. Those who trade liberty for security have neither. 10. The second amendment is in place in case politicians ignore the others. 11. 65,000,000 firearm owners killed no one yesterday. 12. Guns only have two enemies- Rust and Politicians. 13. You don't shoot to kill, you shoot to stay alive. 14. Assault is a behavior, not a device. 15. Criminals love gun control, it makes their jobs safer. 16. If guns cause crime than matches cause arson. 17. Only a government who is afraid of it's citizens tries to control them. 18. You have only the rights you are willing to fight for. 19. Enforce the gun laws WE ALREADY HAVE, don't make more. 20. The American Revolution would never have happened with gun control. 21. When you remove the right to bear arms you create slaves. 22. Outlawing guns will create an illegal firearm market, just like drugs and alchohol during the Prohibition. Thank you.[/QUOTE] having read that list it seems more like satire that's actually in favour of gun control by pointing out how stupid gun nuts are [editline]14th December 2011[/editline] Literally everything on there is a terribly thought out point that can be so easily thwarted it's pretty laughable. i don't understand how someone can put so little thought into that
[QUOTE=ThatIrishSOB;33707069]Outlawing guns wont do anything because almost anything can be used as a weapon[/QUOTE] but not all weapons are equally effective
[QUOTE=Turnips5;33707319]but not all weapons are equally effective[/QUOTE] what about blowguns?
[QUOTE=ThatIrishSOB;33707069]That was one of my points Turnips. "If guns are outlawed can we use swords?" Thats whats happening Turnip, people are using knives instead of guns to casue violence. Outlawing guns wont do anything because almost anything can be used as a weapon[/QUOTE] if people are using knives to the same effect why don't we just use knives instead of guns for everything
[QUOTE=Robbobin;33707382]if people are using knives to the same effect why don't we just use knives instead of guns for everything[/QUOTE] dude, didn't you read his post? almost anything can be used as a weapon we could be saving so much money by issuing paperclips to the military instead of rifles
[QUOTE=Robbobin;33707382]if people are using knives to the same effect why don't we just use knives instead of guns for everything[/QUOTE] Why don't we still manufacture everything by hand? It accomplishes the same thing. It's an argument of efficiency, yes knives, bows, crossbows, hell even blunt bats and axes will all kill someone, none really do it as efficiently as guns though. People are using knives because there's an absence of guns, and if they want someone dead, they'll kill them, with whatever they have available. If, as Gordon Brown apparently tried, they outlawed knives, or at least, pointed knives, people would use axes, bats, cars, or even rope to kill. If you take one thing away, and someone wants someone else dead, they'll find another way of doing it.
[QUOTE=Turnips5;33707415]dude, didn't you read his post? almost anything can be used as a weapon we could be saving so much money by issuing paperclips to the military instead of rifles[/QUOTE] although i know that was a joke, what i said is true, for example. pencils can be used to stab people's eyes out, scissors can be used to slit throats, etc.
1. I'm pretty sure they're both citizens. 2. Fair enough. 3. Yes that's kind of the definition. Not sure what point you're making. 4. The point you're making seems reasonable, but since most countries as developed as the US and with stricter gun control than the US have significantly lower murder rates, it's pretty bold to state it as if it were fact. 5. Guns don't cause crime but they catalyse it by making it easier. That still counts for something. 6. You could say this for any law. That's what the law is; limits on personal freedom. 7. Don't see what that has to do with gun control. 8. That makes gun control legally complex. It doesn't affect whether it's a good idea or not. 9. Again, you could pull this out for any number of 'greater good' laws. 10. Fair enough. 11. 26,000 nuclear weapons weren't fired yesterday. Doesn't mean they don't pose a hazard. (Just for clarity I'm not trying to imply that every gun owner is a hazard). 12. That just doesn't make sense. 13. If the gun isn't being used for crime. And they are used for crime. 14. Really not sure what point this is trying to make. 15. Ah yes this argument. While gun control does mean that the small proportion of serious criminals who do purchase guns on the black market are more damgerous than criminals in a country without gun control, far less criminals will have guns since they are expensive, much harder to get, and must be kept well hidden. The UK has 1/6th the gun crime rate of the US, and it's not like we're a country of pacifists. 17. Again, that's what the law is; control over citizens. What point is this meant to make? 18. I see your point, but this hardly applies to day to day life. 19. Don't see how this is an argument against gun control. 20. Dunno much about that period of US history so I can't say anything against that. 21. Hyperbole ho! 22. See 15. There's a few decent points in there and by all means I don't support gun control to quite as severe an extent as we have it here in the 'one guy did something bad with a handgun so we'll ban them from the entire country' UK, most of those sound like something read off a bumper sticker.
[QUOTE=ThisGuy0;33707493] Ah yes this argument. While gun control does mean that [B]the small proportion of serious criminals who do purchase guns on the black market [/B]are more damgerous than criminals in a country without gun control, far less criminals will have guns since they are expensive, much harder to get, and must be kept well hidden.[/QUOTE] I was under the impression that guns used in crimes were more often than not purchased illegally, can you provide evidence to support your claim to the contrary?
[QUOTE=Turnips5;33707319]but not all weapons are equally effective[/QUOTE] There seems to be this myth that guns cause massive amounts of destruction. I'd be willing to bet that roughly 80% of the people here couldn't hit a simple target 30 feet away with a handgun. They're much more difficult to use than Hollywood depicts them to be.
Gun control is idiotic, yes, because people can always obtain a gun from the black market, but still it's better than nothing.
[QUOTE=Timebomb575;33707567]I was under the impression that guns used in crimes were more often than not purchased illegally, can you provide evidence to support your claim to the contrary?[/QUOTE] That's probably true, but if a country has strict gun control then black market prices will surely be driven up and the illegal gun trade will be less accessible. Point being that some local Johnny Scumbag who decides on a whim to rob his local petrol station is proably not going to have gone to the trouble and expense of obtaining one, which someone is a country where guns are more easily obtainable, both legally and illegally, may quite likely have done.
[QUOTE=ThisGuy0;33707693]That's probably true, but if a country has strict gun control then black market prices will surely be driven up and the illegal gun trade will be less accessible. Point being that some local Johnny Scumbag who decides on a whim to rob his local petrol station is proably not going to have gone to the trouble and expense of obtaining one, which someone is a country where guns are more easily obtainable, both legally and illegally, may quite likely have done.[/QUOTE] You're neglecting the fact that by banning guns, you also remove the possibility of a victim owning a weapon to defend themselves. People think twice before breaking and entering a random house, because, with a gun, an 80 year old woman is just as capable as a twenty year old man. On top of that, criminals break laws, and there would still be thousands of weapons in circulation in the black market. The only armed people would be the criminals and the government, and I sometimes have difficultly over who I trust more.
[QUOTE=ThisGuy0;33707693]but if a country has strict gun control then black market prices will surely be driven up and the illegal gun trade will be less accessible.[/QUOTE] That's the theory but in practice I doubt it really effects a criminal that much.
[QUOTE=Boba_Fett;33707807]You're neglecting the fact that by banning guns, you also remove the possibility of a victim owning a weapon to defend themselves. People think twice before breaking and entering a random house, because, with a gun, an 80 year old woman is just as capable as a twenty year old man. [/QUOTE] Very true, hence why I don't for a second think the UK has gun control right. I just think a lot of pro-gun people ignore the benefits of gun control and focus only on the harm. It gets treated as a one sided debate far more than it should.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.