Gun Control: Why it is Idiotic - General

You know what, gun control is stupid because the criminals that use them are going to get them illegally, probably cheaper too. They won't waste what little money they have on firearms that will be registered and traceable. I think restricting automatic firearms is smart because then you can make those who own them have a license earned after free/cheap classes.

[QUOTE=mobrockers2;33759940]No I'm pretty sure the bill allows the military to detain US citizens too.[/QUOTE] [quote]b) Applicability to United States Citizens and Lawful Resident Aliens- (1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States. (2) LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to a lawful resident alien of the United States on the basis of conduct taking place within the United States, except to the extent permitted by the Constitution of the United States.[/quote]

[QUOTE=DaCommie1;33712659][video=youtube;R4xL3AjSLvM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R4xL3AjSLvM[/video][/QUOTE] Just wanted to point out that this video isn't legitimate, well it is but the robber isn't. He's been convicted of robberies using the same polite robber routine before and has no children.

[QUOTE=Aman VII;33723787]Because it is and I consider it a pipe dream?[/QUOTE] The EU defines poverty as an income below 60% of the median income in the same country. There are several ways you can increase the income of those living below the poverty line. These methods include: 1. Progressive taxation: those with low incomes pay considerably less of their income in taxes. 2. Welfare: nobody should be too poor to buy food and have a home, so subsidising food and rent for people who otherwise couldn't afford it would make the country less poor. 3. Free and universal healthcare: everyone should be able to afford being sick or injured. These methods reduce the poverty amongst the lower income class, and consequently their incentive to commit crimes, and that's why these methods work, whether you agree with them or not.

[QUOTE=Ond kaja;33766718]The EU defines poverty as an income below 60% of the median income in the same country. There are several ways you can increase the income of those living below the poverty line. These methods include: 1. Progressive taxation: those with low incomes pay considerably less of their income in taxes. 2. Welfare: nobody should be too poor to buy food and have a home, so subsidising food and rent for people who otherwise couldn't afford it would make the country less poor. 3. Free and universal healthcare: everyone should be able to afford being sick or injured. These methods reduces the poverty amongst the lower income class, and consequently their incentive to commit crimes, and that's why these methods work, whether you agree with them or not.[/QUOTE] Doesn't work because Merricaaaa Land of the Free!!.!

-[[B]REMOVED[/B]]

[QUOTE=Suff;33775308]How is Gun Control idiotic? It really depends on the mentality of the people and the region. For a country like America, it can not happen as the mentality and country's structure depend on the use of firearms.. Which is rather unfortunate. Most civilized countries have already applied policies to regulate weaponry. I really have no reason to have a weapon. I have a phone to call the Authorities if I feel I'm in danger. Americans can legally shoot home-intruders, or those who trespass onto their property which is something that was so foreign to me when I first immigrated. Everytime their Government suggests they share, Americans cry "Socialism!!!", and equip their guns. I really do not see why I would require a firearm, a sidearm, or a automatic weapon but Americans feel they need it. It's sad, really. Americans see some of their civil liberties torn away, but feel free compared to other countries because atleast they still have their guns. I'm a supporter of Gun-Control, but not here. It can't happen here because of the mentality of the people, the region, and the flawed structure that allows criminals to own, operate, purchase and distribute weaponry, cheat the court system and cry "I have rights!", despite their disregard for human rights for other human-beings.[/QUOTE] The stupid burns my eyes. I'd go into more detail but I'll address one of your points. "phone to call the police" Guess what, the police aren't your personal army that shows up on command. They are rarely there on time when you need them the most. You really want to rely on someone else when it comes to your life?

[QUOTE=Suff;33775308]I really have no reason to have a weapon. I have a phone to call the Authorities if I feel I'm in danger.[/QUOTE] So you'll disregard any prospect for personal responsibility and put your life on the line in hopes that someone will come and save you? Wow, you will [B]definitely[/B] get what's coming to you.

[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] It's been shown that the average person will not shoot to kill but will subconsciously aim to miss, even if their life is in danger, hence the reason for army training. ergo the vast majority of people, even with a gun, will be just as at risk as people without - more so if they frighted someone willing to use a gun into using one.

[QUOTE=ThatIrishSOB;33706572] 8. THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION[/QUOTE] Could be late, but as Seth Meyers said on SNL: [quote]When you talk about guns you always hear a lot about the Second Amendment and the Founding Fathers, and what they would say if they were here. Well, I for one think that if the Founding Fathers were here today, they would be super freaked out by cars. You can talk to them all you want about the Second Amendment, and they would just yell, ‘What are all these metal beasts doing rolling down the thoroughfare?’ And you’d tell them, ‘Those are cars’. And then you’d try to talk to them about militias and they would scream, ‘How can you speak of militias when steel dragons fly through the sky?’ And you’d say, ‘Those are airplanes.’ But even if they could wrap their heads around that they would eventually ask, ‘Why are all the slaves out?’ And they would think that. You can groan all you want, but they would think that. And yes, the Founding Fathers wanted you to have the right to bear arms, but the guys who wrote that would pee through all eight layers of their pants if they saw what guns are now. In 1787 shooting a bullet was slightly faster than throwing one. If you wanted to be bulletproof in 1787 you put on a heavy coat. So with that in mind, I’m all about Americans having guns as long as they’re the muskets from 1787 that take forever to load.[/quote] It's a little bit hyperbolic for entertainment purposes, but the point remains. As much as I'm in favour of human rights bills, the Constitution was made in a very different society, and should not necessarily be looked to in regards to the solution for modern-day problems. [editline]18th December 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=semite;33778833]So you'll disregard any prospect for personal responsibility and put your life on the line in hopes that someone will come and save you? Wow, you will [B]definitely[/B] get what's coming to you.[/QUOTE] This is patently absurd. Millions of people live their lives without ever [i]needing[/i] a gun to protect themselves, using only public services like the police to protect them when they need it. And these people aren't murdered for it. Saying a person who doesn't own and know how to own a gun is not being 'personally responsible' is blatantly fucking ridiculous.

[QUOTE=devotchkade;33779513]This is patently absurd. Millions of people live their lives without ever [i]needing[/i] a gun to protect themselves, using only public services like the police to protect them when they need it. And these people aren't murdered for it. Saying a person who doesn't own and know how to own a gun is not being 'personally responsible' is blatantly fucking ridiculous.[/QUOTE] Cut out the middleman. If you don't take proper responsibility for your own life then you deserve whatever consequences occur as a result.

[QUOTE=semite;33779822]Cut out the middleman. If you don't take proper responsibility for your own life then you deserve whatever consequences occur as a result.[/QUOTE] Why do you need a gun for "proper responsibility"?

[QUOTE=SataniX;33783599]Why do you need a gun for "proper responsibility"?[/QUOTE] Wait until Captain Obvious comes to the recue.

[QUOTE=semite;33779822]Cut out the middleman. If you don't take proper responsibility for your own life then you deserve whatever consequences occur as a result.[/QUOTE] this is a really vicious and sociopathic way to think

This is a pretty interesting thread if you keep the national flags in mind and the USA's gun cult that has left a huge mark in the nation's development from its foundation to this very day. So, thanks for this thread.

If you guys think the police will always be there for you, then its very obvious to me that not a whole lot of you have been involved with the law. I've had dispatchers hang up on me, hell I've had a highway patrolmen tell me that he couldn't do anything to help me when I had my car got ran off the road by a van. With budget cuts left and right some areas are seeing their police force cut in half. Marik, what exactly is your post supposed to mean? "gun cult", please.

[QUOTE=EagleEye;33787664]If you guys think the police will always be there for you, then its very obvious to me that not a whole lot of you have been involved with the law. I've had dispatchers hang up on me, hell I've had a highway patrolmen tell me that he couldn't do anything to help me when I had my car got ran off the road by a van. With budget cuts left and right some areas are seeing their police force cut in half. Marik, what exactly is your post supposed to mean? "gun cult", please.[/QUOTE] It is very interesting to see country's with lacks gun control against country's with strict gun control in this thread, as you can see where everyone is from. It is also interesting to see that people that live in country's with strict gun control aren't particularly fond of guns and Vice Versa. It seems that people that don't come in contact with guns don't see a need to have them, and people that do come in contact with them do.

[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;33786760]this is a really vicious and sociopathic way to think[/QUOTE] Explain your troubled reasoning.

Guns are like nukes, if someone has one, everyone needs one.

[QUOTE=Falchion;33792620]Guns are like nukes, if someone has one, everyone needs one.[/QUOTE] Where's my nuke?

anything control is idiotic

[QUOTE=semite;33779822]Cut out the middleman. If you don't take proper responsibility for your own life then you deserve whatever consequences occur as a result.[/QUOTE] You still haven't told me how not owning a gun isn't taking 'proper responsibility for your own life'.

[QUOTE=devotchkade;33793022]You still haven't told me how not owning a gun isn't taking 'proper responsibility for your own life'.[/QUOTE] I don't think he meant owning a gun, he was responding to the one guy saying something along the lines of "THE POLICE ARE SUPPOSED TO PROTECT ME" in that context.

[QUOTE=Aman VII;33793270]I don't think he meant owning a gun, he was responding to the one guy saying something along the lines of "THE POLICE ARE SUPPOSED TO PROTECT ME" in that context.[/QUOTE] No, I explicitly mentioning owning (and knowing how to operate) a gun, and he confirmed it when he quoted it and reiterated that not knowing how to do so was 'failing to show personal responsibility' or some such thing. [editline]19th December 2011[/editline] And by the way he talks, I think it's fairly obvious that he thinks taking 'personal responsibility' [i]has[/i] to mean having a gun. Even in countries (like mine) where gun crime is not high at all due to gun control. Gun control wasn't a big priority here until the Port Author massacre in 1996, wherein a man killed 35 people and wounded 21 more. The laws were tightened up considerably after that, and gun crime has consequently gone down a [i]lot[/i]. Nowadays, if someone assaults someone in Australia with a gun, it's a big deal. A few years ago, a guy shot three people in Melbourne - one fatally - it's all the media could talk about for weeks, in addition to a week-long manhunt. We've had like two school shootings in my state, and they were both at universities with a small death toll. We're proof that gun control works.

[QUOTE=mobrockers2;33722812]What is it with you people and having no faith at all in democracy.[/QUOTE] Because democracy is awful. It assumes all people are properly educated and on the same moral system. Not to mention that it delays progress due to constant conflict over every little issue. Sure, it's better than every other political system we've come up with so far, but it's still very flawed.

[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] honestly gun laws are fairly silly in their own right, but those are even sillier arguments. a gun nut most likely came up with them

At this point, defense from subjugation by the state isn't really a valid argument. You can ask David Koresh for the reason why

[QUOTE=devotchkade;33793022]You still haven't told me how not owning a gun isn't taking 'proper responsibility for your own life'.[/QUOTE] I never specifically said that, nor did I imply it. Reading comprehension is so hard, right? Then again, so is semantics! [editline]19th December 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Contag;33793906]You can ask David Koresh for the reason why[/QUOTE] Where can I reach him, heaven or hell? Also Ruby Ridge. [editline]19th December 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=SomeRandomGuy16;33793627]Because democracy is awful. It assumes all people are properly educated and on the same moral system. Not to mention that it delays progress due to constant conflict over every little issue.[/QUOTE] People often ignore how fucking inefficient democracy is. The Romans created the Republic for a number of very good reasons.

[QUOTE=ThatIrishSOB;33706572] 1. An armed man is a citizen. An unarmed man is a subject. [/QUOTE] If you're referring to revolutions, there have been plenty of successful nonviolent revolutions, and plenty of unsuccessful violent ones. If you're referring to the ability of the state to exert influence over you, well you don't really have much of a choice these days. The BAFTE will kick down your door, shoot your dog and throw you in front of a kangaroo court before you can say 'liberty'. [QUOTE=ThatIrishSOB;33706572] 2. A gun in the hand is better than a cop on the phone. [/QUOTE] Conversely, is a gun in the hand of a criminal better than a knife? [QUOTE=ThatIrishSOB;33706572] 3. Gun control isn't about guns, it's about control. [/QUOTE] Of guns. That's some third grader logic there. You can spin that the other ways - guns are about control on an individual level. You can control your future to a greater degree. But will you necessarily make the correct decisions, and do you trust others more than the state? [QUOTE=ThatIrishSOB;33706572] 4. If guns are outlawed can we use swords? [/QUOTE] Points like this merely detract from your argument. [QUOTE=ThatIrishSOB;33706572] 5. If guns cause crime than pencils cause misspelled words. [/QUOTE] This one just works against the whole thing. For a second, it seems a bit witty, right? Well I'd imagine if pencils were so regulated that they virtually did not exist, the rate of misspelled words would drop. [QUOTE=ThatIrishSOB;33706572] 6. Free men do not ask permission to bear arms. [/QUOTE] Free men do not pay taxes, either. They tend to end up on the 7 o'clock news after an FBI shooting. There aren't very many free men these days, yet many Americans own guns. [QUOTE=ThatIrishSOB;33706572] 7. If you don't know your rights you don't have any. [/QUOTE] That's not true in a literal sense. If you're taking that metaphorically, then it still doesn't work for your argument. A big part of the debate about gun control is whether possession of firearms is a right. [QUOTE=ThatIrishSOB;33706572] 8. THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION [/QUOTE] Which is a document written by men. It is not infallible, and I tend to regard arguments from legal formalism as a bit silly. For instances, the commerce clause have given the federal government immense power. [QUOTE=ThatIrishSOB;33706572] 9. Those who trade liberty for security have neither. [/QUOTE] The entire foundation of Lockean civil society is trading liberty for security! [QUOTE=ThatIrishSOB;33706572] 10. The second amendment is in place in case politicians ignore the others. [/QUOTE] Guns have been available for quite some time, and politicians have been reinterpreting the constitution for quite some time. Why haven't Americans taken their rights back with vitally important guns? [QUOTE=ThatIrishSOB;33706572] 11. 65,000,000 firearm owners killed no one yesterday. [/QUOTE] About 100,000 people were shot last year, or 280 yesterday. They killed about 80 people, a majority of which was themselves. of course the 'yesterday' figure is a bit stupid, because yesterday no one died in my state from car accidents, yet it would be absurd to suggest car fatalities do not occur. [QUOTE=ThatIrishSOB;33706572] 12. Guns only have two enemies- Rust and Politicians. [/QUOTE] Wouldn't idiots and criminals also be there? Idiot covers the rust part, too. [QUOTE=ThatIrishSOB;33706572] 13. You don't shoot to kill, you shoot to stay alive. [/QUOTE] This is a profoundly stupid statement, especially considering the most significant proportion of gun deaths are suicide. [QUOTE=ThatIrishSOB;33706572] 14. Assault is a behavior, not a device. [/QUOTE] This is true, the Assault Weapons Ban was absolutely stunningly idiotic. [QUOTE=ThatIrishSOB;33706572] 15. Criminals love gun control, it makes their jobs safer. [/QUOTE] Criminals love rehabilitation prisons too. That doesn't make rehabilitation an inherently bad thing. [QUOTE=ThatIrishSOB;33706572] 16. If guns cause crime then matches cause arson. [/QUOTE] Like the pencils one, this is a bit stupid. If you were able to completely remove all matches (and lighters because they're pretty similar), arsons would likely go down somewhat. [QUOTE=ThatIrishSOB;33706572] 17. Only a government who is afraid of it's citizens tries to control them. [/QUOTE] Oh come on. All governments try to control their citizens, otherwise they would collapse. How many citizens would voluntarily pay taxes, for instance? [QUOTE=ThatIrishSOB;33706572] 18. You have only the rights you are willing to fight for. [/QUOTE] I guess the only rights people have then are the rights to be shot by federal agencies, or the right to prison. [QUOTE=ThatIrishSOB;33706572] 19. Enforce the gun laws WE ALREADY HAVE, don't make more. [/QUOTE] This isn't a fact, or even an argument. It's a demand. It's as legitimate as being asking "Why should guns be illegal?" [QUOTE=ThatIrishSOB;33706572] 20. The American Revolution would never have happened with gun control. [/QUOTE] You're absolutely right! If the British hadn't started implementing it, you might still be a commonwealth country! [quote]British gun control which precipitated the American Revolution: the 1774 import ban on firearms and gun powder; the 1774-75 confiscations of firearms and gun powder, from individuals and from local governments; and the use of violence to effectuate the confiscations. It was these events which changed a situation of rising political tension into a shooting war[/quote] [QUOTE=ThatIrishSOB;33706572] 21. When you remove the right to bear arms you create slaves. [/QUOTE] I guess Greece, Russia and Tunisia are full of slaves, then. [QUOTE=ThatIrishSOB;33706572] 22. Outlawing guns will create an illegal firearm market, just like drugs and alchohol during the Prohibition. [/QUOTE] There already is an illegal market for firearms, and unregistered weapons are used in most violent crime (with guns, that is). Of all the legitimate and compelling argument for gun control, this touches on maybe one, and fills the rest of the void with utter trash. [editline]19th December 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=semite;33794073] Where can I reach him, heaven or hell? Also Ruby Ridge.[/QUOTE] Well the apocalypse hasn't happened yet, so he's in neither. Maybe try 1800-BATSHIT? I think the importance of guns to a revolution is overstated. What is truly necessary is overt corruption and violence, and citizen unity. There were only something like 9000 civilian owned guns in Tunisia, yet they managed a revolution. Chances are is that if your movement is strong enough, you'll get foreign weapons anyway.

[QUOTE=semite;33788563]Explain your troubled reasoning.[/QUOTE] "proper responsibility for your own life" is a thing that only exists in western movies. no one "deserves" to be murdered for their unwillingness to go to whatever extreme you've deigned is necessary to protect their own lives. [editline]19th December 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=semite;33794073]I never specifically said that, nor did I imply it. Reading comprehension is so hard, right? Then again, so is semantics![/QUOTE] yeah, you totally did. [editline]19th December 2011[/editline] right here: [QUOTE=semite;33779822]Cut out the middleman. If you don't take proper responsibility for your own life then you deserve whatever consequences occur as a result.[/QUOTE] do you also think that women who were raped "shouldn't have been dressed like that" or "shouldn't have gone into that alley"