Gun Control: Why it is Idiotic - General

[QUOTE=EurofanBMW;33864206]It doesn't matter weather it's provocative or not..he's going to get shot no matter what if he's in my house.[/QUOTE] Yeah uh, usually the person carrying the gun is faster than the person having to grab his gun..

[QUOTE=mobrockers2;33864239]Yeah uh, usually the person carrying the gun is faster than the person having to grab his gun..[/QUOTE] It takes about 4 seconds to open my drawer next yo my bed and have a loaded Beretta in my hands. Your logic is pathetic. Go ahead..give me another argument to shoot down. I've got all day.

[QUOTE=EurofanBMW;33864383]It takes about 4 seconds to open my drawer next yo my bed and have a loaded Beretta in my hands. Your logic is pathetic. Go ahead..give me another argument to shoot down. I've got all day.[/QUOTE] and it takes 0 seconds for him to have a loaded gun in his hand. i understand you don't need logic, you are a trigger happy american

[QUOTE=SIRIUS;33864565]and it takes 0 seconds for him to have a loaded gun in his hand. i understand you don't need logic, you are a trigger happy american[/QUOTE] If the robber is in a different room, which they likely are when a homeowner hears them in the night, they're on even ground, and with a little luck the homeowner has the advantage, as the criminal won't know which room the homeowner will be coming from. The homeowner is more likely to get off the first shot and have the element of surprise when confronting a criminal in their house, as the criminal will likely be heard before seen, and the homeowner will be ready for them. Evidently you didn't think about the situation fully before deciding to jump straight to insults. The homeowner is far more likely to know there's someone in the house before seeing them, and can therefore be ready for them with their weapon.

[QUOTE=DaCommie1;33864725]If the robber is in a different room, which they likely are when a homeowner hears them in the night, they're on even ground, and with a little luck the homeowner has the advantage, as the criminal won't know which room the homeowner will be coming from. The homeowner is more likely to get off the first shot and have the element of surprise when confronting a criminal in their house, as the criminal will likely be heard before seen, and the homeowner will be ready for them. Evidently you didn't think about the situation fully before deciding to jump straight to insults. The homeowner is far more likely to know there's someone in the house before seeing them, and can therefore be ready for them with their weapon.[/QUOTE] You hear people walking around in your house? If someone doesn't want to be heard, it's pretty easy to not be heard in my house.

[QUOTE=SIRIUS;33864565]and it takes 0 seconds for him to have a loaded gun in his hand. i understand you don't need logic, you are a trigger happy american[/QUOTE] How does he know what room I'm in? How am I a trigger happy American? Because I collect firearms?

[QUOTE=mobrockers2;33864852]You hear people walking around in your house? If someone doesn't want to be heard, it's pretty easy to not be heard in my house.[/QUOTE] A creaky board or poorly placed kitchen pottery can be a great wake-up call for a homeowner to let them know there's someone in their house. I don't know about Europe, but in North America almost every floor has an underlying layer of wood, and wood as it ages, or sometimes just because, can get a bit creaky, and that creak at the wrong hour of the morning, or the sound of any number of doors and/or windows at the same hour, can be a great alert for a homeowner with a firearm that there may be an intruder in their house, or that their daughter is sneaking out. Either way the gun is warranted. [sp]Joking on the part about the daughter, due to the response to humour of some people in this thread I feel the need to clarify.[/sp]

[QUOTE=EurofanBMW;33864858]How does he know what room I'm in? How am I a trigger happy American? Because I collect firearms?[/QUOTE] How do you know what room HE is in? How do you know he's even there? You're asleep, he's trying to be silent.

[QUOTE=mobrockers2;33864944]How do you know what room HE is in? How do you know he's even there? You're asleep, he's trying to be silent.[/QUOTE] My floor creaks with every footstep?

[QUOTE=mobrockers2;33864944]How do you know what room HE is in? How do you know he's even there? You're asleep, he's trying to be silent.[/QUOTE] You know your house better than he does, depending on how far away the creak is, it will be able to allow you to gauge approximately what room he is in, as you know how far from your bedroom these rooms are, therefore knowing a more quiet/distant creak means a room farther away from the bedroom.

[QUOTE=DaCommie1;33864929]A creaky board or poorly placed kitchen pottery can be a great wake-up call for a homeowner to let them know there's someone in their house. I don't know about Europe, but in North America almost every floor has an underlying layer of wood, and wood as it ages, or sometimes just because, can get a bit creaky, and that creak at the wrong hour of the morning, or the sound of any number of doors and/or windows at the same hour, can be a great alert for a homeowner with a firearm that there may be an intruder in their house, or that their daughter is sneaking out. Either way the gun is warranted. [sp]Joking on the part about the daughter, due to the response to humour of some people in this thread I feel the need to clarify.[/sp][/QUOTE] I live in a house of 7, even if the burglar would be stupid enough to go upstairs, I'd probably think it was one of my sisters going to the bathroom. Downstairs we have floor heating, so there's cement under our floor. I agree that I might hear a window shatter (they won't get in trough the doors), if that was the case I would probably wake my dad and grab a baseball bat. Another reason I wouldn't want to own a gun is because I don't think I'd be able to use it on another person, making it even more dangerous for me to have one.

[QUOTE=mobrockers2;33865036]Another reason I wouldn't want to own a gun is because I don't think I'd be able to use it on another person, making it even more dangerous for me to have one.[/QUOTE] And that's perfectly fine. I respect that you know your mental limits. As for me, I'm an Infantryman in the 101st Airborne Division and don't have a problem killing some beaner douche bag that thinks he can get away with fucking up my house. Not every one is uncomfortable potentially shooting someone like yourself, therefore as I'm sure you'll agree..it's stupid to impose your views on other people who ARE comfortable taking responsibility for their family's safety.

[QUOTE=Ray-The-Sun;33817781]Oh right. I forgot the American legal system made no fucking sense to the rest of the world.[/QUOTE] Nearly all(possibly every single one) western countries has laws regarding defense of human life. Most of these laws allow the use of deadly force to protect human life. The difference is mostly that in the US it's a RIGHT, and the shooter only has to prove it was self defence, whereas in more european countries it's assumed as murder, and then there's a painful and long process through the legal system even though everything most likely points to self defence. Read up on your laws. Most countries has a law protecting the use of force, and often deadly force when a life is in danger, even if it's not your own life.

[QUOTE=EurofanBMW;33865377]And that's perfectly fine. I respect that you know your mental limits. As for me, I'm an Infantryman in the 101st Airborne Division and don't have a problem killing some beaner douche bag that thinks he can get away with fucking up my house. Not every one is uncomfortable potentially shooting someone like yourself, therefore as I'm sure you'll agree..it's stupid to impose your views on other people who ARE comfortable taking responsibility for their family's safety.[/QUOTE] I'm not trying to impose my views on anyone, I'm not the one calling people that don't want to own a gun irresponsible. Arguing that I don't care about my families safety enough to take matters into my own hands. Tthat I have a problem with. I am not at all arguing that guns should be banned, I'm arguing that it is way too easy to get a gun in the US, and that there should be some form of gun control, which in some states, is a complete lack there of. [editline]23rd December 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=CAPSMAN!;33865452]Nearly all(possibly every single one) western countries has laws regarding defense of human life. Most of these laws allow the use of deadly force to protect human life. [b]The difference is mostly that in the US it's a RIGHT, and the shooter only has to prove it was self defence[/b], whereas in more european countries it's assumed as murder, and then there's a painful and long process through the legal system even though everything most likely points to self defence. Read up on your laws. Most countries has a law protecting the use of force, and often deadly force when a life is in danger, even if it's not your own life.[/QUOTE] False.

[QUOTE=EurofanBMW;33864858]How does he know what room I'm in? How am I a trigger happy American? Because I collect firearms?[/QUOTE] Because anyone who doesn't support strict gun control is Yosemite Sam, and is obviously planning at this very moment to kill people. SIRIUS you have no fucking clue on how to debate, and it sure as hell isn't with launching personal attacks, which in fact makes your argument look stupid.

[QUOTE=A Glitch;33863420]While I'll admit that yeah okay having a weapon in self defense is pretty useful, I'd be willing to bet a large amount of money that guns are used more often for crime in America than then are for self defense/recreation (hunting and the like) but I'll throw these statistics out there, In the UK guns are heavily restricted/illegal. Here we have the deaths per year in the UK by gunshots: YEAR DEATHS 1997 198 1998 229 1999 207 2000 204 2001 193 2002 181 2003 187 2004 191 2005 185 2006 210 Source: [URL]http://www.gun-control-network.org/GF07.htm[/URL] all together that's just under 2000 deaths across 9 years across a whole country of millions of people, the US surpasses that upwards of 4 times as much in any single year mentioned. lets have a look at the exact stats for the US: snip and the ages for the people doing the shooting? snip Is that down to having easier access to guns to commit crimes? I think so...[/QUOTE] 1. The United States has a population five times greater, which you forgot to mention. 2. Where are the stats for homicide by other weapons in the United Kingdom? You make it seem as if people only commit murder if they have access to firearms, and that if we all didn't have guns nobody would kill anybody else. That's just stupid. Obviously the US has a higher gun crime rate. Nobody's disputing that. What you seem to fail to realize is that it's not the gun crime that matters, it's the overall crime rate. As I recall, it's not so rosy for the UK. [editline]23rd December 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=mobrockers2;33865488]I am not at all arguing that guns should be banned, I'm arguing that it is way too easy to get a gun in the US, and that there should be some form of gun control, which in some states, is a complete lack there of.[/QUOTE] All states require at least an instantaneous background check before purchasing a firearm. Most states require a several-day waiting period and more in-depth ATF background check, especially for handguns. You can not simply walk into a gun shop, pick out a handgun, and buy it with no questions asked. If anything, I'd support stronger control on handguns. Street crime isn't performed with assault rifles or hunting rifles, it's done primarily with pistols because they can be concealed. A full-sized rifle or shotgun, on the other hand, can be used as a home defense weapon if need be. [editline]23rd December 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=SIRIUS;33864565]and it takes 0 seconds for him to have a loaded gun in his hand. i understand you don't need logic, you are a trigger happy american[/QUOTE] All the more reason for him to be unarmed in his home, right? Because the more dangerous the intruder is, clearly the safer you are by being more vulnerable. Makes perfect sense. Read up on your stats with respect to home invasions. For an intruder to actually be armed with anything more threatening than a baseball bat is once-in-a-blue-moon rare.

[QUOTE=catbarf;33865897]1. The United States has a population five times greater, which you forgot to mention. 2. Where are the stats for homicide by other weapons in the United Kingdom? You make it seem as if people only commit murder if they have access to firearms, and that if we all didn't have guns nobody would kill anybody else. That's just stupid. Obviously the US has a higher gun crime rate. Nobody's disputing that. What you seem to fail to realize is that it's not the gun crime that matters, it's the overall crime rate. As I recall, it's not so rosy for the UK. [editline]23rd December 2011[/editline] All states require at least an instantaneous background check before purchasing a firearm. Most states require a several-day waiting period and more in-depth ATF background check, especially for handguns. You can not simply walk into a gun shop, pick out a handgun, and buy it with no questions asked. If anything, I'd support stronger control on handguns. Street crime isn't performed with assault rifles or hunting rifles, it's done primarily with pistols because they can be concealed. A full-sized rifle or shotgun, on the other hand, can be used as a home defense weapon if need be. [editline]23rd December 2011[/editline] All the more reason for him to be unarmed in his home, right? Because the more dangerous the intruder is, clearly the safer you are by being more vulnerable. Makes perfect sense. Read up on your stats with respect to home invasions. For an intruder to actually be armed with anything more threatening than a baseball bat is once-in-a-blue-moon rare.[/QUOTE] Oh..didn't you get the memo? Crime is perfectly acceptable as long as it isn't commited with a firearm.

Gun control really only affects normal people who want to shoot guns for fun. Sure, some criminals with a death wish like those guys at Columbine High could use legally bought guns to do something, but even with gun control they'd find them somehow. Really it only affects people who want to shoot guns for fun on a range

[QUOTE=EurofanBMW;33865377] I'm an Infantryman in the 101st Airborne Division[/QUOTE] Neato. Assuming you aren't lying

I don't like the idea that someone could shoot a robber in the face "in self defense." A stolen TV is a lot less of a disaster than a death.

[QUOTE=Splarg!;33867246]I don't like the idea that someone could shoot a robber in the face "in self defense." A stolen TV is a lot less of a disaster than a death.[/QUOTE] So what do you do? Let them steal whatever they want? And it's not like shooting is always the first option, I'd rather yell at them and point my gun at them and get them on the ground then call the cops

[QUOTE=Aman VII;33867035]Neato. Assuming you aren't lying[/QUOTE] Haha..I always hate mentioning it online because that's kind of the default unit to fake about being in on the internet. Add me on facebook. ;)

[QUOTE=Splarg!;33867246]I don't like the idea that someone could shoot a robber in the face "in self defense." A stolen TV is a lot less of a disaster than a death.[/QUOTE] Even in the United States, someone stealing your TV isn't grounds for shooting them. You are only allowed to shoot to kill if lives are at risk if you don't. So if an intruder comes into your house, you can't shoot. If he starts stealing things, you can't shoot. But if he acts aggressively towards you or your family, you can shoot and have it be counted as self defense in court. Self defense is not the right to kill anyone who threatens your property, it is only to be used as a last resort and only in the presence of clear and immediate danger.

[QUOTE=catbarf;33869997]Even in the United States, someone stealing your TV isn't grounds for shooting them. You are only allowed to shoot to kill if lives are at risk if you don't. So if an intruder comes into your house, you can't shoot. If he starts stealing things, you can't shoot. But if he acts aggressively towards you or your family, you can shoot and have it be counted as self defense in court. Self defense is not the right to kill anyone who threatens your property, it is only to be used as a last resort and only in the presence of clear and immediate danger.[/QUOTE] True, but it's not like people won't do it. There was a story not too long ago about a guy who shot someone in the back as they were fleeing their house.

Police in my county say if you shoot a fleeing burglar and he goes down in your yard or on the street, to go drag him back to the house. The police can't do much to you if the guy is in the house vs. on the property.

[QUOTE=catbarf;33869997]Even in the United States, someone stealing your TV isn't grounds for shooting them. You are only allowed to shoot to kill if lives are at risk if you don't. So if an intruder comes into your house, you can't shoot. If he starts stealing things, you can't shoot. But if he acts aggressively towards you or your family, you can shoot and have it be counted as self defense in court. Self defense is not the right to kill anyone who threatens your property, it is only to be used as a last resort and only in the presence of clear and immediate danger.[/QUOTE] Not true. It depends on the state. In a lot of states, breaking an entrance is considered reason enough to kill the intruder

Every man should have the rights to own his firearms, weapon made all man equal. You may disarm yourself, the government may disarm you, but noone is disarming criminals.

[QUOTE=JohnnyOnFlame;33874835]Every man should have the rights to own his firearms, weapon made all man equal. You may disarm yourself, the government may disarm you, but noone is disarming criminals.[/QUOTE] What the hell does that even mean?

[QUOTE=mobrockers2;33875715]What the hell does that even mean?[/QUOTE] Having access to guns makes everyone equal. If you don't use a gun or allow the government to say you can't use a gun, criminals will anyways, and they'll have the advantage over you. I thought it was pretty self-explanatory.

[QUOTE=catbarf;33877878]Having access to guns makes everyone equal. If you don't use a gun or allow the government to say you can't use a gun, criminals will anyways, and they'll have the advantage over you. I thought it was pretty self-explanatory.[/QUOTE] How many times do we have to say that we're not for BANNING guns but for controlling who can get a gun.. And the notion that criminals will always get guns no matter if there is gun control is ridiculous as country's with strict gun control already have less gun involved crimes.