Gun Control: Why it is Idiotic - General

[QUOTE=Boba_Fett;33708356]There's a reason why practically every tyrannical institution in history outlawed civilian ownership of weapons before seizing power.[/QUOTE] Yes, and it also proves how private ownership is completely irrelevant when it comes to tyrannies and revolutions.

[QUOTE=NoDachi;33708412]Yes, and it also proves how private ownership is completely irrelevant when it comes to tyrannies and revolutions.[/QUOTE] Would you mind explaining that further?

[QUOTE=NoDachi;33708412]Yes, and it also proves how private ownership is completely irrelevant when it comes to tyrannies and revolutions.[/QUOTE] American Revolution, most of the men fighting it were militiamen with privately-owned hunting weapons, fighting the tyranny on them they saw from the British Empire.

[QUOTE=Boba_Fett;33708356]There's a reason why practically every tyrannical institution in history outlawed civilian ownership of weapons before seizing power.[/QUOTE] It's funny because we have had strict gun control for a pretty long time here and our government is less tyrannical than yours. Really, of all the arguments for less gun control, the revolution one is the worst

I am in support of the right to bear arms. Criminals will always get guns, matter what. All these laws do is stop normal citizens from having a tool of self-defense/recreation. Of course, we should still have some gun control to stop the the people who obviously are not trustable.

[QUOTE=Chrille;33708457]It's funny because we have had strict gun control for a pretty long time here and our government is less tyrannical than yours. Really, of all the arguments for less gun control, the revolution one is the worst[/QUOTE] There are apparently ~15 guns for every 100 people in Denmark, with an estimated 850,000 registered guns, most shotguns, in Denmark, and about 50,000 pistols in civilian ownership. I can't find what the law states about guns there, but they seem to be similar to the ones here in Canada, based off the statistics. Nevermind, found some, more restrictive than Canada, but allows about the same kinds of guns.

[QUOTE=Aman VII;33708268]Would you be comfortable living to next to a man who owns a car? Statistically they are a shit load more dangerous and kill more people yearly[/QUOTE] Yes, as a genuine matter of fact I am entirely comfortable living next to a man who owns a car. Guns exist to shoot bullets at people. Cars exist to transport people. I've used cars hundreds of times greatly to my benefit. I don't believe in the right to bare arms in exactly the same way I don't believe in the right to possess your own personal nuclear silo. I believe in the right to own a car because they're fucking convenient and not invented for the sole purpose of raining down bullets of death.

[QUOTE=Chrille;33708457]Really, of all the arguments for less gun control, the revolution one is the worst[/QUOTE] It's still much better than the vast majority of arguments for gun control, of which are almost always drafted by people who have never handled a gun in their entire lives.

[QUOTE=Robbobin;33708534]Yes, as a genuine matter of fact I am entirely comfortable living next to a man who owns a car. Guns exist to shoot bullets at people. Cars exist to transport people. I've used cars hundreds of times greatly to my benefit. I don't believe in the right to bare arms in exactly the same way I don't believe in the right to possess your own personal nuclear silo. I believe in the right to own a car because they're fucking convenient and not invented for the sole purpose of raining down bullets of death.[/QUOTE] Ever heard of hunting? Those aren't people their shooting at.

[QUOTE=Boba_Fett;33708293]If he keeps them secured in his house, why is it your business? By having them banned, you're completely violating his personal liberties to defend himself.[/QUOTE] Guns are [I]not[/I] self-regarding objects. You cannot use a gun for it's intended purpose (shooting people) in a way that isn't other-regarding. Guns are nothing to do with personal liberty because their only expressed purpose is destroying a person's liberties in their entirety. (I'm ignoring suicide/guns for sport because i don't care about the issues)

I'm happy with the level of gun control currently in place in the UK. I'd be worried if more people had guns. Also, if you want to have a gun for shooting on the range in the UK, you can. You just have to have a licence, and a secure place to store it. However, the majority of people aren't interested, and I don't see that changing.

[QUOTE=DaCommie1;33708504]There are apparently ~15 guns for every 100 people in Denmark, with an estimated 850,000 registered guns, most shotguns, in Denmark, and about 50,000 pistols in civilian ownership. I can't find what the law states about guns there, but they seem to be similar to the ones here in Canada, based off the statistics.[/QUOTE] The right to own a gun is primarily given to those with a hunting permit, and in that case it is only the right to own rifles. If you're a member of a gun club you can get a gun license as well, but not the right to own ammunition I think. You have to refresh your license every 5 years or something, and you have to keep the gun in a special kind of gun closet. [QUOTE=Boba_Fett;33708550]It's still much better than the vast majority of arguments for gun control, of which are almost always drafted by people who have never handled a gun in their entire lives.[/QUOTE] Generalizations and assumptions, yay!

[QUOTE=Robbobin;33708574]Guns are [I]not[/I] self-regarding objects. You cannot use a gun for it's intended purpose (shooting people) in a way that isn't other-regarding. Guns are nothing to do with personal liberty because their only expressed purpose is destroying a person's liberties in their entirety. (I'm ignoring suicide/guns for sport because i don't care about the issues)[/QUOTE] You've missed a great deal of arguments in this thread then. Guns have far more uses than simply killing people. I've been in contact with guns for well over half of my lifetime, and I've never killed someone, nor have I ever known someone who has killed another person with a firearm.

[QUOTE=Camundongo;33708616]I'm happy with the level of gun control currently in place in the UK. I'd be worried if more people had guns. Also, if you want to have a gun for shooting on the range in the UK, you can. You just have to have a licence, and a secure place to store it. However, the majority of people aren't interested, and I don't see that changing.[/QUOTE] That's a cultural thing. America was founded by proud gun owners, and it's become our culture. And just out of curiosity, do you have much gun-related crime there?

[QUOTE=Robbobin;33708574]Guns are [I]not[/I] self-regarding objects. You cannot use a gun for it's intended purpose (shooting people) in a way that isn't other-regarding. Guns are nothing to do with personal liberty because their only expressed purpose is destroying a person's liberties in their entirety. (I'm ignoring suicide/guns for sport because i don't care about the issues)[/QUOTE] You can't ignore the PRIMARY REASON FOR PRIVATE GUN OWNERSHIP when arguing about guns. As I fucking said, that guy's arsenal isn't there to harm you, it's there to protect him, to preserve pieces of art and history, and for the purposes of hunting and sport shooting. No matter where in the world you are, sport shooting and hunting are the PRIMARY REASONS to own a gun, you can't ignore the main reason someone gets a gun in the first place. Jesus, and people call gun owners paranoid, if he's a law-abiding citizen, which he likely is, he's NOT a risk to you at all, though your opinions and views are a risk to him and his liberty, and to one of what is likely his favourite hobbies or sports. You can't ignore something primary to the argument because it doesn't interest you, it's primary to the Goddamn argument.

[QUOTE=gamefreek76;33708165]In my opinion, guns are tools to be used to overthrow a tyrannical government. When the government fears its people, there is liberty.[/QUOTE] A modern government will always have vastly more and far more capable military hardware than the general populace. Give everyone an AK and they would still do squat to a bomber, tank, even an APC. A modern armed uprising can only be effective if and only if the citizenship is aided by the military. We've gone a very long way from the time were the people had the same means as the government. In that very thing, the ability of a lack of gun control to be able to overthrow an oppressive government is nonfunctional, gone and broken. By and large, the american people have no more chance of overthrowing their government with an armed revolution than the british for instance. And we know just how weapon controlling those are. But in the end I have to agree with one thing. Gun control only works in nations with little to no gun culture beforehand. Otherwise you have far too many weapons and outlets everywhere, to buy them illegally. Also many people are less lkely to loose their guns and will fuel the illegal market. In nations with no preexisting gun culture, it's much harder to get a weapon for a criminal. As there's less legal weapons, there's less weapons that can get lost in the grid so to speak and less people willing to buy them. It also doesn't start the fairly common arming race as seen in countries with gun cultures between crriminals and citizens. [quote] You can't ignore the PRIMARY REASON FOR PRIVATE GUN OWNERSHIP when arguing about guns. As I fucking said, that guy's arsenal isn't there to harm you, it's there to protect him, to preserve pieces of art and history, and for the purposes of hunting and sport shooting. No matter where in the world you are, sport shooting and hunting are the PRIMARY REASONS to own a gun, you can't ignore the main reason someone gets a gun in the first place. [/quote] I get the impression that in the US it's definitely not Sport and Hunting but Defense. As to the argument of arty guns and being destroyed. There's fairly simple means of making a gun display but not use ready in which case you don't require to have a license for it. And can have it anywhere.

[QUOTE=The Kakistocrat;33708634]That's a cultural thing. America was founded by proud gun owners, and it's become our culture. And just out of curiosity, do you have much gun-related crime there?[/QUOTE] No, we don't, and as far as I'm aware it's constantly falling as well. Admittedly, knife crime is a problem, though the rate violent crime as a whole is also falling, as far as I know.

[QUOTE=DaCommie1;33708636]You can't ignore the PRIMARY REASON FOR PRIVATE GUN OWNERSHIP when arguing about guns. As I fucking said, that guy's arsenal isn't there to harm you, it's there to protect him, to preserve pieces of art and history, and for the purposes of hunting and sport shooting. No matter where in the world you are, sport shooting and hunting are the PRIMARY REASONS to own a gun, you can't ignore the main reason someone gets a gun in the first place. Jesus, and people call gun owners paranoid, if he's a law-abiding citizen, which he likely is, he's NOT a risk to you at all, though your opinions and views are a risk to him and his liberty, and to one of what is likely his favourite hobbies or sports. You can't ignore something primary to the argument because it doesn't interest you, it's primary to the Goddamn argument.[/QUOTE] Definitely not primary to the argument. I'm only interested in arguments based on the right to bare arms. The right to play with your guns for purely recreational purposes is totally separate. Think of me as saying "You shouldn't have the right to bare arms based on [I]that[/I] argument", not "people shouldn't own guns for any purpose". [editline]13th December 2011[/editline] To be honest, if I was given the decision to dictate gun control laws, I'd probably not even touch America's. I can reject arguments without having contradictory conclusions.

[QUOTE=wraithcat;33708679]A modern government will always have vastly more and far more capable military hardware than the general populace. Give everyone an AK and they would still do squat to a bomber, tank, even an APC. A modern armed uprising can only be effective if and only if the citizenship is aided by the military. We've gone a very long way from the time were the people had the same means as the government. In that very thing, the ability of a lack of gun control to be able to overthrow an oppressive government is nonfunctional, gone and broken. By and large, the american people have no more chance of overthrowing their government with an armed revolution than the british for instance. And we know just how weapon controlling those are. But in the end I have to agree with one thing. Gun control only works in nations with little to no gun culture beforehand. Otherwise you have far too many weapons and outlets everywhere, to buy them illegally. Also many people are less lkely to loose their guns and will fuel the illegal market. In nations with no preexisting gun culture, it's much harder to get a weapon for a criminal. As there's less legal weapons, there's less weapons that can get lost in the grid so to speak and less people willing to buy them. It also doesn't start the fairly common arming race as seen in countries with gun cultures between crriminals and citizens. I get the impression that in the US it's definitely not Sport and Hunting but Defense. As to the argument of arty guns and being destroyed. There's fairly simple means of making a gun display but not use ready in which case you don't require to have a license for it. And can have it anywhere.[/QUOTE] no, it's not really defense. They might say that as a reason, but they rarely (if ever) use it as such.

[QUOTE=wraithcat;33708679] I get the impression that in the US it's definitely not Sport and Hunting but Defense.[/QUOTE] No, I'd be willing to bet even there more people own guns for hunting purposes than primarily for home or self defence, long guns are far more prevalent than handguns, and their primary purpose is for hunting, as they're not really small enough for effective defence in a home.

[QUOTE=Chrille;33708620]Generalizations and assumptions, yay![/QUOTE] I'm curious, have you ever fired a gun?

[QUOTE=Robbobin;33708711]Definitely not primary to the argument. I'm only interested in arguments based on the right to bare arms. The right to play with your guns for purely recreational purposes is totally separate. Think of me as saying "You shouldn't have the right to bare arms based on [I]that[/I] argument", not "people shouldn't own guns for any purpose". [editline]13th December 2011[/editline] To be honest, if I was given the decision to dictate gun control laws, I'd probably not even touch America's. I can reject arguments without having contradictory conclusions.[/QUOTE] But "arsenals" of guns are still not only there just because he can have them, he has a purpose for owning them. I have people come by my store talking about the 3 Benelli, 2 Franchi, Beretta, Browning, and Remington shotguns they own, they all have what some would consider an arsenal, I know people who have what some people would consider an arsenal, and I plan on having what I would consider an arsenal of firearms, I don't plan on killing my neighbours with them, I want them to preserve pieces of history, to sport shoot, and to hunt. The guys who come by my store looking to buy their, like, 16th Italian shotgun have a veritable arsenal, but thy own it for the purpose of hunting, the sport of guns. No matter what segment of gun ownership you're arguing about, or what reasons, gun sport always comes back to being a major, if not central, factor in the argument. He doesn't own an arsenal for no reason, and you can't ignore the reason for his ownership of the arsenal when arguing against it.

[QUOTE=rivershark;33708058]I don't understand how you could call "gun lovers" idiots. Firearms are not just tools for shooting people. There is a huge amount of people who hunt, who target-shoot, and who collect antique firearms, in addition to the people who have them for self-defense and the "bad guys".[/QUOTE] sorry but people only like guns because of the power they feel.

[QUOTE=joe588;33708887]sorry but people only like guns because of the power they feel.[/QUOTE] This is either trolling or very idiotic slander.

[QUOTE=joe588;33708887]sorry but people only like guns because of the power they feel.[/QUOTE] :rolleyes: Helps me to compensate for my obviously small penis right?

[QUOTE=joe588;33708887]sorry but people only like guns because of the power they feel.[/QUOTE] I found them ultimately well... boring and overrated, and I've done a lot of shooting. Like how emotionally stunted men get too excited about football.

[QUOTE=Robbobin;33708574]Guns are [I]not[/I] self-regarding objects. You cannot use a gun for it's intended purpose. (I'm ignoring suicide/guns for sport because i don't care about the issues)[/QUOTE] Generally when your making a point in a debate you don't say don't you care about an issue your debating against in an issue. It confuses the hell out of people. In relation to points such as this, I believe the image of hunters and collectors have been tarnished by criminals in regard to firearm ownership, it's dodge in it's highest form.

[QUOTE=The Kakistocrat;33708634]That's a cultural thing. America was founded by proud gun owners, and it's become our culture. And just out of curiosity, do you have much gun-related crime there?[/QUOTE] get the odd farmer blasting a burgler with his shotgun but other than that it's your dumb gangculture that made it here, quite a few shootings in th3e run down areas. [editline]14th December 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=superdinoman;33708932]:rolleyes: Helps me to compensate for my obviously small penis right?[/QUOTE] or relentless childhood bullying, crippling anxiety conditions etc, the list goes on

[QUOTE=joe588;33708971]get the odd farmer blasting a burgler with his shotgun but other than that it's your dumb gangculture that made it here, quite a few shootings in th3e run down areas.[/QUOTE] Well maybe you guys should legalize guns and vigilantism so you can solve your problems. Not the USA's fault what happens in your ghettos.

[QUOTE=NoDachi;33708959]I found them ultimately well... boring and overrated, and I've done a lot of shooting. Like how emotionally stunted men get too excited about football.[/QUOTE] exactly, i've had fun for a few hours with an air rifle and a few tins, gets boring quickly. but why in gods name you need to own a semi automatic pistol i have no idea.