Barack Obama vows to pursue gun measures in wake of latest massacre - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;36945388]C4 can be used for blasting rock, demolition, controlled detonation of disused munitions and landmines. Poisons can be used for pest control. You consider both weapons, but they have alternate uses. Much like guns. Why? Because weapons are tools that we use to harm living things. You calling a gun a tool isn't somehow making it more friendly, you're still admitting that it's a weapon.[/QUOTE] Thats sort of my point, they're tools with specific purposes, poison is meant to kill and only kill, C4 is meant to destroy and only destroy. C4 has no recreational purpose, and you're not going to use poison for any other use than to kill pests or people. A firearm can be used for recreation, target shooting, skeet shooting, hunting, or just shooting at a lake or tree for fun. A firearm is only a weapon when it's used as one.

[QUOTE=GunFox;36945873]You talk about people being able to take justice into their own hands without the endorsement of the people. That is the entire point of American gun laws, you are just coming at it from the wrong side. People taking justice into their own hands is certainly not pleasant, but it is small potatoes compared to a government taking justice into its own hands without the consent of the people. Hence the presence of firearms in America. At no point in time are the people left completely without recourse in the event of a total disconnect from our government and the people. Our country is designed from the ground up to avoid devolving into tyranny completely. We are a drastically different culture from your own. Applying British values to Americans is a wildly flawed course of action. [/QUOTE] I'm just against any form of killing as justice, full stop. That's not justice, it's revenge. And on the subject of libertarianism seeing as it's relevant here... mild to moderate libertarianism i'm good with. But imo more extreme forms of libertarianism would only work if everyone was perfect, but as we all know people are flawed and that's never going to change

[QUOTE=Jo The Shmo;36940020]tell me what is accomplished by owning an assault rifle, if it's such a useful "tool"[/QUOTE] Here's a case in which owning a gun saved lives that isn't shooting at people. [url]http://news.yahoo.com/passerby-rescue-children-icy-river-crash-010650491.html[/url] Man shot out a car window in a river to help save three kids from drowning. Guns can be used for something other then "mindlessly shooting people."

[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;36945989] A firearm can be used for recreation, target shooting, skeet shooting, hunting, or just shooting at a lake or tree for fun.[/QUOTE] Air rifles? [editline]26th July 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=LtKyle2;36946026]Here's a case in which owning a gun saved lives that isn't shooting at people. [url]http://news.yahoo.com/passerby-rescue-children-icy-river-crash-010650491.html[/url] Man shot out a car window in a river to help save three kids from drowning. Guns can be used for something other then "mindlessly shooting people."[/QUOTE] Compare the amount of people live's guns have saved to the amount of innocent's lives they have taken away. You don't even have to look at any statistics

[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;36945989]Thats sort of my point, they're tools with specific purposes, poison is meant to kill and only kill, C4 is meant to destroy and only destroy. C4 has no recreational purpose, and you're not going to use poison for any other use than to kill pests or people. A firearm can be used for recreation, target shooting, skeet shooting, hunting, or just shooting at a lake or tree for fun. A firearm is only a weapon when it's used as one.[/QUOTE] A firearm is still a weapon when you do those things.

[QUOTE=RobbL;36946036]Compare the amount of people live's guns have saved to the amount of innocent's lives they have taken away. You don't even have to look at any statistics[/QUOTE] That is irrelevant because the Second Amendment is not about saving lives. It is meant as a safeguard to defend against the formation of an oppressive government.

[QUOTE=RobbL;36946036]Air rifles? [editline]26th July 2012[/editline] Compare the amount of people live's guns have saved to the amount of innocent's lives they have taken away. You don't even have to look at any statistics[/QUOTE] You can't exactly hunt with an air rifle...Target and Skeet shooting is possible but they don't offer as much accuracy because their projectiles are affected by wind and gravity easier.

[QUOTE=Bredirish123;36946103]You can't exactly hunt with an air rifle...Target and Skeet shooting is possible but they don't offer as much accuracy because their projectiles are affected by wind and gravity easier.[/QUOTE] In the UK farmers and hunters can legally own certain rifles and shotguns (i'm not against people being allowed to possess firearms for specific purposes that are relevant to their jobs), but as someone said earlier I shouldn't be comparing the UK to the US

[QUOTE=mobrockers2;36945592]My point is that each of those are just as safe to have around when handled correctly, including the gun.[/QUOTE] Im really not sure how to word my explaination any other way so... Please never be a chemist or an OSHA worker, for the sake of humanity :v:

[QUOTE=King Tiger;36946067]That is irrelevant because the Second Amendment is not about saving lives. It is meant as a safeguard to defend against the formation of an oppressive government.[/QUOTE] That wouldn't be a problem is their was a greater level of democracy. I'm going off on a tangent here, but why does everyone see the government and the people having to always be completely separate and distant? What's wrong with blurring the line between them?

[QUOTE=RobbL;36946291]That wouldn't be a problem is their was a greater level of democracy. I'm going off on a tangent here, but why does everyone see the government and the people having to always be completely separate and distant? What's wrong with blurring the line between them?[/QUOTE] Probably would make a better mass debate thread than a tangent actually

I don't think people fully understand that an "assault weapon" is no more lethal than any other gun, it just looks different, and as a matter of fact, military-grade guns make some of the best hunting rifles, due to their reliability, accuracy, and durability. And half the point of gun collecting is getting one that still functions, it's worth more if it still works. And the funny thing is, handgun bans didn't work in the UK, or Australia, or Mexico, or Jamaica, or anywhere else. As a matter of fact, after the banning of handguns, handgun crime doubled in the UK and handgun homicide tripled in Australia. Gun control doesn't work because it attacks people who do nothing wrong, because criminals will break the law to get these guns anyways, so it doesn't affect them, it only affects the law-abiding.

[QUOTE=DaCommie1;36946314]I don't think people fully understand that an "assault weapon" is no more lethal than any other gun, it just looks different, and as a matter of fact, military-grade guns make some of the best hunting rifles, due to their reliability, accuracy, and durability. And half the point of gun collecting is getting one that still functions, it's worth more if it still works. And the funny thing is, handgun bans didn't work in the UK, or Australia, or Mexico, or Jamaica, or anywhere else. As a matter of fact, after the banning of handguns, handgun crime doubled in the UK and handgun homicide tripled in Australia. Gun control doesn't work because it attacks people who do nothing wrong, because criminals will break the law to get these guns anyways, so it doesn't affect them, it only affects the law-abiding.[/QUOTE] Afaik there is no proof whether it is the tight gun regulation or the fact that there simply are more, and more reliable guns around than before.

Most of you don't know what the fuck you're talking about. You can't take guns away from people because then it hurts hunters, people who need self protection (store owners, people who have homes, etc) and overall everyone because then there is a fearful bias against guns when there should not be. Yes, guns are dangerous, and can kill, but they can also be used to prevent the dangerous and deadly from getting worse, which is why police have guns, why the military have guns, and if American's ever see fit, why all American's are allowed the rights to bear arms and form milita's. Shit wasn't bestowed to us for no reason, our forefathers forsaw how government could turn oppressive, or even the need to defend ones country and countrymen. The second ammendment isn't solely for the destruction of unpopular government, but a safeguad for the protection of the populace in times of invasion, which is why the Japanese during WW2 were so fearful of mounting an invasion on our soil, and the same could be said for us wanting to invade the Japanese for their militaristic approach to defending of their motherland. You can't punish the many because a few take these rights and abuse them, you need to figure out better safeguards for who can and can't have a gun, and make sure these safeguards are not abused so that decent people can be afforded their rights to bare arms.

These safe guards are gun control, which is punishment for a number of people no matter how you look at it. Gun control is the only safeguard.

[QUOTE=mobrockers2;36946341]Afaik there is no proof whether it is the tight gun regulation or the fact that there simply are more, and more reliable guns around than before.[/QUOTE] AFAIK Harvard recently released a study that showed nations with stricter gun control had worse crime. There's also a book I need to read, and I'd recommend others do too, called "More Guns, Less Crime" by John Lott, a former gun control advocate who changed to a gun rights advocate after doing some research. [editline]26th July 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=mobrockers2;36946419]These safe guards are gun control, which is punishment for a number of people no matter how you look at it. Gun control is the only safeguard.[/QUOTE] And how successful has drug control been? Why would gun control do any better?

I think that gun stores in 'murica should have some kind of evaluation that gets sent to a government-run center so that you can apply for a mandatory 'membership' which is free, to enable you to purchase guns whilst making sure you aren't a batshit insane psycho.

If there's one battle he isn't going to win it's this one Was there even any indication that the Aurora shoote was "unbalanced"? No one could tell and there's probably no way to test for it. [QUOTE=mobrockers2;36946483][URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate[/URL] The US is way up there.[/QUOTE] What about knife crime

[QUOTE=DaCommie1;36946420]AFAIK Harvard recently released a study that showed nations with stricter gun control had worse crime. There's also a book I need to read, and I'd recommend others do too, called "More Guns, Less Crime" by John Lott, a former gun control advocate who changed to a gun rights advocate after doing some research.[/QUOTE] [URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate[/URL] The US is way up there. [editline]26th July 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=DaCommie1;36946420]AFAIK Harvard recently released a study that showed nations with stricter gun control had worse crime. There's also a book I need to read, and I'd recommend others do too, called "More Guns, Less Crime" by John Lott, a former gun control advocate who changed to a gun rights advocate after doing some research. [editline]26th July 2012[/editline] And how successful has drug control been? Why would gun control do any better?[/QUOTE] [URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate[/URL] Also I was commenting on the poster above me who first complained that people's guns would be taken away, and then says the only solution is safety guards. You can't both let everyone keep their guns, and have safety guards (gun control) to prevent incidents.

[QUOTE=mobrockers2;36946483][URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate[/URL] The US is way up there. [editline]26th July 2012[/editline] [URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate[/URL] Also I was commenting on the poster above me who first complained that people's guns would be taken away, and then says the only solution is safety guards. You can't both let everyone keep their guns, and have safety guards (gun control) to prevent incidents.[/QUOTE] Yeah but look at the rate of suicides. Even in England and Scotland most firearm related deaths are suicides.

My face when people bitch and moan about guns and the vault next to me has more guns then the Aurora shooter.

"Firearm related deaths" is an irrelevant statistic. The tool used to kill someone doesn't matter. "knife related homicides" or "banana related rapes" are equally useless. The US has a high homicide rate, but does anyone honestly believe that guns cause the high homicide rate. Don't you think that a failing education system, crippled economy, systemic racism, and an extremely culturally diverse population have a considerably larger role? Those tend to be the only factors that really matter. Mexico has extremely strict gun control. How is that working out for them? Switzerland has guns fucking everywhere. Seems to be working out great. Firearms aren't what matter. Quality of life is. You can't just ban something and expect the problem to go away.

[QUOTE=Bredirish123;36946551]Yeah but look at the rate of suicides. Even in England and Scotland most firearm related deaths are suicides.[/QUOTE] It's about 50/50 in the US, 20/80 in the UK and 19/81 in germany (though germany has more firearm related deaths per capita). Significantly higher in the US.

[QUOTE=GunFox;36946638]"Firearm related deaths" is an irrelevant statistic. The tool used to kill someone doesn't matter. "knife related homicides" or "banana related rapes" are equally useless. The US has a high homicide rate, but does anyone honestly believe that guns cause the high homicide rate. Don't you think that a failing education system, crippled economy, systemic racism, and an extremely culturally diverse population have a considerably larger role? Those tend to be the only factors that really matter. Mexico has extremely strict gun control. How is that working out for them? Switzerland has guns fucking everywhere. Seems to be working out great. Firearms aren't what matter. Quality of life is. You can't just ban something and expect the problem to go away.[/QUOTE] You couldn't have put it any better. Well said.

And where are some of the most murderous and crime-ridden places in the US? Washington DC, Chicago, Los Angeles, New York City, all have strict gun control. Moreover, states that have made concealed-carry more accessible to citizens have seen noticeable drops in crime rates, and all but 1 mass shooting in recent years have been in a "gun-free zone," a piss poor joke if there ever was one, because a criminal or madman won't care, they prefer those places because they know they'll have easy prey, they know nobody can fight back.

Might as well ban fast food and alcohol first

[QUOTE=RobbL;36946036]Air rifles?[/quote] You're going to hunt with an air rifle?? [quote]Compare the amount of people live's guns have saved to the amount of innocent's lives they have taken away. You don't even have to look at any statistics[/QUOTE] Firearms are used approximately 2 million times per year in self defense situations.

[QUOTE=GunFox;36946638]"Firearm related deaths" is an irrelevant statistic. The tool used to kill someone doesn't matter. "knife related homicides" or "banana related rapes" are equally useless. The US has a high homicide rate, but does anyone honestly believe that guns cause the high homicide rate. Don't you think that a failing education system, crippled economy, systemic racism, and an extremely culturally diverse population have a considerably larger role? Those tend to be the only factors that really matter. Mexico has extremely strict gun control. How is that working out for them? Switzerland has guns fucking everywhere. Seems to be working out great. Firearms aren't what matter. Quality of life is. You can't just ban something and expect the problem to go away.[/QUOTE] I agree, but people saying gun control never works are being equally ridiculous because it does work in country's with actual control. Besides, I count Switzerland as having strict gun control anyways, not because of the extensive training they receive before they walk around in public with their weapon.

whats the argument for owning an assault weapon?

[QUOTE=notlabbet;36946713]whats the argument for owning an assault weapon?[/QUOTE] It's no more dangerous than a hunting rifle?