Gun Laws in America

onelongsong

jlew24asu wrote:

I couldnt agree more my friend. like I said, I would want tougher laws then are currently in place

i lived in the northern chicago burbs when guns were outlawed in towns like morton grove. guess where the crime rate went up? criminals want/prefer unarmed victims. if i were to break into a house i'd do it where i knew the homeowner wouldn't have a gun.

gue_barium

farfromglorified wrote:

Wow. I'm as anti-gun control as anyone, but how'd you come up with this?

There's a reason the police and the military no longer carry boards with nails in them.

Hey now. A little respect for the slingshot, you know?

CorporateWhore

guns don't kill people, I kill people...

but seriously, the assault weapons that kill people in the streets over drug deals are purchased and sold on the black market. They are guns that are illegal under current law. Therefore, any changes to current law would be an unnecessary breach of 2nd amendment rights.

Guns are tools. The radical shift that society has made towards violence and the devaluing of human life has caused guns to become tools of violence and devaluation of life. The guns are not the problem: it is this society.

Take away our guns and we'll still be a violent society that kills its weakest members. We'll just find different ways of doing it.

Attack the problem where it lies: value human life!

onelongsong

CorporateWhore wrote:

guns don't kill people, I kill people...

but seriously, the assault weapons that kill people in the streets over drug deals are purchased and sold on the black market. They are guns that are illegal under current law. Therefore, any changes to current law would be an unnecessary breach of 2nd amendment rights.

Guns are tools. The radical shift that society has made towards violence and the devaluing of human life has caused guns to become tools of violence and devaluation of life. The guns are not the problem: it is this society.

Take away our guns and we'll still be a violent society that kills its weakest members. We'll just find different ways of doing it.

Attack the problem where it lies: value human life!

YOU'RE RIGHT. we have several redundant laws made to appease those calling for more laws. for example; it is unlawful to discharge a firearm within city limits. it's also unlawful to discharge a gun in the air within city limits. it's also unlawful to discharge a firearm within 300 yards of a building or dwelling. we also have megans law here which says you can't fire a gun in the air in celebration. 4 different laws for the same reason. all cover the same offence. i wonder how much tax money we would have saved just having one law for the one offence.

69charger

jlew24asu wrote:

you can, if you pass a series of requirements. ones that are much tougher now.

one more time. get this through your thick fucking skull. I do not want ALL guns banned.

I want very dangerous ones banned. who determines that? a panel of experts. how bout that?

for guns deemed not very dangerous, I would like a series of very tough requirements. even tougher then now. who determines that? a panel of experts. how bout that?

Who's experts? The NRA's or the Brady Campaign's?

It will never work. Get it?

69charger

Collin wrote:

If tougher laws mean, 20 less people killed every year... I think it's worth it, even one.

What if it mean 2,000 more people killed every year because they had no means to defend themselves? Would you still be for 'tougher laws'?

By an overwhelming percentage, guns are used to PREVENT violence.

jeffbr

Collin wrote:

If tougher laws mean, 20 less people killed every year... I think it's worth it, even one.

LOL. If it saves just one life it is worth being stripped of your liberties? Blah. With that logic we'd be better off banning swimming pools, Big Macs, automobiles, motorcycles, etc...

As Benjamin Franklin said: They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security.

jlew24asu

Its been a great debate here. if I could......


maybe what i'm looking for is tougher penalties for people illegally having a gun.

I do not want a total ban on all guns. but I do want tougher laws to get one, strict background check, credit check, mental history.....this would take serious thought and decided by someone other then me. find some way to ensure guns get into the hands of law abiding people.

I DO want a ban on assault weapons. where to draw the line? I dont know.

I have changed my mind when it comes to it being a constitutional right. now I understand better why it is. The government/FBI/Police can never be the only ones allowed to have weapons.

I still am confused why people really feel the need to carry a gun. I, more then many people here, believe terrorism is a real threat. especially someone like me, who lives downtown chicago in a high rise building, close to a federal building, next to the site of the 90 story trump building, work 2 blocks from the Sears Tower (tallest building in North America), take public transportation daily, travel on a plane monthly. that being said, I understand I am at more of a risk of being mugged on the subway by a fellow american.

but never have I felt the need to carry a gun, let alone use one on somebody.

I also firmly believe that over time, possibly a generation, with tough penalties, and tough laws to obtain one, crime would decrease. specifically crimes committed with guns.

good debate. discuss

Scubascott

jlew24asu wrote:

I have changed my mind when it comes to it being a constitutional right. now I understand better why it is. The government/FBI/Police can never be the only ones allowed to have weapons.

I haven't kept up with this thread, but this point intrigues me. Could you elaborate on it?

I really can't understand the mentality that makes people feel the need to carry a gun 'for protection'. I grew up around firearms, and I still use them occasionally, but I just can't fathom the kind of paranoid mindset that makes you feel that its justifiable to carry a handgun.

jlew24asu

Scubascott wrote:

I haven't kept up with this thread, but this point intrigues me. Could you elaborate on it?

I really can't understand the mentality that makes people feel the need to carry a gun 'for protection'. I grew up around firearms, and I still use them occasionally, but I just can't fathom the kind of paranoid mindset that makes you feel that its justifiable to carry a handgun.

I feel the same way you do. believe me, on all points you make.

but I feel it should be Americans right to bear arms in the insane and unlikely case that the government turns against us. the government should never be the only one to control every firearm ever made.

onelongsong

Scubascott wrote:

I haven't kept up with this thread, but this point intrigues me. Could you elaborate on it?

I really can't understand the mentality that makes people feel the need to carry a gun 'for protection'. I grew up around firearms, and I still use them occasionally, but I just can't fathom the kind of paranoid mindset that makes you feel that its justifiable to carry a handgun.

i'll take this question.
1) i live on a ranch where rattlesnakes and mountain lions are frequent sights. i raise the most dangerous animal in north america because of it's medical value; AND; because profit hungry companies are destroying the medical values by improper care and feeding. i live 4 hours from the nearest anti-venom and 90% of the time; i'm alone. a gun here is a tool every rancher relies on and i shouldn't be punished because of someone elses abuse.
2) i was held at gunpoint. a shotgun held inches from my nose. i will never experience that kind of fear again. i can't turn on the tv without seeing people being killed. hollywood has desensitized the population with killing in games and what we watch. the only thing i really watch anymore is raymond; and the history/national geographic/science channels. once you're held at gunpoint you're never the same.

Collin

jeffbr wrote:

LOL. If it saves just one life it is worth being stripped of your liberties? Blah. With that logic we'd be better off banning swimming pools, Big Macs, automobiles, motorcycles, etc...

As Benjamin Franklin said: They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security.

Actually, if I could save someone's life by giving away my liberties I would. But that's not what I said at all, I can't see how you equate tougher laws with being stripped of your liberties, unless you think your liberties are that nothing in life should be hard or any work.

69charger wrote:

What if it mean 2,000 more people killed every year because they had no means to defend themselves? Would you still be for 'tougher laws'?

See jeffbr, 69charger and you quoted me on the same thing the difference is, 69charger actually came up with a good argument.

In my opinion, there aren't many scenario's where a gun would save your life. Of course, I don't live in the USA, the country of fear, I guess that's a big difference.

hippiemom

Collin wrote:

Actually, if I could save someone's life by giving away my liberties I would.

That's some very dangerous logic right there. That's where shit like the Patriot Act comes from.

Collin

hippiemom wrote:

That's some very dangerous logic right there. That's where shit like the Patriot Act comes from.

Please explain.

edit: Or maybe I should explain myself and clear things up...

I have to go right now... but will come back on this.

jeffbr

Collin wrote:

Actually, if I could save someone's life by giving away my liberties I would. But that's not what I said at all, I can't see how you equate tougher laws with being stripped of your liberties, unless you think your liberties are that nothing in life should be hard or any work.

Protecting my liberties is hard work, as evidenced by the number of gun banners out there. Thanks for proving my point. And if you can't see how laws are created to limit or restrict liberties or freedoms, then you've been drinking too much of the koolaid.

Collin wrote:

See jeffbr, 69charger and you quoted me on the same thing the difference is, 69charger actually came up with a good argument.

Protection of liberties is all the argument one needs if one values liberty. If it is a silly argument to you, it says something about you.

onelongsong

Collin wrote:

Actually, if I could save someone's life by giving away my liberties I would. But that's not what I said at all, I can't see how you equate tougher laws with being stripped of your liberties, unless you think your liberties are that nothing in life should be hard or any work.



See jeffbr, 69charger and you quoted me on the same thing the difference is, 69charger actually came up with a good argument.

In my opinion, there aren't many scenario's where a gun would save your life. Of course, I don't live in the USA, the country of fear, I guess that's a big difference.

first; by saying you'd give up any liberties; spits in the face of all those who have died that others may have freedom. how dare you.
next; if the USA is the country of fear; then you must live where ignorance is bliss.
lastly; if you don't live in fear; why do you fear my gun?

miller8966

onelongsong wrote:

first; by saying you'd give up any liberties; spits in the face of all those who have died that others may have freedom. how dare you.
next; if the USA is the country of fear; then you must live where ignorance is bliss.
lastly; if you don't live in fear; why do you fear my gun?

Great post.

onelongsong

i have to ask;
we know our borders are breached by hundreds daily. from mexico; cuba; and canada. we catch some but not others. we don't know who is coming into our country and we (along with other countries) have suffered attacks.
with this in mind; why would anyone want their guns taken away?

jlew24asu

onelongsong wrote:

i have to ask;
we know our borders are breached by hundreds daily. from mexico; cuba; and canada. we catch some but not others. we don't know who is coming into our country and we (along with other countries) have suffered attacks.
with this in mind; why would anyone want their guns taken away?

how about we secure the border

onelongsong

jlew24asu wrote:

how about we secure the border

what is your plan; what will it cost; and who will pay for it? most of all; how do you make it fail-safe? what about those already here? switzerland requires every head of household to own and know how to opperate an automatic weapon. is this how they can stay neutral while wars wage around them? is someone more likely to attack an unarmed country?