Gun Laws in America

jlew24asu wrote:

so now this has turned into 20 questions. great lets go.
....ok your turn........ready go.........

jlew24asu wrote:

great job turning my thread into some joke of the Far's lesson on life.

Which is it?

jlew24asu wrote:

great job turning my thread into some joke of the Far's lesson on life. anyone else care to join the debate?

I tried to join it pages ago when I asked for proof of your contention that a ban or restriction on guns would lead to lower crime rates. I'm still waiting.

jlew24asu wrote:

BOTH

Protest noted. Tell me at any point if you want me to stop posting in your thread.

jury is still out, but its not looking good

Not looking good because you think I would buy a gun in order to harm someone?

no

If the American public that is buying guns is not, on average, whackos, why are you proposing to treat them as if they were?

sure they should. if they pass the very strict laws of getting one.

But you've said above that you're going to make it very hard to get one, including using words like "ban" and "no loopholes" and "impossible". How then do you expect these people to get them for protection?

that ban wasnt strict enough. and yes over time, crimes used with assault weapons would go down.

And why wouldn't those crimes made with assault weapons just turn into crimes made with handguns?

they would pay the price of their crime.

There "crime" is simply selling guns. What would the price be for such a crime? How would it be enforced? Please don't tell me you're going to use the guns you purchase from the gunmakers to then punish them for selling guns, because that's what it sounds like.

exactly. asshole shouldnt have had a gun in the first place.

No, asshole shouldn't have used that gun to shoot a kid.

no it doesnt.

Right. Now try again without misquoting me:

Hatred for guns equates to hatred for human life at the exact point you kill someone because of your hate.

I hate guns because they are designed to Kill. there only purpose is to wound or kill whatever stands in front of it.

That is your perception. Let me tell you a story:

A number of years back, I bought a gun. I bought this gun in order to win a bet against someone much like you who thought that gun control laws would prevent me from buying a gun. Suffice to say that they did not and I won my bet.

After purchasing my gun I also purchased a box of ammunition. I went to the local shooting range and fired off a few rounds just to see if the gun worked. It did.

Since then, I've attended a number of required gun safety courses and even applied for and received a conceal and carry permit. As I write this, my gun sits in my backpack not three feet away from me. When I go home tonight, my gun will go into my car, and when I get home my gun will go into my house. It will remain in that backpack where it's been for quite a long time.

Someday, it's likely that I'll be the victim of some sort of crime. And it's also more likely that the criminal involved will not be armed. In that event, I will use my gun by pointing it at the criminal and demanding that he or she desist and remove themselves from the situation. That criminal will make the very same assumption you've likely made the entire time you've been reading this: that my gun is loaded.

The box of ammo I purchased that day a long time ago is in the possession of a friend of mine who also owns a gun, though I'm sure he's used that ammo by now. He owns a gun for one sole reason: to go to the shooting range because he enjoys it.

So, as you can see, guns do not only have the purpose to "kill or wound". Guns can have the purpose to trick. Guns can have the purpose for enjoyment. The purpose of a gun is defined by the man or woman who uses it, not by its sheer existence.

Guns are arguably the worst invention in the history of mankind. The gun is involved in most of mankind's greatest atrocities and absent from most of mankind's greatest accomplishments. But they remain powerless inanimate objects until matched with human intent. It is the dark root of that intent, the hatred of one man for another, that you must address if you hope to accomplish what you want. And fighting hate with hate will simply provide you with the silly paradox you're proposing: using the guns of the state to reject the guns of the people.

farfromglorified wrote:

.... And it's also more likely that the criminal involved will not be armed....

Could be that he is... you'd be stuffed then!

All you have to do is open your mouth and let all that verbal diarrhea come out... your assailant would just run away.. no need for a gun for you!

jeffbr wrote:

I tried to join it pages ago when I asked for proof of your contention that a ban or restriction on guns would lead to lower crime rates. I'm still waiting.

its very obvious that violent crime will go down once all guns are banned....there's no denying it....BUT....I do see from this point (Millions of guns already in circulation) till they are truely erradicated...there will be a limited reduction of violent crime. I don't have the stats.....but surely you would agree that countries that have relatively no guns have less murders hence the proof no guns...less violent crime.

I have a real problem when the government interferes with citizens rights....and can understand how some have very strong feelings that owning a gun is their right...I just still feel they cause way more harm than good.

callen wrote:

its very obvious that violent crime will go down once all guns are banned....there's no denying it....BUT....I do see from this point (Millions of guns already in circulation) till they are truely erradicated...there will be a limited reduction of violent crime. I don't have the stats.....but surely you would agree that countries that have relatively no guns have less murders hence the proof no guns...less violent crime.

"Hence"??? First, did it ever occur to you that high rates of gun ownership and high rates of violent crime are not part of a causal relationship with one another, but rather both effects of other factors?

Second, the stats will not really help your contention. Major cities in the US where gun control laws are most severe still suffer from a much higher than average rate of violent crime. States like Texas where gun ownership are high have moderate rates of violent crime.

The one part of your post that is correct is that a complete eradication of guns would certainly reduce violent crime. What I'm interested to hear is how that eradication would happen, and whether or not the methods involved would not themselves amount to violent crime.

callen wrote:

and I thought gun classes taught..don't bring out the gun unless you will shoot..and if you shoot you shoot to kill. Am I missing something....someone else that's taken a gun class please chime in here.

With an unloaded weapon, such things would not be possible. And yes, people advise not to wield a gun unless you intend to use it. I do intend to use it, just not in the fashion they prescribe.

Also at what point do you take out the gun...when someone takes a stick of gum....a pencil???? What are your boundaries??

My boundaries are quite simple: whenever I feel that the perception of having a loaded gun pointed at someone else would give me control of a situation wherein my viable options were limited to that option alone. If I already have a loaded gun pointed at me, that situation would not qualify. However, if I had a stick of gum or pencil pointed at me, it would most certainly qualify.

farfromglorified wrote:

" Second, the stats will not really help your contention. Major cities in the US where gun control laws are most severe still suffer from a much higher than average rate of violent crime. States like Texas where gun ownership are high have moderate rates of violent crime.

The one part of your post that is correct is that a complete eradication of guns would certainly reduce violent crime. What I'm interested to hear is how that eradication would happen, and whether or not the methods involved would not themselves amount to violent crime.

Well I live in Texas...but its in Houston...and our murder rate is way up....Katrina. Compare Countries that don't have guns to the US...not areas within the US. England per capita murder rate to the US...Canada to the US...Germany, Switzerland...wish I had the stats.

I think it would be very easy to ban guns in the US...you have 3 mos to turn in your hand guns....Blue Book for guns would need to be created to pay owners fair market value......gun owners should be compensated then after 3 mos if your caught with a gun...felony and 1 year sentence mandatory.....that would do it.

Course as I mentioned in an earlier thread...I'm contemplating a persons right to arm themselves.