Gun-Nuts wanted :) - see inside

[Dameon]

Ok, I'm in this class at UT, Argumentation and Advocacy, and we have a foreign student. Nice gal and all, but she announced today that she'll be doing a presentation about why

NO ONE OTHER THAN MILITARY / POLICE SHOULD HAVE GUNS.

I want to bury her argument so far in the ground she begs for mercy for being so stupid.
Any "ammo" would be greatly appreciated. Facts, figures, testimonials... good websites to check out for this stuff???

Thanks guys / gals.

 

[Ronstang]

A lot of people say that a gun is either a surrogate p*nis or an extension of a p*nis so inform her that since she has no direct experience with actaully having a p*nis she is not qualified to make any judgement for or against p*nis-enhancers.

 

[NikPreviousAcct]

I have no idea what Ronstang is talking about, but guns don't have nuts.

 

[Napalm381]

If ya do a little search you'll have more than enough "ammo" for your argument. Russ' alone will provide mountains of evidence

 

[DABANSHEE]

Well the only nation that I can think of off hand that gets close to fitting the bill as a nation where only the police/military are armed is Japan, .

Nows as far as nations with high rates of firearm ownership, we have South Africa, the US, Israel, Switzerland, Columbia, Pakistan.

Could we come to any conclusions by comparing those nations, I think not, there are just too many other varibles.

However in nations where there is a low rate of firarm ownership, there's also lower rates of criminals possesing firarms - maybe because they cost more because of limited avaliability. I do know that virtually all the recidivous criminals I know (mainly drug dealers & car theives) would, if they came across a firearm, would sell it before the day is out, as they just arn't worth the hassle here. Plus because supply is limited you can get good money for them, Even a South American S&W.380 'knock off' clone would be worth $500 in Oz.

Plus just by the simple fact there are lower rates of firearm ownership there would definitly be lower rates of firearm incidents such as accidents & impulsive/compulsive acts by ordinary people who just 'lose it' because of jealousy, drunkenous, domestics, etc.

But as far as premeditated acts of firarm violence are concerned I doubt there'd be much difference as we all know criminals don't worry about gun laws. However there maybe less crimes of opportunity, where firearms are involved, just because avaliability is less so they are harder to come by & are more expensive.

 

[Czar]

Dameon

I agree with her, here in iceland we dont even have an army and the cops dont even have guns. I think in the last 10 years we have had 1-2 murders involving guns. Not having guns stops people from shooting each other.

And, whats her email, so I could email her some viewpoints from a country that doesnt think that every home should its own armory.

 

[Windogg]

There also the argument of survival. I had a friend in college from West Virginia. Hate to say it but it one of the most dirt poor regions where many people don't even have runnign water. Whewn winter comes they barely have enough money buy warm clothes let alone buy food. The solution, take the old rifle that was passed down by grandpa and find food. A large deer would usually be enough to sustain the family for a few weeks. They skin and antlers could be sold locally to buy other essential goods like medicine and a few articles of clothing to replace what was worn out. $10 worth of ammunition was all that was needed to ensure the kids had something in their stomaches.

Without their gun, they would have no means to survive.

Windogg

 

[thebestMAX]

I dont think there are any real gun-nuts on this board.


Not meant to be funny but the term is insulting to intelligent gun owners.

 

[Czar]

Windogg

and this is great america, poor people with gun shooting deer for food.

 

[DABANSHEE]

ooh we are sensitive today.

I'd doubt if anyone posted a thread with the title 'car-nuts click here', any of the auto enthusiasts here would be insulted by the term, why should it be any different for Gun enthusiasts.

Or is their subconscious bugging them because they spend all their time wearing camo gear, reading back issues of 'Soldier of Fortune' at the mocal militia clubhouse. Is that your story Max.

Actually I decided to buy a gun today & as it was made before 1900 & fires ammo thats not ordinarily commercially avaliable I don't even need a gun license or have to worry about background checks or cooling off periods (apparenty the situation's the same in the US too, as far as firarms in the same catagory). Its a .455 Webley 'top break' target revolver with a barrel of 6+ inches (looks to be about 7 inches). I only decided once I found out a mate of mine lives near a shooting range & that the price its being sold for is not much more that what ordinary WWI Webleys with 4" barrels go for, & I found a place in the US that stocks .455 ammo & does international shipping. Anyway I know someone with a reloading setup anyway so its not as if I'll have to keep importing ammo (plus I found a place in Sydney that sells .455 jigs).

I just have to get the money together & hopes its still avaliable by the time I'm cashed up.

 

[Windogg]

Czar: More nourishing than volcanic rock.

Windogg

 

[DABANSHEE]

Damn someones put a deposite on it, but the bloke selling the Webley reckons if the balance isnt paid within the fortnight he'll sell it to me instead. & its in near original nick with virtually all the original 'blue' in place.

 

[Czar]

Windogg

But we have shops and money here.

 

[jkersenbr]

Sorry, I don't have any facts and figures. But here is my opinion:

This is supposed to be a free country. If someone doesn't like it, then leave it. There are plenty of other countries around who are willing to trample on the rights of their citizens. If someone can't handle freedom than go to a country that doesn't trust you to have it. DON'T RUIN THIS ONE.

Think about it. If you were going to rob/attempt to kill/rape/whatever someone, who would you rather attack -- someone you knew wasn't carrying a gun because there are no guns in this counry, or someone who might just have one concealed....

Good luck with the debate. The foreign student should go home.

Jeremy

 

[optoman]

I am just wondering how all the kids are getting their hands on guns. If we banned guns and I could be assured that kids would no longer be getting their hands on them, then I say ban the guns. I doubt that would really happen, but would give up owning a gun to make sure you kid could go to school without being shot?

 

[Czar]

jkersenbr

So you are for it that everyone has their own little nuclear bomb in their suit case? just because its their right to own one?

 

[Ulfwald]

Dameon, check your mail, i sent you some links that may help you.

 

[jkersenbr]

Anybody should be able to own a nuclear bomb if they want to. It's something called freedom -- a concept which has been lost over time. It is nobody (government, other citizitens -- NO ONE) else's business unless I harm someone with it. Criminals should be viewed as people who harm others. Owning a weapon of any kind does not necessarily make one a criminal. Guns don't kill people -- people kill people.

Since guns can't kill people by themselves, how about we ban people? Except for those of course who are sensative enogugh to comply with government and soceital regulations. Should the noncompliants simply be destroyed?

Assuming that someone is more dangerous simply because they own weapons is undermining one of the basic principles our jucicial system. Now gun owners are presumed guilty before proven innocent.

In many cases in this country, the police have been unable to respond in a timely fashion in the event of a crime. Since they are often incapable of providing their services fast enough, what benefit is there to reducing the citizens ability to defend themselves?

The perpetrators of crime will always have guns. Legislation restricting firearms freedom doesn't work. If it did, why do kids have guns to commit atrocities with? Why do those with past prison records have guns to perpetrate more violence? Why do illegal aliens have guns? It is already illegal for all of these people to possess guns in this country. Why then do we read in the news everyday of more firearms crimes committed by those who already cannot legally own guns?

Guns cause crime like flies cause garbage.

Semper Fi.

 

[desy]

Lets see, Iceland was founded by a bunch of murauding theiving pirates? I bet the people they were pilaging from would have liked some sort of advantage. I don't buy into the illusion that because we in the Northern hemispere have had peace since 1945 that the world is a safe cozy place where nothing will ever go weird again.
I can't afford to buy a weapon of mass destruction but a weapon to defend my own life? Not that I have them to currently do that they sit locked up in a box till hunting season BUT I sleep better.
Hitler, Stalins first order of buisness was to disarm the population
so if you choose to see the world in rose coloured glasses but I worked with a guy who lived in Serbia and after hearing what he had to say you wouldn't see me without one.

 

[Czar]

desy

I see you dont know much about icelandic history. There are few explinations about why people came and started living here. They were explorers that sought more land to live on. They were rebels who wouldnt want to live under the kings rule in Norway. They came because there was no more room in Norway. But that all happened over 1000 years ago. Not like america which has 400 years of history or less, and was founded by the same reasons Iceland was founded. I like to think that because of the internet and more communications we are reaching much more peaceful times in history. For how long, lets just say as long as people have the internet or so Long live the Internet, our new king.

 

[BeHeMOTH]

Well the way I see it if there was a ban on guns, there are still enough guns out there that you could never get rid of them and the sales would be huge. PLus being in america you would have to lay off workers that make the guns if not imported, gun shop would raise prices and people would still get killed but by more drastic measures. So instead of a nut shooting 10 people he axed 5 before the police could get there. I know this is hypothical but, I'm a gun owner and I see it as my right as an american to buy what ever I can and own everything I can as long as it's within the law.

 

[desy]

CZAR
Actually I was just buggin yah. I do know some about Viking history as my dad is Danish and my father in law is Icelandic, I am Canadian.
I would hope that with the internet and yes a largly more educated population there wouldn't be a need for societies where guns exist.
I also have to look no further than the new hostilities in the Middle East and an ever increasing world population where resources become scarcer to believe this tiny blip in time could be enduring.
Its a little unrealistic to compare a lowly populated Island to large populated continents don't you think?

 

[LANMAN]

I have to agree with BaHeMoth and Kb0ogt on their posts. But for those of you that want to ban guns, what would you say or do when you are confronted with the same situation a lady in Texas had to face?

Some dude walks in to a resturant and just starts shooting customers in the booths they sat .. one after another.. as he slowly gets down to this ladies parents, she is terrified she can't do anything to stop this guy. (Little did anyone know, her concealed 38sp was in her car because Teaxs doesn't allow firearms in a public establishment) That idiot killed her parents right in front of her! The only way she got out with her life is because he ran out of ammo. Now tell me the law in this county is so fired up on "Banning all firearms" is the correct thing to do? She swares to this day, she will support gun ownership as long as she's on this earth.

So my word to all of you that think banning is the way to go: Bet you change your mind, when something like this happens to you, but wait? You can't do anything because you voted for banning your rights to own one! Oops...

--LANMAN

 

[DABANSHEE]

The thing is Lanman, if that bloke was acting impulsively he wouldn't have a gun in the 1st place, however if it was premeditated he would have purchased that firearm illegally anyway. However in countries with low rates of firearms, they are much more expensive (because of lack of supply) consequently, even criminals have a low rate of firearm ownership too.

Didn't you bother to read my 1st post -

"Well the only nation that I can think of off hand that gets close to fitting the bill as a nation where only the police/military are armed is Japan, .

Nows as far as nations with high rates of firearm ownership, we have South Africa, the US, Israel, Switzerland, Columbia, Pakistan.

Could we come to any conclusions by comparing those nations, I think not, there are just too many other varibles.

However in nations where there is a low rate of firarm ownership, there's also lower rates of criminals possesing firarms - maybe because they cost more because of limited avaliability. I do know that virtually all the recidivous criminals I know (mainly drug dealers & car theives) would, if they came across a firearm, would sell it before the day is out, as they just arn't worth the hassle here. Plus because supply is limited you can get good money for them, Even a South American S&W.380 'knock off' clone would be worth $500 in Oz on the blackmarket - except for the standard exceptions (working in law enforcement, security, war trophies prior to 1946, family heirlooms, amtique firearms, etc) handguns have been illegal in Australia, since about 1920).

Plus just by the simple fact there are lower rates of firearm ownership there would definitly be lower rates of firearm incidents such as accidents & impulsive/compulsive acts by ordinary people who just 'lose it' because of jealousy, drunkenous, domestics, etc.

But as far as premeditated acts of firarm violence are concerned I doubt there'd be much difference as we all know criminals don't worry about gun laws. However there maybe less crimes of opportunity, where firearms are involved, just because avaliability is less so they are harder to come by & are more expensive"

Anyway its too late for the US as there are simply too many guns out there for any such legislation to work except in the very long term. Plus if they chosed to have an idiotic wastefull buyback scheme like they did in here in Australia it would cost billions/trillions, well something like that.

 

[desy]

So there are fewer guns deaths. . .
Are there less murders, less suicides?
I bet their stats fall in line with any other industiralized country.
Canada has 1/10 the guns deaths of the US, ie your argument less firearms but 10X the number of knife deaths? See the correlation guns don't kill people kill and a society that is violent is violent.
In the old days they used to do it with poison.
All banning firearms does is eliminate spree killings which is a low low percentage. The day of Columbine in the US Britain had 2 gun murders and 100 killed in bombings, this country has one of the most strict gun control going.
Its the attitude of your population not the tool used.