If everybody in America was allowed to carry a gun...

[Narmer]

1. Would America resemble Israel where the reason is for protection from an external threat?

2. Is Israel an exceptional case?

3. Or would it be like Afghanistan, Northwest Pakistan where you use it to protect yourself from others within society?

4. Wouldn't this increase accidental shootings and death by gun astronomically?

5. Would this be acceptable to those who advocate such protection?

6. Would this be an efficient way to deal with an overbearing government? Look at Afghanistan, Northwest Pakistan, where they have weak governments.

7. Are more guns the solution to guns? Or would it be better if there were no guns? But how would we answer #6?

Are the negatives worth the positives? Are there certain places in America that allows people to carry guns, unconcealed?

 

[jman19]

Good post, I'd like to see what some of the answers are - hopefully there will be some good ones before this thread goes down in flames.

 

[manowar821]

Mmmm... I don't think people can know for sure. The majority of people are NOT evil, and I'm willing to bet that crime would be stamped out fairly efficiently. However, the criminals generally are more willing to pull the trigger, too. So who knows?

Americans are CRAZY, so I don't know what to think. I'm sorry, but we are nuts. Anyone who denies that is either naive or in denial.

 

[Mxylplyx]

I, as a conservative/libertarian, would gladly trade our gun situation with England, France, Germany, or other European countries that make it very difficult to obtain guns. The situation in America has gotten ridiculous, and our crime situation is frankly embarassing when held up against many other Western countries. However, the cat is already out of the bag in America, and the gun situation cannot be brought under control at this point. Therefore, any citizen who is trained with a firearm should be allowed to carry.

 

[Narmer]

Originally posted by: manowar821
Mmmm... I don't think people can know for sure. The majority of people are NOT evil, and I'm willing to bet that crime would be stamped out fairly efficiently. However, the criminals generally are more willing to pull the trigger, too. So who knows?

Americans are CRAZY, so I don't know what to think. I'm sorry, but we are nuts. Anyone who denies that is either naive or in denial.

You say that people are not inherently evil. But isn't that what everyone wants, efficiency? If somebody shoots somebody in the streets, somebody else can shoot him. Justice would've been served and the police can come and clean up the mess. No need to wait for heroes to come and save us like we're schoolgirls in distress. Sure, violent deaths would skyrocket but human beings are violent animals anyways, right? It's par for the course.

 

[Narmer]

Originally posted by: Mxylplyx
I, as a conservative/libertarian, would gladly trade our gun situation with England, France, Germany, or other European countries that make it very difficult to obtain guns. The situation in America has gotten ridiculous, and our crime situation is frankly embarassing when held up against many other Western countries. However, the cat is already out of the bag in America, and the gun situation cannot be brought under control at this point. Therefore, any citizen who is trained with a firearm should be allowed to carry.

What remedies do those countries have against an overbearing government? Power corrupts, right?

 

[PimpJuice]

Originally posted by: Narmer

Originally posted by: manowar821
Mmmm... I don't think people can know for sure. The majority of people are NOT evil, and I'm willing to bet that crime would be stamped out fairly efficiently. However, the criminals generally are more willing to pull the trigger, too. So who knows?

Americans are CRAZY, so I don't know what to think. I'm sorry, but we are nuts. Anyone who denies that is either naive or in denial.

You say that people are not inherently evil. But isn't that what everyone wants, efficiency? If somebody shoots somebody in the streets, somebody else can shoot him. Justice would've been served and the police can come and clean up the mess. No need to wait for heroes to come and save us like we're schoolgirls in distress. Sure, violent deaths would skyrocket but human beings are violent animals anyways, right? It's par for the course.

are you serious? What if the first person shot the other in self defense and you didnt know it. Do you shoot the guy because he shot someone? So in your opinion, everyone should have a gun and be judge/jury/executioner.

I will stop here and assume you are 10 years old and think having a gun makes you a cool sheriff.

 

[Narmer]

Originally posted by: PimpJuice

Originally posted by: Narmer

Originally posted by: manowar821
Mmmm... I don't think people can know for sure. The majority of people are NOT evil, and I'm willing to bet that crime would be stamped out fairly efficiently. However, the criminals generally are more willing to pull the trigger, too. So who knows?

Americans are CRAZY, so I don't know what to think. I'm sorry, but we are nuts. Anyone who denies that is either naive or in denial.

You say that people are not inherently evil. But isn't that what everyone wants, efficiency? If somebody shoots somebody in the streets, somebody else can shoot him. Justice would've been served and the police can come and clean up the mess. No need to wait for heroes to come and save us like we're schoolgirls in distress. Sure, violent deaths would skyrocket but human beings are violent animals anyways, right? It's par for the course.

are you serious? What if the first person shot the other in self defense and you didnt know it. Do you shoot the guy because he shot someone? So in your opinion, everyone should have a gun and be judge/jury/executioner.

I will stop here and assume you are 10 years old and think having a gun makes you a cool sheriff.

That's why I created this thread to ask some serious questions. Besides, my scenerio was very simplistic. But if you're smart you wouldn't automatically shoot, right. The first thing you'd do is think and try to assess what's going on. For all we know, one or more of the actors could be lying. In the end though, people shouldn't go around shooting people, so some serious judgement is required. That's why I created this thread.

 

[Toastedlightly]

Originally posted by: Mxylplyx
I, as a conservative/libertarian, would gladly trade our gun situation with England, France, Germany, or other European countries that make it very difficult to obtain guns. The situation in America has gotten ridiculous, and our crime situation is frankly embarassing when held up against many other Western countries. However, the cat is already out of the bag in America, and the gun situation cannot be brought under control at this point. Therefore, any citizen who is trained with a firearm should be allowed to carry.

That is a very, very not-libertarian view you have there.

I am for all citizens to bear arms (within reason). It helps the "good" populace when the evil in society don't know who is armed.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: Narmer
1. Would America resemble Israel where the reason is for protection from an external threat?

2. Is Israel an exceptional case?

3. Or would it be like Afghanistan, Northwest Pakistan where you use it to protect yourself from others within society?

4. Wouldn't this increase accidental shootings and death by gun astronomically?

5. Would this be acceptable to those who advocate such protection?

6. Would this be an efficient way to deal with an overbearing government? Look at Afghanistan, Northwest Pakistan, where they have weak governments.

7. Are more guns the solution to guns? Or would it be better if there were no guns? But how would we answer #6?

Are the negatives worth the positives? Are there certain places in America that allows people to carry guns, unconcealed?

1. Entirely different situations. Israel is in a constant state of war with terrorists who are armed equivalent to the military. This has created a populace which is likewise armed as the military. Moreover Israel has mandatory military service and a far greater sense of nationalism and unity.

2. Therefore yes, Israel is an entirely special case.

3. It would be like America, where people carry safe weapons responsibly and use them for their safety/security from whatever infringes upon that safety/security.

4. Nope. There is absolutely no statistical support for that. In fact, there are fewer accidents/incidents from concealed carry holders than any other facet of citizen - including military and law enforcement.

5. See above.

6. It is a fair tradeoff. Private ownership of basic arms is enough to begin a revolution should it become necessary, without granting every person their own artillery and armored vehicle.

7. Obviously it would best if there were no guns. However that is an absolute impossibility, and therefore moot. Only a gun can answer a gun in a gun encounter, therefore they are the only answer once engaged. To avoid engagement in the first place is better, but would require a complete socio/economic restructuring.

There are almost no negatives to consider. Many, many, many states allow open carry.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: Mxylplyx
I, as a conservative/libertarian, would gladly trade our gun situation with England, France, Germany, or other European countries that make it very difficult to obtain guns. The situation in America has gotten ridiculous, and our crime situation is frankly embarassing when held up against many other Western countries. However, the cat is already out of the bag in America, and the gun situation cannot be brought under control at this point. Therefore, any citizen who is trained with a firearm should be allowed to carry.

You are for gun control? Then you are no libertarian, stop trying to pass yourself off as one.

 

[Nebor]

1. We would not resemble Israel. We have no immediate exterior threats
2. Israel is exceptional in that the large amount of firearms in private hands, meant to handle exterior threats, also greatly deters domestic (inside the country) violence and crime.
3. We wouldn't be like Afghanistan or Pakistan. We don't have warlords. We have the rule of law.
4. I think that the purposeful use of guns and homicide would grow at a rate far greater than that of accidental gun deaths.
5. Yes. I think the instances of justifiable homicide would far outweigh any negatives.
6. I don't really see how this is applicable. We already have most of the guns we need to overthrow the government if we wanted. This discussion is about carrying them in public.
7. There is no solution to guns. The genie is out of the bottle. People will kill each other. The only thing to do is make sure the good guys are as armed as they can be against the forces of evil.

Yes, there's something like 28 states that allow for "open" or not concealed, carry of handguns. Then there are states that allow for the open carry of rifles and other long guns. There are neighborhoods in Dallas where it's not unusual to see men walking around with shotguns slung over their shoulders.

 

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: Mxylplyx
I, as a conservative/libertarian, would gladly trade our gun situation with England, France, Germany, or other European countries that make it very difficult to obtain guns. The situation in America has gotten ridiculous, and our crime situation is frankly embarassing when held up against many other Western countries. However, the cat is already out of the bag in America, and the gun situation cannot be brought under control at this point. Therefore, any citizen who is trained with a firearm should be allowed to carry.

You are for gun control? Then you are no libertarian, stop trying to pass yourself off as one.

Seriously. A libertarian should be able to see that gun control is really only about control. Guns are just one of the methods of gaining that control.

 

[Narmer]

Can I get some second opinion here. A lot of gun owners are claiming that everything is honkey-dory with everyone armed. I simply don't believe that there are no drawbacks. I mean, look at all these third-world countries where there are gangs/warlords and weak central governments. The stats may be non-existant, but I doubt that gun-ownership is as perfect as some people make it out to be.

 

[TheSlamma]

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
1. Entirely different situations. Israel is in a constant state of war with terrorists who are armed equivalent to the military. This has created a populace which is likewise armed as the military. Moreover Israel has mandatory military service and a far greater sense of nationalism and unity.

2. Therefore yes, Israel is an entirely special case.

3. It would be like America, where people carry safe weapons responsibly and use them for their safety/security from whatever infringes upon that safety/security.

4. Nope. There is absolutely no statistical support for that. In fact, there are fewer accidents/incidents from concealed carry holders than any other facet of citizen - including military and law enforcement.

5. See above.

6. It is a fair tradeoff. Private ownership of basic arms is enough to begin a revolution should it become necessary, without granting every person their own artillery and armored vehicle.

7. Obviously it would best if there were no guns. However that is an absolute impossibility, and therefore moot. Only a gun can answer a gun in a gun encounter, therefore they are the only answer once engaged. To avoid engagement in the first place is better, but would require a complete socio/economic restructuring.

There are almost no negatives to consider. Many, many, many states allow open carry.

These are some very good answers IMO. :thumbsup:

 

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: Narmer
Can I get some second opinion here. A lot of gun owners are claiming that everything is honkey-dory with everyone armed. I simply don't believe that there are no drawbacks. I mean, look at all these third-world countries where there are gangs/warlords and weak central governments. The stats may be non-existant, but I doubt that gun-ownership is as perfect as some people make it out to be.

Exactly, look at those 3rd world countries. We're not one. We live in a just society of rules and laws.

 

[techs]

Originally posted by: Narmer
Can I get some second opinion here. A lot of gun owners are claiming that everything is honkey-dory with everyone armed. I simply don't believe that there are no drawbacks. I mean, look at all these third-world countries where there are gangs/warlords and weak central governments. The stats may be non-existant, but I doubt that gun-ownership is as perfect as some people make it out to be.

We would see a HUGE increase in gun violence. Just imagine how many people get into fights every day. Then imagine what would happen if they had a gun in their pocket.
What people overlook, is that in the old west gun violence was epidemic. They fixed the problem by passing laws against carrying guns in town.
If anyone could get a concealed weapons permit, the most aggessive people would get guns. Then those who feared the aggressive people would have guns.
Clearly, their would be tens of thousands if not over a few hundred thousand more gun deaths every year. Crimininals would also start shooting their victims, secure in the knowledge that with so many gun crimes and accidental shootings every day, the use of guns in crimes would be commonplace.

 

[Narmer]

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: Narmer
Can I get some second opinion here. A lot of gun owners are claiming that everything is honkey-dory with everyone armed. I simply don't believe that there are no drawbacks. I mean, look at all these third-world countries where there are gangs/warlords and weak central governments. The stats may be non-existant, but I doubt that gun-ownership is as perfect as some people make it out to be.

Exactly, look at those 3rd world countries. We're not one. We live in a just society of rules and laws.

There are many countries that were well-off, but then regressed because of wars, intercenine conflicts. Your status today isn't a guarantee it'll be the same tomorrow.

 

[Narmer]

Originally posted by: techs

Originally posted by: Narmer
Can I get some second opinion here. A lot of gun owners are claiming that everything is honkey-dory with everyone armed. I simply don't believe that there are no drawbacks. I mean, look at all these third-world countries where there are gangs/warlords and weak central governments. The stats may be non-existant, but I doubt that gun-ownership is as perfect as some people make it out to be.

We would see a HUGE increase in gun violence. Just imagine how many people get into fights every day. Then imagine what would happen if they had a gun in their pocket.
What people overlook, is that in the old west gun violence was epidemic. They fixed the problem by passing laws against carrying guns in town.
If anyone could get a concealed weapons permit, the most aggessive people would get guns. Then those who feared the aggressive people would have guns.
Clearly, their would be tens of thousands if not over a few hundred thousand more gun deaths every year. Crimininals would also start shooting their victims, secure in the knowledge that with so many gun crimes and accidental shootings every day, the use of guns in crimes would be commonplace.

Do you have a reference for this?

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: techs

Originally posted by: Narmer
Can I get some second opinion here. A lot of gun owners are claiming that everything is honkey-dory with everyone armed. I simply don't believe that there are no drawbacks. I mean, look at all these third-world countries where there are gangs/warlords and weak central governments. The stats may be non-existant, but I doubt that gun-ownership is as perfect as some people make it out to be.

We would see a HUGE increase in gun violence. Just imagine how many people get into fights every day. Then imagine what would happen if they had a gun in their pocket.
What people overlook, is that in the old west gun violence was epidemic. They fixed the problem by passing laws against carrying guns in town.
If anyone could get a concealed weapons permit, the most aggessive people would get guns. Then those who feared the aggressive people would have guns.
Clearly, their would be tens of thousands if not over a few hundred thousand more gun deaths every year. Crimininals would also start shooting their victims, secure in the knowledge that with so many gun crimes and accidental shootings every day, the use of guns in crimes would be commonplace.

And yet huge numbers already carry guns and this absolutely NEVER happens. Why is that? It's because you're wrong, and I'm right quite simply. Nearly everyone can already get a concealed weapon permit, yet most don't.

You have not fact one to support your claim, I have research done over the last 20 years that totally supports mine. CCW holders do not commit crimes, do not have accidents, etc. They are statistically the safest citizens in the world with a weapon...statistically safer than military, safer than law enforcement, and so on.

In other words, you're talking out your ass while I'm providing a reasoned and supported argument. Thanks for playing, ok, bye-bye.

 

[CycloWizard]

I do not own a gun, nor will I ever own a gun. However, I do see guns as useful because they make an 85-year-old woman equal to a 25-year-old man who means to be violent with her. No other weapon achieves this equality nearly as well as a firearm, since the firearm removes the necessity of physical strength from the equation. It stands to reason that if a little old lady may have a gun in her pocket, a criminal is less likely to rob/assault her, and every statistic I've ever seen has supported this assertion.

The simplest analogy can be seen in modern foreign policy. Should countries be allowed to have nukes? The nuke levels the playing field between nations with amazing militaries (e.g. the US) and riff raff (e.g. Afghanistan in 2001). If Afghanistan might have had nukes in 2001, would we have invaded them? I sincerely doubt it. Not knowing whether or not they have the ability to inflict massive damage to our side (or, knowing that they do indeed have nukes) is a very powerful deterrent. We are forced to play relatively nicely with nations like North Korea because we know that they could inflict massive damage on us or our friends if we crossed the line.

 

[TheSlamma]

Originally posted by: Narmer
Can I get some second opinion here. A lot of gun owners are claiming that everything is honkey-dory with everyone armed. I simply don't believe that there are no drawbacks. I mean, look at all these third-world countries where there are gangs/warlords and weak central governments. The stats may be non-existant, but I doubt that gun-ownership is as perfect as people make it out to be.

You really need to get a passport and some stamps in it. Other countries are not the same as the US either are their people. People who stay in this country too long get a false sense that humans all think the same way.

The most laughable part of your post is the fact that you are actually bringing up 3rd world countries to compare to a first world country with police and 200+yr old laws.

BTW I don't own a gun.

 

[Dari]

I remember hearing a song ten years ago from Iran/Afghanistan/Pakistan where the guys sings:

:music:I solve all my problems with a Kalishinkov:music:

 

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: techs

Originally posted by: Narmer
Can I get some second opinion here. A lot of gun owners are claiming that everything is honkey-dory with everyone armed. I simply don't believe that there are no drawbacks. I mean, look at all these third-world countries where there are gangs/warlords and weak central governments. The stats may be non-existant, but I doubt that gun-ownership is as perfect as some people make it out to be.

We would see a HUGE increase in gun violence. Just imagine how many people get into fights every day. Then imagine what would happen if they had a gun in their pocket.
What people overlook, is that in the old west gun violence was epidemic. They fixed the problem by passing laws against carrying guns in town.
If anyone could get a concealed weapons permit, the most aggessive people would get guns. Then those who feared the aggressive people would have guns.
Clearly, their would be tens of thousands if not over a few hundred thousand more gun deaths every year. Crimininals would also start shooting their victims, secure in the knowledge that with so many gun crimes and accidental shootings every day, the use of guns in crimes would be commonplace.

Um, anyone can get a concealed carry permit. You just have to not be a felon. That's it. And we've heard the same "the streets will run red with blood!" But the fact is, concealed carry permit holders are less likely to comit violent crimes that police officers. In Texas, they account for ~1% of the crime, and less than 1 murder per year.

As someone who's carried a gun for more than a decade, every day, I can tell you that your fears just aren't justified. Responsible people with guns don't shoot other people because their mad. I've drawn my weapon twice, and both times it resulted in a bad guy being shot.

I've found there are two kinds of gun control supporters: Those that don't trust themselves with a gun, and those who don't trust anyone but themselves with a gun. You, and most others, are the former. Elitists and government\authoritarian types are the latter.

 

[Narmer]

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: techs

Originally posted by: Narmer
Can I get some second opinion here. A lot of gun owners are claiming that everything is honkey-dory with everyone armed. I simply don't believe that there are no drawbacks. I mean, look at all these third-world countries where there are gangs/warlords and weak central governments. The stats may be non-existant, but I doubt that gun-ownership is as perfect as some people make it out to be.

We would see a HUGE increase in gun violence. Just imagine how many people get into fights every day. Then imagine what would happen if they had a gun in their pocket.
What people overlook, is that in the old west gun violence was epidemic. They fixed the problem by passing laws against carrying guns in town.
If anyone could get a concealed weapons permit, the most aggessive people would get guns. Then those who feared the aggressive people would have guns.
Clearly, their would be tens of thousands if not over a few hundred thousand more gun deaths every year. Crimininals would also start shooting their victims, secure in the knowledge that with so many gun crimes and accidental shootings every day, the use of guns in crimes would be commonplace.

And yet huge numbers already carry guns and this absolutely NEVER happens. Why is that? It's because you're wrong, and I'm right quite simply. Nearly everyone can already get a concealed weapon permit, yet most don't.

You have not fact one to support your claim, I have research done over the last 20 years that totally supports mine. CCW holders do not commit crimes, do not have accidents, etc. They are statistically the safest citizens in the world with a weapon...statistically safer than military, safer than law enforcement, and so on.

In other words, you're talking out your ass while I'm providing a reasoned and supported argument. Thanks for playing, ok, bye-bye.

Do you have references?