in one sentence describe why you are for or against gun ownership

[krunchykrome]

I want to protect my myself and my family.

 

[Avalon]

I'm for it cause I wanna pop a cap in yo ass.

 

[unxpurg8d]

What about someone who isn't a criminal but snaps one day and goes on a rampage, like that Korean kid at Virginia Tech. If guns were illegal he probably wouldn't have been able to kill 32 people unless he knew gang members who could get him a gun.

If guns hadn't been banned on campus someone could've shot him long before he got to 32.


Or he could've just used a VEHICLE.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster

Point here is that if someone is really determined to do something horrific they're going to find a way. If that weren't true there would be a murder rate of ZERO in the countries that ban guns.

The cliche "guns don't kill people, people do" is true. Anything is a weapon in the hands of someone determined to harm another. A knitting needle is deadly but grannies still get to knit.

 

[Macamus Prime]

Because I am a racist that is itching to shoot and kill anyone that is different than me.

 

[ShawnD1]

I support gun ownership because then people can kill themselves the proper way instead of "suicide by cop" or "suicide by driving like a god damn retard."

Not joking.

 

[Zargon]

Because I enjoy the fact that most dems are scared of me due to something as silly as gun ownership

I am not the governments sheep.

 

[soulcougher73]

People kill people.

That is all. A gun is just a tool to make it happen. Could have easily have been a knife or bat.

 

[Juddog]

I'm for it. It's about fighting fire with fire. Thieves / criminals have the advantage over the unsuspecting, a gun just evens things out instead of leaving you helpless.

Say some punk try to get you for your auto,
Would you call the one-time, play the role model?
No, I think you play like a thug
Next hear the shot of a magnum slug
Hummin', comin' at cha
yeah ya know I'm gonna gat ya.

 

[rivan]

I believe in the Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America.

I believe in the Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America.

 

[Scotteq]

I enjoy shooting. Full Stop.

From there, I accept the additional responsibility which comes with ownership and conduct myself accordingly. The protection aspects are far secondary, considering the chances of someone invading my home. OTOH, if you do get invaded, then you are 100% a victim. In such an event, IMHO, it's far better have the option to fight back to protect yourself and your family than to be at the mercy of criminals.

 

[ultimatebob]

If the Bad Guys have guns, I want one of my own to defend myself against them.

Besides, the Bad Guys will continue to have guns whether they're legal or not.

 

[pontifex]

i am completely against private ownership of firearms.

no, really?!?!?!?!?!?

 

[Thebobo]

nerds with guns

 

[pontifex]

Because private ownership of firearms is retarded, unnecessary and results in deaths.

I haven't killed anyone. None of the people that I know that own guns have killed anyone.


its neither retarded nor unnecessary, in fact its the opposite.

 

[Pantlegz]

guns are mainly for wars of the barbaric, and war is just that. and we have no use to hunt wild game anymore, we raise our food

Really? I know plenty of people that go deer hunting and eat what they kill. This really depeneds on where you live but it happens more than you might think.

I've never gone hunting with my AK, partially because it's illegal to here because there isn't enough powder in the rounds, they're like 15g too light.

I own a gun because I can, I would use it to protect myself if needed but I really don't see that being an issue. It's a hobby really, go out to the range get better, modify the gun, get even better etc...

 

[Pantlegz]

Because private ownership of firearms is retarded, unnecessary and results in deaths.

And has been proven in several situations to prevent unnecessary death. I've never killed anyone and I don't know anyone that has.

 

[Scotteq]

And has been proven in several situations to prevent unnecessary death. I've never killed anyone and I don't know anyone that has.

Don't argue with Hal, especially on this topic - He doesn't care what you (or anyone, really) thinks. He will not change his opinion, nor even listen except insofar as he can use bits and pieces of whatever you typed to throw back into your face. He really does enjoy pissing people (especially Americans) off as much as he can.

It is therefore not possible to have a discussion with him; and I do not recommend attempting same.

 

[drebo]

Personal fucking freedom.

 

[jonks]

the Author of that BBC article is an american gun nut who couldn't get a job as a hooker here in Europe, let alone a teaching position at a decent educational institution...
she keeps comparing London to NYC, but to my knowledge NYC has some of the strictest gun laws in the US... flawed logic is very flawed.

getting any information from the daily mail is like getting information on evolution from the watchtower...

Yeah, I liked this part:

There are also degrees of violence. While the UK ranks above South Africa for all violent crime, South Africans suffer more than 20,000 murders each year - compared with Britain's 921 in 2007.

So a bar fight in the UK resulting in arrests counts for stat purposes as "violent crime" but the 20,000 murders in S.A. don't carry any more weight. Useless article is useless.

 

[HAL9000]

The point of that phrase is that criminals will do whatever they can to get their weapons. If they were illegal, then people who weren't going to break any laws just can't get them anymore but the criminals and gang members will go through illegal means to get them anyway. So there's no point in outlawing them because the people who want them bad enough will still get them... through any means necessary.

Of course that's true, but banning guns would result in less gun deaths.

no, really?!?!?!?!?!?

Really,really really.

I haven't killed anyone. None of the people that I know that own guns have killed anyone.


its neither retarded nor unnecessary, in fact its the opposite.

There are some outliers, but it's obvious that countries with private gun ownership have a higher rate of gun death than those without, obviously I'm talking about on a general level not individual level.

 

[HAL9000]

I haven't killed anyone. None of the people that I know that own guns have killed anyone.


its neither retarded nor unnecessary, in fact its the opposite.

I'm talking about the masses owning guns, obviously some individuals haven't killed with their guns, but as a whole private gun ownership causes deaths.

And has been proven in several situations to prevent unnecessary death. I've never killed anyone and I don't know anyone that has.

Of course it has, but on the whole countries with legal gun ownership have higher gun death rates than countries without.

Don't argue with Hal, especially on this topic - He doesn't care what you (or anyone, really) thinks. He will not change his opinion, nor even listen except insofar as he can use bits and pieces of whatever you typed to throw back into your face. He really does enjoy pissing people (especially Americans) off as much as he can.

It is therefore not possible to have a discussion with him; and I do not recommend attempting same.

That's not the case, I enjoy debate, and while I have been a member of this forum I have changed my opinion on gun ownership to some degree.

 

[gorcorps]

Of course that's true, but banning guns would result in less gun deaths.



Really,really really.



There are some outliers, but it's obvious that countries with private gun ownership have a higher rate of gun death than those without, obviously I'm talking about on a general level not individual level.

See... the reason everybody says you're a troll is that you make blanket statements like these with absolutely nothing to back them up. I wouldn't mind having a discussion with you but I'd like some proof.

We have stats that show certain cites in the US have high gun violence (Chicago and NYC) despite being in states that have incredibly strict gun control laws compared to the rest of the country. If you want to go global you can compare countries where every single male joins the military and is given a gun at a certain age. Compared to the general level (like you said) they have a lower level of gun related violence because of the known population of guns.

Of course there are going to be sporadic accidents and stuff, but those are quite far from the norm. I'm not sure where you're getting your info, but all of the real world numbers seem to indicate that in areas where there's known armed citizens the recorded gun violence is lower.

 

[Numenorean]

There are some outliers, but it's obvious that countries with private gun ownership have a higher rate of gun death than those without, obviously I'm talking about on a general level not individual level.

I don't care to live in some nanny-state like England which doesn't allow guns and yet allows ridiculous shit like squatters to take over your home. That's bullshit. That wouldn't happen here because if someone was in my home I have the means and rights to remove them. How can you not have the right to have the police come and jail those morons?

 

[HAL9000]

See... the reason everybody says you're a troll is that you make blanket statements like these with absolutely nothing to back them up. I wouldn't mind having a discussion with you but I'd like some proof.

We have stats that show certain cites in the US have high gun violence (Chicago and NYC) despite being in states that have incredibly strict gun control laws compared to the rest of the country. If you want to go global you can compare countries where every single male joins the military and is given a gun at a certain age. Compared to the general level (like you said) they have a lower level of gun related violence because of the known population of guns.

Of course there are going to be sporadic accidents and stuff, but those are quite far from the norm. I'm not sure where you're getting your info, but all of the real world numbers seem to indicate that in areas where there's known armed citizens the recorded gun violence is lower.

First google search result for "gun deaths by country"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

You are 7th from the top, we are 8th from the bottom.

I don't care to live in some nanny-state like England which doesn't allow guns and yet allows ridiculous shit like squatters to take over your home. That's bullshit. That wouldn't happen here because if someone was in my home I have the means and rights to remove them. How can you not have the right to have the police come and jail those morons?

Oh OK.

 

[Numenorean]

First google search result for "gun deaths by country"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

You are 7th from the top, we are 8th from the bottom.

Oh OK.

Oh OK what?

And firearm related death? Does that include accidental discharge? If so, those are morons just cleaning the gene pool a bit, and I don't care.

Gang related deaths? More morons.

Criminals? Morons.

That's fine with me. Let's find a list that compares the total gun deaths and breaks it up into two categories - innocent and criminal. Until then, I can't really comment.

If it's 80% criminals dying then you can take that number and subtract it as they are meaningless and I don't give a shit about them. They can all go in a cage and fight each other and kill each other off for all I care.