Will there ever be a time when we won't need guns?

[xj0hnx]

South Korea. I lived there until late 90's and even the police did not carry guns. No one outside the military was allowed to carry guns. Streets were safe and no one worried about their kids getting hit on the street (except by their peers).

Weapon of choice by criminals: Usually kitchen knives, baseball bats, or simply physical force by outnumbering victims.

Ok, so now name a country that has been able to get along without guns.

And thank you for at least entertaining the reality that criminals do not need guns to hurt people.

 

[diesbudt]

And thank you for at least entertaining the reality that criminals do not need guns to hurt people.

Strengthens the argument for not banning guns. Because it is the intent of the person behind any/all tools.

Whether it is a rake, fork, gun, grenade, bazooka, magic fireballs. Doesn't matter. Whoever wields it, is the factor in if it hurts someone or not.

 

[DrPizza]

As soon as someone trains wood chucks not to dig holes in my fields, someone trains foxes, raccoons, skunks, mink, weasels, etc. not to try to kill and eat my chickens; as soon as someone trains deer to just package themselves up and jump into my freezer, then perhaps I won't need a gun. Wait a second... I can get Bambi with a bow. Gun not needed for deer (though it increases the number that I can legally shoot each year.)

 

[mect]

South Korea. I lived there until late 90's and even the police did not carry guns. No one outside the military was allowed to carry guns. Streets were safe and no one worried about their kids getting hit on the street (except by their peers).

Weapon of choice by criminals: Usually kitchen knives, baseball bats, or simply physical force by outnumbering victims.

There are still guns in South Korea. As you said, the military has them. Additionally, there are still privately owned guns in South Korea, just not very many, about 1.1 per 100 citizens according to gunpolicy.org citing Karp, Aaron. 2007. ‘Completing the Count: Civilian firearms.’ Small Arms Survey 2007: Guns and the City, p. 67. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 27 August..

 

[PJABBER]

Who does DHS intend to fight with 450 million rounds of .40-caliber ammunition???

DHS has 200,000 employees, that means each one of them gets 2250 rounds apiece, including paper pushers, secretaries and janitors.

Realistically, only about 10 percent of DHS staff would even be qualified, much less authorized to carry a weapon. That means those lucky individuals will get 22,500 rounds apiece. Assuming they might use 1,000 rounds a year for annual range use and qualification, that leaves 21,500 pistol caliber rounds apiece with which to wreak havoc.

Do they have some sort of idea that the Chinese are going to invade the US?

Or do they think they will be holding down a domestic insurrection of a type that has never occurred in history, to include the Civil War?

And why .40 cal? That is a pistol round that would leave the poor DHS agent outgunned by anyone with a rifle, or even a shotgun.

Let's add to that amount.

This was followed by another DHS solicitation asking for a further 750 million rounds of assorted bullets,

So now the approximately 20,000 weapons qualified, not necessarily authorized to carry, agents are going to get another 37,500 rounds (for a total of 60,000) apiece???

Army Compartmented Elements (ACE) and Navy DEVGRU go through those kind of unit training ammo allocations and more, but I don't know of any other US government agency under DHS, other than maybe the Secret Service, that does. Certainly not ICE agents, nor Customs, nor Coast Guard, nor TSA.

 

[D-Man]

I overheard a First Assembly Preacher answer that question. His answer. Not until the second coming of Christ. Take it for what you will.

 

[BurnItDwn]

If every government in every goverment would give up their guns at the same time, then we as a species would no longer need them.

Otherwise, we keep guns around as a "you hurt me, you will get hurt back" mechanic and they are not going anywhere. (note: you could also use missiles, bombs, grenades, and other weapons in place of just guns)

 

[MrColin]

We never "needed" guns. Everything you do with a gun could be accomplished with a sharp stick or a rock. Just takes a lot more elbow grease. We don't need cars either, just use bikes or horses.

 

[sandorski]

If you mean Military, who knows, maybe never. If you mean for Civilians, that time came already.

 

[xj0hnx]

If you mean Military, who knows, maybe never. If you mean for Civilians, that time came already.

Not even close.

 

[cybrsage]

Not in the U.S. But plenty of countries get by without guns.

Which ones?

EDIT: I see it has already been answered. There are none.

 

[OCGuy]

No.

 

[uhohs]

Will there ever be a time when we won't need guns?

When there is an end to famine, disease, and poverty.
When there is limitless and free energy.
When there is no longer a need for currency.
When all that one desires can be had without work or effort.









Then we'll have phasers instead.

 

[sandorski]

Not even close.

Incorrect.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Nope.

I mean, if we invent something better than guns (phasers or whatever) then we can all switch to that. Every individual must always maintain the right to defensive arms equivalent to the small arms that may be used against them. This will NEVER change.

 

[xj0hnx]

Incorrect.

No, it's absolutely correct, unless you live in your fantasy world.

 

[monovillage]

Incorrect.

http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/sunnews/politics/archives/2012/07/20120703-195254.html

Some provincial chief firearms officers (CFOs) were using a loophole to collect information on all rifle and shotgun owners when they bought their guns, despite the fact the Conservatives killed the federal long-gun registry.

Firearms advocates warned that since the registries were the property of the CFOs and thus the province, the info could instantly be turned into a long-gun registry for any province that was forcing store owners to keep the information on people who bought long guns.

The feds have now tweaked the firearms regulations, stopping the practice. "Our government made a commitment to Canadians to end the long-gun registry once and for all and that is what we did with the Ending the Long-gun Registry Act," Public Safety Minister Vic Toews said Tuesday. "These regulations will ensure that the will of Parliament is upheld and that a long-gun registry is not re-created through the back door."

The new regulation is now in effect.

Even your own government thinks it isn't time yet.

 

[sandorski]

No, it's absolutely correct, unless you live in your fantasy world.

Nope.

 

[trenchfoot]

Let's add to that amount.



So now the approximately 20,000 weapons qualified, not necessarily authorized to carry, agents are going to get another 37,500 rounds (for a total of 60,000) apiece???

Army Compartmented Elements (ACE) and Navy DEVGRU go through those kind of unit training ammo allocations and more, but I don't know of any other US government agency under DHS, other than maybe the Secret Service, that does. Certainly not ICE agents, nor Customs, nor Coast Guard, nor TSA.

I remember going to the range for qualification and after everyone cycled through (~180 troops) there'd be thousands of rounds left over. So in order to get the same quota at the next qualification some of us were asked to volunteer and load up the leftovers in 30 round magazines and "expend the excess" downrange. I'd fire off hundreds of rounds on full auto until white flakes would form and peel off the barrel of my 16. Cool down for 10 minutes and do it all over again. Everything downrange was demolished. Trees, bushes, target stands, unfortunate insects.....fun was had by all. I'd stitch the ground in front of me and continue downrange for lack of a target. And we didn't really care much about the weapons because they were all rejected gen1 16's sent back from 'Nam.

So if the policy is still the same (I hope it's not), then the numbers you mentioned doesn't seem unrealistic at all, considering how wasteful government policy can be.

 

[Jaskalas]

As long as you have rapists, murderers, torturers, child molesters and people like them, we'll need honest citizens to be armed.

But if you remove privacy... and those crimes are captured on the internet... BAM, justice guaranteed for all those crimes. Soon people will learn they absolutely cannot possibly get away with it.

Fewer are going to step up to the plate to get locked away.

 

[Bitek]

Will there ever be a time when we won't need guns?

If and only if we all have guns. Concealed, loaded and carried at all times. The the balance of power will be perfectly attuned, all thoughts of crime and violence will disappear as the calming influence of weaponry spreads across all humanity fostering a transcendence into a new reality of peace and harmony.

This new era could be ours but for the weak and cowardly not arming themselves, permitting the corrosive influence of greed to see opportunity and exploit it, casting all into a hellscape of gunfire, powderburns and exit wounds.

 

[davmat787]

South Korea. I lived there until late 90's and even the police did not carry guns. No one outside the military was allowed to carry guns. Streets were safe and no one worried about their kids getting hit on the street (except by their peers).

Weapon of choice by criminals: Usually kitchen knives, baseball bats, or simply physical force by outnumbering victims.

Even without the firearms, South Korea has a murder rate of 2.6 vs. the USA's rate of 4.2. Given the relative homogeneous population of South Korea vs. the US and the lack of firearms, I would have guessed the murder rate disparity to be higher.

Guess that just goes to show that guns don't kill people, rather people kill people.

Source for murder rates: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_rate

 

[zanejohnson]

the people who think society may break down, or that they may in fact cause society to break down if you take there dick errr..i mean gun away...

when they go away.. that's when, and by go away i mean, are bred out of existence because of such INFERIOR mindset...

 

[Agent11]

2nd ammendment /thread

 

[PJABBER]

I remember going to the range for qualification and after everyone cycled through (~180 troops) there'd be thousands of rounds left over. So in order to get the same quota at the next qualification some of us were asked to volunteer and load up the leftovers in 30 round magazines and "expend the excess" downrange. I'd fire off hundreds of rounds on full auto until white flakes would form and peel off the barrel of my 16. Cool down for 10 minutes and do it all over again. Everything downrange was demolished. Trees, bushes, target stands, unfortunate insects.....fun was had by all. I'd stitch the ground in front of me and continue downrange for lack of a target. And we didn't really care much about the weapons because they were all rejected gen1 16's sent back from 'Nam.

So if the policy is still the same (I hope it's not), then the numbers you mentioned doesn't seem unrealistic at all, considering how wasteful government policy can be.

I've been a range officer at the division level and did the same thing, so that we wouldn't have to inventory and move the leftover ammo stock back into supply. 5.56, 7.62, .50 cal., you name it, we shot it until the weapon barrels glowed red.

An innocent explanation might be that the entirety of DHS is moving off what is remaining of the 9mm M9/M11 platform with its 5,000 round expected service life (yes, Beretta now claims double that with new manufacturing) and they are stockpiling for a full transition to the H&K USP Compact LEM, P2000 and P2000SK, as well as the SIGs that they bought previously that are likely still good.

Still, that is an awful lot of ammo for non-military agencies.