Discuss. General Tavern rules apply. (No mudslinging, be respectful, etc.) I'll open with the statement that people should not have guns. No one at all, except the armed forces, and even then, keep the guns on the bases. Cops should carry riot shields and armor instead of guns. If they need crowd control, use Water Cannons. Supporting evidence: the following skit: What's your reason? Setting: A gun shop, modern day. A Customer walks into the gun shop and asks the Shopkeeper, "Hi, i'd like to buy a gun please." The Shopkeeper pulls out an application form and asks the customer "Alright, what's your reason for wanting to buy a gun?" The Customer says "I need one for personal protection." The Shopkeeper nods. "I have just the thing for you, I guarantee you cannot get any more personal protection than this baby right here. What i'm about to show you offers so much protection, it can stop a shotgun shell." The customer, very interested, stares at a full-size Riot Shield, the kind the police use. He scoffs. "That's not what I want, I want a gun!" The Shopkeeper shrugs. "Are you sure? This fine piece of equipment will protect you more than a gun ever will! It's very strong, reinforced titanium and kevlar..." by now, the angry Customer has left. Later, another Customer enters. "Hi, I need a gun." Again, the Shopkeeper clicks his pen and pulls out an application form. "For what reason?" he asks. The Customer hesitates, than says "Hunting." The shopkeeper smiles. "Of course! I love to hunt. Hunting is a wonderful sport. I guarantee that this item will give you the maximum amount of satisfaction you can ever get from hunting! Here, this is the sport at its peak." And he pulls out a Crossbow, complete with crosshairs for better accuracy. The customer shakes his head. "No, I want a gun." he states. The shopkeeper reluctantly puts away the Crossbow. "Are you sure? With a gun, it's so...boring, just pulling a trigger. And it's unfair to the animal, with this you give the deer a chance and have to chase it for up to an hour, just like the Native Americans did back in the day! Unless of course..." He fails to finish his sentence, as the pissed off customer has left in a huff. Later, a third customer walks in. "Hi, I'd like to buy a gun." he says. The shopkeeper holds his pen at the ready. "For what reason, sir?" he asks. The customer glares. "I dont need a reason, read the god **** second amendment "THE RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS." It's in the constitution you idiot! The shopkeeper merely smiles. "Of course, I have the perfect thing for you. This gun is covered under Second Amendment laws, guaranteed!" And he holds up a 200-year-old, civil-war-era musket, complete with rusty bayonet. The customer shrieks. "No, man! I want a Glock, a shotgun, something better than that civil war crap!" The shopkeeper merely smiles. "I'm sorry sir, please come back when they update the second amendment to include those types of guns. Here, i'll even give you a discount..." the shopkeeper holds out a discount to the enraged customer, who tears it in half and leaves. Fourthly, another Customer walks in. "I really need a gun, now." He says. The Shopkeeper holds his pen and application form ready. "For what reason, sir?" he asks. Instead of stating his reason this time, the Customer snatches the application form and looks at it. There, in the spot titled "Reasons" is a circle for "other". "Other! That's my reason!" the Customer declares triumphantly. The shopkeeper shrugs. "Very good answer sir." he says, while pressing a button under the counter. Two cops arrive at the shop in less than a minute and cuff the Customer. "Hey! What the *PROFANITY* ARE YOU *PROFANITY* GUYS DOING? I'VE DONE NOTHING WRONG!" He yells, almost breaking the glass of the windows. "Actually, you have." The Shopkeeper begins. "the "other" reason, by exclusion of the other reason, can only include wanting to kill or rob someone. Therefore, you were thinking about commiting a crime when you selected "Other" as your reason. Caught you red-handed, trying to buy the tools necessary to commiting a crime. You confessed to it when you selected "Other"! Take him downtown, please." The cops nod and take the Customer away. The last thing he hears from the Shopkeeper is "Oh, and I knew it was you all those times!"
Moral of the story: You do NOT need a gun for a particular activity. In any given activity (And I challenge you to give me a valid, legal activity for which you would need to personally own a gun), there are many other options. Why buy a gun for personal protection when a Riot Shield blocks shotgun shells? Why buy a gun for hunting when the point of hunting (and every other sport) is satisfaction, and since you get more satisfaction with more challenge, and since a crossbow offers more challenge than a gun, you'll get more satisfaction with the crossbow. Why buy a gun based on the Second Amendment when the Colonial-age guns were either giant cannons or black-powder, muzzle-loading Muskets? Did the Founding Fathers have AR-15's, and SPAZ-12 shotguns,And AK 47s, not to mention all the accessories like laser scopes and hollow-point bullets? I dont think so!
The only way you can disprove my argument is to give me a valid, LEGAL activity which requires you to personally own a gun. This excludes Skeet-shooting, because the facility can and should/will provide the gun. Until anyone can do that, YOU DONT NEED A GUN, NO ONE NEEDS GUNS! They're WAY too dangerous and make it too easy to kill someone! Why have something you dont need?
Said the man who help founded this great nation. Said the man who lead troops in a time of rebellion. Said the man who was ten fold more educated than today's youth.
Said the man who declared unalienable rights for ALL men yet owned slaves. Said the man under pressure due to the threat of British power. Said the man hoping to arm his country to defend, not to kill each other.
People who are for extreme gun control are just uneducated. Its as simple as that.
People who do not believe in any gun control are also uneducated. Such people must not understand that guns cause far more violence than they prevent. Furthermore, being unwilling to allow minor restrictions upon fire-arms is not only ignorant, but irresponsible. Neither extreme is acceptable.
Stalin, Hitler, and Mao disarmed their countries. Millions were killed thereafter. Believe REALLY need to read about Mao. That guy was a MONSTER.
Your lack of historical context is insulting.
History repeats itself. And anyone who thinks that it cannot happen to this country is a **** fool.
Not completely true. And those who share your paranoia are equally foolish.
I will not disarm. I will not register.
What is the laws say otherwise?
What is wrong with moderate gun control? You speak in one extreme or the other. You do not consider the other possibilities. By limiting guns, by doing adequate background checks, and restricting the more dangerous weapons American society has the potential to become safer without intruding upon the second amendment.
So I ask you all, those of you who are against gun control; why do you only see the extremes? Why is it an all or nothing gambit, when the reality lies elsewhere. Furthermore, why are you so paranoid?
That article, while from a comedy website, adresses several key points about American society as a whole. I think it provides a viable argument both for and against the extremes which we have witnessed people arguing on AG. The key is not to go one way or the other, as I have said before, but it is to find a compromise. Furthermore, the author of that article touches on many issues with American society at large, which as a Canadian, I would be unable to address without the use of stereotype and bias.
Said the man who declared unalienable rights for ALL men yet owned slaves.
Jefferson wrote it, not Washington.
Said the man hoping to arm his country to defend, not to kill each other.
The internal wounds are always the strongest, why do you think the one punishment for treason, universally, is death?
People who do not believe in any gun control are also uneducated.
I'm pretty educated, and I'm not a fan of gun control.
Such people must not understand that guns cause far more violence than they prevent.
Can I get a graph? Some stats? Historical reference with sources?
Furthermore, being unwilling to allow minor restrictions upon fire-arms is not only ignorant, but irresponsible.
It's YOUR property, the government shouldn't have tabs on a purchase you make in the legal field of the marketplace.
Not completely true. And those who share your paranoia are equally foolish.
It's not paranoia, well, at least not as extreme. I'd say moreso "extreme caution". Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. There's two amendments to the constitution that protect our free speech, the first that is enforced during peace, and the second, in case some sword that breaks the pen begins to encroach on the minds and livelihoods of the American people.
By limiting guns, by doing adequate background checks, and restricting the more dangerous weapons American society has the potential to become safer without intruding upon the second amendment.
The state has nothing to do with my personal life. They're there to collect meagre taxes and defend me when someone tries to scuffle America's shoes. It's my purchase, and my property. Making America "safer" is a re-wording of the concept of a "conforming" society, one that does as its told without question. Well, I do have a question, and a lot of old guys are in congress. Sometimes the old timers can't hear so well, can't register my questions. Well, there's not much louder than a gunshot.
Mind you, I don't own any firearms, but I understand how integral they are to some people's interests, what makes them who they are. That's why /k/ exists. If someone took away, or limited, my ponies, I'd be pretty upset too.
I take back all my previous points on gun control. If the government can start to encroach on rights to things like guns then they'll start to encroach on other rights. I may not be a huge fan of guns in the US but it's better than trading away freedoms and rights in the name of 'safety'.
Guns can be confiscated during any 'emergency'. example.
20 people a year are killed by horses.
In the US. My stats were for worldwide, thus the number gap.
President Obama passed 23 executive edicts today, all limiting gun rights. Ladies and gentlemen, our rights are under fire. (no pun intended.)
What are you going to do about it? Have him assassinated and become a traitor? I can see many gun lovers thinking that and if they act upon it then they reveal who they really are... nothing but traitors.
You really like that Strawman thing don't you? How about changing your name for it? The extremist gun lovers will go that far and I'm worry some retards would consider it. I just hope they'll get caught before they act. I hate those sick ****!
BTW, I thought it was established that there are gun owners and gun lovers. The first ones being afraid of everything and paranoid about monsters and heavily armed robbers and aliens attacking their homes and the second ones being retards who worshiped their assault rifles and having orgasm while destroying targets and feeling like Gods while taking lives of vegetables and paper people. Knowing this then what's the big deal about making sure the ATF can do it's job without being interfered by some NRA terrorist?
Your conduct betrays your intentions, SSTG. What's with the stereotypical lumping of gun users those who do not use them? Have you read the previous 55 pages and some of the arguments that gun users have used that are logical?
