Gun Control

[ultraviolet]

No, dammit, it looks like that huh? Those places where gun laws are weak traffic to other areas illegally. Gunrunning.

I'm not really sure what you're trying to say here. Those places have lax gun laws (and also gunrunning) because they're third-world or wartorn countries. The government in those countries are corrupt! Somalia in particular hasn't had central governmental control since the early nineties or something; it's also one of the poorest (and consequentially, most violent) places in the world. The US is quite decisively not that poor or violent!

Look in the end there is no way to stop gun violence. People will find ways to find guns, even in places like the UK that seem to brag about their strict gun laws. They aren't going away and stricter laws aren't going to stop it.

No? In Australia, we have stricter gun laws than the UK, and something like 5% of people own guns here.

For each firearm a "Genuine Reason" must be given, relating to pest control, hunting, target shooting, or collecting. Self-defense is not accepted as a reason for issuing a licence, even though it may be legal under certain circumstances to use a legally held firearm for self-defense.[2]

I've seen guns twice in my life, and I've seen one used once - both times were on a farm, because they own sheep. To be honest, I'm not even sure if police officers carry firearms. I've heard they do, but I've never seen a police officer with a gun.

How can you say that gun violence is always going to happen even if strict laws are in place when it ...doesn't? Sure, people are always going to find ways to do things illegally, but this doesn't mean that making things illegal has no merit. Should we unban illegal drugs, if people are going to find them anyway?

There's actual evidence that less guns = less gun crime, so I'm not sure why you keep saying otherwise. o.o

Between 1991 and 2001, the number of firearm-related deaths in Australia declined 47%.[23]

 

[Aletheia]

To be honest, I'm not even sure if police officers carry firearms. I've heard they do, but I've never seen a police officer with a gun.

The last time I saw one without a gun was... well, I can't remember :p
(then again I live in Colorado, where almost everyone owns a gun)

And the argument isn't that people are going to find drugs anyway, it's that people who sell drugs illegally are making a crapton of money due to the illegality of said drugs.

If drugs were legalized, it would make them much easier to obtain/sell, eradicating drug-based organized crime.

 

[Crazy Linoone]

If drugs were legalized, it would make them much easier to obtain/sell, eradicating drug-based organized crime.

It would, however, create a lot more crime cause by drug abuse, etc. etc.

It's all about picking your poison, really. Do you want innocent people to die from gun misfires/retarded people doing stupid things, or do you want a blackmarket where the mass majority of innocents are not involved?

 

[opaltiger]

It would, however, create a lot more crime cause by drug abuse, etc. etc.

I have to call you out on this. Portugal de-criminalised all drugs about ten years ago and the rates of drug abuse have only gone down.

 

[Saith]

Look, when it comes down to it, without guns, the King of England could just march into your home and tell you to join Britain.

Do you want that, Linoone?

Do you?!

 

[Music Dragon]

guns don't kill people, people kill people.

See, it's the "kill people" part I have a problem with.

 

[Hiikaru]

Look, when it comes down to it, without guns, the King of England could just march into your home and tell you to join Britain.

Do you want that, Linoone?

Do you?!

Let's say you have a gun, and the King of England starts existing and marches into your home and tells you to join Britain.

...What do you think you're going to do? Shoot the King of England? And his guards? I'm pretty sure they'd wear like, bullet-proof vests or something. Plus, you know, there's way more of them than there are of you? There's one of you. I'm pretty sure there's one of you, anyway. Or even if there's like, two of you, I'm pretty sure the King of England is still going to win that fight. Or actually even if there's a whole bunch of you, he's probably still going to win, because you're just some dudes with a gun and he's a king with a bunch of trained guards wearing bullet-proof vests.

How did him and his guards even get to your house, anyway? Don't we have like, an army, and police, and a bunch of precautions in place so that some random people can't just march into your house carrying guns?

I don't understand what you're trying to say.

 

[Crazy Linoone]

I have to call you out on this. Portugal de-criminalised all drugs about ten years ago and the rates of drug abuse have only gone down.

Whoops. I withdraw my comment, then. It's not really related to this debate, at any rate.

Look, when it comes down to it, without guns, the King of England could just march into your home and tell you to join Britain.

Do you want that, Linoone?

Do you?!

...So you're telling me to shoot the King of England instead of, say, calling the police or perhaps just refusing him politely.

And even with guns, can't he still march into my home?

I'm not sure what your point is...

 

[ultraviolet]

And the argument isn't that people are going to find drugs anyway, it's that people who sell drugs illegally are making a crapton of money due to the illegality of said drugs.

If drugs were legalized, it would make them much easier to obtain/sell, eradicating drug-based organized crime.

fair point, perhaps my analogy wasn't really accurate; what I meant to say that just because people would probably own guns illegally anyway if gun restrictions were tightened, doesn't mean that adding restrictions has no merit. Adding restrictions would deter people from owning guns illegally, just like making pretty much anything else illegal deters people from doing it.http://forums.dragonflycave.com/editpost.php?do=editpost&p=484987

 

[Vladimir Putin's LJ]

There isn't even a King of England at all if we're going to pick apart a facetious comment.

 

[Saith]

I- I was totally quoting The Simpsons. :<

On the gun issue, I don't actually have an opinion, because it'll never change. So it doesn't matter to me. And I really wouldn't mind either way. If I can buy a gun, cool beans. If not, then I probably won't get shot. Cooler beans.

 

[shy ♡]

I really don't get the 'it'll never change' attitude. Really? Do you really think that? Have we really never changed anything at all? I mean, the US has had some progress. We're not still putting black people in the back of the bus.

Saying 'it'll never change' is an excuse to not take action towards changing it.

 

[Saith]

It'll never change because the majority of Brits don't want guns.
The majority of Brits don't need guns.
The majority of Brits have never touched a gun, and don't really give a damn about them more than to say 'Americans have guns and we don't. We're clever.'
So yeah, it'll never change. : 3

 

[Crazy Linoone]

It'll never change because the majority of Brits don't want guns.
The majority of Brits don't need guns.
The majority of Brits have never touched a gun, and don't really give a damn about them more than to say 'Americans have guns and we don't. We're clever.'
So yeah, it'll never change. : 3

...I don't understand your logic.

 

[Karkat Vantas]

If drugs were legalized, it would make them much easier to obtain/sell, eradicating drug-based organized crime.

Drugs are nothing like guns. If you piss off a guy who had just had some LSD, you probably wouldn't die. If you piss off a guy with a gun, you probably would.

Narcotics are nothing like weapons and therefore you can't make this argument.

 

[Butterfree]

Eh, I don't think American gun laws will change, really - largely because guns are currently such a big part of American culture that it seems impractical to outlaw them as if you can just make all the millions of guns already in the country simply vanish in a puff of smoke. :/ Doesn't mean I agree with the current laws, just that I don't really think the change can happen in practice.

 

[shy ♡]

Eh, I don't think American gun laws will change, really - largely because guns are currently such a big part of American culture that it seems impractical to outlaw them as if you can just make all the millions of guns already in the country simply vanish in a puff of smoke. :/ Doesn't mean I agree with the current laws, just that I don't really think the change can happen in practice.

Outlawing guns =/= pretending guns don't exist. You can make it illegal to buy more guns. You can make it illegal to buy ammo. Just making it more difficult to get a license would be nice.

The reason this attitude irks me so much is because you can have this same attitude about anything. I don't think people will change their minds about gays, so eh, why bother! Eh, no. If people won't change their minds, don't ask them. Change kids minds instead.

 

[Butterfree]

Outlawing guns =/= pretending guns don't exist. You can make it illegal to buy more guns. You can make it illegal to buy ammo. Just making it more difficult to get a license would be nice.

The reason this attitude irks me so much is because you can have this same attitude about anything. I don't think people will change their minds about gays, so eh, why bother! Eh, no. If people won't change their minds, don't ask them. Change kids minds instead.

I'm not saying "people won't change their minds, so why bother" or anything remotely like it; I'm saying "outlawing guns when there are already guns all over the place will just leave a hell of a lot of illegal guns lying around and trying to somehow access and destroy them all is an impractical endeavor because these are physical objects and people's legal property and anybody whose gun you take will want to be compensated etc. etc. etc." There is absolutely no parallel between this and attitudes towards homosexuality.

 

[Phantom]

Butterfree managed to say what I wanted to say better and in less posts. *bows*

 

[Aobaru]

Okay a lot of arguments going around here. Let me summarize:

Do you believe if guns were banned, the same number of people would be killed every year, only the cause of death would change?

I can't say either way because I'm not omniscient. There are too many variables. The number of murders from illegal guns would most likely not be affected considering if someone is murdering someone with an illegal gun they aren't going to pay attention to a gun ban.

Are you implying that you have the right to shoot anyone who threatens you or your property?

Are you telling me that, hypothetically, if you had a gun on you and someone came at you with a knife you wouldn't shoot them? I mean, to answer your question, when it's a choice between their life and mine, I would definitely choose theirs. But it's always as a last resort.

Easy access to guns results in people killing each other where they wouldn't have otherwise.

See, it's the "kill people" part I have a problem with.

You seem to think that if someone kills someone using a gun, that person would have killed them even if they didn't have a gun.

My point is people will always kill people. It's an undeniable fact. Even if guns had never existed, people would kill people. People killed people long before guns were invented. In the future, a better weapon than a gun will probably be invented, and people will again kill other people with it.

I get that guns make it easier to kill than most weapons, but I think complete gun bans are completely impractical, especially in places of high gun ownership. I have no problem with moderate gun control.