Gun Control

[CrypticQuery]

I'm sorry for being a jerk to you TSA~ USER and everyone else here.  I'm most likely gonna step out of this thread so I don't get into trouble/banned.

I edited my past posts, sorry they sounded so inflammatory.

Julius, don't worry about it, it's just a friendly debate :P

["User"]

I'm sorry for being a jerk to you TSA~ USER and everyone else here.  I'm most likely gonna step out of this thread so I don't get into trouble/banned.

I edited my past posts, sorry they sounded so inflammatory.

It's alright I take no offense, it's just that I kind of trained myself to not rely strictly on heresy when engaged in an online debate.  I personally like to attempt to back up as many of my points of view with other sources (I try to use the more credible ones possible and not rely on things like The Onion ) And by no means do I want you to leave or worse yet get banned, you're an intelligent person and I know we can team up against other POV's in other Pub topics.

Controversial issues like this can get heated though, and cool heads eventually need to prevail. 

I found that in the end though, this debate gave me a rush.

Edit:  In retrospect, I seemed to have replied to a few of your posts BEFORE you later edited them with more content, I only realized this now after reviewing the entire thread. Btw, I AM hesitate at times with using Wikipedia as a primary source, but if what I'm linking to from the Wiki has, at the bottom of the page, a shit load of references from published books etc then it's pretty much almost guaranteed that the article is factually correct, any "stupid obvious" edits are very quickly noted and reverted back to it's previous state by other users.

[Robert Monroe]

Who forced you to get close to a cheetah, in the

middle of the Sahara, in the first place?

And as I explained later: Hunting for food is fine

as long as the species hunted is not endangered.

Cheetahs use their speed to hunt prey, is what I meant. Almost every animal runs faster than humans, so we gotta use our wiles and wit to beat them to the punch for food. Now, regulating hunting to a degree is important, because it maintains species diversity.

Biology: making politics easier since.... well, never, but it should really start doing that.

[Guest DRL]

Cheetahs use their speed to hunt prey, is what I meant. Almost every animal runs faster than humans, so we gotta use our wiles and wit to beat them to the punch for food. Now, regulating hunting to a degree is important, because it maintains species diversity.

Biology: making politics easier since.... well, never, but it should really start doing that.

It is okay, but again, there is no need

to specially face the cheetah. Wait untill

it is full, and then go hunt around, or

search for another place to hunt.

You know, unless you live in a county

as small as Luxenburg, I doubt there

will not be other places for food-hunting.

[Robert Monroe]

It is okay, but again, there is no need

to specially face the cheetah. Wait untill

it is full, and then go hunt around, or

search for another place to hunt.

You know, unless you live in a county

as small as Luxenburg, I doubt there

will not be other places for food-hunting.

I am not talking about HUNTING CHEETAHS. I am arguing that humans NEED weapons to hunt, PERIOD, because we lack the physical abilities of animals LIKE cheetahs.

[Guest DRL]

I am not talking about HUNTING CHEETAHS. I am arguing that humans NEED weapons to hunt, PERIOD, because we lack the physical abilities of animals LIKE cheetahs.

It is okay, I never denied that.

I said I would ban 'sport' hunting

allthogheter, leaving hunting for

those who do it for food.

[Robert Monroe]

It is okay, I never denied that.

I said I would ban 'sport' hunting

allthogheter, leaving hunting for

those who do it for food.

Sport hunting is eh for me. I feel man should be allowed to do what he wants, so long as he is responsible.

[Guest Julius Quasar]

Sport hunting is eh for me. I feel man should be allowed to do what he wants, so long as he is responsible.

Right.  We sure as hell don't want hunters going all "Ernest Hemingway" or "Teddy Roosevelt" on nature... 

Speaking of hunting, CA was dumb enough to ban .50 cal rifles (BMG rifles especially).  Why?  Because "they don't want gangs to use them"...criminals NEVER, in the history of Cali, used ANY .50 Caliber rifles.  They're too heavy, ammo is too heavy and expensive, the recoil is too strong, and the .50 caliber hunting rifles are barely any good for hunting.  Just like our crummy state to try to fix a problem that don't exist. :roll:

[Guest DRL]

Right.  We sure as hell don't want hunters going all "Ernest Hemingway" or "Teddy Roosevelt" on nature... 

Well, in my country, hunters do not even

make a 0,1% of the population. Bannig it

will be as easy as like 'nobody cares'... .

[Guest Julius Quasar]

Vermont and Alaska are the only 2 states in America where you can carry concealed without a CCW permit. 

I wouldn't wanna live in Alaska, but Vermont sounds nice.

[Robert Monroe]

Well, in my country, hunters do not even

make a 0,1% of the population. Bannig it

will be as easy as like 'nobody cares'... .

In America, it's a big deal. So yeah.

Vermont and Alaska are the only 2 states in America where you can carry concealed without a CCW permit. 

I wouldn't wanna live in Alaska, but Vermont sounds nice.

There is nothing wrong with concealed carry permits. I never did understand all the resistence many pro-gun people have towards such things. If you're a law abiding citizen (the same ones who supposedly will be victimized by gun bans), then what are you worrying about?

[Vy'drach]

Right.  We sure as hell don't want hunters going all "Ernest Hemingway" or "Teddy Roosevelt" on nature... 

Speaking of hunting, CA was dumb enough to ban .50 cal rifles (BMG rifles especially).  Why?  Because "they don't want gangs to use them"...criminals NEVER, in the history of Cali, used ANY .50 Caliber rifles.  They're too heavy, ammo is too heavy and expensive, the recoil is too strong, and the .50 caliber hunting rifles are barely any good for hunting.  Just like our crummy state to try to fix a problem that don't exist.

Actually, it was banned more for the safety of law enforcement and private individuals from some "gun nuts" that actually do go nuts. Someone shoots something up with an M82A1 or A2, and you can have serious casualties, as no body armour has ever been known to stop a .50 BMG round, and it is capable of punching through a few walls. What I find funny, however, is the Russian 12.7x108mm is probably legal here, given it's rarity in America. To put that round in perspective, the .50 BMG's measurements are 12.7x99mm. Would love to have a Serbian Zastava M93 Black Arrow rifle (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zastava_M93_Black_Arrow).

There is nothing wrong with concealed carry permits. I never did understand all the resistence many pro-gun people have towards such things. If you're a law abiding citizen (the same ones who supposedly will be victimized by gun bans), then what are you worrying about?

The problem is more that they very rarely give the concealed carry permit, even if you meet the requirements. My Vietnam vet ex-Green Beret Special Forces grandfather got his wife a CCW permit in Kentucky (though it's good in almost all southern states), one of the most relaxed states about gun laws, and it was still a pain in the ass. Keep in mind that my grandfather could of been chief of the Louisville police if he wanted to, but it would of required him to move out of the house he built himself, so he passed.

Personally, I think that as long as you meet the requirements, and pass a psych test to ensure that you'd only use a firearm to defend yourself or others from mortal danger, it should be all but guaranteed to get one.

I do love that, last I heard, if a gun is over a certain length (I forget the inches), it can not legally be considered concealed, no matter what you do with it or where you put it.

[Guest Julius Quasar]

There is nothing wrong with concealed carry permits. I never did understand all the resistence many pro-gun people have towards such things. If you're a law abiding citizen (the same ones who supposedly will be victimized by gun bans), then what are you worrying about?

I never said there was anything wrong with CCW Permits. 

It was just a random fact I was doling out.  I'm in favor of CCW permits, as long as they're not hideously overpriced, "Restrictive May Issue" status, impossible to obtain due to any asinine regulations (psychological tests that aren't accurate, "liability insurance", etc.), or the general public and the stupid press isn't allowed to access the database of permit holders.

[Asper Sarnoff]

I didn't read trough all of what's posted above, so I might allready be threading on ground that has allready been walked upon.

First of all, I'm going to dub the situation the US is in with regards to guns a "problem".( ) Yes, I can see the appeal to guns. Target-shooting is good fun, and can make for a good, social sport under right circumstances. But, if one had the choice of lettings guns be easy and legally available, both to the good and the bad guys, with the complications that leads to, or that none at all had access to weapons, save for the military, law-enforcement and the odd hunter, wouldn't one rather have the later option? I certainly would be willing to pay the price of not being able to do recreational shooting considering the amount of people killed with firearms in the US every year. Would you?

To find the source of this problem, one will need a quick lesson in history.

Back in good 'ol days, the days when the west was wild, a man needed a gun to be able to protect his home and his family. Lawless out for a fistfull of dollars, or natives pissed off because the white man had taken their land made guns a necesity. The arm of the law wasn't long and strong enough to provide sufficent protection, so the ordinary guy in the street had to be able to defend himself.

As the wild west gradually was tamed and become safer, there were countless guns in circulation. They weren't really needed anymore, not for most people. The sensible thing would at first glance be to ban guns, to ensure a safer community for everyone. But, who would that stop? Only the lawfull ones. Those out to deal out some hurtin' could pick up a weapon anywhere they wanted. Just a ban of guns would make the US into a haven for criminals, and people would have to live in fear trough their entire life. Collection and destruction of all guns? Hehe, wouldn't work. Way too expensive, and to many firearms would slip trough the net for it to have any effect on restricting the bad guys access to guns.

Thus, the people of the US is trapped into an arms race of which no easy way out is clear. Never, have I been afraid of getting shot, robbed, or had anything else horrid happening to me when walking city streets alone long after sunset. I doubt anyone here would say no to being in that position.

[CrypticQuery]

I didn't read trough all of what's posted above, so I might allready be threading on ground that has allready been walked upon.

First of all, I'm going to dub the situation the US is in with regards to guns a "problem".( ) Yes, I can see the appeal to guns. Target-shooting is good fun, and can make for a good, social sport under right circumstances. But, if one had the choice of lettings guns be easy and legally available, both to the good and the bad guys, with the complications that leads to, or that none at all had access to weapons, save for the military, law-enforcement and the odd hunter, wouldn't one rather have the later option? I certainly would be willing to pay the price of not being able to do recreational shooting considering the amount of people killed with firearms in the US every year. Would you?

A good example of why firearms shouldn't be limited to military and police is the LA Riots.  When the police retreated, civilians were left to fend for themselves. 

Thus, the people of the US is trapped into an arms race of which no easy way out is clear. Never, have I been afraid of getting shot, robbed, or had anything else horrid happening to me when walking city streets alone long after sunset. I doubt anyone here would say no to being in that position.

It depends what city streets you are walking long after sunset , many, MANY places shouldn't be visited alone or unarmed after dark

["User"]

It depends what city streets you are walking long after sunset , many, MANY places shouldn't be visited alone or unarmed after dark

Like Detroit.  I hate driving in that city at night.  Other areas in Chicago like Norridge I found are pretty ghetto at night as well. 

[CrypticQuery]

Like Detroit.  I hate driving in that city at night.  Other areas in Chicago like Norridge I found are pretty ghetto at night as well.

Hell yeah!

Mostly heavily populated urban areas

[Vy'drach]

Or Compton, but hell, most every city has areas you don't want to be in at night.

But where I used to live, there were areas you didn't want to be in, period. I lived in a nice little family friendly neighborhood, but a few blocks away there were murders that happened consistently, mostly by and on the people from the High School I was going to go to, and that my sister DID go to. One year, there were six murders on the school grounds, during school hours. Also, none were firearm related, the worst one probably being when a guy who was accepted into the Navy tried to break-up a fight between some Mexicans and Armenians, and some more Armenians rolled-up in a car, saw this, and got out. Five people held him down while a girl beat him to death with a tire iron.

That's another reason why we have guns in this house, because that's the kind of people we live near.

[Asper Sarnoff]

Or Compton, but hell, most every American city has areas you don't want to be in at night.

Fixed that for you. I have been walking around areas designated as "shady" in two of the largest cities in the country at nighttime, and neither have I experienced, or heard of, anyone being afraid of having guns pointed at them.

I suspect it's also partially mental as well. To simplify a little, most of the population here can be split into two camps in regards to using firearms against another human being, for defence or shadier purposes. We have those who believe firearms are crude and stupid, below their intellect, and there's no problem they can solve better than a clear mind, and then we have the other half who looks down at guns because they're a cowards weapon, and who prefer to settle things up close, personal, and unarmed.

[Vy'drach]

Walking around Compton and such, the fear isn't about being shot (though that is a high possability, as well.) It's a fear of getting mugged, raped, stabbed, beaten, bludgeoned, etc etc.

They're just places you don't want to be, period.

Having guns are there in-case anyone from areas like that decides to make house-calls (which happens often enough).

[Guest Julius Quasar]

I didn't read trough all of what's posted above, so I might allready be threading on ground that has allready been walked upon.

First of all, I'm going to dub the situation the US is in with regards to guns a "problem".( ) Yes, I can see the appeal to guns. Target-shooting is good fun, and can make for a good, social sport under right circumstances. But, if one had the choice of lettings guns be easy and legally available, both to the good and the bad guys, with the complications that leads to, or that none at all had access to weapons, save for the military, law-enforcement and the odd hunter, wouldn't one rather have the later option? I certainly would be willing to pay the price of not being able to do recreational shooting considering the amount of people killed with firearms in the US every year. Would you?

To find the source of this problem, one will need a quick lesson in history.

Back in good 'ol days, the days when the west was wild, a man needed a gun to be able to protect his home and his family. Lawless out for a fistfull of dollars, or natives pissed off because the white man had taken their land made guns a necessity. The arm of the law wasn't long and strong enough to provide sufficient protection, so the ordinary guy in the street had to be able to defend himself.

As the wild west gradually was tamed and become safer, there were countless guns in circulation. They weren't really needed anymore, not for most people. The sensible thing would at first glance be to ban guns, to ensure a safer community for everyone. But, who would that stop? Only the lawfull ones. Those out to deal out some hurtin' could pick up a weapon anywhere they wanted. Just a ban of guns would make the US into a haven for criminals, and people would have to live in fear trough their entire life. Collection and destruction of all guns? Hehe, wouldn't work. Way too expensive, and to many firearms would slip trough the net for it to have any effect on restricting the bad guys access to guns.

Thus, the people of the US is trapped into an arms race of which no easy way out is clear. Never, have I been afraid of getting shot, robbed, or had anything else horrid happening to me when walking city streets alone long after sunset. I doubt anyone here would say no to being in that position.

Agreed!

A good example of why firearms shouldn't be limited to military and police is the LA Riots.  When the police retreated, civilians were left to fend for themselves. 

It depends what city streets you are walking long after sunset , many, MANY places shouldn't be visited alone or unarmed after dark

^ Win

Like Detroit.  I hate driving in that city at night.  Other areas in Chicago like Norridge I found are pretty ghetto at night as well. 

Totally.  Chicago's the worst.   So dangerous.

Or Compton, but hell, most every city has areas you don't want to be in at night.

But where I used to live, there were areas you didn't want to be in, period. I lived in a nice little family friendly neighborhood, but a few blocks away there were murders that happened consistently, mostly by and on the people from the High School I was going to go to, and that my sister DID go to. One year, there were six murders on the school grounds, during school hours. Also, none were firearm related, the worst one probably being when a guy who was accepted into the Navy tried to break-up a fight between some Mexicans and Armenians, and some more Armenians rolled-up in a car, saw this, and got out. Five people held him down while a girl beat him to death with a tire iron.

That's another reason why we have guns in this house, because that's the kind of people we live near.

I agree.  Stupid California has dwindled into a 3rd World Hellhole. *Minaret squawks outside my window*

I suspect it's also partially mental as well. To simplify a little, most of the population here can be split into two camps in regards to using firearms against another human being, for defence or shadier purposes. We have those who believe firearms are crude and stupid, below their intellect, and there's no problem they can solve better than a clear mind, and then we have the other half who looks down at guns because they're a cowards weapon, and who prefer to settle things up close, personal, and unarmed.

...meh

Walking around Compton and such, the fear isn't about being shot (though that is a high possability, as well.) It's a fear of getting mugged, raped, stabbed, beaten, bludgeoned, etc etc.

They're just places you don't want to be, period.

Having guns are there in-case anyone from areas like that decides to make house-calls (which happens often enough).

^ Again, win!

["User"]

Fixed that for you. I have been walking around areas designated as "shady" in two of the largest cities in the country at nighttime, and neither have I experienced, or heard of, anyone being afraid of having guns pointed at them.

That's because you live in a socialist country compared to anywhere in North America.

Canada isn't as socialist as other European countries but I feel much the same way when I walk the streets at night in Toronto...there just isn't a sense of danger. 

[Guest Julius Quasar]

Lots of gun control laws were passed [in America] out of racist motivation.  In 1919, the State of North Carolina mandated a $5 permit to purchase pistols, "issued at the Sheriffs' discretion", all so they could prevent African Americans from owning handguns.

The New York City "Sullivan Laws" were passed in 1910/1911, to prevent all Italian, Irish, Chinese, and other immigrants from owning/carrying guns for self defense.

[Robert Monroe]

Fixed that for you. I have been walking around areas designated as "shady" in two of the largest cities in the country at nighttime, and neither have I experienced, or heard of, anyone being afraid of having guns pointed at them.

I suspect it's also partially mental as well. To simplify a little, most of the population here can be split into two camps in regards to using firearms against another human being, for defence or shadier purposes. We have those who believe firearms are crude and stupid, below their intellect, and there's no problem they can solve better than a clear mind, and then we have the other half who looks down at guns because they're a cowards weapon, and who prefer to settle things up close, personal, and unarmed.

People who regard guns as "lower" than them are imbeciles who don't realize its just a tool. Is a man any less of a man because he has to use a hammer for a nail? Admittedly, I would admire anyone who could hammer nails with their bare hands, but I also admire someone with the balls and charm to talk himself out of a gunpoint situation too.

For the rest of us who lack these natural and rare abilities, we have tools to help us. They are not "crude", or "below" anyone's intelligence. They help solve problems we otherwise may not overcome, and like any other tool need to be handled with responsibility.

[Guest Julius Quasar]

People who regard guns as "lower" than them are imbeciles who don't realize its just a tool. Is a man any less of a man because he has to use a hammer for a nail? Admittedly, I would admire anyone who could hammer nails with their bare hands, but I also admire someone with the balls and charm to talk himself out of a gunpoint situation too.

For the rest of us who lack these natural and rare abilities, we have tools to help us. They are not "crude", or "below" anyone's intelligence. They help solve problems we otherwise may not overcome, and like any other tool need to be handled with responsibility.

^ YES!!!  WIN!