Guns - good or evil?

January 7, 2012

Two things. One, I fail to see how firing three rounds in rapid succession, which, as I said, is an international distress signal, is not typical use for a gun, considering only a firearm can blah blah blah.

You totally and completely missed the point. Using a gun AS A CRUTCH is not a typical use for one.

Two, I find it odd you have no issues with hunters when they are only private owners of firearms (or bows and crossbows) that use them to kill animals. Only difference between a hunter and someone like myself is that I shoot at paper, metal, and clay targets, not flesh and blood.

I'll make this short because hunting is another debate entirely, but I do not have any problem whatsoever with people who hunt for food because that is a case in which the gun is actually being used as a tool, to obtain something that is vital in some way. Getting food is more important than shooting at paper or metal or whatever. That being said, I'm okay with shooting ranges existing as far as safety precaution is taken, and perhaps, it is the only place where the weapons are even available; what I am AGAINST is people being able to own weapons that they don't necessarily need, without proper training, and without proper personal evaluation.

Was it so hard to figure out that I said the .22 was the training process, not something used as punishment when the training process failed? It was quite effective because, as I said, after a short while that dog would not cross the road unaccompanied, no way, no how.

There are better ways to train a dog than shooting it, man.

As far as the bees/trees thing goes, until it's a recommended method of accomplishing these tasks from people who are experts in the field, I am quite honestly going to dismiss it as the antics of wacky hillbillies. You might have a point that poison can be more harmful, but there's also the part where you consider application of the poison. Beehives aren't hard to take out with poison because they're stationary; you don't have to poison the entire area, like you would with ants or cockroaches.

Not sure if you're counting the rock climbing thing in this, but the only danger is the same danger you have with any rock/mountain climbing equipment, and that's it doesn't secure well enough. Well, there is also the chance some idiot could shoot himself in the foot with the thing, but that's someone being a dumbass. And let me rephrase what I said earlier, it's actually usually recommended to have a firearm when going into any wilderness away from civilization, not just woods and forests, as wildlife can be dangerous, signaling aid, acquiring food if necessary, and with the mountain/rock climbing, it can allow the crossing of ravines and what not.

Okay, you know, considering your entire post is basically comprised of anecdotes, I'm going to use one myself.

I took this photo.

To be more specific, I took it off the back porch of my parents house when I went to visit them at Christmas. This is where I lived for eleven years. I don't know about you, but it kind of looks like "the wilderness" to me. Especially considering the part where it's on the outskirts of one of the larger parks in North America and everything.

Not once was it ever, ever "recommended" to have a firearm on you when traversing this area, and being in Canada, the only people in town who even had weapons were police officers and a handful of hunters. The number of those armed is dwarfed by the number of hikers, skiiers, climbers, cyclists, and "people who walk to work" who reside here and regularily take a stroll through the vast wide open. Yes, bears wander into town all the time. So do moose, and cougars. There are wolves and coyotes in the area (the latter of which I've strolled side-by-side with on the way to school), as well as deer and elk who become belligerent around mating season. You know how this is dealt with? Education and common sense. Make noise when you go hiking, do not go alone. Report wildlife sightings to officials. Carry bear spray, and know how to react when encountering a bear (surprise: the answer isn't always "shoot its face off").

And not once have I ever heard of the massive outdoors and climbing community using guns to help them climb. It is dangerous to do so, particularily considering many of these peaks have snow throughout the year and shooting a mountain can quite easily trigger an avalanche and kill you.

And yes, the fishing method is technically illegal, hence why I said it's done in desperation by people with no money (some people do it just for the schadenfreude, but that falls under being a dumbass).

Which brings us full circle as to why I'm for firearm regulations; guns themselves are not stupid, but as a general rule, people tend to be. Also, it's probably illegal for a reason. Oh, yes, the poor people were desperate for food and it's their only choice etc. poor people mug others and rob convience stores all the time. So I don't see how that justifies it.

And while it is typically uses by military/police, it isn't exclusive to them as the shot can be purchased by civilians, and while highly unlikely, the need for it can arise.

Once again, the whole "well the miltary and police use it!" misses my point entirely, as does the "highly unlikely" need for civilian use. If you can't get your door open, I dunno, call a locksmith?

Not going to attempt to say you can use guns daily, because as I said before, short of a combat zone, there's no reason to use one daily.

Ladies and gentlemen: the point.

However, how many tools do you have at your house that aren't used daily? Hell, how many at your house that haven't been used, perioud? We have plenty of the latter here because they'd be pretty damned handy to have when the need arises.

You might not use your scissors or caulender or potato peeler daily, true. But they have a specific use. The specific use of a gun is killing things, and I doubt you do that a lot. I also doubt you use guns for anything else just as I doubt you'd use a potato peeler for measuring temperature.

And I have a question. I can understand the thought that a cop might be more knowledgeable about firearms, despite the majority we've met not knowing their asshole from an ejection port, to the point that my dad had to once pull his shotgun out of a cop's hands and unload it for him because the guy chambered a shell and couldn't figure out how to unload it himself, where as I know how to safely check, unload, and decock every firearm we have, which brings me to my question.

Oh shit, guys, Vydrach's met an idiot cop! I guess this means all cops are idiots, right? And regular people who spend all day playing video games are more qualified than them, right? Right?

As I said before, the only real difference between hunters and general firearm owners is that hunters shoot animals, where as general owners typically shoot inanimate objects.

That's actually a pretty big difference. Hunting has an end goal, preferabbly being delicious life-sustaining food. There is no point in shooting inanimate objects.

What is it that suddenly makes hunters more qualified in firearms and firearm safety? I'm honestly curious what makes you think that.

What I meant was that hunting is one of the few legitimate excuses for gun ownership. You should still have to go through some manner of training, background check and profiling before being allowed to obtain a weapon, even if it is for hunting, which I stated my reasons for approving of earlier in the post.

Anyways, Harlow: the only list I found with a top 20 was on Wiki, in which the States came in...as 20th. Right before Thailand.

January 7, 2012

I think it really depends on the country per se. In here, I had two friends whose houses got raided (luckily, there wasn't anyone wounded/kidnapped) including that that kind of crimes occurs regularly. So, owning a gun for self-defense would be almost a necessity here. Sure, gun selling would make it accesible to criminals, but even with a gun ban law, criminals will get one of they want. That's what crinimals do. Break law. And, looking it other way, criminals will kill you and menace you with a frying pan if necessary. Not all people willing to kill own guns.

So some countries like Sweden, Denmark, Japan, etc... have found a way to work public safety without firweapons. Great for them, but that doesn't mean it would work the same in other countries just like that. Tests would have to be done.

And about gun usage: Sure the gun was created with belic purposes, but so was wireless communication and security systems. One can give anything the use that one sees it fit (like the story of the child rescue linked on the first post. The gun was a great obstacle remover)

January 7, 2012

Here's a good video for this thread;

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/crime/2012/01/05/early-mom-calls-911-to-shoot.cnn?iref=allsearch

While this situation does not happen every day, it is a good thing to be prepared! Criminals are known to be criminals for not following laws, therefore regulation against the usage of firearms would only dramatically affect civilians.

January 7, 2012

The major flaw in this argument is the assumption that all criminals right now, as it stands, are smart and connected enough to obtain firearms whenever they want. This is not the case. Removing firearm restrictions would make it far easier for more criminals to break the law; there's also the faulty lumping of "criminals" into a seperate category as "people". Such criminals are not mustache-twirling villains lurking in the shadows whose goal in life is to simply make bad shit happen. Even as Vydrach brought up, people may resort to crime out of desperation. Many homicides are crimes of passion--in-the-moment emotional reactions--and not premeditated in the slightest.

The key difference in a frying pan and a gun is that a frying pan was not designed with the intent to kill.

January 7, 2012

Removing firearm restrictions would make it far easier for more criminals to break the law; there's also the faulty lumping of "criminals" into a seperate category as "people".

I have no problems with the existence of some firearm restrictions, but I draw the line at particularly ridiculous ones; I believe California has a law where a weapon cannot possess both a pistol-grip and detachable magazine. That seems like it was written up by someone who had no ideas how guns work.

Also, the if the "designed to kill argument" is fair game, then couldn't we break things down to more basic levels? Firearms, as many other things are, are composed primarily of steel. Would this make steel indirectly designed to kill? And even further, it can be argued that firearms are not designed to kill, but rather to launch projectiles at high speeds. While I'm not saying I agree with that last comment, I'd just like to say that it depends upon interpretation and usually personal experience when it comes to regulation of firearms.

January 8, 2012

Also, the if the "designed to kill argument" is fair game, then couldn't we break things down to more basic levels? Firearms, as many other things are, are composed primarily of steel. Would this make steel indirectly designed to kill?

No. A gun is composed of specifically designed steel parts, which all work together in a unique way to fire projectiles at high speeds, which - while it may have other uses - is basically only practical for killing. The steel is a component that could easily be replaced by something else. The only thing it does is work more reliably.

And even further, it can be argued that firearms are not designed to kill, but rather to launch projectiles at high speeds.

Poisonous gases aren't designed to kill, they're designed to be breathed. That must mean breathing is designed to kill!

Yeah, you can totally get anal about the details of the purpose and try to connect them in some ways, but it's silly to do so.

January 8, 2012

Personally I think it'd be fun trying to kill someone with my stainless steel tea ball.

January 8, 2012

A few things, I wasn't here for the bees argument, but in Brazil they used flamethrowers to fend off large swarms. Not sure if they do nowadays, but flamethrowers actually have no restrictions or anything in most states of the US.

And also I would think that the reason you weren't advised to carry a firearm with you in the wild was because in Canada they have stricter gun laws.

Also, not only are guns comprised of Steel, daggers, swords, lots of short range weapons are made of steel.

And Crazy does have a point here about the designation of firearms. Lots of rounds are very nonlethal. Rubber bullets, sandbags, etc. They're designed to hurt or incapacitate, not kill, therefore making the gun that fires it not a lethal weapon.

January 8, 2012

Here's how I view it a gun is like a tool just like a screwdriver, hammer, etc. Now recently there was a shooting down in Ogden one officer is dead and five are wounded. Would anyone be scared of a shooting that close to your county what are you gonna defend your self with a lame letter opener no not at all. Here's basically what I'm saying if you have a gun use it. It's the most firepower you can get these days.

January 8, 2012

Here's how I view it a gun is like a tool just like a screwdriver, hammer, etc.

A screwdriver and hammer are designed for mundane, utilitarian purposes. Screwing and hammering, respectively. Yes, a gun is a tool. It's a tool designed to kill or injure. That's the fundamental difference.

Now recently there was a shooting down in Ogden one officer is dead and five are wounded.

Officers. People who are trained and supposed to carry guns, and use them when necessary. They were doing their jobs.

Would anyone be scared of a shooting that close to your county what are you gonna defend your self with a lame letter opener no not at all.

Or, you could do the logical thing and not try to be goddamn Rambo just because you have a gun. If there's a shooting, the average civilian need not involve themselves, and it's likely that in doing so they would only endanger themselves and those around them because they don't have the proper training. Leave that shit to the police.

Here's basically what I'm saying if you have a gun use it. It's the most firepower you can get these days.

Have you read the topic at all? Yes, it's the most firepower you can get. But why the fuck do you need that firepower in the first place? I know some people use them to hunt with, and even though I think that's largely unnecessary, it's fine because it serves a purpose. Just having a gun on the off chance that one day you'll be in a situation where you can live out your commando fantasies is stupid.

January 8, 2012

How about recreational purposes though? Sport shooting is very fun, and just going to the range is an immense stress reliever.

January 8, 2012

How about recreational purposes though? Sport shooting is very fun, and just going to the range is an immense stress reliever.

Yes, I'm all for target practice and hunting.

For recreation, only gun rental and use on a permitted place.

For hunting, as long as you have your permits and licenses, fine by me.

January 8, 2012

Yes, I'm all for target practice and hunting.
For recreation, only gun rental and use on a permitted place.
For hunting, as long as you have your permits and licenses, fine by me.

Out of curiosity, how would you feel toward self-defense?

___

Also, I've got a quick question to pose. Those in favor of stronger firearm regulation in the United States, to what length would you go with those regulations? (i.e. implementation of a better background-checking/mental stability system, banning firearms from the general public except in specific cases, etc.)

Have you read the topic at all? Yes, it's the most firepower you can get. But why the fuck do you need that firepower in the first place? I know some people use them to hunt with, and even though I think that's largely unnecessary, it's fine because it serves a purpose. Just having a gun on the off chance that one day you'll be in a situation where you can live out your commando fantasies is stupid.

But, conversely, having a gun to defend yourself/business in a shitty neighborhood isn't a bad idea at all IMO. Not to say that I disagree with your point that morons who own firearms as a status symbol make things worse for the rest of us.

January 8, 2012

This phrasing is problematic, but I'm sure someone will tell you why much more eloquently than I could.

As for my opinion, I'm definitely in favor of regulation, but not outright banning, for the reason TCPeppyTC said, criminals will get them whether they're legal or not, leaving law abiding citizens exposed.

not to mention if crimnals couldn't get their hands on guns, well then they would just use knives and other such things. I am pro guns. in a sense.

January 8, 2012

But, conversely, having a gun to defend yourself/business in a shitty neighborhood isn't a bad idea at all IMO. Not to say that I disagree with your point that morons who own firearms as a status symbol make things worse for the rest of us.

That's actually a point I hadn't thought about, and a pretty good one.

not to mention if crimnals couldn't get their hands on guns, well then they would just use knives and other such things. I am pro guns. in a sense.

And in return, the cops with guns would have a much easier time subduing the criminals armed with knives.

January 8, 2012

And in return, the cops with guns would have a much easier time subduing the criminals armed with knives.

actually my dad was a cop, most criminals with guns make assaults at 20 to 40 feet. the lethality of these attacks are dramatically lower then one might think. Often times a cop will even have a chance to scramble for cover before a bullet actually comes near his body. knives assaults often occur only 2 to 5 feet away fromt he cop leaving him little chance to react. i'd rather have some bum try to shoot at me then have a bum try to stab me

January 8, 2012

actually my dad was a cop, most criminals with guns make assaults at 20 to 40 feet. the lethality of these attacks are dramatically lower then one might think. Often times a cop will even have a chance to scramble for cover before a bullet actually comes near his body. knives assaults often occur only 2 to 5 feet away fromt he cop leaving him little chance to react. i'd rather have some bum try to shoot at me then have a bum try to stab me

Well it's said a shot hurts less than a stab, but I won't guarantee anything.

Out of curiosity, how would you feel toward self-defense?

I said earlier that I am in favor of it.

January 8, 2012

Well it's said a shot hurts less than a stab, but I won't guarantee anything.

I said earlier that I am in favor of it.

Well it's said a shot hurts less than a stab, but I won't guarantee anything.

well generally a 22 hurts less then 6 inches of cold steel being thrust in your throat

January 8, 2012

I'm a not feeling too well right now, so I'll tackle some of the stuff later, but I want to point something out before any discussion about this takes place. The crook in that video was a felon, which means he did not purchase that weapon in any gunstore, because you have to go through a waiting perioud while they perform a background check, and when it comes through that you are a felon, they will not sell you the gun. No way, no how. A convicted felon can not own any firearm. Ever.

Not sure what they mean by altered, as it can mean a number of things.

well generally a 22 hurts less then 6 inches of cold steel being thrust in your throat

Actually, a .22 is considered by a lot of people to be one of the worst things to be shot by because it's a small round that is easily deflected, so it's not uncommon for a round taken in the leg to wind up in the torso because it ricocheted off the bone inside the body. Course that depends on the type of projectile and the angle.

January 8, 2012

actually my dad was a cop, most criminals with guns make assaults at 20 to 40 feet. the lethality of these attacks are dramatically lower then one might think. Often times a cop will even have a chance to scramble for cover before a bullet actually comes near his body.

Do you understand how bullets work? They travel at several hundred feet per second. FEET. PER. SECOND. Now, even if a bullet only went 20-40 feet per second, that only gives someone 1 second to move. And know what? Bullets don't go 40 FPS. They go several hundred. I doubt a cop is gonna move out of the way of anything other than a shot that wasn't gonna hit anyway.

knives assaults often occur only 2 to 5 feet away fromt he cop leaving him little chance to react. i'd rather have some bum try to shoot at me then have a bum try to stab me

Do you understand how thinking works? You just said bullets are effective at 20-40 feet. That's why they're BETTER than knives. The assaulting criminal won't get a chance to get 2-5 feet away from the cops if they have GUNS,

January 8, 2012

Do you understand how bullets work? They travel at several hundred feet per second. FEET. PER. SECOND. Now, even if a bullet only went 20-40 feet per second, that only gives someone 1 second to move. And know what? Bullets don't go 40 FPS. They go several hundred. I doubt a cop is gonna move out of the way of anything other than a shot that wasn't gonna hit anyway.

Do you understand how thinking works? You just said bullets are effective at 20-40 feet. That's why they're BETTER than knives. The assaulting criminal won't get a chance to get 2-5 feet away from the cops if they have GUNS,

Actually, most bullets travel well over a thousand feet per second, with the .45 ACP that has a muzzle velocity of about 850 or so feet per second (depends on several variables) is considered an incredibly slow round.

However, there is something called the "three second rule" that officers are trained in, which is that a perpetrator will almost universally hesistate for a few seconds before actually squeezing the trigger, due to things such as doubt, being unsure of whether they should risk retaliation or the charges of assaulting an officer with a deadly weapon, or killing an officer, and that the report of the firearm is quite an attention getter. Officers are trained to draw, aim, and fire their weapon in this window of opportunity. Perps with knives generally don't have that hesitancy for some reason.

Also, officers are issued ballistic vests, iirc. Most ballistic vests can stop up to a 7.62x39mm round, which is the standard round of the AK-47/SKS. They will protect the body from most pistol bullets short of things such as perhaps a .50 AE, .454 Casull, S&W .500 Magnum (most powerful production handgun round around), and military grade 5.7x28mm (civilians are prohibited from owning military grade 5.7 because only military grade rounds have the armour penetrating characteristics). Kevlar vests, unless one has steel plating, do all of nothing against knives. A sharp knife goes through a bullet resistant vest like... well... a hot knife through butter.

January 8, 2012

That's all very well, but it still doesn't change the fact that a cop with a gun has one HELL of a range advantage against a criminal with a knife.

January 8, 2012

Do you understand how bullets work? They travel at several hundred feet per second. FEET. PER. SECOND. Now, even if a bullet only went 20-40 feet per second, that only gives someone 1 second to move. And know what? Bullets don't go 40 FPS. They go several hundred. I doubt a cop is gonna move out of the way of anything other than a shot that wasn't gonna hit anyway.

Do you understand how thinking works? You just said bullets are effective at 20-40 feet. That's why they're BETTER than knives. The assaulting criminal won't get a chance to get 2-5 feet away from the cops if they have GUNS,

your assuming the cops have their guns drawn when the thugs attack them with knives. I think the cop is actually is at a disadvantage. However, when an untrained bum starts shooting from 20-40 feet. the gun is actually less lethal at its common use range in the hands of a untrained individual. A cop also would be able to go to cover considering the first shots miss. The knife however won't be as likely to miss ( hurp turp the targets right in front of you lol ) and the cop won't be able to react as well

And maybe you don't understand thinking! your assuming the cop gets to take advantage of his ranged weapon as if the knife wielder is blatantly attacking from 20 feet away but obviously a knife is concealed in till he is with in striking range. Your cop's range advantage is blown to hell!

January 8, 2012

Of course some believe that concentrating guns in hands of cops is dangerous. Cops can be unreliable/ negligent about policing neighborhoods.

January 8, 2012

Of course some believe that concentrating guns in hands of cops is dangerous. Who will stand up to cops if they get out of line?

Maybe if militias served as auxillaries to cops... maybe that might be a nice compromise

militias? and who would garrison the weapons? civilians? o wait now we are back were we started. it seems there is little wrong with the second amendment

Guns - good or evil?

Recommended Posts

Drasiana

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Mr. Krystal

Prince Elite

unoservix

Harlow

Link to comment

Share on other sites

CrypticQuery

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Drasiana

Link to comment

Share on other sites

CrypticQuery

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Xortberg

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Drasiana

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Arashikage

Link to comment

Share on other sites

TacticalLynx

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Xortberg

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Arashikage

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Harlow

Link to comment

Share on other sites

CrypticQuery

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Thu'um

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Xortberg

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Thu'um

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Harlow

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Thu'um

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Vy'drach

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Xortberg

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Vy'drach

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Xortberg

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Thu'um

Link to comment

Share on other sites

TCPeppyTc