Poll: Fun control

[Clashero]

Yes, I'd love to be able to swing my claws at people.
Oh, firearms! Well, then, I think that criminals are going to get their hands on guns anyway, so civilians might as well be armed (I'll never buy a gun, though. Miniature crossbow for the win. Or, for something more practical, tazers.)

 

[Souplex]

No biggie. It's a long thread, and you shouldn't have to look over all of it if you don't want to.

It is actually pretty short by Escapist standards,(Just hit three pages)there are just a lot of complex opinions and un-snipped quotes.

 

[Satin6T]

I think we should all have as many Guns as possible, as long as they're American, because Americans are awesome and deserve all the Deadly Killing Machines they can get.

Amen

 

[Thamous]

We can't buy assault weapons in the U.S.

Actually I am fairly sure you can in certain states.

Actually, I'm pretty sure you can't get around the Congressional Assault Weapons ban.

Well the assault weapons ban expired in 2004, and fully automatic weapons are legal to own if you posses the proper license and ,if I recall correctly, if they were made before 1984.

 

[asinann]

I like being able to conceal my .44 mag and I'd like to keep it that way. Was the 2nd ammendment reference really neccesary though?

I used it to establish that guns aren't the pea shooters our founding fathers had in mind and as such people might want some changes to gun control. I think it works.

Other than the fact that it didn't take 2 minutes to load those things and they were all .50 cal shots.

I have to ask: did your finger slip while you were typing the title, or was that intentional?

It is ridiculous that you can buy an assault weapon in the U.S. No amount of deer hunting requires armor piercing rounds and a muzzle velocity of 3,200 ft/s.

Uhhhh....
We can't buy assault weapons in the U.S.

Really, then I guess the gun shop down the street with the class C firearms dealing license is doing something illegal then. And so am I since I have a class C firearms permit that specifically allows me to purchase and own assault weapons.

We can't buy assault weapons in the U.S.

Actually I am fairly sure you can in certain states.

Actually, I'm pretty sure you can't get around the Congressional Assault Weapons ban.

You mean the one the supreme court struck down or the one that expired?

Just because they look like fully automatic assault rifles doesn't mean they are.
And no, of course not.
It's a completely different receiver.

Just because it's not fully automatic doesn't mean it's not an assault rifle. The M16A2 is not fully automatic, are you going to tell the military it isn't an assault rifle?

The only thing needed in California to classify something as an assault weapon is a magazine that is in front of the trigger.

 

[Thwarted]

Link to home office gun crime statistics in the UK 98-2007

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6960431.stm

gun crime doubled between 1998 and 2006, the period directly after handguns were banned.

to the poster above me, the 1992 ban expired in 2002. At the time there was an attempt to have it extended but that failed when it went before congress. The 1984 Assault weapons act still applies and has no period of expiry, unlike the 1992 ban.

 

[Souplex]

For readability sake can I ask that everyone snip their quotes down to what they are actually discussing or use spoilers?

 

[Mr Wednesday]

Link to home office gun crime statistics in the UK 98-2007

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6960431.stm

gun crime doubled between 1998 and 2006, the period directly after handguns were banned.

Well that's pretty bloody conclusive. I salute you for not talking out of your arse like most internet folk. These are statistics mind, and such things can be warped, simply by how data is collated. You do have to take into account that gun crime suddenly included owning a gun, and other new offences. Still though, I'm impressed.

 

[LCP]

Guns are necessary. An armed civilian force is the worst enemy to a fascism

 

[Mr Wednesday]

Guns are necessary. An armed civilian force is the worst enemy to a fascism

I'm really not sure I believe that.

I'd say, given the right circumstances, they can be the very thing used to usher in its birth. Fascism isn't always a top down thing. Hilter built the Nazi party from the ground up, not from the Reichstagg down, and totalitarian Russia, one of the most evil institutions in history, was a people's revolution.

There is a danger in assuming that the only enemy is the Man.

 

[Deleted]

Its not like civilians use their guns to protect themselves. When have you heard someone using a gun on a gangster?

 

[LCP]

Guns are necessary. An armed civilian force is the worst enemy to a fascism

I'm really not sure I believe that.

I'd say, given the right circumstances, they can be the very thing used to usher in its birth. Fascism isn't always a top down thing. Hilter built the Nazi party from the ground up, not from the Reichstagg down, and totalitarian Russia, one of the most evil institutions in history, was a people's revolution.

There is a danger in assuming that the only enemy is the Man.

I mean invading forces.

Its not like civilians use their guns to protect themselves. When have you heard someone using a gun on a gangster?

watch some TRUtv

 

[shotgunbob]

Most states have laws against automatic weapons. Some have permits I think but im not sure. Alot of guns are seriously unneccasary for civilans to own. Like 50. Cal rifles. A bit of overkill for a deer or an intruder

 

[Mr Wednesday]

I mean invading forces.

Well... well yes, a massive civilian insurgency is a pretty surfire way to kick out an invading force, or, at least bleed it dry. But honestly, who would be stupid enough to invade America? As far as terrain goes it's up there with Russia for "Only a Moron Would Invade this Land"ness.

Fascism can come from within, and thrives on a diet of angry, millitaristic men. Once they're in place, everyone is either too cowardly, or too dead, to say anything.

Also, why then specifically Fascism? Its not like that particular philosophy has a monopoly on foreign conquest.

 

[LCP]

I mean invading forces.

Well... well yes, a massive civilian insurgency is a pretty surfire way to kick out an invading force, or, at least bleeding it dry. But honestly, who would be stupid enough to invade America? As far as terrain goes it's up there with Russia for "Only a Moron Would Invade this Land"ness.

Fascism can come from within, and thrives on a diet of angry, millitaristic men. Once they're in place, everyone is either too cowardly, or too dead, to say anything.

that is a good time to move to south and rename yourself to Benito Camelas

 

[Thwarted]

Can anyone fill me in on why some people are ideologically opposed to gun ownership? I know it's more than simple ignorance of what happens when they are banned. Most people dont care about evidence here, they just pick a side and run with it. can anyone explain?

 

[Escapefromwhatever]

The problem there is that most gun violence doesn't come from gangs and random criminals hanging out on the street, but from everyday people who just snap or have some sort of plan that others don't know of. Legal gun owners are often a bigger threat than criminal gun owners. What I would like to see happen (in the U.S. at least) is for people who want to own anything other than a shotgun or hunting rifle to have to join the national guard or another military branch.

Where do you get that idea? Most of the news I see that mentions gun violence is when it's involved in the commision of another crime, like drug dealing or robbery. Source, please?

Well, seeing as this is a casual conversation, I'm not really in the mood to do extensive research, so I'll just use the same source you used- whenever I hear about gun crime or see it in the news its almost always related to domestic violence, planned murder, murder-suicide, or kidnapping, all usually committed by seemingly normal people who have legally owned guns for quite some time.

EDIT- If anybody wants to look up some statistics and send them our way, go for it.

 

[stonethered]

i'm torn here.
on the one hand cities should have strong gun control, even with the best intentions a gun in a crowded room is a death witing to happen.
on the other hand even out in the middle of no where a gun is still a weapon waiting to hurt something.
further, assault rifles and other military grade weaponry should never be made available to civilians. ever.
conversely, in a rural area a weapon may be needed for either a) survival or b) self defense against loonies, indeed the same applies to cities.


i propose a return to sword based self defense. as swords are difficult to conceal yet quite practical for defense against any natural opponents(i.e. bears, wolves, minor demons, etc...)
while in a true self defense situation a ranged weapon like a gun is generally impractical in either a close quarters situation(see last note) or in a room full of innocent bystanders. a ranged weapon is only truly effective against an opponent you can see coming from sufficent distance, or one who is also ranged.

edit: and is the title on purpose? because it's a punny title.

 

[tthor]

i'm torn here.
on the one hand cities should have strong gun control, even with the best intentions a gun in a crowded room is a death witing to happen.
on the other hand even out in the middle of no where a gun is still a weapon waiting to hurt something.
further, assault rifles and other military grade weaponry should never be made available to civilians. ever.
conversely, in a rural area a weapon may be needed for either a) survival or b) self defense against loonies, indeed the same applies to cities.


i propose a return to sword based self defense. as swords are difficult to conceal yet quite practical for defense against any natural opponents(i.e. bears, wolves, minor demons, etc...)
while in a true self defense situation a ranged weapon like a gun is generally impractical in either a close quarters situation(see last note) or in a room full of innocent bystanders. a ranged weapon is only truly effective against an opponent you can see coming from sufficent distance, or one who is also ranged.

edit: and is the title on purpose? because it's a punny title.

i vaguely remember an example of this in social studies,
some country armed with guns fought against china, who were armed with swords. needless to say, the chinese were masicured, and realized their swords were not enough anymore

 

[Samurai Goomba]

Fact: cops take about 10-20 minutes to get to the scene of any crime after it's phoned in.

So if you want to be sure you have the best chance possible to not die, a gun and a pair of excellent running shoes are probably your best bet.

Even if all guns are made illegal, criminals are people who break the law. They can always find guns as long as they have money. You want a perfect gun ban? Bomb every poor country in the world out of existence, 'cause they're the ones with thriving black markets.