Poll: Guns and you!

[Dwarfman]

I have no problem with someone owning a gun for home defence, sporting or rural purposes.

I do and will draw the line with have automatic and military grade rifles, semi-automatic shotguns and semi-automatic pistols above a certain ammo capacity. Such items were never intended for a civilian population. I mean seriously folks you don't need a glock or M-16 to defend your home with!

 

[Jelly ^.^]

Don't ban anything.

School massacres are awesome.

[/sar]

 

[ultrachicken]

Considering how many things could be used as a weapon, banning all of them doesn't make sense. Steak knives, rocks, hell, even a fucking plastic bag can be used to kill someone.

As for the gun laws? I think they're okay, but I've never been able to fully make up my mind on the subject.

 

[RelexCryo]

You shouldn't be able to walk down the street and have a gun with you. I could accept a handgun or shotgun at home or a small collection at a gun range, but both guns and owners would need to have a complete licensing and screening process, while individuals with a firearm inventory over a certain threshold automatically get put on a special watch list. All this, and it is illegal to carry a loaded gun with you off your property or any other licensed area.

Uh...the areas of the United States that refuse to let people carry guns have the highest crime rates. Chicago is the muder capitol of the United States. By contrast, when Michigan passed right to carry laws in 2000, the crime rate got lower, and kept getting lower, despite the recession. I support requiring people to get training before they are allowed to carry a gun, but not flat out refusing to let them carry. Totally refusing to let us carry consistently results in more crime, not less.

http://www.washingtonblade.com/2010/07/22/a-gay-perspective-on-d-c-gun-rights/

 

[UltraParanoia]

I have no problem with someone owning a gun for home defence, sporting or rural purposes.

I do and will draw the line with have automatic

Goddamnit, I'm getting tired of this nonsense.

Automatic weapons have been illegal for civilian ownership and use since the fucking 20s unless said civilian has a class III firearms license, which is nigh impossible to get.

and military grade rifles,

What the hell does that even mean? Most rifles used by snipers are modified versions of hunting rifles, and pretty much all other guns are select fire(the aformentioned illegal to own guns) and you(yet again) cannot get any of the larger guns used by the military without a class III.

semi-automatic shotguns and semi-automatic pistols above a certain ammo capacity.

And what capacity are you talking about? 8 rounds instead of 5? Or do you mean drum mags, which I'm fairly certain are illegal for civilians unless you manage to get government approval.

Such items were never intended for a civilian population.

And that's totally why the manufacturers who made em either sell the damn things to civilians or have civilian versions readily available to steal your hard earned money.

I mean seriously folks you don't need a glock or M-16 to defend your home with!

I may not need a AR-15(an M16 is illegal to own without a class III) for home defence, but I can damn sure hunt with it. As far as the Glock goes, I'd like to see what your suggestions for home defence are as opposed to an accurate, reliable pistol.

 

[Srdjan]

Forbid nuclear, chemical and biological weapons.

Everything else is good to go. Automatic weapons have great usage in sport.

 

[TheDarkestDerp]

I believe they should be outright banned for citizens.

Honestly, when does a citizen need a firearm?

Only law enforcement and government officials who are typically required to carry them should be allowed to use them.

And before anyone tries to respond with scenarios of rising crime and black market operations to acquire firearms, well they woouldn't be able to do much without firearms, especially when the law enforcement tracking them down does.

The most glaring example of the cognitive dissonance on the left is the concept that human beings are inherently good, yet at the same time cannot be trusted with any kind of weapon, unless the magic fairy dust of government authority gets sprinkled upon them. - Moshe Ben-David

Not to mention the fact that Prohibition worked oh so well.

Win.

I have been in several situations when a armed citizen was the only reason the much larger and somewhat drunk, very violent citizen, didn't commit an act of rising crime. As for me, I own a few firearms myself and have my CCL.

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

I believe that if you are competent enough and have the maturity enough, then you should be able to buy a gun.

Honestly, when does a citizen need a firearm?

Well, states side the second amendment only exists so that the citizens could fight the government if it had gotten too powerful and began to dissolve any rights. Oh, and home defense and hunting help too.

i heard that the second amendment was only for the USA's ARMY to have the right to be armed not its citizens.

This depends largely on your interpretation. The right to bear arms might apply to the militia for example (I.E. the National Guard) for example. That is the beauty of the the amendment: it is concrete enough that we know what it basically means but it lacks the specific information necessary to apply it universally. After all, in it's entirety it states: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.".

That "well regulated militia" along with the word "arms" is where you find the problem. The modern milita is the National Guard, and the state (and federal government) provides their armaments. The definition of arms has expanded greatly. A tank is obviously a weapon of war so should private citizens be able to own a Main Battle Tank?

 

[BonsaiK]

what is the general belief here on the Escapist about guns?

I think guns are great - but only for me. I think I should have all the guns, and other people shouldn't have any.

 

[biggles1]

Guns dont kill people, people kill people
guns are tools, just like knives, hammers and the such. They are just tools that are easy to kill with, and anyway, how else would I be able to put my Howitzer in my backyard?

 

[Fuselage]

Well look at it this way, Why ban guns when the impending zombie apocalypse is coming

 

[Astoria]

I like the gun laws in Australia. You're allowed to have one but you have to have a liecence. I also think you have to be part of a shooting club and can't have it loaded when not on a range or something but I'm not entirely sure. Regardless, I think it's good because it allows people to relieve stress without actually killing someone. While it doesn't completely erase gun related crime it sure isn't as bad as in the US. I get the whole wanting to feel protected but surely the good old baseball bat gives you some sort of reassurance.

 

[scar_47]

I like how most of the anti gun arguments make little to no sense, make an informed decision or none at all. Also fact chech you have acess to the largest source for information in the world spend 10 minutes using it. The MI firearms laws are a great example of what I think the US should have you need either a concealed carry permit or have to get a purchase permit by passing a basic knowledge test on firearms safety (this is only for pistols), then go purchase your firearm you get a background check at time of purchase to make sure your not a felon or a crazy, then you go register your firearm with local law enforcement which also does a safety check. Allows the average citizen to own a firearm and keeps them away from felons and crazies, works for me. Although I dislike the fact that I have to register my firearm since theres already a record of my purchase at the gun shop it just makes a little more work for me.

To those of you opposed to gun ownership I'm not saying you have to like guns but there are valid reasons to own them self defense included just do a little research and you'll see why.

 

[scar_47]

baseball bats tend not to do well against people armed with guns, as much as I'd prefer to have a fair one on one fight to settle thing the local gangbangers tend to go the course of 5 on 1 or using weapons, so i'll stick to my gun until they grow a pair.

 

[austin9993]

Ban all types of weapons for anything other than display purposes (e.g. Display swords on walls) but beyond that there is just no good reason for them to be legal.

Two words:
Zombie Attack.

 

[The Maddest March Hare]

What about traditional martial arts? Many of those involve weapons...

You don't need for instance, a sword with a proper edge on it, but the requirements for one that can be used in martial arts practice are still quite different to those that are suitable for display.

Personally, I don't like guns. It's just too easy to kill someone with a gun, and too difficult to protect yourself from one.

Any melee weapon, you stand a reasonable chance of running away. And even the injuries aren't nessesarily that bad in a lot of cases.

But with a gun, that changes quite quickly.

I'd much rather be facing a psycho with a sword than one with a gun.

That's the issue I have with guns too. Also, I think the use of weapons in martial arts could be restricted to the learning environments of where they train, at least up until a certain level of mastery (however that art may rank it) is reached. Martial arts also train discipline and respect for fighting, so someone who has dedicated themselves to it is often less likely to snap and kill someone that wasn't the aggressor. Or at least I'd hope that's the case.

Exactly my thoughts. With maybe the exception of law enforcement. Tazers work quite well.

I think I should elaborate my first post slightly, I was tired so I missed out "civilian", I believe that law enforcement should have some form of threat to make people respect their authority a little more. Although as a few recent threads have shown, give an officer a gun and he can be just as irresponsible as a civilian, such as the whittler shooting. 8 or so second warning and then 5 shots on a harmless man..

Two words:
Zombie Attack.

You make a compelling argument..

 

[L-J-F]

From reading comments here it would seem that the majority of people against guns are highschool kids whose only experience of them come from Call of Duty. Look at some statistics or do some research before posting "omg ppl shuldnt have assualt nuclear ak-47's with tigerstripes and red dot sights!".

 

[Ekonk]

Y'see, you can use a knife to - I dunno, prepare an apple for om nom nom? With guns however, you can only shoot. They're designed to kill stuff and - well - that means that everyone who has a gun has the power to kill someone by just pulling an itty bitty trigger.

Yeah I'm pretty against guns. However there is the tough issue of guns used in sport and hobby, so yeah. I don't have the magical solution.

EDIT: And of course zombies. That's the strongest argument in favour of guns.

 

[Kair]

It makes me sad to see that humans in the US have such a close relationship to functional weapons.

 

[The Funslinger]

Honestly, when does a citizen need a firearm?

So you're telling me that the lady that got raped and left for dead in an alley didn't need some sort of protection? That's what firearms give you, they give you a sense of protection and the means to defend yourself against others who will do harm to you.

I imagine guns also give you an intimidation factor and leverage with which to rape someone.

Seriously, though, I don't have a problem with guns, but anyone with a violent felony should have restrictions clamped down instantly.