Poll: Should Kids Be Allowed To Carry Guns?
- Thread starter Stormcloud23
- Start date
I wasn't bragging, I was proving that there are some of us teenagers out there who aren't complete dipshits.LooK iTz Jinjo said:
And to humor you, I'll quote your old post and point out all the flaws with it.
1) If you read my post, I wasn't claiming 5-10 year old kids should have them. I said responsibility starts at the high school level, and that's where it should BEGIN in it's very elementary stages should they be on that path. Yes, I realize you wrote this post before mine. No, I don't understand how that makes a difference seeing that you cited this post as reasoning.LooK iTz Jinjo said:
2) If guns are made illegal, only men living in the illegal underworld will have guns. Do you see the problem here? The ordinary citizen is being PUNISHED for following the law, while the unlawful can and do run around with firearms. Then, I have no way to protect myself when something goes wrong. Example: Columbine, VA Tech
3) Again, if "nobody is allowed to carry guns", how do you regulate those who decide not to give a damn about the law? If police have them taken away, I ASSURE you there will be a GIGANTIC jump in crime in several places. Guns, with the civilian population, are mostly used as a deterrent; the mere possibility of having something go wrong is enough for most criminals to pack up and leave, and perhaps move to Australia, seeing that nobody has any guns there.
I read quite an interesting piece somewhere that stated a solution:
1) Give every single woman (traditionally less powerful and a more attractive target) a handgun, proper training, and a psyche evaluation (for confirmation of mental wellbeing);
2) Allow that woman to either keep (which would require the psyche evaluation and training) or sell (which would not) back to the government such weapon, with documentation for each to prevent the weapon from falling into the hands of a criminal.
What would happen here? I can speculate that criminals would be SEVERELY deterred; if there was a 100% possibility that their target had a firearm, then they wouldn't go for it. They aren't dumb. Sure, some, or maybe even a majority would sell their firearms back, but the criminals do not know this. The numbers would not be released, perhaps they would get out eventually, but the state of mind would remain: The government gave this lady a gun, I don't know what she did with it. I'm not going to take my chances.
Yeah, I kinda realized what a Utopia I was describing when I submitted my post. I'm still not convinced that you even NEED the entire "cover up" operation; the "good" kid would most definitely know the value/importance of not ever using it except in the most dire of circumstances, nor would he ever give it to someone else for the reason that they don't know that. Of course, there would be the few that slip through with every policy/test, but that number would be quickly dealt with once they're caught. Then again, even that is wishful thinking.LooK iTz Jinjo said:
33%. That's how many domestic abuse cases involve male victims. And a quick poll on "Yahoo! Answers" had 28 respondents out of 30 say that if a man was hit by a woman they'd either laugh, or not help. 1 stated they likely wouldn't help unless it was a friend, because they didn't know the situation, and another said that they had dealt with something similar when a friend showed up at the office with bruises. They'd helped him.mike1921 said:
A similar poll (using the exact same wording, substituting "male" with "female", and "female" with "male"), showed that 23 out of 24 would do something (in most cases the reply consisted of something along the lines of "Cut off the dudes balls!" or "I'd ****ing kill him!" (sadly with much worse punctuation, spelling and grammar).
A book I read a while back on crime prevention confirms what these statistics and [informal] surveys show, and then some. When targeting victims, muggers (and, presumably, most other criminals) target based on gait, of all things. If somebody walks confidently, and is aware of their surroundings, then muggers usually avoid these people, however people who are busy focusing on something else, or have an awkward gait (e.g.: Swing their left arm forward at the same time as their left foot while walking) are targeted as much as five times as often as others. This even extends to the elderly or disabled.
TL;DR: What that guy said.
Yes that is fairly nuts. Sorry for being sane an logical but killing someone over a relationship is a bullshit excuse for lesser minds. You argument (I presume) was in support and then state that 1/3 of the people you know would react badly to that power. (I may have got the wrong message but let's see how clear your reading is after being awake for 50 hours straight)mike1921 said:
It's not an excuse if it's the actual reason. THey'd react badly to that power if they were put into an extremely unlikely position (they walk in on it, they happen to have their gun on their person, and it happens to be loaded. I find that really unlikely.demonsaber said:
My friends are to busy stoned off their asses playing hacky sack to even use a firearm XD.mike1921 said:
Well I have to say most people don't adjust their numbers to fit per-capita. I also know that 7x means that there are 7 times as many. In addition to that though I think it is harder for those same items to be smuggled into your island nation than for our country and the weak protection that is afforded to our southern border. People think that assault rifles are so scary and deadly yet they are used in less than 1%. I only spoke up because it seemed there were a lot of people screaming about an all out ban and I wanted clear up somethings while offering up my two cents on the issue.Doug said:
Well, I figured it wasn't fair to the USA to just look at the base numbers and declare our gun crime rate was lower - after all, we have only 1/7th as many people (approx), its bound to be lower just because of that, heh.SmogCzar said:
And yeah, its true I hadn't considered your Southern border, although we still do get drugs and people smuggled in through the ports and through the channel tunnel (after all, the sheer volume of traffic through them makes its virtually impossible to search even the majority of vehicles.
And indeed, its surprising people focus on assault rifle weapons when, from what little I know of it, pistols and 'machine-pistol' (those fully automatic small guns) are used a hell of alot more for crime.
Yeah there will always be gun crime and adding new laws to the books won't help as much as people think they will. I really believe we need to enforce our current gun laws more before we add new ones that will also be overlooked. That's another thing the public tends to think automatic weapons are so prolific when in fact it is almost impossible to get them. You have to have an FFL to get them in the first place which requires a background check and if you fail the background you don't to have any fun and you shouldn't have any guns at all then anyways. I like being able to go out any time and hunt or target shoot without carrying around a giant book full of licenses.Doug said:
I see we're now getting into the issue of gun and crime, in which case I'm going to have to agree with those that say the removal of guns in America at this point really isn't going to keep criminals from committing crimes with them. One needs to understand that there's a thriving global black market in weapons, and somebody who's planning to rob a bank or kill somebody very likely isn't going to make sure he acquires his gun in a legal or proper fashion, nor will he say, "well, guns are illegal now, guess I'll just use this bag of chips instead."
Gun control has worked (sort of, they just switched to knives in the UK, going from the statistics) in other countries in the past, but it simply cannot work in America because this is one of the only countries in the world that was founded during the age of guns, grew up with guns and continues to have a very close relationship with guns. Guns are also deeply ingrained in the tradition of American Crime. From Cosa Nostra to meth heads, people everywhere (including criminals) associate the commission of crime with the need to possess a firearm. It's a belief, and making guns illegal isn't going to stop criminals from seeking them out at this point.
But still, there's a reason you have to be an adult to get a CCW permit. People under 18 can conceal and carry all sorts of weapons that aren't guns, no reason to add guns to that list.
Here's an absolutely hilarious picture I found. Supposedly some kids made it in completely serious protest of people owning firearms. I think they did something wrong, though, because it really doesn't seem to send the message that they apparently thought it would. Or maybe it was just a big hoax, which seems likely.
Aw man, that cracks me up every time I look at it.
Gun control has worked (sort of, they just switched to knives in the UK, going from the statistics) in other countries in the past, but it simply cannot work in America because this is one of the only countries in the world that was founded during the age of guns, grew up with guns and continues to have a very close relationship with guns. Guns are also deeply ingrained in the tradition of American Crime. From Cosa Nostra to meth heads, people everywhere (including criminals) associate the commission of crime with the need to possess a firearm. It's a belief, and making guns illegal isn't going to stop criminals from seeking them out at this point.
But still, there's a reason you have to be an adult to get a CCW permit. People under 18 can conceal and carry all sorts of weapons that aren't guns, no reason to add guns to that list.
Here's an absolutely hilarious picture I found. Supposedly some kids made it in completely serious protest of people owning firearms. I think they did something wrong, though, because it really doesn't seem to send the message that they apparently thought it would. Or maybe it was just a big hoax, which seems likely.
Aw man, that cracks me up every time I look at it.
The difference between here and the Middle East is mentality. I don't believe for a second that anyone here is going to try and blow themselves up for the cause.SyphonX said:
Sure, historically civilian militia have fared ok against organized militaries. They were similarly equipped and the militia usually had the advantage of home turf. But historically, organized militaries didn't have stealth bombers, ground-attack fighter jets, or tanks.
