Poll: What is your stance on Guns?

[Aur0ra145]

I haven't shot anybody, and I don't have the desire to.

But, I do own a couple of handguns, hunting rifles, assault rifles and shotguns. Buying, maintaining and shooting firearms is a hobby of mine. In fact, I just bought a bullet reloading kit. I'm super excited to start reloading, but I've got a LOT of reading to do before I start.

Also, as my escapist motto goes:

"Politicians prefer unarmed peasants."

 

[kebab4you]

I would restrict it to police only, but seeing how American citizens love there gun I would say you would need a license to carry any kind of gun, a step in the right direction and it would stop fucktards from carrying them.

Yes only the police should possess firearms! and the military. A police state is the best form of society. If the people resist we shall brutalise them in ways unimaginable

So it´s better every gun toeing nutjob out there carries a gun you say?

Also looking at you and the two people you are friends with, all 3 accounts was created today 99% by you, most likely to just sit here like an ars and defend "guns for everyone, nothing can go wrong!"

 

[Vivi22]

My problem with guns is that too many people think they are entitled to the biggest, best guns, for their "protection"
Hunting rifles are fine and dandy, but the average civilian doesn't need a fully automatic, drum fed, .50 cal machine gun, with FMJ hollow point rounds.
Like all things, I think dealing with absolutes is stupid, so I'll just say that people should be allowed to have any gun they want within reason, but require registration and regulation in place so they can't accidentally go gun-happy when they break up with their girlfriend.

I basically agree with all of this. I do think guns should be allowed for purposes such as target shooting and hunting. What is completely unnecessary is civilians owning military grade weaponry. News flash, there is no practical purpose for owning a fully automatic assault rifle if you aren't in the military. Even if the government ever did one day turn on you and brought the military to bear against it's people, you would be no match for them even if you were equally equipped as far as a straight up fight goes.

 

[Romblen]

I think the average person should be allowed to own a gun, but there should be some restrictions. Most people can use a gun for recreational or in a rare cases self defensive ways. Everyday there are millions of gun owners that get through the day without shooting anyone.

Honestly I think the fear that surrounds them is just not knowing anything about them. Guns are fun, they can be used solely for recreation safely. Like anything else, guns are just objects that can used in different ways.

 

[Dfskelleton]

Look at the crime rates in every state in the USA. I'll bet you that if you look up the ones with the lowest crime rates, you'll see that they are allowed to carry guns.
Besides, if you make a law against guns, criminals are obviously going to ignore the law and get the guns anyways, and then the law abiding citizens have no means to defend themselves or others.

 

[willsham45]

I am for guns for self defence, and I think everyone should have or should be able to have a gun on them at all times hidden or shown.

I think it is safer because in the case of anything happening it can be quickly put down. A crazed gun man starts shooting people. If there are no guns allowed he kills people until the police come and even then nothing is certain lots of people die with guns the crazed gun man will become a target for pretty much everyone in the local fasinity. Same with a home invasion.

Those who want to use guns for evil will get there guns with or without the law. Making it harder for the general good willed public to get them and defend themselves is just making them easier targets for the evil ones.

Come on you got a gun you want to mug someone what would you prefer a world where chances are your victim does not have a gun or one where your victim will probably have a gun?

Although do note as I say this I do not have a gun nore do I want one and I never want to kill anything let alown anyone. But if someone someone broke into my house I would probably wish I had one...will probably have to make do with a bow and arrow.

 

[Michael Hirst]

Well the problem now in America is you've come too far to start taking guns off people, that and the people you would be taking them off would start invoking constitutional rights to shoot you.

I believe that responsible gun ownership should be taught strictly to anyone wishing to obtain a firearm in America and that anyone who owns and illegal/unlisenced firearm should be punished even more severely than they already are.

Living in England I'm glad that we don't have open season on owning guns for self defence and outside of the occasional nut job or ghetto killing we don't get much gun crime at all. It is legal to own firearms for sporting use and stuff but the restrictions are very strict.

There's definitely arguements for both sides of the debate and while I do beleive a man is entitled to defend his life and property from intruders, so in America they should keep them because the gun is a huge cultural icon now and to remove it suddenly would provoke nothing short of an uprising of American citizens claiming that they're being left defenceless to the people who won't follow the new laws...which is true.

I'm a humanitarian at heart and don't wish to see anyone dead really but that said sometimes when the chips are down people need to defend themselves with lethal force and in America this means owning a bloody gun.

 

[demyxtheyoung]

"Politicians prefer unarmed peasants."

A society incapable of defending itself should not exist.

 

[El Danny]

Because letting the general public have access to something that only use is to put chunky holes in things seems like a great idea...

No! only the communist party shall be allowed firearms! the people serve us! if they disobey we shall exterminate them. Never allow the subject race to possess arms. It is political suicide

Why does every NRA member in the US think that fire arms is all they need to combat a government? Common sense informs me that even if you're all armed with M16s and AKs, you'd still get slaughtered

Yes but if you don't allow the people to possess firearms in the first place, my plans of genocide become even easier why make it harder for us dictators

So your reasoning for legal firearms is in the most unlikely situation that your government turns on you enough to justify an armed response? Imagine your government thought it would be logical to build 100s of massive space cannons just in case aliens show up to give us a rough time Independence Day style. Your reaction would be roughly how I feel about your logic now.

 

[let's rock]

We need to have guns to defent ourselves. Have you noticed that mass shootings almost always happen in gun free zones, like malls and schools, and never in firing ranges? They know that if they start firing into a croud of people in a mall or school, nobody will fire back. Also, notice that when gun control was at it's highest, gun crime skyrocketed, and has decreased ever science they have been lightened. I myself carry a Bretta 92 (not sure what varent), I keep it very visable, and nobody is stupic enough to attack me, they know thay will die, common sense, espicaly when I am with friends, all of whoom also have a gun. This all said, I DON'T think we should be allowed to have everything the military has, full autos and RPG-7's arn't very useful in self defense, but we should be allowed to have rifles for recreational purposes, and I can't see limiting it to just non semi ones.

If a criminal wants a gun, he will get one anyways, even if they are illegal, because he is a criminal, criminals don't obay laws, so if he wants a gun and they are illegal, he will get a black market one. Then us law abiders will not have guns to defend ourselves with. I fully support a law saying all law abiding citizens should be required by law to carry a handgun at all times, then no ************ would be stupid enough to attack someone publicly, knowing hundreds might easaly shoot back at him, and it would not arm the criminals, who are already armed, just arm the ones who need to be.

BTW: If somebody gets stupid and threatens the lives of me or my loved ones, that ************ will know exactly what a 9mm wide hole in his vital organs feels like, and I'm pretty sure it's not to good

 

[Images]

And any of you 2nd Amendment thumpers? Grow up. I think the bearing of arms is pretty obviously in reference to having the tools to form a militia against the oppression of governments seeking to clamp down on the foundling new republic. That time is long over Rambo.

Yeh its been almost a week since the last genocide in Libya, give up your guns now. Only my good friends Stalin and Gaddafi shall possess them

1. Do you live in Libya?

2. Does the 2nd Amendment apply to Libya? If not, do you think I was possibly only referring to the country it does apply?

3. Since Stalin is dead, how will a gun be of use to him?

 

[kebab4you]

So it´s better every gun toeing nutjob out there carries a gun you say?

Also looking at you and the two people you are friends with, all 3 accounts was created today by you, most likely to just sit here like an ars and defend "guns for everyone, nothing can go wrong!"

nope all different people, check ip if you like and if by every gun toeing nutjob you mean my communist party then yes! but not the non party members though! never allow the people to possess arms

You and your friends then, doesn't really matter T.T" Point still stands that these account was only made to camp this thread and act like an ars towards everyone.

 

[DaJoW]

Law enforcement and hunters can have weapons, don't see the benefit of an armed public.

 

[mb16]

2nd amendment - 1791
Of course the usa hasn't changed in 220 years, so its entirely relevant today. As the evil government want to take our freedom. /sarcasm

see, other 1st world countries with stricter gun regs, aren't being oppressed by the government

OT: I own a few guns, but i have a "need" for them (pest control) you shouldn't have a gun for the sake of having a gun

 

[Daverson]

Concerning:
"Yes, it should be restricted to just small pistols"

Can we not an option the other way? Handguns should be the ones that are illegal. You can justify a shotgun or even a rifle for home defence, target shooting, hunting etc., but pistols are designed to provide a weapon capable of killing a man in the most compact (and therefore concealable) form possible.

I'm going to agree with the firearms law in the UK. It's tough, but guns aren't exactly toys, are they?

 

[faspxina]

Why do you think he implied he had that right?

It's the logical accompaniment of any belief. By virtue of the fact you believe something, you believe you are correct. As such, you believe your view is the correct one and everyone else should follow your lead. That's essentially what a debate is, people attempting to convince everyone else to adhere to their ideal(s).

You can still believe in something and accept the subjectiveness of your belief to the point that you wouldn't force it on other people.

You probably were just questioning a point of view but instead you were questioning the supposed right to force that point of view on others.

 

[Dark marauder]

I think only the police and miltary should be allowed them and I never quite got the whole self defense thing if everyone is allowed a gun to protect themselves from other people with guns then why not get rid of the guns in the first place

 

[CM156_v1legacy]

I think only the police and miltary should be allowed them and I never quite got the whole self defense thing if everyone is allowed a gun to protect themselves from other people with guns then why not get rid of the guns in the first place

Run on sentence, ahoy!

Simply put, you CAN'T get rid of every gun. The better (and more realistic) solution is to allow law abiding citizens to be on the same level as criminals in terms of defense.

 

[Yechezkel]

Because letting the general public have access to something that only use is to put chunky holes in things seems like a great idea...

No! only the communist party shall be allowed firearms! the people serve us! if they disobey we shall exterminate them. Never allow the subject race to possess arms. It is political suicide

Why does every NRA member in the US think that fire arms is all they need to combat a government? Common sense informs me that even if you're all armed with M16s and AKs, you'd still get slaughtered

Yeah, I'm for guns and even I don't get this. The US military has stealth fighters, self-propelled artillery, and trucks that shoot pain [https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Active_Denial_System]. What exactly does anybody think their made-before-1985 machine pistol is going to do against that?

 

[t3h br0th3r]

We need to have guns to defent ourselves. Have you noticed that mass shootings almost always happen in gun free zones, like malls and schools, and never in firing ranges? They know that if they start firing into a croud of people in a mall or school, nobody will fire back. Also, notice that when gun control was at it's highest, gun crime skyrocketed, and has decreased ever science they have been lightened. I myself carry a Bretta 92 (not sure what varent), I keep it very visable, and nobody is stupic enough to attack me, they know thay will die, common sense, espicaly when I am with friends, all of whoom also have a gun. This all said, I DON'T think we should be allowed to have everything the military has, full autos and RPG-7's arn't very useful in self defense, but we should be allowed to have rifles for recreational purposes, and I can't see limiting it to just non semi ones.

If a criminal wants a gun, he will get one anyways, even if they are illegal, because he is a criminal, criminals don't obay laws, so if he wants a gun and they are illegal, he will get a black market one. Then us law abiders will not have guns to defend ourselves with. I fully support a law saying all law abiding citizens should be required by law to carry a handgun at all times, then no ************ would be stupid enough to attack someone publicly, knowing hundreds might easaly shoot back at him, and it would not arm the criminals, who are already armed, just arm the ones who need to be.

BTW: If somebody gets stupid and threatens the lives of me or my loved ones, that ************ will know exactly what a 9mm wide hole in his vital organs feels like, and I'm pretty sure it's not to good

I agree wholeheartedly.

I am American and do not, nor have i ever owned or fired a gun but I still think people should have the option.

My philosophy is that the citizenry should be allowed to arm themselves as well as the average criminal.

if all they use in one area are brass knuckles and switchblades then that is what you ought to be allowed to use. In the US the average criminal uses handguns and other small arms, therefore the US citizenry should be allowed to use them as well to counter the criminal threat, if the individual so chooses.

and likewise, if you live in a place where the average criminal is part of a militia and walks around with AK-47s and M16s, then that is what the citizens should be allowed to own.

TL;DR people ought to be allowed to be well armed enough to make criminals think twice.