The 4 Most Meaningless Arguments Against Gun Control.....

[Something Amyss]

Go to Japan, police don't have guns, citizens don't have guns, but i bet you dollars to Doughnuts you'll be hard pressed to find a yakuza member without one.

Yeah, but do you have an evidence of that, or just a bunch of crime movies/games?

How bout England, do you think the criminal elements there don't have guns? You think they run around with billy clubs committing crimes and holding up convenience stores?

Actually, street-level gun crime is very infrequent and a pretty big deal when it happens. Sure, some people do have access to firearms, but I think you might actually need to look into crime in England before you continue to talk about how other countries work.

it just guarantee's that no citizen will ever squash a crime or protect their family from a criminal who has a gun.

Come now, that's utter crap. Are you telling me that if one side has a gun, they win? That's not even true in the US now, why would it be true because firearms are illegal?

Also a militia is important for the defense of a country. Just saying.

A "militia" exists. We have one of the best-funded and ostensibly best-trained militias in the world. Hell, even if you're going the "stand against the government" route, the US Constitution puts the President in charge of militias. This is largely because this was the colonial version of the standing army. Just saying.

 

[Sandernista]

If the Police wouldn't want to carry guns...why the fuck are they allowed to be Police anyway?
Their job is to protect and serve, and sometimes in order to protect they have to use deadly force. That's as stupid as wanting to join the Army but not wanting to use firearms.

Carrying a gun generally escalates a conflict from non-lethal to lethal, when you pull a gun on a criminal you push him against a wall, and they will react accordingly. Anyone who is not crazy as shit does not want more dead bodies lying around. I'd prefer my cops not to be crazy as shit.

 

[oneeyemug]

The article fails to refute the most legit argument against gun control that I've seen: "If we outlaw guns for all citizens, only criminals will have guns," which is irrefutable. As for the arguments that it does address:

4. As has been said before, guns on their own can't kill a person, as they don't possess the brain capacity necessary to do so. Just because it CAN be used to kill someone, doesn't mean it should be outlawed. Just because it was DESIGNED to kill someone, doesn't mean it should be outlawed. Nuclear fission was originally designed to kill, but we found a way to use it to provide another source of electricity. Likewise, people have a way to use guns for sport and entertainment.

3. Nothing that hasn't said before; guns can be used for sport, not just killing. "Oh, but those gun sports are used to practice killing others." Then why don't we just outlaw ALL combat sports. (Fencing, Archery, Wrestling) You "practice killing people" in those sports, using equipment intentionally designed to be weapons. And by the way, if someone is accidentally killed by a gun, it IS a misuse.

2. This guy doesn't seem to understand the relationship between offense and defense. The mere threat of instant death by a gun is enough to deter most criminals. Less than 1 percent of the guns used in self-defense are actually fired back at the attacker.
http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2003/04/10/duncan3/

1. This is the only rebuttal that has any weight. It IS a fallacy to assume that it is okay to have guns just because the Constitution or the Supreme Court says so.

Most of the fear toward guns stems from ignorance. Just know basic gun safety and no one will get hurt.

 

[McNinja]

I think the POTUS' stance is pretty reasonable (and I didn't even vote for him! OH GOD I MUST SUCK AT POLITICS!! D. Respect the second amendment right to own guns, but outlaw ones that serve no practical purpose except for use in violent crime. Sure, it may not be "cool" to saw assault rifles are illegal, but seriously, WHO THE FUCK NEEDS AN ASSAULT RIFLE?! They aren't even legal hunting weapons! There is NO REASON to ever own one unless you plan on using it in a CRIME. Ted Nugent will ***** and moan, but let him! Those guys are in a serious minority.

That's not true at all. I plan on owning more than a few assault rifles and I will never use any of them in any sort of illegal manner. I just like guns. I've been around guns since I was six, been taught firearms safety since I was nine, and learned how to shoot properly when I was a teenager. Not everyone intends to use guns (of any kind) for violent crime, and to assume so is a terrible generalization.

Just because you can't find value or reason behind owning an assault rifle, does NOT mean that I cannot either. List of reasons I want to own an Assault rifle, fully automatic or no:

1.) They're cool. No really, they are. Will I ever use it? Barring the Zombie apocalypse, no, probably not. But then again, I'll never use my dinner-plate-sized shuriken or any of my LotR swords either.

2.) I like collecting weapons. I have about a dozen swords, a few things that I'm not sure how to classify (like that huge shuriken), and a whole bunch of knives. It's one of my more expensive hobbies.

EDIT: Just read the article. Got to the end of the first point and had to stop. The author is so stupid, so naive, and so fucking ignorant it made me cringe. That is the single worst article I have ever read on Cracked and it makes me ashamed to live in the same country as that ignorant jackass.

 

[Vanitas likes Bubbles]

Guns don't kill people. Bullets do.

Bullets don't kill people, Metal Does.

Metal doesn't kill people, human organs failing does.

OT: I'd rather guns didn't exist entirely. They are really unmanly and pussy way of fighting. Let's go back to riding dinosaurs and breathing fire onto people while using lightsabres, YEAH! It can totally happen.

 

[omega 616]

My only problem with this article is that it starts off with what is, in my opinion, an inherent misconception. Namely, that killing, and violence, is itself a problem.

"Human nature is deeply intertwined with violence and killing, and we as a species need to evolve past that in order to move forward into the vast playground of the Universe."

Who the hell actually thinks that? Is it terrible when some nut job shoots up a movie theatre? Yes. Does that mean that killing is always wrong? No.

Guns are indeed for killing, duh. But that's not necessarily a problem on its own.

So violence and killing are good things? In which context?

I am really looking forward to this reply 'cos the only example I can think of is, if a wild animal attacks and you have to use something to stop it.