Why illegalizing guns will not work in the U.S

[cjbos81]

-wonka-

Again, I'm going to slap this one on here.

You don't win an argument with a quickmeme generator, and if "But criminals will always break laws because they're criminals!" is all you have to say for your case, maybe you should stand aside and let people who actually make good points speak for that case, as you're doing it a disservice.

It happened in China only about a week ago. 20 kids stabbed.

Yes and not a single kid died because of the stabbing.

Maybe the guy in china was a weakling.

The Japanese are much more efficient when it comes to deaths from mass stabbings. Google it.

 

[Trekkie]

ask a copper and they will tell you that criminals will always find a way to get guns. small firearms are ilegal in the UK but there are still shootings in London.

 

[Vegosiux]

Maybe then he would have built a bomb or done some worse things later in life. Guns are not the only way to kill and crazy people are....crazy.

And maybe he wouldn't, imagine that. You know how asinine it sounds to say it's okay it was "only" a shooting because it "might have been" a bombing otherwise.

I agree that this problem needs to be tackled on several fronts, but as I said before, gun control and a socialized system of mental healthcare are simply not mutually exclusive. It's not "one or the other".

 

[Epona]

Maybe then he would have built a bomb or done some worse things later in life. Guns are not the only way to kill and crazy people are....crazy.

And maybe he wouldn't, imagine that. You know how asinine it sounds to say it's okay it was "only" a shooting because it "might have been" a bombing otherwise.

I agree that this problem needs to be tackled on several fronts, but as I said before, gun control and a socialized system of mental healthcare are simply not mutually exclusive. It's not "one or the other".

Guns have always been legal here in the US, why are we only seeing these mass shootings in the last couple of decades? That's the question we should be asking because as long as the societal problem remains, there will be people looking for a way to do these things.

Anyway, I am done with this topic because I would only be repeating myself.

 

[jbm1986]

This could never work, for two reasons firstly the cost of the periodic evaluations. To have every gun owner drug tested and psychologically analyzed annually would cost an enormous amount of money. Who is supposed to pay for that, the gun owner? the tax payer?

Secondly, your the only person on the planet who would be okay with being examined like that every year. All this would do would encourage people to acquire illegal firearms, because no one wants to spend the time or money having their lives intrusively examined.


I am not pro guns myself, but I think having more easily accessible and far cheaper psychiatric help available for anyone who feels they need it would prevent more shootings than the simple banning of certain weapons.

Annual cost $125~$250 for an evaluation AND drug test if you have a job shouldn't be an issue considering the cost of a gun itself. Costs range from $200~$600+ for just a (quality) gun. That does not include cost of a gun safe, ammunition, or any gun related item a person would need just to use it properly.

Maybe you wouldn't have to go annually or whatever but still need to get checked out. However this would be less effective because the gun owner could become unstable later in life (example: fired from job and becomes angry and vengeful.) Also people who have issues don't always seek help when they need it. They bury it deep inside until they explode and that is the dangerous behavior that gets innocent people killed.

 

[Vegosiux]

Guns have always been legal here in the US, why are we only seeing these mass shootings in the last couple of decades? That's the question we should be asking because as long as the societal problem remains, there will be people looking for a way to do these things.

Anyway, I am done with this topic because I would only be repeating myself.

Just so we're clear. I am not saying "ban guns". I'm saying "make it so that people who are not fit to use guns, cannot get guns."

Oh, and enjoy your day, I know how annoying it gets to repeat oneself all the time ^^

 

[spartan231490]

I'll have to repeat myself from your other topic, because my point still stands.

Ban all guns! Ignore the fact that there are literally millions, if not billions, of guns in the U.S., a good deal of which are in the hands of private owners! The U.K. did it! Never mind the fact that the U.K. has about a quarter of the population and 2 percent of the area. If one country can do it, every country can!

Nevermind the fact that the murder rate in the UK has been skyrocketing ever since. Nevermind the fact that study after study shows that gun control has no meaningful impact on crime rates. Nevermind the fact that 3 of the 4 deadliest elementary school shootings took place in the UK or Germany. Nevermind the fact that you might actually be able to stop these mass shootings and even reduce the overall crime rate by improving the US mental health system beyond it's current, incomprehensibly in-effective state, nevermind all these facts and just go with the knee-jerk reaction of banning guns and watch things get even worse than they were in the early 90's.

Seems like a great idea to me.

The U.K. did it! Never mind the fact that the U.K. has about a quarter of the population and 2 percent of the area. If one country can do it, every country can!

Speak for yourself, I live in the country!


I think the reason we haven't had any school shootings is that the guns when not in use are required by law to be locked away, unloaded in a special gun cabinet, and only the owner has access to the key. I said this in another thread, but since it's highly unlikely the rather paranoid populace will ever give up their guns, I think it could be useful to consider tighter restrictions on gun storage in America. Keep them locked away out of reach of children and teens, except under constant supervision, and teens like this will find it a lot harder to access deadly weapons for school shootings. I don't know if this would have helped in this particular case, but it would surely lessen the huge amount of death caused by accidental discharge of guns every year in the US. I dunno, just a thought.

Oh really?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunblane_school_massacre
Also, don't even talk about the "huge amount of death caused by accidental discharge of guns every year in the US." That is a lie. Only a few hundred people a year die in the US because of accidents involving guns, and that includes mis-fires and drunk hunters shooting their hunting buddies. More people accidentally poison themselves than die from an accidental discharge. The idea that guns are these dangerous things that will just decide to fire on their own is a lie, that has been told to you by the anti-gun community to scare you over to their side.

 

[spartan231490]

-wonka-

Again, I'm going to slap this one on here.

You don't win an argument with a quickmeme generator, and if "But criminals will always break laws because they're criminals!" is all you have to say for your case, maybe you should stand aside and let people who actually make good points speak for that case, as you're doing it a disservice.

It happened in China only about a week ago. 20 kids stabbed.

Yes and not a single kid died because of the stabbing.

How about the 10 times a year that Japan suffers a massive stabbing spree that usually have death tolls similar to columbine.

 

[thebobmaster_v1legacy]

snip

I think you need to check your sarcasm detector. Seems to be broken.

 

[Meight08]

Oh really?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunblane_school_massacre
Also, don't even talk about the "huge amount of death caused by accidental discharge of guns every year in the US." That is a lie. Only a few hundred people a year die in the US because of accidents involving guns, and that includes mis-fires and drunk hunters shooting their hunting buddies. More people accidentally poison themselves than die from an accidental discharge. The idea that guns are these dangerous things that will just decide to fire on their own is a lie, that has been told to you by the anti-gun community to scare you over to their side.

If you had actually read that article you would have seen that was before the ban

 

[joeman098]

Yea lets just ban all guns cause that def wont just make a black market for them causing more crime like all the self righteous people did with the whole lets Ban alcohol thing that didn't create a huge underground organized crime ring.

people are short sighted and quick to follow the rest of the herd lead by their Sheppard the mass media. People kill people Guns dont kill people. Ban guns people will still get them or they will just go to other methods to cause death so what are we going to ban all explosive / poisons / sharp things? bad things happen people do bad things

Personally I think if we all treated each other better things like this wouldn't happen as much. its not the guns that are the problem its people bullying and making other people feel bad. Imagine if we lived where everyone got along and treated each other with respect? theres a fucking dream.

 

[spartan231490]

Oh really?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunblane_school_massacre
Also, don't even talk about the "huge amount of death caused by accidental discharge of guns every year in the US." That is a lie. Only a few hundred people a year die in the US because of accidents involving guns, and that includes mis-fires and drunk hunters shooting their hunting buddies. More people accidentally poison themselves than die from an accidental discharge. The idea that guns are these dangerous things that will just decide to fire on their own is a lie, that has been told to you by the anti-gun community to scare you over to their side.

If you had actually read that article you would have seen that was before the ban

You didn't specify post-ban, but fair point. However, the UK murder rate has still climbed ever since the ban.

 

[spartan231490]

snip

I think you need to check your sarcasm detector. Seems to be broken.

Sorry, it's been a long couple of days on the escapist.

 

[DrunkenMonkey]

I think we need stricter gun control laws, not simply ban all guns. This extreme progressive law, will fail before it even starts. Just look at what happened with the prohibition, it failed before it even started with bootleggers. If they pass a ban all firearms law, the black market is literally going to get a massive influx of customers.

 

[Harker067]

Why illegalizing guns will not work QUICKLY in the U.S

There I fixed it for you . No honestly this isn't a problem you can solve with a silver bullet (to use a gun metaphore). There have been plenty of deeply ingrained cultural practices that we realized or are realizing are stupid and they don't go away over night but if you make small steps, build up a base and work at changing thing it can happen.

To bad the pro-gun base has been doing just that. 2 decades ago the Gun control was at 53% in polls. Pro-Gun groups have done exactly that, and is getting stronger by the day. Clocking at 49% in favor of staying the same or being less restrictive on guns. They are still going around doing just that, and the gun control groups are getting less funds, though with this shooting they'll get a spike then fall back down as the week pass. There's a reason why Gun Control groups call pro-guns groups bullies, they got the backing of the American people and have a stronger ground game, and have grown to be a powerful force in the political arena in America. Greatly helps that the gun culture has been ingrained in American culture, so they are building a base for protecting that right, by decree of the Second Amendment.

On that note, people needs to stop saying we can easily ban guns, by just passing laws to limit, and ban sells of guns, and take them like we did. Yeah because law dictate that owning a gun is a constitutional right, and yourfighting the 2nd amendment, so it wouldn't fly. At least know our laws.

Sure and female genital mutilation was being opposed at least as far back as the 1920s. Sati has been outlawed in india for almost 200 years and there was still an occurrence as recently as 2008. 2 decades is very little time in terms of overthrowing a cultural practice. Give me 3-5 generations then we'll talk.

 

[MysticToast]

You talk about removing guns from private owners like it'd be impossible- I present to you this. Give them insintive- Give them a chance to turn them in for money, any that don't have their's taken away by force, preferably by the Military. What are they going to do? Shoot the soldiers at their door who are armed to the teeth?

You're clearly underestimating the amount of gun owners we have here who value their firearms more than their own lives.

Please tell me you're not defending this mentality or putting it on a pedestal as something to be proud of.

Where would you get that idea? I was just pointing out the very real mentality that exists in this country.

 

[Matthew Ostman]

Maybe then he would have built a bomb or done some worse things later in life. Guns are not the only way to kill and crazy people are....crazy.

And maybe he wouldn't, imagine that. You know how asinine it sounds to say it's okay it was "only" a shooting because it "might have been" a bombing otherwise.

I agree that this problem needs to be tackled on several fronts, but as I said before, gun control and a socialized system of mental healthcare are simply not mutually exclusive. It's not "one or the other".

Guns have always been legal here in the US, why are we only seeing these mass shootings in the last couple of decades? That's the question we should be asking because as long as the societal problem remains, there will be people looking for a way to do these things.

Anyway, I am done with this topic because I would only be repeating myself.

The guns that were around when the 2nd amendment was drafted were a little different than the guns we have today. The sort of weapon that the founding fathers would have owned could, in the hands of a SKILLED operator, fire about three shots per minute. PER MINUTE. Shootings like we have today were not possible because anyone who attempted such a thing could have been easily overpowered during the 20+ seconds it would take them to reload. The founding fathers may have not wanted to ban all guns, but they also never intended for any average citizen to walk into a store and walk out with a device that can fire 30+ rounds as fast as you can pull the trigger.

 

[Tony2077]

lax gun laws or harsh gun laws won't change a thing until people themselves change

 

[sextus the crazy]

Pretty sure slavery was an enormous part of America's heritage and identity, and you seem to have removed that one.

Slavery is still illegal, but the divide caused by the issue is still pretty ingrained into our culture.

 

[freakonaleash]

Of course, getting rid of guns will not stop someones urge to kill, but if guns were less available people would have to act on their urges with less lethal weapons and less people would die.