Why illegalizing guns will not work in the U.S

Hero in a half shell

It's not easy being green
Dec 30, 2009
4,286
0
0
spartan231490 said:
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.
The Statistical News Release Homicides, Firearm Offences and Intimate Violence 2010/11: Supplementary Volume 2 to Crime in England and Wales 2010/11
In 2012 the Home Office reported that, "in 2010/11, firearms were involved in 11,227 recorded offences in England and Wales, the seventh consecutive annual fall".
Wikipedia then notes that "Firearms statistics in England and Wales include airguns and imitations guns, which make up a high proportion of these recorded offences" Which is correct (4000 of those offences were air-guns) So the UK's gun crime has been falling after the increased restrictions, on gun control, consecutively, for years.
spartan231490 said:
Nevermind the fact that 3 of the 4 deadliest elementary school shootings took place in the UK or Germany.
Maybe so, but America clearly has a huge problem with school shootings not present anywhere else in the world. This year (2012) America had 6 incidents of guns being used in school (mainly only as a weapon of suicide) and one with a knife. The rest of the world have had one incident this year. Just look at the sheer distribution of school shootings in the Wikipedia article about it: America get their own separate page to list their shootings, which dwarves the lists of the other continents. There is a big problem in the US, and it seems to be getting worse.

spartan231490 said:
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.
Oh I agree completely. The most common cause of death by white males aged 28-30 is suicide. Clearly something is seriously wrong with the way our society is treating mental health issues, this is a huge problem, and one that I would say is very much a main cause of these school shootings. A better infrastructure of mental care must be created for people, and this is perhaps more needed than gun control because it is such a widespread problem that will, if it is successful, do a lot to help reduce school shootings, but I also think it would be very much worthwhile to reduce the ease with which guns can be obtained by people.
spartan231490 said:
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.
According to this website: http://mortality-rates.findthedata.org/l/14990/Accidental-discharge-of-firearms It averages at 747 people per year killed by accidental misfire, which is no small amount.
This Wiki page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate
Includes accidental deaths, with a population average death rate thingymibob, to average everyone's out for comparison. The US had 0.27 accidental discharge deaths per thousand, (11th from top overall) the U.K had 0.1. [EDIT: It's 0.01, derp] (11th from bottom overall) That IS a big difference, in fact there is a huge difference in every figure.

Australia had a huge gun culture, much like the US's, until a terrible mass shooting there, this article explains it better than I could: http://world.time.com/2012/12/17/when-massacres-force-change-lessons-from-the-u-k-and-australia/?iid=gs-main-lead.
If you look back at the wiki chart, you'll see Australia a good 3/4 of the way down the chart, with very little gun crime and related deaths compared to America, and no Mass shootings since, so it can happen in a very pro-gun area. No other first world country has as much gun related crime or death as America, no other country has as many school shootings, there is a reason for that, and a solution, yes it requires not just a change of law on weapons, but a change of attitude as well, and an addressing of the issues of why young American males are taking their own lives and the lives of others in these 'events', but it'll take all those things to properly make an impact on these horrific incidents.
 

Faraja

New member
Apr 30, 2012
89
0
0
Casual Shinji said:
Faraja said:
Casual Shinji said:
I don't think I've ever heard anyone literally say 'ban all guns', seeing as that's pretty much impossible.

But there's no reason not to stop public access to automatic weapons. You want a gun for home security or to feel save in your neighborhood? Your standard revolver is more than enough to fill that task. You don't need AK-47's, M-16's, or even a 9mm.

Military grade fire arms should be kept out of the public's hands.

But then it's already too late. This whole gun problem in America is just one big fucking vicious circle; "Oh my God, another shooting spree... We should get more guns to protect our selves!"
You can't exactly walk into a Walmart and buy a full-auto anymore, ya know?
No, but the general public can buy full automatic weapons legally. It doesn't matter if it's not at the general store, the fact that it's even possible is fucking ridiculous. And I don't care how well you check out mentally, the average joe should not be able to buy military weaponry.

And wait... "anymore"? You mean it was actually possible at one point to buy full automatic weapons at Wallmart? For Christ's sake...
I agree, bad choice of words. I don't know if you ever could buy a full auto in Walmart, I'm assuming not.

But, I see no reason why someone shouldn't be able to acquire a full-auto. Because of what they might do with it? You'd be amazed what you can do with just the objects lying around your house. Acetone (don't think that's how it's actually spelled) and bleach make a pretty potent combo, and it's much easier to get your hands on those. Pipe bombs are easy to make, and you can get everything from a single store. Should we just start banning things for what they might be used for?
 

getoffmycloud

New member
Jun 13, 2011
440
0
0
All I am going to say is there is one massive thing that was a part of American culture that no longer happens- Slavery
 

talker

New member
Nov 18, 2011
313
0
0
After reading through this thread, I noticed a large amount of people going on about how guns are part of America's heritage and culture, but they're not. a katana is a traditionally Japanese weapon because it was only used in Japan, but a double-barreled shotgun or M9 pistol is not only used in the US, and neither are any of the other weapons in the American civilian's arsenal.
 

Faraja

New member
Apr 30, 2012
89
0
0
AldUK said:
FelixG said:
MASTACHIEFPWN said:
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?
Well considering that I personally own several AR15s with FMJ ammo, as well as an assault shotgun, it wouldnt be very feasable to 'take' my firearms without it being a pyrrhic victory for whoever came to take them.

AldUK said:
My God... the paranoia of you Americans is unbelievable. "Iff'n tha gunmernt takes mah shooty-sticks den dey gunna kill us all uh-huh-yup!"

Grow up.
"I dont like your facts, so you need to grow up!"

Classic
First of all, why the hell is the first thing you think of "IF" gun law is enforced is to shoot the officials that come to collect? Do you not see how some people may see that as a little over the top?

And secondly in regards to my post, it was intentionally degrading for the reason that the post I quoted was ridiculous, comparing yourselves to tragic government oppression over the past century is absurd, you are a democratic 1st world country, yet you seemingly have the mentality of an under-siege dictatorship.
Not really. Something that's guaranteed in the Second Amendment, right after the right to Free Speech might I add, and acts as safety net between you and whatever want's to cause you harm is something one generally wants to have around. Americans, a growing number of them every day it seems, don't trust the police force, and we certainly don't trust our government.

You know what stops a nation from falling under the thumb of a tyrant? An armed populace with the will to stand and means to stand against their oppressors. If you really think the conflict in Syria would have ended better if the people there had stuck to their protests, then you're a fool.

Now, had they had access to military-equivalent hardware, al-Assad might have thought twice before being a complete tool.
 

Elyxard

New member
Dec 12, 2010
137
0
0
Australia's model for this sounds perfect for the US. Let the guys who actually have a reason to keep guns and forbid everyone else seems like a proper compromise. The buyback program would be next year's "cash for clunkers", which also worked fairly well. It doesn't have to happen overnight, just restricting the purchase of guns alone would set ourselves up for a curve towards less gun violence in the long run.

And for those saying that it'll be "too hard" to do and that it "wouldn't work in the US", I have only one thing to say to that: Boo-hoo. We don't do things because they are easy, but because they are hard.
 

Vegosiux

New member
May 18, 2011
4,381
0
0
ultrabiome said:
Vegosiux said:
Why not the gun owner? If I own a car, I also have to pay for the registration and annual technical check-ups myself all the same. And regular check-ups to determine I'm still fit to drive. It's my responsibility which I need to live up to if I want to exercise my right to drive.

So, why not the gun owner?
you don't have a right to drive in the United States. if you did, it would be part of the Constitution, like the right to bear arms.
Objection, relevance? Okay, so in USA nothing is a right unless it's in the Constitution if it's as you say, but I don't see how that should make any difference, or why a gun owner should not be obliged to go through regular check-ups in order to determine whether or not they are still fit to keep and bear their arms.

Or in other words, nobody would lose the right to keep and bear arms so long they remain fit to use them, all that would be required here is to show some personal responsibility about it. "You want to own a gun? Fine, but we won't just sell you one until you prove you're fit to use it responsibly."
 

RJ Dalton

New member
Aug 13, 2009
2,285
0
0
You're really all missing a serious point here.
Guns have been legal in this country since it's founding and up until the mid 1900s, there were no gun control laws at all. Occasionally, you had duels, (which were swiftly made illegal) but mass shootings did not occur in places where law enforcement was strong and organized until the prohibition era and those were usually shootouts between cops and criminals or organized crime executions. It wasn't until the last twenty years that school shootings like this have become a more common thing.
If guns have been legal in this country for years, but mass shootings are only a recent problem, that suggests the problem is not guns, but culture. Given that this is the case, banning guns isn't going to stop the problem. People who want to commit horrible crimes will simply find other means. And they will still get their hands on firearms if they really want to. There are channels to go through that allow you to get your hands on automatic and military grade firearms, if you go about it the right way, even though it's against the law to own them.

If the shootings are to be stopped, we need to address the cultural issue that is behind them.
 

Kopikatsu

New member
May 27, 2010
4,924
0
0
Hero in a half shell said:
According to this website: http://mortality-rates.findthedata.org/l/14990/Accidental-discharge-of-firearms It averages at 747 people per year killed by accidental misfire, which is no small amount.
You think 747 is a large number? 747 isn't even an atom of a drop in the bucket. Alcohol alone kills 75,000~ Americans a year. Heart related illness and cancer ring up at over a million per year. Getting worked up over 747 deaths is like being upset that you can't buy an iPad 2 with a penny.(I mention those three specifically because they're lifestyle choices. Except for cancer in a way. It is possible to get cancer because of lifestyle choices.)
 

AldUK

New member
Oct 29, 2010
420
0
0
Faraja said:
You know what stops a nation from falling under the thumb of a tyrant? An armed populace with the will to stand and means to stand against their oppressors. If you really think the conflict in Syria would have ended better if the people there had stuck to their protests, then you're a fool.

Now, had they had access to military-equivalent hardware, al-Assad might have thought twice before being a complete tool.
I don't agree with protests or military action by the people in Syria or elsewhere. I by no means advocate the Syrian government either. My own opinion on the matter is that at it's root, the conflict in Syria is a cultural one, which could of been prevented and the situation improved through a democratic and cultural shift.

And that's also in many ways how I feel about the gun debate. As many others have said, the gun problem in America is ingrained in your culture, but that is no excuse for apathy. Anything can be changed if you have the will to do so. I believe the solution to your problems is better comprehensive medical care, particularly mental health and a gradual shift in culture to make guns unappealing, much like what has happened in regards to smoking.

It frankly terrifies me that many people here believe in violence as the first and only means to protect their interests.
 

spartan231490

New member
Jan 14, 2010
5,186
0
0
Hero in a half shell said:
spartan231490 said:
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.
The Statistical News Release Homicides, Firearm Offences and Intimate Violence 2010/11: Supplementary Volume 2 to Crime in England and Wales 2010/11
In 2012 the Home Office reported that, "in 2010/11, firearms were involved in 11,227 recorded offences in England and Wales, the seventh consecutive annual fall".
Wikipedia then notes that "Firearms statistics in England and Wales include airguns and imitations guns, which make up a high proportion of these recorded offences" Which is correct (4000 of those offences were air-guns) So the UK's gun crime has been falling after the increased restrictions, on gun control, consecutively, for years.
spartan231490 said:
Nevermind the fact that 3 of the 4 deadliest elementary school shootings took place in the UK or Germany.
Maybe so, but America clearly has a huge problem with school shootings not present anywhere else in the world. This year (2012) America had 6 incidents of guns being used in school (mainly only as a weapon of suicide) and one with a knife. The rest of the world have had one incident this year. Just look at the sheer distribution of school shootings in the Wikipedia article about it: America get their own separate page to list their shootings, which dwarves the lists of the other continents. There is a big problem in the US, and it seems to be getting worse.

spartan231490 said:
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.
Oh I agree completely. The most common cause of death by white males aged 28-30 is suicide. Clearly something is seriously wrong with the way our society is treating mental health issues, this is a huge problem, and one that I would say is very much a main cause of these school shootings. A better infrastructure of mental care must be created for people, and this is perhaps more needed than gun control because it is such a widespread problem that will, if it is successful, do a lot to help reduce school shootings, but I also think it would be very much worthwhile to reduce the ease with which guns can be obtained by people.
spartan231490 said:
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.
According to this website: http://mortality-rates.findthedata.org/l/14990/Accidental-discharge-of-firearms It averages at 747 people per year killed by accidental misfire, which is no small amount.
This Wiki page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate
Includes accidental deaths, with a population average death rate thingymibob, to average everyone's out for comparison. The US had 0.27 accidental discharge deaths per thousand, (11th from top overall) the U.K had 0.1. (11th from bottom overall) That IS a big difference, in fact there is a huge difference in every figure.

Australia had a huge gun culture, much like the US's, until a terrible mass shooting there, this article explains it better than I could: http://world.time.com/2012/12/17/when-massacres-force-change-lessons-from-the-u-k-and-australia/?iid=gs-main-lead.
If you look back at the wiki chart, you'll see Australia a good 3/4 of the way down the chart, with very little gun crime and related deaths compared to America, and no Mass shootings since, so it can happen in a very pro-gun area. No other first world country has as much gun related crime or death as America, no other country has as many school shootings, there is a reason for that, and a solution, yes it requires not just a change of law on weapons, but a change of attitude as well, and an addressing of the issues of why young American males are taking their own lives and the lives of others in these 'events', but it'll take all those things to properly make an impact on these horrific incidents.
You're rate of gun crime might be decreasing, but your murder rate skyrocketed after the law was put in place.

America has a problem with violence in general, our murder rate is several times higher than any other modern nation excluding Russia, you can't compare us to any other nation and draw a meaningful conclusion, we're too much of an outlier.

It seems like reducing gun availability would help, but the studies just don't support that.

Your math is wrong, we have a .0025 rate of deaths due to accidental discharge per 1000 people, and that's based on the 747 number that you provided. Your second site must be inaccurate for some reason or another, our rate of deaths to accidental discharge is low. 747 sounds like a high number until you realize our population is 300 million, far above the population of any European nation.

Ausralia did not have a massive gun culture like the US, no nation does or ever did. We have more guns than people in this nation, no other nation was ever even close. Besides, our nation was found by guns, with gun rights as an inherent given, that is different than any other nation except maybe Switzerland, but they have a much more militarized, as opposed to individualized gun ownership.

You have to understand, you are taking statistics out of nowhere and trying to draw conclusions from them, that's bad science. The studies do not support a positive correlation between gun availability and crime. Hell, the 9 nations in Europe with the lowest gun ownership, have a murder rate 3 times higher than the 9 nations with the highest gun ownership. There is obviously more at work than just "more guns = more crime". The problem is our mental health, criminal, and drug enforcement systems, not our guns.
 

Bertylicious

New member
Apr 10, 2012
1,400
0
0
Bollocks to the lot of you. I've shot a gun before and I can tell you right now; it was LOUD!

To those who say that gun's are not worth tens of thousands of lives every year I say look; I don't think you realise just how loud we're talking about here.
 

SonOfVoorhees

New member
Aug 3, 2011
3,509
0
0
This thread is silly because we all know we are past making guns illegal. There are so many that it would be impossible. Psychos can never be stopped. But look at it this way, what about making the laws tighter to stop accidental deaths? Educate or have a licence only once you completed gun safety courses and ensure police are involved to ensure guns are secure away from kids. Make only small calibre weapons for private use, you dont need a machine gun for private protection. An if you want an assault rifle then its only allowed at a gun club and only stored there in there safes.
 

Heinrich843

New member
Apr 1, 2009
96
0
0
I agree guys- we gotta ban guns. It's just too easy for people to heat-seeking, aircraft destroying, bazooka, rpg, fully automatic assault rifles. I mean, I walk outside, and there's just this guy standing there next to this recoiless rifle he's set up on my front lawn.

So I ask him, "What are you planning to do with that?"

He just looks at me, and then he gets up ontop of it, and fires it into a house across the street. Meanwhile- there's just this sporadic machine-gun fire going on around the houses.

And then I woke up.
 

Faraja

New member
Apr 30, 2012
89
0
0
rhizhim said:
Friendly Lich said:
First I want to recommend a book "Deer hunting with Jesus" that I had to read in college. The author grew up in a very conservative home and is a "cultural defector" if you will. This book will give you an insight into the U.S gun culture, its also very funny.

With all the talk of guns and shootings recently I've read allot of posts from users oversees that suggest we simply make guns illegal in the U.S. The problem is it just wont work, guns have become an enormous part of america's culture and are apart of the nation's heritage/identity. I don't identify with the subculture that is obsessed with guns but I know people who are and if guns were made illegal there would be very large, very dangerous, armed riots all over the country.

Secondly there are huge, powerful lobbying groups that spend billions to maintain influence in Washington and they will not see the day when guns become illegal.

Gun laws and control might work but making guns completely illegal is not an option anymore.
we dont want to ban all guns at all.
we want to make it harder to get one and even slightly impossible to get rifles, bazookas and other high damadge and high velocity firearms.

you dont need a grenade launcher or a minigun or even an assault rifle for "hunting".
Did you just compare a rifle to a bazooka? It kinda tears your point to shreds when you compare even an M-4 to an anti-tank weapon. Besides, the price for just one rocket would be astronomical so as to make it unfeasible.

rhizhim said:
and we want a longer waiting time with a better background research before you give a gun out.
And what are you going to look for? Past incidents of mental instability? Are you going to rule out anyone on anti-depressants? What about people who might have had anger issues when they were in their teens, are they going to be ruled out too?

rhizhim said:
people in america are always on the brink of being insanely scared of everything. and thats not normal.
"People"? No, I'm willing to bet it's actually a pretty small minority who are constantly afraid that something is going to happen. We actually made a show about it on NatGeo called Doomsday Preppers, very fun show.

rhizhim said:
the shooter turns out to be autistic and his mom was preparing for an possible end of the world scenario.
so ungrounded paranoia + a dog eat dog mentality = rampage.
Autism is actually a pretty big umbrella of a lot of different issues. Are you going to rule someone out because they have something that falls under the umbrella of Autism?

rhizhim said:
i was joking with a friend a month ago how many idiots are going to commit suicide because they ignore all the evidence and are afraid of dying in a horrible way like the mayans allegedly predicted.
and now we have a wave of people killing people.
A wave? I wasn't aware there was a wave, or that it was motivated by people fearing a possible apocalypse. You'll have the cults and crazies who hold to those beliefs despite all evidence, but you'll rarely see that in the general public.

rhizhim said:
you just have to change your mentality (and tv program) and be less scared of everything. it might help you cure that itching trigger finger.
All you have to do is get rid of sensationalist journalism. Beyond that, no one has any right to dictate what a movie/show can or can't contain. The people have the right not to see, and theaters/stations have a right not to air it, but no government organization has the right to say that you cannot, under any circumstances, have x, y, and z.

rhizhim said:
lets look at the problem:

you have several shoot out with firearms in your country since its easy as cake to get a firearm and everyone is scared to be jumped at and get killed. (thats why you have the silly stand your ground law in some states)

but you dont want to make it harder to obtain a gun. since it would interfear with a over 200 years old parchement that gives you the right to defend yourself against the tea drinking, queen loving, bean eating, bad teethed british scum.
The only shoot outs I've heard about occur when the aggressor makes it very clear that the victim will do what he/she wants, or they'll shoot. I call that self defense. You can't rely on the police to make it there before you, yourself, get shot/robbed/or otherwise injured, if you can even contact them at all.

rhizhim said:
you want to include the newest high tech gizmo super A.I. controlled microchip in every gun so it only shoots when you say the phrase "Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious" or "Avada Kedavra maximus deadliness"
A simple point-and-shot set works for me.
[/quote]
 

tangoprime

Renegade Interrupt
May 5, 2011
716
0
0
xDarc said:
You know what else bothers me about this whole thing; all this focus on stopping spree killers. It's emotional over-reaction. Spree killers account for what? Like 0.005% of annual firearms deaths in the US? Hell- I'll even take out all the suicides- 0.01%.

Everyone wants to know why the spree killer does it, but when 4 people were shot and killed last week in a home invasion/robbery here in Detroit, nobody gives a rat's ass.
Exactly, the same weekend this happened, that is, the Friday the spree happened, then Saturday and Sunday, there were 10 drug/gang related shooting murders in Chicago, a city with extremely extensive gun control laws.
 

Starik20X6

New member
Oct 28, 2009
1,685
0
0
Xanex said:
Because outlawing drugs like meth and MJ has obviously worked so well in America.
Don't start comparing guns to other illegal substances, because they are not the same and shouldn't be treated as such. How many people have the ability to grow guns in their closet? Get back to me when a psycho can slaughter 28 people with a dime-bag of weed.
 

Faraja

New member
Apr 30, 2012
89
0
0
AldUK said:
Faraja said:
You know what stops a nation from falling under the thumb of a tyrant? An armed populace with the will to stand and means to stand against their oppressors. If you really think the conflict in Syria would have ended better if the people there had stuck to their protests, then you're a fool.

Now, had they had access to military-equivalent hardware, al-Assad might have thought twice before being a complete tool.
I don't agree with protests or military action by the people in Syria or elsewhere. I by no means advocate the Syrian government either. My own opinion on the matter is that at it's root, the conflict in Syria is a cultural one, which could of been prevented and the situation improved through a democratic and cultural shift.
You contradicted yourself. You don't agree with the protest, or the revolution, but you think the problem can be solved with a cultural shift. Let's ignore, for the time being, that the Syrians were protesting for more freedoms in their very-undemocratic country. What, then do you call protests and revolutions? Romps through the woods? There were massive protests and rallies in the sixties in the US, it was a cultural movement by a sub-sect to change things in the rest of the culture. It achieved some good things, and a lot more terrible things, but it was a cultural movement.

The Syrians tried things the peaceful, trying to change the ways of their country in a way that's often been associated with the democratic process. It didn't work. Their leader turned his military against them, and forced them to fight back. Also a cultural movement. The US wouldn't exist today if we hadn't done the exact same thing.

So, if you don't agree with protests, or revolutions, what other methods do you think people should utilize to change things? Mass thinking meetings where everyone gets together and thinks really hard about changing something, in the hopes that their combined brain power will spontaneously change the universe?

AldUK said:
And that's also in many ways how I feel about the gun debate. As many others have said, the gun problem in America is ingrained in your culture, but that is no excuse for apathy. Anything can be changed if you have the will to do so. I believe the solution to your problems is better comprehensive medical care, particularly mental health and a gradual shift in culture to make guns unappealing, much like what has happened in regards to smoking.

It frankly terrifies me that many people here believe in violence as the first and only means to protect their interests.
You think it's apathy? It's anything but. I do care about gun control, namely, I care about making sure that the rights of the people aren't torn away because a few bad people did a few bad things. It was terrible, yes, but that shouldn't give the government the right to take something away from millions of law-abiding residents.

How do you really think you could make guns unappealing? They're literally everywhere. In TV shows, movies, video games, books, and magazines. Sure, you can sit here and say guns are bad, and list the reasons why, but there's an even greater fore telling you the exact opposite, including a large number of people who are very happy gun owners. Besides, why should you? Because some bad people did bad things?

On your last point, if someone breaks into your house, or tries to take you out on the street, what choices do you have? Invite them to sit and chat over some tea and biscuits in the hopes of changing their ways? You could always try calling the cops, and hope they'll actually respond and respond in time to maybe do some good. You could also roll over and simply let the criminals do what they want. I suppose another option would be to try and engage them close up, putting yourself in greater danger by closing with someone who may already have it in their head to kill anyone that get's in there way, that might be stronger then you, might be better armed then you, and might be a better fighter.

I just hope you aren't a parent if you chose that last option. If things don't turn out your way, things could go very very bad for you children, and spouse.

When you stop and think about it, taking away a persons right to defend themselves with a fire arm and deadly force is actually a terrible thing, far worse then what a few people will do with guns. It's something I don't think gun control groups really wrap their heads around. At least the NRA and pro-gun people, like myself, acknowledge that bad things will continue to happen with fire arms. Have the pro-gun control people ever actually thought about how many bad things will happen from a want of adequate protection?