Topic: gun control

[micah]

since a recent thread brought up the question of whether or not the death penalty deters criminals... how about your thoughts on gun control laws.

it is a well documents fact (or coincidence, depending on how you want to interpret it) that states and cities with LESS regulation on private citizens carrying firearms for self protection also have LESS crime and murder per-capita.

on a somewhat ironic note:

a year ago this past January in Virginia, "A bill that would have given college students and employees the right to carry handguns on campus died with nary a shot being fired in the General Assembly.

House Bill 1572 didn't get through the House Committee on Militia, Police and Public Safety. It died Monday in the subcommittee stage, the first of several hurdles bills must overcome before becoming laws."

so apparently it is against the law to have a gun on campus in Virgina.  Not good if you're a student who wants to defend yourself.  It would seem that the asshole this morning didn't realize there was a law in effect. funny how gun regulations only apply to law-abiding citizens.

Virginia Tech spokesman Larry Hincker was happy to hear the bill was defeated. "I'm sure the university community is appreciative of the General Assembly's actions because this will help parents, students, faculty and visitors feel safe on our campus." (article)

your thoughts?

[KnuckleBuckett]

You are an idiot.

Guns are the problem.  Why would anyone have to defend themselves if guns are banned?  People would no longer have any way of killing each other on a mass or individual basis.  How obvious can the answer be?

C'mon use your Nixon head.  ONLY the government should have the right to defend us, as we are too stupid to defend ourselves on a personal basis.

[KnuckleBuckett]

Of course that was sacrasm.

I am with you and the facts you presented all the way.

GJ micah!

[Perspective]

There is no reason for any citizen to carry automatic weapons or handguns. Hunting rifles, sure, they have a legit purpose, but anything else has no purpose other than to harm other people.

[PJYelton]

I'm all for the idea of gun control. I have yet to see any evidence or statistic showing how often having a gun actually saved someones life, but instead have seen many statistics where owning a gun has accidentally killed someone or allowed someone to quickly kill someone out of immediate anger.

In fact, I'd argue that owning a gun often puts people in worse situations to begin with. A woman with no business walking down a dark alleyway suddenly thinks its ok because she has a gun. A husband hears noices and crashes downstairs and instead of staying with his family and calling 911 tries to be a hero with his new gun and go and "check it out". Do you think any less people would have died at VT if students were carrying their own guns? I think it more likely you'd get some idiot thinking they can be the hero and leaving their dorm room, *bam* student dead.

That said, I think America is screwed because our culture has become so ingrained on guns that it would be nearly impossible to get rid of them now without causing more crime and issues immediately.

And the whole notion of cities that have less gun control have less crime is BS in my opinion. If you have more crime to begin with it stands to reason they'll then institute gun laws.

[KnuckleBuckett]

You have to be kidding.

There are good reasons to own and carry a handgun on ones person.  Defence of person, property and or family being high among them.  Another is that unless the person carrying the weapon is misusing or mishandeling it, it is none of anyone elses business to try to take it away(or ban it).  Try focussing this anti-gun bull roar on proven criminals not those undeserving of such disrespectful treatment.

Want a good example of society banning guns check out the USSR and China.  Another spectacular example of what happens when the people can no longer defend themselves is Nazi Germany.  Keep it up and someday you or the next generation or so will see shit like that here.  Oh and the argument "It will neeeevvver happen here." is just so much bloody shit.

[PJYelton]

You're right, of course its only the proven criminals that ever do bad things with guns ever.   So I take it you wouldn't have an issue with me or anyone else owning anthrax or building a nuclear bomb?  What if we promise to never misuse them?

[Rob]

Deja vu

[drakkenkorin]

>>Defence of person, property and or family being high among them.<<

if i'm not mistaken, tx is the only state in which it is legal to kill someone who breaking into your property (house or auto) or if you are "in fear of your life" - of course they never explain what "in fear" actually means ...

the strange thing - if someone breaks in and you shoot them (which is within your legal rights) and they survive, you can get sued.  if you wind up killing them - its all good.  makes perfect sense...

[KnuckleBuckett]

Look across history and you will see over and over again what happens to a civilian populace that is no longer capable of protecting itself against its own government.

Why does this have to keep repeating?

Folks just like you.  

Wake up.  Weapons in civilian hands are a necessity.  Yes.  There is a cost, but it is nothing in comparison to losing what little freedom we have left.

Further I did not mention WMDs including fully automatic weapons.  Don't be an ass using nonsensical arguments such as Anthrax.  Sheesh.

Do you honestly think that if the Jewish population was as heavily armed as US civilians are that they would have been exterminated to the extent that they were?

How about the US revolutionalry war?  Armed citizens tossing a government WAY out of control out of power (mind you a perfect time for all US citizens to remember to say thanks to France for the help)?  

It goes back to biblical times.

[KnuckleBuckett]

FL also.

[Mike]

Gun control means using both hands...

[Mike]

the strange thing - if someone breaks in and you shoot them (which is within your legal rights) and they survive, you can get sued.  if you wind up killing them - its all good.  makes perfect sense...

Repeat after me:  2 to the chest, 1 to the head

[charlie]

While the story about the bill that didn't pass in Virginia is ironic, it is not a very good argument (in fact it makes me want to disagree on principle). Similarly, any comment about what happened at Virginia Tech today as evidence that gun control is good or bad might be interesting, but it is useless and harmful for an actual discussion of the issues. (Feel free to continue with those kinds of comments, I seriously don't mind, I'm just saying I hope they aren't being given as actual arguments).

That said, I'd love to hear good reasons about why gun control is a bad thing. My intuition says it is not. My feeling for our society and humans in general says it is not a bad thing (I'm specifically talking about the U.S.).

The idea that an armed populace is necessary to prevent a government from going too far sounds plausible, although I don't buy it just yet. The idea that less regulation implies less crime sounds dubious to my logic sensors, so unless I'm presented with more details I'm going to have to just keep that thought in the background. Any other reasons out there?

I can understand the perspective that a people need to be armed to prevent a corrupted government from committing atrocities and taking away freedoms, but in our society, do you really think that allowing people to have guns will be a relevant solution to such a problem? Our government is a republic/democracy, we vote on who we want to represent us in that government. If the majority of people want change, then the government will change. An armed militia would only be helpful if a minority wants a change, but allowing that to happen would not be a good thing.

If the president or some other person in power gained control of our military and attempted to circumvent the constitution and laws we have been governed by for centuries, I find it hard to believe that the members of that military would follow blindly.

So when I look at our society, and compare the likelihood that we will ever need to have armed civilians to prevent too much governmental power, versus the possibility that unarmed civilians would make a safer and better society, there is not much of a contest. My logic says the second possibility is so much greater than the first, that gun control just makes sense.

Trust me, I'd love to hear persuasive arguments. I just don't see them right now.

[stealth]

It think it boils down to gun culture in America being antiquated and based upon principles of freedom which in this day and age are irrellevant, which in turn relates to why any whackjob with a screw loose can get his hands on a gun and murder innocent people.  I hate to be a cynic, and all due respect to the victims of this tragedy, but it won't be the last time we see the same headline, different place.  It's criminal that it's happened but what, if anything, will be done to make sure it never happens again?