Assault Weapons Ban- Yea or Nea?

[cgrabe]

I'd be thrilled if the ban expired. As others have said, it's all cosmetic. A good modern hunting rifle is more powerful and accurate than a typical 'assault weapon'. Banning firearms is just attacking a particular symptom. If banning them actually contributed to reducing crime, I'd bet Wahington DC would be a whole lot safer.

Whether a gun is a 'hunting' gun should have absolutely nothing to do with whether it should be permitted or banned. The Second Amendment does not protect our right to shoot Elk. It protects our right to both keep and bear arms. I do both.

 

[Tyler718]

Originally posted by PumaWard
While I admit that the following statement might be on the ignorant side when you consider other factors... it is still true.

Guns don't kill people; people kill people. Plain and simple.


If someone wants to kill another person, they will do it. Having a gun or not isn't going to change their mind, they have a billion other methods they could use... knives, poison, baseball bats, golf clubs, cars, arson, water, dogs... the list is never ending.

And, as already said, gun control doesn't solve anything. Law abiding citizens are the only ones who'd follow it and the only ones being punished. A little "gun control" isn't going to stop the crack dealer down the street from getting a gun if he wants one... heck, they ALREADY are getting them illegally.

I fully agree. I own roughly own some 20 weapons. Does that mean mean I'm going to be some mass murderer. I think not.

What chaps me is that people blame inanimate (sp?) objects for their actions. Somebody has to pull the trigger, thrust the knife, swing the bat, etc.... So should all these objects be out lawed. I think not.

 

[Cheech]

I don't like guns.. . Don't think people should have them... It's too easy for someone to pull a trigger when you've blown a gasket, even if it's for a few seconds.. I;d rather stay away from them, and hope that the people I care about don't get close to them either...

imo

 

[Lila]

Originally posted by cheech
I don't like guns.. . Don't think people should have them... It's too easy for someone to pull a trigger when you've blown a gasket, even if it's for a few seconds.. I;d rather stay away from them, and hope that the people I care about don't get close to them either...

imo

It's even easier for them to grab a knife or use their bare hands. Guns are not the reason for deaths. Plain and simple.

It's like saying it's McDonald's fault people are fat. Or the carmaker's fault for road rage. They use the vehicle as a weapon, don't they?

Once again, using inanimate objects as the fault for things happening is ... weak.

It's people that do things, not things that do things.



Lila

 

[mogurnda]

I own roughly own some 20 weapons. Does that mean mean I'm going to be some mass murderer. I think not.

Nope. You are also trained to use them effectively, unlike a lot of people who believe that they can "protect" themselves with firearms. My ex was a federal agent who got a little tired of seeing people killed with their own guns. For most, it's a false sense of security. Plus, the more legal guns there are, the more will fall into the wrong hands when they are stolen.

I won't convince anyone, but I am always amazed that people think that they are safer with guns in the house.

 

[dwayne]

Look at your desk. Just about anything on there can be used as a weapon to kill (or if not kill, seriously injure) someone. Should the government outlaw ball point pens, scissors, picture frames, paper weights, keyboards, or rulers? No.

Look around your house. How many things contained in your house can you use to kill someone? Should the government outlaw kitchen knives, frying pans, Drain-o, ammonia, cyanide, gas stoves, telephone receivers, lamps, coffee tables, tv's, or even *gasp* fish tanks? No.

I am NOT a fan of guns. I'll never have one in my house. I'll never allow my son to play in a house where there are guns (unless said guns are in a locked cabinet and the keys are not where the kids can get to them).

Guns should be legal. All guns. I don't know much about guns, but every type of gun should be legal, including rifles, those guns that shoot off hundreds of bulletts at one pull of a trigger, Rambo type guns etc etc etc... As someone else said, a crackhead can get a gun illegally now, why should they be made illegal so that law abiding citizens can't get one? Making them illegal will not take them out of the hands of criminals.

~Tara

 

[happychem]

Ah, the never ending debate!

True, inanimate objects don't kill people. Or: "Gun's don't kill people; people kill people". However, that's hardly an argument supporting owning a gun.

The concept of having a gun for protection is foolishness. Are you going to carry one with you everywhere like in Westerns? Doubtful. Are you going to have one lying handy in every room in your house? Equally doubtful and completely irresponsible. If someone armed is robbing you, are you going to have a chance to run to your gun cabinet, or closet, or wherever you (hopefully responsibly) store your weapon? And if you do, are you bringing all your family and loved ones with you? And then? Assuming you were able to reach the gun and prevent your family from being taken hostage as you ran for your weapon, what then? Are you going to get into a big ole Hollywood gunfight? Please!

Conversely, the concept of a gun ban in the USA is rediculous. The ownership of them is ingrained in your culture. Furthermore, the argument that guns are the cause of crime is silly. Crime is a cultural thing, if the crook didn't have a gun, they'd find something else. If you want to cut down on crime, you need to attack the cause of crime, not the means of carrying it out.

However, guns serve only one purpose, to kill. Tara, Lila, Tyler, others, the argument that a gun is no different that bats, knives, powercords, etc. is weak. These things all serve a non-violent purpose. If you can explain to me the non-violent purpose of a handgun, I would be intrigued. That said, I don't have any problem with someone like Tyler owning guns, he knows how to use them and use them safely. The ability to acquire an object that serves no purpose but to kill, whether for hunting, target shooting, or 'protection', should be restricted to those who can demonstrate that they have the maturity to store them safely and the knowledge to use them properly. Restricting the circulation of guns to people who can use them safely and keep them out of curious (or nefarious) hands doesn't seem like a bad idea to me.

But a ban? That solves no problems.

 

[dwayne]

Happy ~ how about a sense of security (albeit a false one, in most cases) as a non-violent purpose of a gun? Even target shooting is essentially non-violent... My argument is, just about anything can be turned into a violent weapon, if one so chooses to do so. Those monster trucks that people build, only to crash and squish them up together, have no non-violent purpose. Shoot-em-up video games, essentially, have no non-violent purpose.

But I agree with you. People who are trained to safely use a gun (for hunting/target or skeet shooting etc) should be allowed to have a gun. Criminals will always be able to get their hands on guns, so why should law abiding citizens who are properly trained (or even no so properly trained) be banned from owning?

~Tara

 

[PumaWard]

Are you going to have one lying handy in every room in your house? Equally doubtful and completely irresponsible. If someone armed is robbing you, are you going to have a chance to run to your gun cabinet, or closet, or wherever you (hopefully responsibly) store your weapon?

Actually, yes, you do. You know your way around your house quickly; chances are the intruder doesn't
Guns also provide peace-of-mind. When I was being stalked all around town by some creep one night in my freshmen year of high school, I felt pretty safe knowing that my .22 was at the foot of my bed when I went to sleep that night.

However, guns serve only one purpose, to kill. Tara, Lila, Tyler, others, the argument that a gun is no different that bats, knives, powercords, etc. is weak. These things all serve a non-violent purpose. If you can explain to me the non-violent purpose of a handgun,

Hmm, well, that's simple. Target shooting is a non-violent purpose. I won't lie to you, shooting a gun is fun, some people do it regularly. It's no more "violent" than hitting a baseball with a bat.

I don't like guns.. . Don't think people should have them... It's too easy for someone to pull a trigger when you've blown a gasket, even if it's for a few seconds.. I;d rather stay away from them, and hope that the people I care about don't get close to them either...

Anyone with education isn't going to have a loaded gun in their house right next to them, making it nearly impossible to simply blow a gasket and shoot.


Plain and simple, however, is that instead of gun control, there should be firearm safety implemented... I think, in EVERY school. I was taught how to use a gun safely since the age of 4, I passed hunter safety at age 8. I have never ONCE in my life played with a firearm and have never left one in the house loaded, without the safety on, or the firing pin all set to go. The reason for this is my father allowed my to observe and shoot them at a young age... completely eliminating any curiosity I had, and he also taught me how they should be handled... as if they are loaded....

Now my dad, at age 4, was not allowed to anything I did. So he stacked a bunch of chairs on top of each other to get to the (locked) cabinet my grandfather had, unlocked it, loaded the firearm inside, and proceded to shoot himself in the hand with it. This is why he taught my brother and I at a young age how to treat guns.

Pretending they don't exhist or living in fear of them isn't going to solve anything.

I personally think that education is the route to combat accidental deaths and injuries from guns and also to help prevent things like school shootings.

Anyway, I'm done rambling. But, when I turn 18 this year, I reserve my right to keep and bear arms.

 

[Cheech]

Originally posted by Lila Boffins


It's even easier for them to grab a knife or use their bare hands. Guns are not the reason for deaths. Plain and simple.

It's like saying it's McDonald's fault people are fat. Or the carmaker's fault for road rage. They use the vehicle as a weapon, don't they?

Once again, using inanimate objects as the fault for things happening is ... weak.

It's people that do things, not things that do things.



Lila

Let's just agree to disagree... I won't change my mind on this one. .


I woudn't want my kids to think for any reason that guns might be "cool", or I wouldn't want them to be talking about "that new gun in the market right now", or anything like that, EVEN IF they knew all they needed to know about the safety of guns. Accidents do happen, and I'd like to avoid them at all costs...

I've never met anyone that died because of not defending himself with a gun that he could use to blow away the other guy's brains.

on the other hand, my uncle got shot in the back because they were out back shooting cans, and a bullet deflected off a can, and hit my uncle, who bled to death... They had also drank a little bit too much, and probably weren't as carefull as they could have been. Still, if there weren't any guns around, he'd still be here.,..


Therefore, even though there's safeties, gun rooms, cabinets, locks, and anything else that diminishes the chances on an accident, I would still rather not have them around...

no hard feelings.