|
|
| Izzy |
since the issue of gun control basicly comes down to personal liberties, isnt it kinda ironic that usually the left is about clamping down on that personal liberty while the right is the one advocating it?
there are those who belive that we should be able to do drugs legaly because it is our personaly freedom to do what we want to our body, why cant this same reasoning apply to guns. why cant i own a gun and take it to my local firing range and allow myself the personal gratification of stress relief or anger managment or any other feeling it my gives me.
most arguements that apply to drugs also work for gun laws. an example would be like just as drugs are a controlled substance, it doesnt stop them from being possessed and used. same would hold true for guns.
how do must drug proponents act when confornted with the question, drugs are dangerous to society because someone high could jump in a car and drive off impared and dangerous. most of them answer that there are still laws that forbid driving under the influence and it should be the responsibility of the user to obey, not the drug (or whatever valid arguement the bring up). same could be parallelled to guns... even though they may be used for some good they also posses a grave threat, but should that be enough to illegalize them? should we make religion illegal because even though it can be used for good, some abuse it and use it to basicly kill people?
ps. i have never owned or intend to own a fire arm of any kind. |
|
|
| occrider |
I think that people are responsible enough to use CERTAIN drugs. With regards to guns though ... I think that we're pathetic. It's a shame how we abuse our 2nd amendment right. I say ban them. The intent of drugs are personel self indulgences. The intent of a gun is to maim or kill. Any dolt with an IQ of a retard can own a gun, there simply is no control at all. The right to possess a deadly weapon should not be an inherent right. I don't like either, but people are too irresponsible to have ownership of a deadly weapon.
PS I'm surprised you arent more of a gun advocate coming from texas haha |
|
|
| Arbiter |
Well when it comes to the right to bear arms, certainly we have to draw the line somewhere. For instance, I doubt even the staunchest gun advocate would argue that all American citizens had the right to bear nuclear arms. At the same time, we can't ban everything that could be used as a type of arms - we'd have little left.
So, clearly, the question of where to draw this line is a function of the potential destructiveness if the weapon is misused. Automatic weapons, I think, clearly fall on the side of being too destructive. Other guns are very borderline, but I think the optimal course of action would probably be to phase them out of circulation by:
1. Banning the manufacture of new guns for public distribution.
and
2. Destroying guns found to have been used in crimes.
Perhaps I'll elaborate more later, but right now I'm feeling a bit sick. |
|
|
| JohnSmith |
my stance is that guns should be prohibted from citizens, with the exception of hunting rifles and such. the simple truth is that the purpose of a 9mm, a 357 magnum, or an AK47 is to kill a human being. nobody goes hunting deer with an uzi.
I had never really thought of target practice, i suppose that is a legitimate activity, and one you might want to use a pistol or assault weapon for. in that case, maybe the shooting range should have to store them, under lock and key for you? seems kinda like an invasion of your freedom, but i think it's worth it, given that it will preclude someone from getting such a weapon and shooting up a highschool or something.
I grew up with guns, my dad likes to hunt and has several rifles, shotguns, and even a pistol. i admit, i have went out in the bush for target practice when i was younger, and fired guns, and enjoyed the freedom to do it. I haven't done it in years though, and probably won't ever pick up a gun again.
Even though my stance is anti-gun (or at least anti handgun), there is something that i want to point out. In Australia, the made owning a gun illegal. in the weeks following home invasions in australia went up about 400% or so i think. I don't have specific information or sources on this, maybe our friend renegade can help?
anyway, just a quick note on the drugs thing, i believe people should have this freedom, because drugs hurt the USER, not a target. nobody goes to a school with a bag full of joints and tries to kill people with them. unless you count drug dealers, but then the participants are willing, not innocent targets. |
|
|
| Mental Exodus |
Well like most things the governments do the semi/recent global clamp down on the types of legal firearms was a joke and a half but in the spirit of jumping on the band wagon many countries even distant ones like Australia put more limitations on the tpyes of firearms that are legal. WHATS REALLY GOING ON HERE?!?!?!!?!?!?!?!
Well like everything in life there are good, bad and neutral factors occurring here.
THE GOOD STUFF FIRST.
MILLIONS of people world wide enjoy target shooting, hunting and other related activities. This has been a very old tradition especially amongst old and young men in families. Its like bonding and stuff. These things also are useful in controlling many animal populations at the hunters expense which is very very very important as the balance of nature is way off in many areas where farm land and other types of human settlements allow explosions in certain animal populations. Especially for animals imported into new habitats by accident that have no predators. The amount of $$$ the taxpayers would have to pay in order to control these populations if the hunters had there firearms takeaway would be very very high indeed. 99% of legal gun owners in Canada( I live in Canada) are extremely safe and cautious when it comes to use, storage and training.
THE BAD
Throughout history people have tried to kill one another with technology. Guns are most popular nowadays. So naturally we say. HMMM lets get rid of the guns. Does this solve the problem of people wanting to kill one another no not really. There are many other ways to kill people and they will be used just as much as guns if they are taken away. However, the # of illegal or unregistered guns in circulation is rather alarming. For this reason we see many crime related shootings with unregistered guns. Even in Canada I know that if I have the money I can obtain illegal firearms (Mainly small hand guns). This coupled with people who want to start shiz, are really the problem and no amount of pressure on legal owners will stop the criminals who seem to be untouchable.
The situation surrounding the types of firearms u can own in certain countries is out of hand. The USA is kind of like this. Anybody and his uncle can buy 50 cal machineguns and semi auto shoties with extremely powerful fleshets with tubes that can house 10 + shells at a time. So over time u get a situation of neglect or bad parenting in one way or another and your got a bunch of kids shooting up a school with enough equipment to hold off the police which is exactly what they did in Colorado. SO we say hey guyz no more gung ho on the gunz, chill out. This is a very cheap easy and fruitless method of crime prevention to start with but fixing the reason people have to kill in the first place cant really be solved in the primitive state the world Is in now.
IN conclusion, I believe that restrictions on the certain types of fire arms and other deadly weapons should be controlled. However we should realize that most people in the world aren't criminals in the sense that they want to kill people needlessly and don't act as such when on position of powerfull technology. |
|
|
| Izzy |
i personally belive that gun control should definitly be regulated, i would like to see a lisence system imposed similar to that of the drivers lisence. no one has the automatic right to drive a car, they have to earn that trust, but the opportunity should be there. just as you may need a different liscense to drive a truck or bus same should be imposed with guns (higher exams and restrictions for those wanting certain more powerful guns). so basicly i oppose the idea of banning guns in general to all citizens. the opportunity should be there. just as i belive someone should have the right to smoke weed legaly if they wanted too, is it not the same for guns?
many of you have mentioned or hinted at this arguement....
| quote: | Originally posted by occrider
The intent of a gun is to maim or kill. |
i think that is kind of narrow minded-ness because i can think of many ways an intent of gun would not be to maim or kill. the examples being, me wanting to go to a shooting range just for stress relief, or shooting skeet or even coke cans for personal pleasure, or the feeling of security it may give me knowing i can defend my home. in other words the intent is not to kill but rather give a certain emotional feeling, one of which simply put can be described as pleasure, why should i be denied this personal liberty? |
|
|
| occrider |
| quote: | Originally posted by Izzy
i think that is kind of narrow minded-ness because i can think of many ways an intent of gun would not be to maim or kill. the examples being, me wanting to go to a shooting range just for stress relief, or shooting skeet or even coke cans for personal pleasure, or the feeling of security it may give me knowing i can defend my home. in other words the intent is not to kill but rather give a certain emotional feeling, one of which simply put can be described as pleasure, why should i be denied this personal liberty? |
Haha so go use a bb gun or a paintball gun. Why do we get such a mad rush out of shooting a gun? Because we're holding a weapon of significant power that can end another person's life in a second. I think that most people enjoy the thrill of shooting something so deadly. And personally I think that's kind of sick. Trust me I've gone to a shooting range and I thought shooting a gun is awesome. However I would rather relinquish that satisfaction if it results in a significant decrease of crime. Call me narrowminded, but I think public safety in this case outweighs personal enjoyment. |
|
|
| Mental Exodus |
| quote: | Originally posted by occrider
However I would rather relinquish that satisfaction if it results in a significant decrease of crime. Call me narrowminded, but I think public safety in this case outweighs personal enjoyment. |
What you want and what is possible are two difrent things. Creating a plan to take away all the guns in the world or even the united states would take forever as there are too many unregisterd guns that people wont giv up. |
|
|
CLICK TO RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE
tranceaddict Forums Archive > Other > Political Discussion / Debate
|
