By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - Shooting at Batman Premiere - 12 dead / Your opinions on gun laws

sperrico87 on 21 July 2012
curl-6 said:
brendude13 said:

I would hate to live in a country where a firefight could break out in a cinema, I would hate to live in a country where people look to guns for safety rather than the police.

Amen. The thought of living in the US terrifies me.


You both have a complete misunderstanding about our Constitution and our culture.  The Constitution guarantees, among many things, a right to bear arms, and to defend ourselves and practice our lives how we see fit as long as we don't harm others. 

You think the Police can protect you?  The Police only do what they're told to do, depending on whom is in charge.  They can't protect you from harm any more than you can protect yourself.  You would rather live in a controlled police-state than a free state?  Shameful.



 

Around the Network
zuvuyeay on 21 July 2012

really,the EU state terrifies me,i'd rather have america anyday or switzerland



                                                                                                                                        Above & Beyond

   

kain_kusanagi on 21 July 2012
leatherhat said:
kain_kusanagi said:
curl-6 said:
kain_kusanagi said:
curl-6 said:
My opinion on gun ownership is simple; the average person is too irresponsible and too stupid to be allowed to own something as dangerous as a gun.

Couldn't the same be said of owning something as dangerous as a car? What about having children? Seems like any idiot can get behind the wheel of a 2 ton killing machine or fail to properly raise a batch of future welfare cases.

We license people to drive, don't we?

And I fully believe people should have to get a license to have kids too.

Oh yeah, that driver's license thing sure works. All those drunk drivers, sleepy drivers, texting drivers, who've kill so many must have been driving without a license. Being an idiot doesn't seem to stop people from getting a license, and people without licenses do drive illegally. The same is true with guns and criminals. Gun crimes are by definition illegal, but criminals commit crimes. Pass as many laws as you want, people will find ways to be idiots and commit crimes.

What do you want to do. Create some kind of draconian class system where only high class people can own cars, guns, and have children? Who decides who is worthy? How is it enforced? Where do individual rights begin and state control end?

It's easy to just say, idiots should not be allowed to be idiots. It's another thing to live in a nanny state where your government has more say in your life than you do. What's next, fat people not alowed to eat? How about ugle people not alowed outside?

Individual rights begin and the state control is total. You are controlled from cradle to the grave. Because if we don't let the state run stupid people (and they are all stupid unless they want total state control) will do stupid and evil things. And as we all know one person can be evil but a collective of people in a government can only be altruistic. 

You are a cynical elitist. The whole point of the constitution is to prevent the kind of oppression you seem to want. And you only want it because you think you are above those that would be oppressed.



kain_kusanagi on 21 July 2012
curl-6 said:
kain_kusanagi said:

What do you want to do. Create some kind of draconian class system where only high class people can own cars, guns, and have children? Who decides who is worthy? How is it enforced? Where do individual rights begin and state control end?

Not high class people, just people who are found to be capable and mentally sound through rigorous screening. Such screening would obviously be handled by dedicated departments of the government.

State control begins where it is called for by issues within society.

And think about what would happen if people DIDN'T need a lincese to drive? Do you honestly believe there would then be a lower road toll?

I think you jumped in the middle of a discussion and may have missed the context. I wasn't really talking about license. I'm not even against gun licensing. I was arguing against another user who believes the average person is too stupid and irresponsible to own a gun and used cars as an example of a average person's even more dangerous weapon. I'm against elitism and oppression.





kain_kusanagi on 21 July 2012
sperrico87 said:
kain_kusanagi said:

Banning guns at this point in American's history would only put the general population in more danger. Banning liqueur didn't stop drinking. The ban of drugs doesn't stop illegal drug use. Drunk driving is illegal but people are killed nearly every day by a drunk driver. Hell, you're not supposed to speed, but you probably do anyway.

It's an old point and people who want to ban guns like to argue it doesn't matter. But I believe that if you ban guns, criminals will still have them and law abiding citizens will be defenseless. Will a ban on gun ownership reduce home gun accidents? Yes it will, but it will also reduce home defense. Criminals break the law, they will continue to break the law. What criminals do with guns today breaks the law. If the law bans guns those same criminals will break that law too. Most criminals are probably breaking a law by owning or carrying a gun anyway, but they just go and break the law anyway.

The Aurora Colorado shooter broke many laws when he opened fire on those innocent victims. To break those laws he plans for months and collected an armory of ammo and firearms. If guns were outlawed he would have found alternative methods to build his arsenal. He may have even used an alternative weapon like a pipe bomb. A gun ban would not have stopped him or even delay him. But you know what could have stopped him. Maybe, just maybe if we all carried guns and he knew that he theater would be filled with armed law abiding citizens, maybe he wouldn't have done it. Maybe he would have figured it wasn't worth the risk, knowing that as soon as he opened fire he would be gunned down by those he threatened. Maybe if more people took gun safety classes and earned conceal carry permits we would all be safer in public.

You can argue all day about what this country would be like if guns had been banned generations ago. But no such law was passed and it's too late. Guns are everywhere. The problem is they are in the wrong hands. More responsible citizens should carry than criminals. It's backwards. Why do so many people look to others for safety instead of protecting themselves? Why do they complain about criminals yet do nothing practical?

Last time I checked guns are a tool, a tool that can not harm anyone without human action. If a zoo keeper takes a monkey's ball away because the monkey keeps throwing the ball at his face. The monkey will just throw shit, maybe even just in spite. With guns and criminals, you can't even take the "ball" away, but passing a ban law would surely cause a shit storm.

 

True. Government prohibitions do not work, and have never worked. Just look at the War on Drugs.  What a waste of money and lives that has been. $1 trillion dollars, nothing to show for it.  All it does is drive the market underground and breed more crime and resentment.

Of everything I said, THAT is all you took from it? My point wasn't even against drug and alcohol laws. My point was that criminals break laws no matter how many laws you set.

Personally I'd rather live in a country where every good decent American owns a gun rather than a crack pipe. Drugs probably cause more gun violence than any other motive and legalizing drugs wouldn't stop that. Maybe if drugs were given out for free to all addicts, but that's a disgusting society I'd never want to be part of.

But, all that is beside the point. This topic is about a tragedy and gun laws. My heart breaks for the victims and victim's families of the Aurora Colorado shooting. My stance on gun control remains firm. You can't stop criminals from committing crimes with guns and you shouldn't stop good decent citizens from defending themselves. If anything more people should earn conceal carry permits.





Around the Network
usrevenge on 21 July 2012

gun laws wouldn't effect this. it would simply make the black market in weapons sales larger. its just like marijuana, if MJ was legal a huge market for drug dealers would be gone. MJ has less negative effects on your body then drinking or smoking cigarets.
If weapons were illegal crime wouldn't change. it would just create a new market.

no one in their right mind does a crime with their own weapon that can be traced to them.



sperrico87 on 21 July 2012
kain_kusanagi said:
sperrico87 said:
kain_kusanagi said:

Banning guns at this point in American's history would only put the general population in more danger. Banning liqueur didn't stop drinking. The ban of drugs doesn't stop illegal drug use. Drunk driving is illegal but people are killed nearly every day by a drunk driver. Hell, you're not supposed to speed, but you probably do anyway.

It's an old point and people who want to ban guns like to argue it doesn't matter. But I believe that if you ban guns, criminals will still have them and law abiding citizens will be defenseless. Will a ban on gun ownership reduce home gun accidents? Yes it will, but it will also reduce home defense. Criminals break the law, they will continue to break the law. What criminals do with guns today breaks the law. If the law bans guns those same criminals will break that law too. Most criminals are probably breaking a law by owning or carrying a gun anyway, but they just go and break the law anyway.

The Aurora Colorado shooter broke many laws when he opened fire on those innocent victims. To break those laws he plans for months and collected an armory of ammo and firearms. If guns were outlawed he would have found alternative methods to build his arsenal. He may have even used an alternative weapon like a pipe bomb. A gun ban would not have stopped him or even delay him. But you know what could have stopped him. Maybe, just maybe if we all carried guns and he knew that he theater would be filled with armed law abiding citizens, maybe he wouldn't have done it. Maybe he would have figured it wasn't worth the risk, knowing that as soon as he opened fire he would be gunned down by those he threatened. Maybe if more people took gun safety classes and earned conceal carry permits we would all be safer in public.

You can argue all day about what this country would be like if guns had been banned generations ago. But no such law was passed and it's too late. Guns are everywhere. The problem is they are in the wrong hands. More responsible citizens should carry than criminals. It's backwards. Why do so many people look to others for safety instead of protecting themselves? Why do they complain about criminals yet do nothing practical?

Last time I checked guns are a tool, a tool that can not harm anyone without human action. If a zoo keeper takes a monkey's ball away because the monkey keeps throwing the ball at his face. The monkey will just throw shit, maybe even just in spite. With guns and criminals, you can't even take the "ball" away, but passing a ban law would surely cause a shit storm.

 

True. Government prohibitions do not work, and have never worked. Just look at the War on Drugs.  What a waste of money and lives that has been. $1 trillion dollars, nothing to show for it.  All it does is drive the market underground and breed more crime and resentment.

Of everything I said, THAT is all you took from it? My point wasn't even against drug and alcohol laws. My point was that criminals break laws no matter how many laws you set.

Personally I'd rather live in a country where every good decent American owns a gun rather than a crack pipe. Drugs probably cause more gun violence than any other motive and legalizing drugs wouldn't stop that. Maybe if drugs were given out for free to all addicts, but that's a disgusting society I'd never want to be part of.

But, all that is beside the point. This topic is about a tragedy and gun laws. My heart breaks for the victims and victim's families of the Aurora Colorado shooting. My stance on gun control remains firm. You can't stop criminals from committing crimes with guns and you shouldn't stop good decent citizens from defending themselves. If anything more people should earn conceal carry permits.


Um....I agree with you?  Have you seen none of my other posts on this thread?  I think we're in full agreement on this topic.



 

Mr Khan on 21 July 2012
kain_kusanagi said:
sperrico87 said:
kain_kusanagi said:

Banning guns at this point in American's history would only put the general population in more danger. Banning liqueur didn't stop drinking. The ban of drugs doesn't stop illegal drug use. Drunk driving is illegal but people are killed nearly every day by a drunk driver. Hell, you're not supposed to speed, but you probably do anyway.

It's an old point and people who want to ban guns like to argue it doesn't matter. But I believe that if you ban guns, criminals will still have them and law abiding citizens will be defenseless. Will a ban on gun ownership reduce home gun accidents? Yes it will, but it will also reduce home defense. Criminals break the law, they will continue to break the law. What criminals do with guns today breaks the law. If the law bans guns those same criminals will break that law too. Most criminals are probably breaking a law by owning or carrying a gun anyway, but they just go and break the law anyway.

The Aurora Colorado shooter broke many laws when he opened fire on those innocent victims. To break those laws he plans for months and collected an armory of ammo and firearms. If guns were outlawed he would have found alternative methods to build his arsenal. He may have even used an alternative weapon like a pipe bomb. A gun ban would not have stopped him or even delay him. But you know what could have stopped him. Maybe, just maybe if we all carried guns and he knew that he theater would be filled with armed law abiding citizens, maybe he wouldn't have done it. Maybe he would have figured it wasn't worth the risk, knowing that as soon as he opened fire he would be gunned down by those he threatened. Maybe if more people took gun safety classes and earned conceal carry permits we would all be safer in public.

You can argue all day about what this country would be like if guns had been banned generations ago. But no such law was passed and it's too late. Guns are everywhere. The problem is they are in the wrong hands. More responsible citizens should carry than criminals. It's backwards. Why do so many people look to others for safety instead of protecting themselves? Why do they complain about criminals yet do nothing practical?

Last time I checked guns are a tool, a tool that can not harm anyone without human action. If a zoo keeper takes a monkey's ball away because the monkey keeps throwing the ball at his face. The monkey will just throw shit, maybe even just in spite. With guns and criminals, you can't even take the "ball" away, but passing a ban law would surely cause a shit storm.

 

True. Government prohibitions do not work, and have never worked. Just look at the War on Drugs.  What a waste of money and lives that has been. $1 trillion dollars, nothing to show for it.  All it does is drive the market underground and breed more crime and resentment.

Of everything I said, THAT is all you took from it? My point wasn't even against drug and alcohol laws. My point was that criminals break laws no matter how many laws you set.

Personally I'd rather live in a country where every good decent American owns a gun rather than a crack pipe. Drugs probably cause more gun violence than any other motive and legalizing drugs wouldn't stop that. Maybe if drugs were given out for free to all addicts, but that's a disgusting society I'd never want to be part of.

But, all that is beside the point. This topic is about a tragedy and gun laws. My heart breaks for the victims and victim's families of the Aurora Colorado shooting. My stance on gun control remains firm. You can't stop criminals from committing crimes with guns and you shouldn't stop good decent citizens from defending themselves. If anything more people should earn conceal carry permits.

Right, so that the number of "justifiable homicides" can shoot up. Our nation's culture of vigilantism is the problem, and shouldn't be indulged. Even in the Wild West they knew well enough to have people check their weapons before coming into town.



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

kain_kusanagi on 21 July 2012
sperrico87 said:
kain_kusanagi said:
sperrico87 said:
kain_kusanagi said:

Banning guns at this point in American's history would only put the general population in more danger. Banning liqueur didn't stop drinking. The ban of drugs doesn't stop illegal drug use. Drunk driving is illegal but people are killed nearly every day by a drunk driver. Hell, you're not supposed to speed, but you probably do anyway.

It's an old point and people who want to ban guns like to argue it doesn't matter. But I believe that if you ban guns, criminals will still have them and law abiding citizens will be defenseless. Will a ban on gun ownership reduce home gun accidents? Yes it will, but it will also reduce home defense. Criminals break the law, they will continue to break the law. What criminals do with guns today breaks the law. If the law bans guns those same criminals will break that law too. Most criminals are probably breaking a law by owning or carrying a gun anyway, but they just go and break the law anyway.

The Aurora Colorado shooter broke many laws when he opened fire on those innocent victims. To break those laws he plans for months and collected an armory of ammo and firearms. If guns were outlawed he would have found alternative methods to build his arsenal. He may have even used an alternative weapon like a pipe bomb. A gun ban would not have stopped him or even delay him. But you know what could have stopped him. Maybe, just maybe if we all carried guns and he knew that he theater would be filled with armed law abiding citizens, maybe he wouldn't have done it. Maybe he would have figured it wasn't worth the risk, knowing that as soon as he opened fire he would be gunned down by those he threatened. Maybe if more people took gun safety classes and earned conceal carry permits we would all be safer in public.

You can argue all day about what this country would be like if guns had been banned generations ago. But no such law was passed and it's too late. Guns are everywhere. The problem is they are in the wrong hands. More responsible citizens should carry than criminals. It's backwards. Why do so many people look to others for safety instead of protecting themselves? Why do they complain about criminals yet do nothing practical?

Last time I checked guns are a tool, a tool that can not harm anyone without human action. If a zoo keeper takes a monkey's ball away because the monkey keeps throwing the ball at his face. The monkey will just throw shit, maybe even just in spite. With guns and criminals, you can't even take the "ball" away, but passing a ban law would surely cause a shit storm.

 

True. Government prohibitions do not work, and have never worked. Just look at the War on Drugs.  What a waste of money and lives that has been. $1 trillion dollars, nothing to show for it.  All it does is drive the market underground and breed more crime and resentment.

Of everything I said, THAT is all you took from it? My point wasn't even against drug and alcohol laws. My point was that criminals break laws no matter how many laws you set.

Personally I'd rather live in a country where every good decent American owns a gun rather than a crack pipe. Drugs probably cause more gun violence than any other motive and legalizing drugs wouldn't stop that. Maybe if drugs were given out for free to all addicts, but that's a disgusting society I'd never want to be part of.

But, all that is beside the point. This topic is about a tragedy and gun laws. My heart breaks for the victims and victim's families of the Aurora Colorado shooting. My stance on gun control remains firm. You can't stop criminals from committing crimes with guns and you shouldn't stop good decent citizens from defending themselves. If anything more people should earn conceal carry permits.


Um....I agree with you?  Have you seen none of my other posts on this thread?  I think we're in full agreement on this topic.

I'm sorry if it sounded like I was being caustic, that was not my intent. I just wanted to reiterate my point because it seemed like you may have focused on only a supporting argument.



kain_kusanagi on 21 July 2012
Mr Khan said:
kain_kusanagi said:
sperrico87 said:
kain_kusanagi said:

Banning guns at this point in American's history would only put the general population in more danger. Banning liqueur didn't stop drinking. The ban of drugs doesn't stop illegal drug use. Drunk driving is illegal but people are killed nearly every day by a drunk driver. Hell, you're not supposed to speed, but you probably do anyway.

It's an old point and people who want to ban guns like to argue it doesn't matter. But I believe that if you ban guns, criminals will still have them and law abiding citizens will be defenseless. Will a ban on gun ownership reduce home gun accidents? Yes it will, but it will also reduce home defense. Criminals break the law, they will continue to break the law. What criminals do with guns today breaks the law. If the law bans guns those same criminals will break that law too. Most criminals are probably breaking a law by owning or carrying a gun anyway, but they just go and break the law anyway.

The Aurora Colorado shooter broke many laws when he opened fire on those innocent victims. To break those laws he plans for months and collected an armory of ammo and firearms. If guns were outlawed he would have found alternative methods to build his arsenal. He may have even used an alternative weapon like a pipe bomb. A gun ban would not have stopped him or even delay him. But you know what could have stopped him. Maybe, just maybe if we all carried guns and he knew that he theater would be filled with armed law abiding citizens, maybe he wouldn't have done it. Maybe he would have figured it wasn't worth the risk, knowing that as soon as he opened fire he would be gunned down by those he threatened. Maybe if more people took gun safety classes and earned conceal carry permits we would all be safer in public.

You can argue all day about what this country would be like if guns had been banned generations ago. But no such law was passed and it's too late. Guns are everywhere. The problem is they are in the wrong hands. More responsible citizens should carry than criminals. It's backwards. Why do so many people look to others for safety instead of protecting themselves? Why do they complain about criminals yet do nothing practical?

Last time I checked guns are a tool, a tool that can not harm anyone without human action. If a zoo keeper takes a monkey's ball away because the monkey keeps throwing the ball at his face. The monkey will just throw shit, maybe even just in spite. With guns and criminals, you can't even take the "ball" away, but passing a ban law would surely cause a shit storm.

 

True. Government prohibitions do not work, and have never worked. Just look at the War on Drugs.  What a waste of money and lives that has been. $1 trillion dollars, nothing to show for it.  All it does is drive the market underground and breed more crime and resentment.

Of everything I said, THAT is all you took from it? My point wasn't even against drug and alcohol laws. My point was that criminals break laws no matter how many laws you set.

Personally I'd rather live in a country where every good decent American owns a gun rather than a crack pipe. Drugs probably cause more gun violence than any other motive and legalizing drugs wouldn't stop that. Maybe if drugs were given out for free to all addicts, but that's a disgusting society I'd never want to be part of.

But, all that is beside the point. This topic is about a tragedy and gun laws. My heart breaks for the victims and victim's families of the Aurora Colorado shooting. My stance on gun control remains firm. You can't stop criminals from committing crimes with guns and you shouldn't stop good decent citizens from defending themselves. If anything more people should earn conceal carry permits.

Right, so that the number of "justifiable homicides" can shoot up. Our nation's culture of vigilantism is the problem, and shouldn't be indulged. Even in the Wild West they knew well enough to have people check their weapons before coming into town.

Would you rather trade justifiable homicides for plain old homicides? The thing about weapon checks is everybody gets checked. Right now there are probably more criminals walking around with guns than law abiding citizens. It's backwards. If put in the position I would rather commit justifiable homicide than be the victim of homicide. Would you not?

Oh and outside of movies like Back to the Future 3 I'm not sure where you are getting your history from. There may have been weapon checks here and there once in a while, but American towns did not have giant walls and guarded gates to maintain security and check for weapons. Private businesses may have asked customers to leave weapons outside, but cities as a whole did not.