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

What types of Guns should we ban?

All Guns 62 24.80%
 
All Guns, make guns legal... 16 6.40%
 
All Guns, in Major Cities... 9 3.60%
 
All Guns, except Hunting Rifles 16 6.40%
 
Just Handguns, they serve... 2 0.80%
 
Just Semi-Auto Rifles, a bit overkill 11 4.40%
 
None, but we should make ... 27 10.80%
 
None, we have a right to carry weapons 43 17.20%
 
None, I still don't beli... 42 16.80%
 
See Results 21 8.40%
 
Total:249
Michael-5 on 05 February 2013
Kasz216 said:
 


Again you are just making shit up.  Taser's are nowhere near as effective as guns because it can actually be pretty hard to hit somebody with both darts... and even if you do hit them, if they're big enough or have drugs in them it might not bother them that much.

http://forums.officer.com/t34616/

Gives a few examples of taser issues.

Heck, a few layers of clothing can defeat a taser.

I said Taser, not Taser gun. Maybe in USA they aren't ass effective with rampant obesity, lol, but a Taser will easily knock someone under 300lb out.

OMG Cocaine.....LOL, you're funny.

Mace works effectively on all weight's, and yes they are very effective for self defence. I mean people use Bear Spray (strong Pepper Spray) to stop Bears. If it can stop a bear, it can stop a person.

Just as effective, and involve no killing. Gee, what a terrible solution, I'm such a big anti-gun nut that I just can't see the advantages of guns..


I just don't understand you pro gun Americans. Everytime I talk to people in Canada, be it a cop, or another person, no one would even even consider a gun for self defence here. We understand guns are dangerous, but you...just always have an excuse. You don't need guns, who cares if you have a right to bear arms, you don't need it. It's not like Alcohol, it helps no one.



What is with all the hate? Don't read GamrReview Articles. Contact me to ADD games to the Database
Vote for the March Most Wanted / February Results

Around the Network
NintendoPie on 05 February 2013

No. We should not ban guns.

The people who want them will get them in anyway shape or form. Edit: I know I haven't kept up with this conversation but this is a logical answer. You can't over look this if you think otherwise.



Viper1 on 05 February 2013
Michael-5 said:

I did multiple times say Drug abuse is a bigger factor then gun control. However, I still thing gun control should be better regulated. A family member shouldn't be able to buy a second gun if the first one was stollen, or buy one at all if anyone in the household doesn't pass the psych test.

As for Dallas, it's just unsettling, to me it's no different then walking into someone with a scythe on their back. I mean I know scythes were designed to cut grass, but it would still be unsettling seeing someone hold one in public. Texas is just very very different.....

Dallas actually reminded me of Tanzania. The military carry AK47's and took pretty damn intimidating. Took a photo with one guy because I couldn't miss the opportunity, but I never touched the gun.


Anyway, it's just different culture. I think Canada is very different. In Toronto only 3% of people are licenced to carry pistols, and I think that except for cops, no one should carry a pistol.

Drugs are the issue.  Take away the drug problems and you take away the overwhelming majoriyt fo the gun problems.  If you don't focus on the actual problem, you'll never solve it.

Since most guns used in those crimes are illegally obtained, how will stronger gun regulations and bans change anything?   

A ban or regulation does not prevent habitual criminals from obtaining them. Do drug bans stop criminals from obtaining drugs?



The rEVOLution is not being televised

Michael-5 on 05 February 2013
Viper1 said:
Michael-5 said:

I did multiple times say Drug abuse is a bigger factor then gun control. However, I still thing gun control should be better regulated. A family member shouldn't be able to buy a second gun if the first one was stollen, or buy one at all if anyone in the household doesn't pass the psych test.

As for Dallas, it's just unsettling, to me it's no different then walking into someone with a scythe on their back. I mean I know scythes were designed to cut grass, but it would still be unsettling seeing someone hold one in public. Texas is just very very different.....

Dallas actually reminded me of Tanzania. The military carry AK47's and took pretty damn intimidating. Took a photo with one guy because I couldn't miss the opportunity, but I never touched the gun.


Anyway, it's just different culture. I think Canada is very different. In Toronto only 3% of people are licenced to carry pistols, and I think that except for cops, no one should carry a pistol.

Drugs are the issue.  Take away the drug problems and you take away the overwhelming majoriyt fo the gun problems.  If you don't focus on the actual problem, you'll never solve it.

Since most guns used in those crimes are illegally obtained, how will stronger gun regulations and bans change anything?   

A ban or regulation does not prevent habitual criminals from obtaining them. Do drug bans stop criminals from obtaining drugs?

I agree about drugs.

Stronger regulations helps prevent people from obtained guns which were originally obtained legally. I'm not sure how hard it is to get a second gun after the first one was stollen, but it should be impossible. Same with families who have a member in the family which doesn't pass a psych test, and same with people who don't need it. Like I said, in Canada I can't get a gun because I'm from a middle class family, and I rarely go to ghetto area's in town.

As for your last point, I agree, but it makes it harder. As an example Marijuanna seeds are legal to buy and sell in Canada.....how f***ed is that? Anyone who wants to grow and sell weed, only needs a trip to the store and a few months of grow time. Ban Marijuanna seeds, and over time, through several drug op busts, weed will be harder to find/grow. I know USA does gun busts, if say handguns were full out illegal, it would be much easier for police to seize pistols.


However I agree, there are many issues which first must be solved before a gun ban. I didn't realize how different the USA is then Canada. I've read about high poverty rates, especially in the south, but I didn't realize you guys had such an incometent/untrustworthy police force, among other factors.



What is with all the hate? Don't read GamrReview Articles. Contact me to ADD games to the Database
Vote for the March Most Wanted / February Results

Viper1 on 05 February 2013
Michael-5 said:

I agree about drugs.

Stronger regulations helps prevent people from obtained guns which were originally obtained legally. I'm not sure how hard it is to get a second gun after the first one was stollen, but it should be impossible. Same with families who have a member in the family which doesn't pass a psych test, and same with people who don't need it. Like I said, in Canada I can't get a gun because I'm from a middle class family, and I rarely go to ghetto area's in town.

As for your last point, I agree, but it makes it harder. As an example Marijuanna seeds are legal to buy and sell in Canada.....how f***ed is that? Anyone who wants to grow and sell weed, only needs a trip to the store and a few months of grow time. Ban Marijuanna seeds, and over time, through several drug op busts, weed will be harder to find/grow. I know USA does gun busts, if say handguns were full out illegal, it would be much easier for police to seize pistols.


However I agree, there are many issues which first must be solved before a gun ban. I didn't realize how different the USA is then Canada. I've read about high poverty rates, especially in the south, but I didn't realize you guys had such an incometent/untrustworthy police force, among other factors.

You need to realize that the US is 10 times bigger than Canda.  We have single states with your population.

And you're still looking at illegally obtained guns as having been first purchased legally.    That's not usally the case with the average gun involved crime.

Did you know that the FBI claims that there are 400 million legally owned guns in the US?   Now imagine 2 things.  First, that most gun involved crimes is perpetrated with an illegal gun that was never legally owned by someone else in the first place.   That means the number of illegal guns is also a very huge number.  Second, it would be a logistical impossibility to round up what could be 1 billion firearms.

 

I can tell that your mind is completely set and that you never intended to have a discussion where data could persuade your reasoning.  However, I don't blame you for that either.   This is merely a matter of you growing up under a system and circumstance that is different to the point that differing opinions seem not just alien but irrational.  However, you can't create a thread with a heavy bias and not expect to vehemently confronted by that very circumstance you fail to understand.



The rEVOLution is not being televised

Around the Network
Kasz216 on 05 February 2013
Michael-5 said:
Kasz216 said:
 


Again you are just making shit up.  Taser's are nowhere near as effective as guns because it can actually be pretty hard to hit somebody with both darts... and even if you do hit them, if they're big enough or have drugs in them it might not bother them that much.

http://forums.officer.com/t34616/

Gives a few examples of taser issues.

Heck, a few layers of clothing can defeat a taser.

I said Taser, not Taser gun. Maybe in USA they aren't ass effective with rampant obesity, lol, but a Taser will easily knock someone under 300lb out.

OMG Cocaine.....LOL, you're funny.

Mace works effectively on all weight's, and yes they are very effective for self defence. I mean people use Bear Spray (strong Pepper Spray) to stop Bears. If it can stop a bear, it can stop a person.

Just as effective, and involve no killing. Gee, what a terrible solution, I'm such a big anti-gun nut that I just can't see the advantages of guns..


I just don't understand you pro gun Americans. Everytime I talk to people in Canada, be it a cop, or another person, no one would even even consider a gun for self defence here. We understand guns are dangerous, but you...just always have an excuse. You don't need guns, who cares if you have a right to bear arms, you don't need it. It's not like Alcohol, it helps no one.


Those were you know... trained law officers... as opposed to you who are... completely making shit up... honestly your just doing your cause a diservice. 

Ok, lets see a hand taser...  Criminal has a gun.  How effective is that hand taser going to be across a room?

Pepperspray... if we're talking gas, you have to be close and risk it backdrafting on you.  If we're talking liquid... hope you have GREAT aim.

The best way for you to convince people to support gun control is to stop argueing since your general lack of information and just making things up is hurting your cause. 

You don't understand us because your uninformed and would rather make untrue and often made up arguements then be informed.



Jay520 on 05 February 2013
Michael-5 said:

I said Taser, not Taser gun. Maybe in USA they aren't ass effective with rampant obesity, lol, but a Taser will easily knock someone under 300lb out.

OMG Cocaine.....LOL, you're funny.

Mace works effectively on all weight's, and yes they are very effective for self defence. I mean people use Bear Spray (strong Pepper Spray) to stop Bears. If it can stop a bear, it can stop a person.

 

It's not hard to see why tasers and mace aren't as effective as a gun. Imagine a group of thugs broke into your house while your family was sleeping.Which method seems more "effective"?: (a) initiating close-combat with each assaliant using a taser and/or mace spray, or (b) staying at a safe distance and using your gun to scare them off and/or shoot them if they get too close. Which is the more effective method for protecting you and your family?



Jay520 on 05 February 2013
Kasz216 said:

The best way for you to convince people to support gun control is to stop argueing since your general lack of information and just making things up is hurting your cause. 


Yeah, I'm honestly not that informed on the effects of gun laws so I haven't really had any strong opinions on it. But Michael-5 is really making me more and more pro-gun that I've ever thought I'd be.



HesAPooka on 05 February 2013
Kasz216 said:
Michael-5 said:
Kasz216 said:

All available credible science shows that banning guns will accomplish nothing, and in fact likely makes the problem worse.

So your own disbelief mostly seems to stem from your lack of researching regarding the topic.

You'd find more scientific evidence to suggest banning videogames then you would guns.

Uhh... Really, that's your counter? I tell you that countries with laws that have lenient gun control polocies, and countries with free boarders to these countries have high high homicide rates, and countries with strict boarders do not, using your own data, and you say...

"My data says otherwise, despite you using it to make these claims."

WOW

Here, I'll give examples: Strict Boarders and strong regulations

Country-Homicide Rate

Australia-1.0
New Zealand-0.9
Japan-0.4
Hong Kong-0.2
Macau-0.7
South Korea-2.6
China-1.0
Canada-1.6
IceLand-0.3

Weak Regulations, or Weak Boarder Control
USA-4.8
North Korea-15.2 (LOL I had to add it)
Mexico-22.7
Russia-10.2

BTW, Drugs are a much much bigger incfluence on homicide rates. The two regions of the world with the highest homicide rates are South America and West Africa. This is why Mexico's homicide rate is so high despite strong regulations (lots of smuggling). Even when you look at US states, while Nevada has a high homicide rate and gun ownership rate, it's also got a lot of drug related problems, same with Puerto Rico.

Kasz216 said:

The US has as far as i know the lowest amount of "Hot" home invasions... aka robberies in which people are home when robbed.  In the US you don't rob someone unless you are 100% sure they aren't home because criminals are more afraid of homeowners then police. (actual study).

You're also 3 times more likely to get shot when there is a home robbery when you carry a firearm vs. when you don't. I also really doubt USA's "Hot" Home Invasion rate is lower then Canadas.

A)Mexico and Russia both have some of the strictist gun control policies in the world... and Russia polices the hell out of it's borders.  If you want to debate this stuff you should really be researching it rather then just making assumptions on who does what based on what thier murder rates are.

B) In the UK it's about 4 times more likely that you end up in a "hot invasion".   Not sure about Canada but there is no reason to suggest it would be otherwise. People are more likely to break into your house while your there if they are convinced you aren't going to shoot them.  How is that not common sense?


They are also two of the most corrupt countries, and quite poor as well. Police in both countries can easily be bought off. When comparing gun violence in the US we should compare them to other developed countires such as: Canada, England, Norway, Sweden, and Japan. Not Russia, and Mexico.




I was walking down along the street and I heard this voice saying, "Good evening, Mr. Dowd." Well, I turned around and here was this big six-foot rabbit leaning up against a lamp-post. Well, I thought nothing of that because when you've lived in a town as long as I've lived in this one, you get used to the fact that everybody knows your name.

Kasz216 on 05 February 2013
HesAPooka said:
Kasz216 said:
Michael-5 said:
Kasz216 said:

All available credible science shows that banning guns will accomplish nothing, and in fact likely makes the problem worse.

So your own disbelief mostly seems to stem from your lack of researching regarding the topic.

You'd find more scientific evidence to suggest banning videogames then you would guns.

Uhh... Really, that's your counter? I tell you that countries with laws that have lenient gun control polocies, and countries with free boarders to these countries have high high homicide rates, and countries with strict boarders do not, using your own data, and you say...

"My data says otherwise, despite you using it to make these claims."

WOW

Here, I'll give examples: Strict Boarders and strong regulations

Country-Homicide Rate

Australia-1.0
New Zealand-0.9
Japan-0.4
Hong Kong-0.2
Macau-0.7
South Korea-2.6
China-1.0
Canada-1.6
IceLand-0.3

Weak Regulations, or Weak Boarder Control
USA-4.8
North Korea-15.2 (LOL I had to add it)
Mexico-22.7
Russia-10.2

BTW, Drugs are a much much bigger incfluence on homicide rates. The two regions of the world with the highest homicide rates are South America and West Africa. This is why Mexico's homicide rate is so high despite strong regulations (lots of smuggling). Even when you look at US states, while Nevada has a high homicide rate and gun ownership rate, it's also got a lot of drug related problems, same with Puerto Rico.

Kasz216 said:

The US has as far as i know the lowest amount of "Hot" home invasions... aka robberies in which people are home when robbed.  In the US you don't rob someone unless you are 100% sure they aren't home because criminals are more afraid of homeowners then police. (actual study).

You're also 3 times more likely to get shot when there is a home robbery when you carry a firearm vs. when you don't. I also really doubt USA's "Hot" Home Invasion rate is lower then Canadas.

A)Mexico and Russia both have some of the strictist gun control policies in the world... and Russia polices the hell out of it's borders.  If you want to debate this stuff you should really be researching it rather then just making assumptions on who does what based on what thier murder rates are.

B) In the UK it's about 4 times more likely that you end up in a "hot invasion".   Not sure about Canada but there is no reason to suggest it would be otherwise. People are more likely to break into your house while your there if they are convinced you aren't going to shoot them.  How is that not common sense?

They are also two of the most corrupt countries, and quite poor as well. Police in both countries can easily be bought off. When comparing gun violence in the US we should compare them to other developed countires such as: Canada, England, Norway, Sweden, and Japan. Not Russia, and Mexico.


You wouldn't consider Mexico and espiecally Russia developed nations?  What definition are you using for the term?

When compairing the USA to other OCED countries you get one result.  The US is a big outlier in homicides   Remove them from the equation and you end up with a very slight correlation that shows more firearms = less homicide.   With them in the equation you get the exact opposite.

End result?    A lot of people get murdered in the US with guns, because a lot of people get murdered in the US.  Why?   Look at who's doing it. 

It ONLY works with homicides afterall.

Violent crime wise.


Look at how much more violent a country Canada is compaired to America... doesn't fit perceptions, huh?