Gun Control

[grEnAlEins]

You mean i won't get to hold your zmag again?

If you can migrate to Texas, you're more than welcome

[tigar19]

Gun control means not firing until she is ready.

[snoopay700]

If you can migrate to Texas, you're more than welcome

Haha, maybe, but once i'm able to escape Wisconsin/Illinois Colorado seems more my taste.

[wetwrks]

Haha, maybe, but once i'm able to escape Wisconsin/Illinois Colorado seems more my taste.

We could use more good maggers in Colorado

[snoopay700]

We could use more good maggers in Colorado

If i do make my way out there it won't be for some time. I gotta get a job in my field once i graduate and hopefully pay off my loans before i look for a job out that way, but i hope to make it within a few years.

[BEEFYDAN]

My .02

Living in Arizona is pretty nice, I don't even need a concealed carry permit to carry a concealed pistol just about anywhere in the state. Also since the open carry law was put into effect, the crime rate in Arizona has dipped significantly, despite the rise in violence on the border. Most of the violence there is on the other side anyways (something close to 50,000 Mexicans killed by other Mexicans by the way) But strangely enough, I have not gotten into any gunfights since the law was passed. Despite the predictions from the Brady bunch, and every other anti-gun bunch around, the state has NOT turned into the "Wild West" as they said it would. In fact there had never been a lessening of state guns regulation which has then been followed by a rise in crime anywhere in the U.S. Ever.

[going_home]

[going_home]

[Henchman]

I've lived in countries with strict gun control, and they are actually safer places to live.
This a a fact, not an opinion:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States

Gun-related homicide rates in the United States are twenty to thirty-five times higher than they are in countries that are economically and politically similar to it.

Gun control doesn't mean you are not allowed to own a gun.
It just makes it easier to put people in jail, who aren't allowed to have them.

[Frizzle Fry]

I've lived in countries with strict gun control, and they are actually safer places to live.
This a a fact, not an opinion:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States

Gun control doesn't mean you are not allowed to own a gun.
It just makes it easier to put people in jail, who aren't allowed to have them.

Thank goodness your wikipedia "fact" link offers so much detail about crimes committed with legally purchased and legally owned firearms. While I won't and don't accept that article as "fact", I will say that it seems to state clearly that other equally developed countries with much more strict gun control laws have comparable instances of violent crime. It also states that the number of guns used in crimes every year compared to the number of guns owned in the country is minuscule. So, if we chose to accept this wiki article as a "fact" then it really disproves your statement.

The fact of the matter is that gun control makes it more difficult for the right people to get what they need, and does very little to curb the wrong people. I live in the state where it is most difficult to get licensing and the most difficult to purchase a firearm when you are properly licensed, a state whose gun policy has been the basis for most anti-gun politicians proposed laws. In this state, Clinton-era federal bans that were revisited and found to be poorly written by ill-informed loons are still upheld a decade after the federal government retracted them. Since these draconian laws have been put into place (going on 25 years) legal gun ownership has dropped by 80% and gun crime has continued to grow at a frightening rate. With a minimum of gun ownership, the state has incredible instances of gun crime (especially compared to surrounding states with much more lax laws and higher ownership rates, but essentially similar environments). All that gun control has done here at ground zero is make it difficult to impossible (and unappealing) for law-abiding people to practice a constitutional right. Meanwhile, violent gun crimes at least double every year (not to mention the increase in non-violent "crimes" because of the over-regulation and lack of legal clarity about ownership).

The problem that is encountered with every gun crime study in the US is that for there to be a crime committed "on the books", there has to be a conviction or an admission. With a judicial system that more readily relies on deals and plea bargains, most cases don't reach a jury, and there is a huge group of criminals who plead out to lesser crimes. DAs prefer this; less work, less cost, better conviction rates, etc. In these situations even innocent people will often plead out to lesser crimes for fear of being convicted of a greater one, fear that often results from bluffs by the prosecutor. When a gun is involved, rather than something like a knife or a "blunt object" (the two most common weapons in 'killings'*) it is much harder to deny premeditation, whereas a defense lawyer might present a knife or club as a weapon of opportunity. DAs are more likely to be lenient in their plea offers when crimes involve the latter weapons - the opposite is true of gun crimes, most of which are viewed as a "sure thing", especially in states where legal gun ownership is over-regulated to the point that even intelligent and informed gun owners don't always know whether they've obeyed the law to a t. It's murky subject to say the least, but it's safe to say that most statistics on the matter should be taken with a grain of salt.

*I say killings because with the skewed statistics concerning degrees of murder, manslaughter, and wrongful death, it's difficult to firmly state with or without statistics what falls into which category.

[Henchman]

Wether the guns used were llegal or not is beside the point.
As far as violent crimes go, again, the US is far ahead of European countries there as well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

Now, feel free to back up your opinion, with links to facts.

[MoeMag]

We live in a nation that was born from oppressed people. It required a revolution at gun point to make some poor morons realize that we will not be taken advantage of. Because of that it is our right as a people to keep and bear arms. Not for hunting, not for illegal purposes, but to protect our rights against those who are trying to take advantage of us.

Why is it that these people have forgotten this!?

Guns are not about violence.

Yes they are misused in violence, but so are cars driving over people, angry wives with frying pans and rolling pins, ball-peen hammers to pop a little toe, a baseball bat, rocks, a 2x4 with nails in it, an ax, blow torch and a pair of pliers, a car battery and a wet sponge... and my favorite... that electric gyro meat slicer thing... it would make short work of skinning someone alive.

My point... bad people will ALWAYS do bad things.

Will a "no firearms allowed" sign stop someone from doing a mass murder at a school? Luby's Cafeteria? Tell me yes... I dare you.

I will leave you with this... If law makers abuse the first amendment as badly as they already have the second, you can look forward to stuff like this...

-Only certain law enforcement or military officials are allowed to have free speech.
-Citizens are required to have a permit to carry a bible, but it is still illegal to transport it across state lines, bars, national parks, or federal buildings and school zones.
-Certain religions are illegal, because they are the cause of violent crimes.
-The people may peaceably assemble... but that only means in your on home.
-you may be required to be finger printed and pass a background check, so that you are able to access the internet on a computer capable of no more than a 56k connection.

So, when someone starts talking about gun control being a good thing... I start gathering more ammo in case things get out of hand.

[Henchman]

This is not the 1800's.
Again, gun control does not mean taking away guns.

And also, feel free to explain why America has such a hughbrate of violent crimes, and intentional homicides, compared to countries with stricter gun control.

And I again invite you to back up opinions with links to facts.

[dahoeb]

Wether the guns used were llegal or not is beside the point.
As far as violent crimes go, again, the US is far ahead of European countries there as well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

Now, feel free to back up your opinion, with links to facts.

Oh please. Trying to say that the violent crime rates in Europe are analogous to the US is about as good as comparing apples and oranges. We have very different cultural and societal dynamics in play.

If what you suggest had any hard application to the US, then Chicago and DC would be the 2 safest cities in the country. Heres a quick hint....they're not.

[MoeMag]

This is not the 1800's.
No, but its still the 2nd amendment... and the revolutionary war was in the 1700's.


Again, gun control does not mean taking away guns.

No, it is the control of new guns. Guns are machines. machines wear out. they become less and less available to the people. Its taken about 26 years for the 1986 machine gun ban to make owning a machine gun a unrealistic dream to most of the people.


And also, feel free to explain why America has such a hughbrate of violent crimes, and intentional homicides, compared to countries with stricter gun control.

Cause we some rowdy folk.

And I again invite you to back up opinions with links to facts.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Revolutionary_War

-response in red

EDIT:
another great link...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution