The Official Gun Control Debate thread

[tommyvee]

Thats not true though... there is no such thing as sport atomic bombing / long range missile firing/ serin gassing (any of those are made specifically for killing). Whereas there is sport shooting with all kinds of weapons automatic/ semi/ single shot. The reason you can't get a gun if you are a felon is because you are obviously unstable. You can't protect everyone from everyone else. Are you going to make everyone go through a psych evaluation yearly?

Actually I think playing around with shoulder-launched missiles would be pretty sporting and I'm sure lots of people have fired bazookas and wire-guided munitions for fun. Explosives for entertainment has a long tradition, way back before Hunter S. Thompson. When I worked at the Climax mine, plenty of people snuck explosives home in their lunch boxes for sporting purposes.
I just don't consider a few people's recreational interests to balance out the costs to society of widespread availability of super-effective killing technologies. Everybody sane agrees with me.

Anyway, my point was that the inanimate nature of guns is irrelevant. All the tools, technologies, and substances that we regulate are not alive, incapable of evil, etc., but pretty much all societies choose some level of regulation for poisons, weapons, drugs, pollution, etc.. The question is what level of regulation is appropriate, since regulation is universal. I would argue that the current crazy quilt of federal,state, and local gun regulation in the US is too weak, too inconsistent and too poorly enforced to adequately protect the public.

[Jer]

Everybody sane agrees with me.

That's crazy talk.

[stihletto]

NO IT'S NOT!! PEOPLE WHO DON"T DRIVE A PRIUS AND DON"T USE THE RIGHT LIGHTBULBS CAUSE GLOBAL WARMING!!!!!

Actually it's the people that drive a prius and use the right light bulbs. It's just more so people like you.

little bitch, asshat jer

[Jer]

Cho Seung-Hui (sp?) legally aquired the handguns he used to murder the Virginia Tech students/faculty. He also planned this whole thing WAY in advance - he even called in bomb threats to see what campus security would do so he could be more efficient in his killing spree. I fail to see how stricter gun laws would have done anything to stop him. He was very deliberate. If he would have failed to aquire weapons legally, then he would have done so illegally. Most far-left wingnuts don't realise how easy it is to buy weapons illegally. Let me put it this way - you hippies don't have any problem buying your weed do you? It's kinda like that.

[Jer]

your mom gave me this picture to of you to use as my avatar.

I was a cute little nipper!

Bye bye, now. Have fun with spook/truckeelocal!

[doughboyshredder]

That is no longer a real proposition.
Welcome to 2007. There is a 'slight' technology and infrastructure discrepancy. Go start a Montana style revolution, and see for yourself how far it gets.

Yeah, Technology is sure winning the battle in Iraq.

[MeatPuppet]

I just don't consider a few people's recreational interests to balance out the costs to society of widespread availability of super-effective killing technologies.

If people's recreational interest's were what was at issue here, you would make a really good point. But you, as well as many other people, have completely missed the boat on this one. This is about our constitution. Change that and you/we can outlaw every form of firearm known to man. Until then, the average American has a right to keep and bear firearms.

Everybody sane agrees with me.

Then you have shown yourself to be a bigot. Thanks for letting us know.

This is not a debate over right and wrong. It's about what kind of nation we want to live in. But we have to share that nation with all the other people in it. It is possible for reasonable, rational opinions to exist on both sides of this debate.

There is a way to outlaw firearms. If enough people agreed with you, then the constitution can be changed. Unless/until that happens, you should respect it and stop trying to paint your side as the intellectually superior side of the debate. Neither side has a lock on that.

[rideit]

Yeah, Technology is sure winning the battle in Iraq.

Totally and completely a different animal, and you know it.

Nice try, but....

(Most of Montana's residents don't despise and resent the US 'presence' there, adhere to a different religion, and have had 60-100,000 of their residents recently die due to the instability that has ensued after the occupation, regardless of who is to blame...it is not a germaine comparison, IMO)

[doughboyshredder]

Ding ding ding!
I know I sound like Tipper Gore or some shit, but honestly, I think we need to step back and call for a little bit of responsibility from our sources of entertainment culture.

I got an idea! How about holding parents responsible to make sure their kids aren't watching, playing, or listening to this crap. We live in a supply and demand world. If parents were more responsible the entertainment industry wouldn't make enough money to warrant such an overwhelming supply.

[doughboyshredder]

Totally and completely a different animal, and you know it.

Nice try, but....

(Most of Montana's residents don't despise and resent the US 'presence' there, adhere to a different religion, and have had 60-100,000 of their residents recently die due to the instability that has ensued after the occupation, regardless of who is to blame...it is not a germaine comparison, IMO)

It still proves that a small group of dedicated fighters with sub par technology can fight the massive technology and expertise of the US Military.

Nor do I think that any militia could or should even think of attacking the US government. That is not my point at all.

However, I do think that a well armed citizenship would have a much better chance at protecting itself against a government turned bad (doubtful that could happen here, but Bush is sure a sign that it is possible), than a citizenship armed with bats and kitchen knives.

[doughboyshredder]

Social Revolution is the only way to address these problems. America is addicted to violence, plain and simple. I call for an all out boycott of tv, movie, music, and video game violence.

and this is the ONLY way that violence will not be part of popular culture. Remove the financial benefit and it will be gone.

Look at Imus. He didn't get fired for being a bigot, he got fired because the advertisers pulled their spots.

[EPSkis]

So now the issue is the immigration status of the shooter ? Sort out immigration and gun related crime will go away. Is that where you're going with regard to solutions ?

THE issue? No - I'll leave THE issue to such geniuses as yourself to solve here in the confines of TGR.

Is issuing handguns via Federal permit to non-US Residents an issue? In my opinion, YES.

Gonna solve anything in the long run? Probably not - but go ahead & debate me on whether such legislation would've saved 33 lives yesterday.

[gaijin]

you hippies don't have any problem buying your weed do you? It's kinda like that.

Thank you, Jer.

1- banning guns would simply increase the black market.
2- existing non-registered guns would be impossible to account for. (many states do not currently require registration.)
3- Those who are registered, the ones abiding by their state law, would be forced to give up arms while those who are not abiding by the law would still be packing.
4- I won't give up my guns for you. And I am registered.

Here is a link showing the state gun laws for Virginia. http://www.bradycampaign.org/legisla...php?st=va#bgnd

There is a very large gray zone between anti and pro gun that I think most involved in this debate have no knowledge of. Readers- Please educate yourself before just accusing gun owners as lunatics. I am willing to bet that after you see how many variations there are in current gun laws, you are probably not actually 100% anti-gun.

[DamRepublican]

If I want to kill someone I'm going to do it, if I have a gun or not, the gun isnt it, I watched a news reporter, on a legit news program CNBC maybe (it was a while ago) go to Australia (where there is a gun ban on concealed weapons and assault weapons) find a weapon dealer (identity blocked out) who showed the reporter that within 15 minutes of inquiry was able to come back to the reporter with an AK47 and a .45 1911. Tell me gun bans keep guns away from law-BREAKING people. yeah right give me a break, it isnt guns. Look at the statistics for repeat offenders in violent (and non violent crimes) what we really need are longer sentences and stricter parole laws.

[Cliff Huckable]

THE issue? No - I'll leave THE issue to such geniuses as yourself to solve here in the confines of TGR.

Is issuing handguns via Federal permit to non-US Residents an issue? In my opinion, YES.

Gonna solve anything in the long run? Probably not - but go ahead & debate me on whether such legislation would've saved 33 lives yesterday.

OH,PLEASE!

[rideit]

Holy run-on sentence, batman!

[DaveTV]

If I want to kill someone I'm going to do it, if I have a gun or not, the gun isnt it, I watched a news reporter, on a legit news program CNBC maybe (it was a while ago) go to Australia (where there is a gun ban on concealed weapons and assault weapons) find a weapon dealer (identity blocked out) who showed the reporter that within 15 minutes of inquiry was able to come back to the reporter with an AK47 and a .45 1911. Tell me gun bans keep guns away from law-BREAKING people. yeah right give me a break, it isnt guns. Look at the statistics for repeat offenders in violent (and non violent crimes) what we really need are longer sentences and stricter parole laws.

Clearly, you are not a VaTECH English major. Did you learn how to write like that at that bastion of higher ed in Bozeman?

[Roo]

Like an increasing gang population without the traditional British respect for authority and a willingness to import firearms?

You'll have a very, very hard time arguing that the handgun ban has made Britons any safer:

Without a control set of statistics it's impossible to make that assumption i.e. we do not know what the figures would have been without a ban on handguns and subject to the same societal externalities.


All you're left with is conjecture.

[tommyvee]

If people's recreational interest's were what was at issue here, you would make a really good point. But you, as well as many other people, have completely missed the boat on this one. This is about our constitution. Change that and you/we can outlaw every form of firearm known to man. Until then, the average American has a right to keep and bear firearms.

Then you have shown yourself to be a bigot. Thanks for letting us know.

This is not a debate over right and wrong. It's about what kind of nation we want to live in. But we have to share that nation with all the other people in it. It is possible for reasonable, rational opinions to exist on both sides of this debate.

There is a way to outlaw firearms. If enough people agreed with you, then the constitution can be changed. Unless/until that happens, you should respect it and stop trying to paint your side as the intellectually superior side of the debate. Neither side has a lock on that.

My point was that every sane person believes in restricting access to chem/bio weapons, missiles, and other "super-effective killing technologies". I have never argued to "outlaw firearms".

I do argue for implementing the clear words in the constitution,
Second Amendment
" A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free
State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be
infringed."
What is about well-regulated that is so hard to understand?
Well-regulated can include registration and tracking of weapons, limitations on types and usage of weapons, background checks, waiting periods, training requirements, limitations on where and how weapons can be legally carried,etc.,etc.

If weapons in the United States were limited to the actions of well-regulated militia (kind of like the National Guard or Switzerland's citizen army) I would be quite happy. A competent militia leader (like any officer in the National Guard) would have quickly realized that the VT shooter was not competent to bear arms. But there was nothing "well-regulated" about US gun culture and the thousands of deaths it brings each year.
Of course no law is completely obeyed, and gun control would have violations like any law. But the evidence is clear, the countries that have implemented tighter gun restrictions have murder rates and gun death rates that are fractions of the US rate (see statistics upthread). Just because laws against murder are not universally obeyed is not a reason to remove them from the books, but more a reason to implement better, tougher enforcement.

Australia still has illegal weapons, but it has a murder rate that is more than 60% lower than the US rate. Making gun access harder for disturbed individuals puts up one more barrier against mass murder. The barrier is clearly not insurmountable, but it clearly has an impact.

[grrrr]

What’s all this talk about banning violins on television? Violins are perfectly acceptable for all ages.

[spook]

What’s all this talk about banning violins on television? Violins are perfectly acceptable for all ages.

speaking of violins, there's this excellent story about joshua bell playing in a subway somewhere around here.... let me see....

[Cyber Cop]

spew...

........

[rideit]

speaking of violins, there's this excellent story about joshua bell playing in a subway somewhere around here.... let me see....

Yeah, and everyone pretty much ignored him.
One lady recognized him, and gave him $20.00...OUCH!

[Jer]

Clearly, you are not a VaTECH English major. Did you learn how to write like that at that bastion of higher ed in Bozeman?

This is a great arguement. Don't attack a guy's ideas or opinions, attack his grammar and use of punctuation.

That's about as stupid as me saying something like this:

Australia still has illegal weapons, but it has a murder rate that is more than 60% lower than the US rate.

Oh yeah? Well....whatabout that guy in Wolf Creek? He scared the hell outta me. And they never did find him!

[Hurricane]

Guns don't kill people, people kill people.

He was a product of our society. Fix society.

How many of our soldiers in Iraq have died from gunfire, and how many have died from IEDs? You may want to think about that for a minute, gun control freaks.