Community Message: We're currently in the middle of our donation drive. For those willing to send a donation, we ask that you use the feature in the sidebar to send a donation. For those who send a donation, a donation badge will be featured in your profile next to every message you post. members can dismiss this message by clicking on the 'x' in the upper-right corner. Donations are used for hosting fees, license renewal for the forum software and domain name renewal.

Jump to content
Goddess Relief Office
Sign in to follow this  
DeLtA

Gun control

Recommended Posts

DeLtA    8
DeLtA

So KM mentioned gun control in a different topic, so I wanted to make this its own topic because I think it'd be interesting to discuss in a civil manner. Probably controversial. I have my own views about gun control that could be described as moderate (i.e. I have no solution that I want to push). I want to reiterate again that I am neither for nor against gun control. I see both sides of the argument. I'll start it up with a point (that's for gun control), but feel free to add in your own points and counterpoints.

 

There is a problem with people with guns killing indiscriminately in the US (see Columbine, Sandy Hook, etc.). Agree or disagree?

 

Here are some solutions that use gun control. If guns that can kill multiple people quickly (high capacity magazines, etc) were banned, we would reduce the death toll from gun-related violence. Further, if the 2nd amendment was amended to reject citizens' rights to bear arms, then we would have the benefit of very little gun violence in the United States.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Keiichi Morisato    418
Keiichi Morisato

Well, in theory, gun control is a good idea. But, in practice, I feel it's nothing more than a knee jerk reaction to a violent episode of gun violence. Here in the United States, no agency that exists in the country does enough to ensure that weapons stay out of the hands of those who aren't mentally fit to possess them. Truth to tell, when gun control laws are passed into law and enforced, who exactly does it benefit? It benefits the criminal, the bank robber, the gang0banger, the drug dealer. Gun control laws wouldn't have any effect on the criminal element and it never has because they are unlikely to rush out and apply for a gun license.

These type of laws are only designed to make people feel good about themselves, which is why they are called "feel good laws" and why most pundits refer to such ideas about such laws as nothing more than "knee jerk" reactions. Instead of forcing the gun laws that we currently have, people think that more laws should be passed to make it even more restrictive. Some time ago, I remember when there was outrage that the government was considering gun confiscation laws to take away everyone's second amendment rights. While there were no such laws when it happened, I remember when Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans. The New Orleans Police Chief decided to go home to home and confiscate every weapon that every citizen had in their home or in their possession, despite having no legal right to do so. That happened back in 2005 when local police and the FBI tried to forcibly remove people from their homes because they thought they were doing some good. This also ended up with the outrage over the gun confiscation procedure.

It just becomes a sad story of good ideas that have turned bad. Personally, I don't own a gun and I doubt I would ever pick one up again. My dad let me fire a .357 Magnum when I was around eight years old and I almost knocked myself out with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sugoi    47
Sugoi
2 hours ago, DeLtA said:

Here are some solutions that use gun control. If guns that can kill multiple people quickly (high capacity magazines, etc) were banned, we would reduce the death toll from gun-related violence. Further, if the 2nd amendment was amended to reject citizens' rights to bear arms, then we would have the benefit of very little gun violence in the United States.

I think around the globe the US are quite infamous for their comparatively super lax gun control laws. It's almost like the lawless wild west depicted in the movies. That's why there is also jokes like that American police officers tend to shoot first before they ask any question (which doesn't seem to be very far from reality at times...).

Anyways, a private individual owning big caliber, automatic, or military grade guns is just unthinkable over here. If a person has one of those, chances are high that they are terrorists...  Since guns are so rare here there is rarely any gun violence. As far as I know it's pretty much the same with all other countries with very strict gun control laws. It definitely works! So I totally support Delta's notion of an America "free" of guns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Keiichi Morisato    418
Keiichi Morisato

Honestly, you wouldn't be too far off but the thing is, the media only reports about the bad apples. There are a lot of good police officers here but ever since the aftermath of September 11th, the Black Lives Matter movement, Ferguson, Zimmerman and so forth, it's not so much that law enforcement have become trigger happy but rather every idiot with a cellphone who go out of their way to provoke police officers into doing something they wouldn't normally do.

I remember a video where a police officer pulled over a woman who had her children in the car. While the officer was talking to her about why she was stopped, she proceeded to argue with the officer and sped off, forcing officers to do what they needed to be done to stop the vehicle. There were a number of things that transpired with that stop. She was pulled over after police stopped her for doing over 70mph in a 55mph speed zone. When the officer went back to his patrol car to check her paperback, she sped off from the officer. When she was pulled over again by the same officer, that's when the confrontation devolved. He ordered the woman out of the car to which she refused. That's when her son exited the car and proceeded to advance upon the officer. This is something you never do, especially when the situation has become very heated with a police officer.

The problem is that many of these incidents with police officers tend to happen when the person the officer has stopped has decided to resist the officer at any and all costs.

One just has to search youtube for videos like these, where videographers have literally verbally egged police officers on and then wonder why police officers in the country take such an aggressive stance against civilians videotaping them. I'm not saying that every confrontation with police officers is the fault of the public, I'm sure there are some aggressive officers out there. I'm just saying that this isn't true with every officer and that the only ones you ever hear about are the bad apples, those police officers who have no sense of duty about their core mission "to protect and serve".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DeLtA    8
DeLtA
16 hours ago, Sugoi said:

Since guns are so rare here there is rarely any gun violence. As far as I know it's pretty much the same with all other countries with very strict gun control laws.

It might be true for many countries, but some go against the trend, muddying the waters of whether gun ownership is good or bad. One of the things that I've noticed is that in Mexico, it is illegal to own guns. However, gangs and drug cartels don't care about the law. They do own a lot of guns and end up murdering innocent individuals and also affecting local/national governments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Keiichi Morisato    418
Keiichi Morisato

@DeLtA, exactly. This is why gun control doesn't work. Think about it this way before enacting a law. Who is going to be affected by gun control laws? Only those civilians who have no criminal record, who obey the law and who register for a gun permit and license. Criminals who engage in illegal activity aren't affected by gun control laws or by gun laws. This is why it doesn't work because a criminal doesn't care about a gun control law, they just laugh about it, roll their eyes and dismiss it because there is a reason why they are engaged in illegal activity in the first place. I seem to recall more than a few years back when there was some incident in New York, I don't recall what it was exactly, but there was outrage when gun control fanatics wanted to pass stronger gun control laws and restrict everyone's rights.

It involved someone in the media who was in favor of gun control releasing detailed information via Google Maps about everyone who owned a gun and even pinpointed those locations on a map. At that time, I thought it was hilarious because the very thing they were trying to prevent at the time just gave every criminal in the state a roadmap on which homes to vandalize for weapons. It was insane. Matter of fact, it happened back in 2012 when a newspaper released the names, addresses and other pertinent information of every gun owner that resided in the state. The information was published by The Journal News at the time and resulted in a lot of outrage by people on both sides of the fence.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/25/us/new-york-gun-permit-map/index.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DeLtA    8
DeLtA
2 minutes ago, Keiichi Morisato said:

gun control fanatics wanted to pass stronger gun control laws and restrict everyone's rights.

That's another interesting point. So there might be a line between weapons that kill indiscriminately versus weapons that kill with a purpose. Right now, things like bombs are not protected by the second amendment. I guess you could think of guns that are high caliber as things that indiscriminately kill. I mean, if I shot something that was automatic, I'm not trying to kill a specific person, I'm trying to spray into a crowd of many people I don't even know. I think that's the reasoning behind having stronger gun control laws (but not necessarily overturning the 2nd amendment): high caliber guns are likened to bombs in that they indiscriminately kill, and there isn't a need for it.

About the reporter releasing gun ownership... I'm confused... do they actually have a database of people who own guns? I live in NH right now, and I think I can just go to a store and buy a gun without any verification of where I live or anything. I guess there are states with more lax and strict gun laws. Whether that's good or bad is a topic of another discussion about states rights, haha.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sugoi    47
Sugoi
3 hours ago, DeLtA said:

...One of the things that I've noticed is that in Mexico, it is illegal to own guns. However, gangs and drug cartels don't care about the law. They do own a lot of guns and end up murdering innocent individuals and also affecting local/national governments.

I think there's two reasons for that:
1. It's easy for criminals / the cartels to get all the guns they could ever wish for as gun lover's paradise uncle Sam is right "next door".

2. The Mexican government and its institutions such as law enforcement agencies perform subpar due to insufficient funding and/or corruption.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Keiichi Morisato    418
Keiichi Morisato

@DeLtA, @Sugoi. The thing that a lot of gun control nuts need to worry about is this: let's say for a moment that excessive strict gun control laws are passed into law. Let's also say that guns are banned. There are no legal gun owners that can protect themselves. That leaves the criminal element in each country freely available to roam, rob, kill, rape, pillage with no respect for who they hurt and that law enforcement can do nothing about it because civilians would no longer help the police out. There was an incident here in Michigan where a police officer was attacked by a crowd for pulling over another vehicle, for possibly violating the vehicle laws, maybe for speeding or something like that. There was another incident (in California, I believe) where an officer was saved by the heroic act of an ex-Crips gang member and actually saved the officer's life.

When you curtail someone's right to defend themselves, such as taking away their rights to own a gun, it not only makes the job harder for law enforcement but that it's never a guarantee that it will stop gun violence either. It's a common rule of thumb that if someone wants to commit an act of violence against another person, then they're going to find to do that. Passing a gun control law won't prevent that. For instance, I imagine you can go into any state, any city, here in the United States, and purchase a gun for around $50 and the person selling it to you won't do a background check, they won't give you a license. Matter of fact, the only thing they will ask for you is the cold hard cash for the weapon.

To make matters worse, a gun isn't the only kind of weapon that someone could use either. In the wrong hands, a baseball bat, a taser, an automobile, they can all be turned into weapons. When I was in the ninth grade, I had a classmate stab me in the chest with a pencil because I wanted to sharpen the pencil I had. But, anything you can pick up with your hand can be turned into a weapon. But, telling someone they can't own a gun, they are more likely to go out and purchase one illegally and that's why gun control laws don't work.

Playing Devil's Advocate here, but the only reason that lawmakers talk about wanting to pass stronger gun control laws is usually a knee-jerk reaction to another incident of gun violence. What I find hilarious about it is the fact that we don't need more gun control laws. We just need law enforcement doing its job to enforce the laws we currently have. Those are more than enough to do the job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sugoi    47
Sugoi
5 hours ago, Keiichi Morisato said:

@DeLtA, @Sugoi. The thing that a lot of gun control nuts need to worry about is this: let's say for a moment that excessive strict gun control laws are passed into law. Let's also say that guns are banned. There are no legal gun owners that can protect themselves. That leaves the criminal element in each country freely available to roam, rob, kill, rape, pillage with no respect for who they hurt and that law enforcement can do nothing about it...

Mhh, I hear that self-defence argument a lot. And it definitely makes sense. Which is why it's necessary to make sure that as many guns as possible are withdrawn from circulation for this to work.

I mean there is pretty much no guns where I live. But despite that there is no "endless" pillaging, robbing, killing and so on (you won't need a gun to commit such crimes anyways). The other "bonus" is over here encounters with law enforcement are not potentially life threatening! There is absolutely no need to worry about getting gunned down by police officers just because you were reaching for your car's glove box or because you were making hasty movements for instance.

 

Quote

To make matters worse, a gun isn't the only kind of weapon that someone could use either. In the wrong hands, a baseball bat, a taser, an automobile, they can all be turned into weapons. When I was in the ninth grade, I had a classmate stab me in the chest with a pencil because I wanted to sharpen the pencil I had. But, anything you can pick up with your hand can be turned into a weapon...


Well, it's true that plain everyday objects can be misused to cause harm. But unlike those everyday objects a gun's true purpose is either to inflict (potentially lifethreating) harm or to threaten a "third party" to inflict that kind of harm to them (IMHO).

 

Quote

But, telling someone they can't own a gun, they are more likely to go out and purchase one illegally and that's why gun control laws don't work.

As mentioned above I think certain requirements must be met for this to work. In Germany at least it does.

But I admit no guns is not a perfect solution! But I believe the solution guns for self-defense causes greater problems that wouldn't exist (to such an extent) otherwise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Keiichi Morisato    418
Keiichi Morisato

The reason it's used a lot is because everyone who owns a gun uses it as a generic defense and I think it's become a generic term and a rallying cry for everyone who owns a gun. There are legitimate reasons for using that defense when defending your right to own a gun. But, generally speaking, when you have gun nuts parading around town with a rifle strapped over their shoulder, those are the lunatics who should have their gun rights taken away from them because I see it as nothing more than creating a public nuisance. Here in the United States, if you own a handgun and you wish to go out in public, you also have to have a permit to carry that weapon. With rifles, you don't. There are different types of gun permits. Open Carry and Open Carry Concealed.

Truthfully, I believe that police officers should have the right to confiscate anyone carrying a rifle, walking down the street and that they should be charged with inciting the public. While I respect everyone's constitutional right to the Second Amendment, that right doesn't extend to you walking down the street with a rifle slung over your shoulder because then you're the one who is infringing on the personal safety of other civilians. When that happens, you deserve exactly what you get if a police officer stops you. The least that could happen is that the police confiscate your weapon, detain you at the local precinct for a few hours and leave you embarrassed to explain to your family and your employer why you were arrested in the first place.

It just makes it inconvenient on your part and you end up ranting and raving for something that you could have totally prevented. Personally, I think these gun nuts are just looking for attention, their 15 minutes of fame, and their constant bragging on youtube about how you think your civil rights were trampled on. The vast majority of the numb-nut, gun toting moron videos that I have watched have been idiots going out of their way to provoke the police into doing something just so they can get their youtube fame.

When you really think about it, owning a gun is a privilege, it's not a guaranteed right, unless you're doing your hunting in the middle of a shopping mall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DeLtA    8
DeLtA
19 hours ago, Keiichi Morisato said:

It's a common rule of thumb that if someone wants to commit an act of violence against another person, then they're going to find to do that. Passing a gun control law won't prevent that.

While this is true, do you agree that making it difficult for people to obtain guns will nullify those people who want to buy a gun on an impulse to do something rash, in a moment of extreme anger or sadness? It could be argued that passing gun restrictive laws are essentially nullifying crimes of convenience.

It's like, we could lock our doors, but why should we require locks on apartment doors? If a criminal wanted to steal, they could, lock or not. It's, again, a way to prevent crimes of convenience. A normal person might turn into a thief if it is made super easy to steal something. However, if they meet a bit of resistance, they usually won't pursue it. A hardened or determined thief, of course, could break into any home and steal stuff. I feel like the same could be said of enforcing stricter gun control laws.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

Board Life Status


Board startup date: December 12, 2004 13:15:32
×