U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 06-10-2009, 02:41 PM
 
Location: memphis tn
530 posts, read 568,499 times
Reputation: 119

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Parrotrosie View Post
Thanks for your agreement! But now you are using the same argument the anti-gun folks use....'They don't NEED' this weapon or that. Who decides what I need and for what purpose? As mentioned earlier, I most certainly would NEED an uzi if I had to go toe to toe with the military of the USA as ordered by a corrupt government....It could happen...

I likely would not have that weapon in my arsenal should that day come, but I would be very , very , grateful to those that did have It's a slippery slope argument....beginning the erosion of a right eventually leads to the loss, in it's entirety of that right.
No thanks...I want the entire right, in it's glory full on - thank you very much!
And thank god you have that right. I'm all for personal rights, you will be hard pressed to find anyone more for personal rights than me. Thank you for showing me the light on that point! never thought about that...Hey I can admit when I'm wrong!

 
Old 06-10-2009, 03:01 PM
 
Location: NW Nevada
13,340 posts, read 10,909,247 times
Reputation: 12290
The 'need' and 'sporting purpose' argument against ownership of certain types of arms has been way overused. Nowdays semi autos are not distinguished from full autos and cosmetic features are the prime focus as to what is 'evil' in a firearm. To make our nation a 'gun free' zone would be unwise at best and disastrous at worst. The right to arms was put into the Constitution for a reason and that reason had nothing to do with 'sporting purposes'. "Need', however, was a prime motivator. Free men need to be able to defend that freedom, and force of arms is ,all to often, required to accomplish that end. It is prudent for the citizens of a free nation to be armed adequately enough to be a deterent to a would be tyrant or dictator who would attempt to use the military to take control. All other purposes for ownership of firearms are secondary to that reason.
 
Old 06-10-2009, 05:30 PM
 
Location: MS
3,949 posts, read 3,856,381 times
Reputation: 1370
Quote:
Originally Posted by Parrotrosie View Post
I most certainly would NEED an uzi if I had to go toe to toe with the military of the USA as ordered by a corrupt government
The Uzi comes standard in 9mm but other pistol calibers are available. I'd rather have a semi-auto rifle in a rifle caliber with a large magazine. That's why I have 3 with 1 on order. I'm missing something that is accurate in the 500+ meter range.

-Robert
 
Old 06-10-2009, 06:25 PM
 
Location: Maine
898 posts, read 1,194,624 times
Reputation: 554
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert_J View Post
The Uzi comes standard in 9mm but other pistol calibers are available. I'd rather have a semi-auto rifle in a rifle caliber with a large magazine. That's why I have 3 with 1 on order. I'm missing something that is accurate in the 500+ meter range.

-Robert
I want one of these...

YouTube - Full Auto Saiga-12 (Alliance Armament)
 
Old 06-10-2009, 06:26 PM
 
Location: southern california
55,237 posts, read 72,427,088 times
Reputation: 47455
its been tried in germany prior to 3rd reich
 
Old 06-11-2009, 11:34 PM
 
9,912 posts, read 12,186,445 times
Reputation: 7257
Quote:
Originally Posted by trmihall01 View Post
Well, i do remember reading that within 3-6 months that violent crime had gone way, way up. It also stands to reason if innocent people can't defend themselves then the criminals(who have guns anyway) will prey on them.......
The strange thing about it is that we've never (that I'm aware of) been allowed to own a handgun for personal use AND we can still use single shot (or whatever it's called. Not semi automatic but load and shoot, reload and shoot) so potentially you could still be shot by an innocent person defending themselves here and that has happened fairly recently. Not that I remember all the details but an old guy shot some kid that broke into his house and was getting violent with him.

I do think the gun buy back has had an impact on the psyche of the criminal element as well as the general population but it is strange how we as a nation view it. Well not strange but different to the US. I was reading just recently comments attached to a newspaper article about escalating ethnic gang violence and there seemed to be an awful lot of average Aussies that were wishing we were able to arm ourselves. Remember though that the "right to bear arms" has never been a given in our constitution.

I think we most definitely have had an escalation in violent crime here and yes I think that part of that can be attributed to the general population mostly being disarmed BUT I also think that we have an under funded, over worked and sometimes incredibly disinterested police force, and a legal system that doesn't really give a **** about Joe Average. There's been a HUGE increase in the numbers of ethnic AND bikie gangs AND general gang related violence and a good deal of the "random" violence we see here is also alcohol fueled. Just last week here in Melbourne a young guy went to the aid of another who was being attacked by a gang and the good samaritan was stabbed and killed as his friends watched in horror. The gang members flew out of Melbourne the next day bound for Thailand and there's no way of knowing IF the police will even bother to track them down OR manage to extradite them back here to face charges OR if even supposing all that happens and they are found guilty that the judiciary will give them much more than a slap on the wrist, effectively punching the victim and his family in the face repeatedly.
 
Old 06-12-2009, 12:47 AM
 
Location: Canada
5,478 posts, read 6,189,918 times
Reputation: 7863
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asheville Native View Post
When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.

England, Canada, Australia has removed the ability of a person to defend themselves against ARMED intruders in their own home.

The thug with a gun is going to be bolder if he knows the people he is about to rob do not have a gun in their house.
I don't know where you got this idea from but I am Canadian and it is basic English common law (1689) that an individual has the right to self-defense. Gun control is not gun prohibition.
15. Isn't the US-style self-defence illegal in Canada?

And the facts are not born out by the glib idea that "if guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns." Outlaws have guns when there are so many guns available.

"While murder rates without guns are roughly comparable between our two countries, the firearm homicide rate in the US is 7.9 times greater and handgun homicide 14.5 times higher than in Canada. Uncontrolled access to guns puts officers at risk - the more guns that widely accessible, the greater the risk to police. Widespread access to guns in the United States has increased risk for police officers. In 1997, 1 police officer was murdered on the job in Canada, while in the US, with a population ten times greater than Canada and much easier access to guns, there were 64 police officers murdered on duty and 63 of them were killed with a firearm. "

Link: 15. Isn't the US-style self-defence illegal in Canada?

Since I grew up in a rural area and still live in a rural area, my father had guns. He was not a hunter but kept them for the reason any farmer would - putting down sick livestock. They were never kept in the house but in the barn.

My husband used to hunt and has guns. Registered, of course. I don't know anyone who has a gun due to a fear of their personal safety. It isn't part of the mindset here. In the rare case of a homeowner being faced by an armed intruder, most homeowners with access to guns, would probably use it to defend themselves. In a true instance of a real threat to life, that is not a crime.

That being said, no, I don't think that the US will ever be free of guns.
 
Old 06-12-2009, 09:32 PM
 
Location: vagabond
2,631 posts, read 4,832,743 times
Reputation: 1300
Quote:
Originally Posted by netwit View Post
And the facts are not born out by the glib idea that "if guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns." Outlaws have guns when there are so many guns available.
despite the fact that i think you are overlooking some important points, what about the gun restrictions is going to get guns away from these criminals that isn't already working?

you state that outlaws have guns when guns are available, but what of the countries where outlaws have them despite their restricted availability to the public?

how is it that the guns are going to be taken away from evil men and women when the government comes to my home demanding my .22 and .223 rifles?

seems to me like the criminals will have the guns regardless.
 
Old 06-13-2009, 01:31 AM
 
Location: Canada
5,478 posts, read 6,189,918 times
Reputation: 7863
[
Quote:
quote=stycotl;9268930]despite the fact that i think you are overlooking some important points, what about the gun restrictions is going to get guns away from these criminals that isn't already working?
The point is that information intended to scare people is being broadcast as truth when it is not true. And I don't doubt that what the poster wrote about Australia and the UK is as wrong as he/she was about Canada. I like facts.

We have never had the kind of gun culture in Canada that you have in the US and since we have a different mindset regarding the rights of the community as being at least as important as the rights of the individual, our criminals do not have the sorts of guns that you have in the US. And crime is usually criminal on criminals as opposed to random home invasions by strangers.

The premise that "when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns" is clearly untrue since if it were true, law-abiding, non gun-toting Canadians would be falling by the wayside right, left and centre, since our outlaws should be having a field day with guns. And they aren't. Ditto for the UK. And, I suspect, though I haven't looked up the statistics, for Australia as well.

My main interest was in correcting the statement that Canadians can't defend themselves against armed intruders. It's basic common sense as well as basic English common law, which is what your second amendment is based on.

I read a lot of posts by Americans that reference personal defence but I have never actually met a Canadian gun owner who would use defense as a reason for his or her gunownership. Not saying there aren't any, just saying that it isn't common. People who have guns talk about hunting, not defending themselves.

The gun registration here is rather in a mess since no one seems to know how to implement it, but that's another story.


Quote:
you state that outlaws have guns when guns are available, but what of the countries where outlaws have them despite their restricted availability to the public?
See above. Canadians are not lying dead on the roads in spite of gun restriction. There are fewer Canadians dead as the result of guns than there are Americans, who have few, if any restrictions.

How many people do you know who have actually has to defend themselves with a gun against some sort of attack? I don't know any. Theoretically, if I go for a drive tomorrow, an airplane could land on my head but it isn't likely. I don't lock my doors either. If worse came to worse, I am sure my two gnormous German shepherds would do a better job than a gun. I would be more likely to shoot myself in the foot. I personally don't know how to shoot and I don't want to either.

Why do most western countries, where guns are not so in evidence as in the US have lower rates of crime? And why, with the easy availability of firearms in the US, are there so many more murders than in countries with gun control laws?

There clearly is a relationship between the number of guns available in a society, even those by law-abiding citizens, and the guns that criminals have. It is a societal issue, and both the law-abiding citizen and the criminal are products of the society they live in. Americans value individual rights more than most. I'm not criticising that, just pointing it out as a partial answer to the original question, whether the US will ever become gun free.

Quote:
how is it that the guns are going to be taken away from evil men and women when the government comes to my home demanding my .22 and .223 rifles?
I seriously doubt the government will ever want your guns unless you are engaged in illegal activity or showing obvious signs of mental illness. Even in Canada.
 
Old 06-13-2009, 03:06 AM
 
Location: Oviedo, Fl formerly from the Philly Burbs!
1,012 posts, read 2,357,230 times
Reputation: 365
Quote:
Originally Posted by netwit View Post
[
I seriously doubt the government will ever want your guns unless you are engaged in illegal activity or showing obvious signs of mental illness. Even in Canada.
I am going to say, I agree with the majority of your post and say that our crime is is societal, and even if we never had guns...we would likely still have a higher crime rate than other countries.....sadly.

BUT...as far as the tidbit I left above....

Our government is ACTIVELY, and has been for the last, at least 20 years been trying to find some way to erode our gun rights, and slip in ways to take our guns back. It is a fight every step of the way not to give them any ground, and they are making headway unfortunately. Little by little they are eroding our rights.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top