U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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 08-06-2019, 05:10 AM
 
Location: Texas
27,021 posts, read 11,349,510 times
Reputation: 6219

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brave New World View Post
This isn't about the right to carry or not to carry a gun, it's the type of weapon and calibre that you are allowed to legally own and bringing in proper checks to ensure that gun owners are responsible individuals, who don't have any current mental health issues or other such problems relating to drugs and alcohol addiction, or a history of serious violence.

As for the right not to be armed, I am not aware of any such right, indeed there has been periods of compulsory military conscription in most western countries.
Then you don't understand rights. No one is being forced to defend themselves.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-06-2019, 05:16 AM
 
10,477 posts, read 6,367,971 times
Reputation: 5865
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuakerBaker View Post
Many people say that we need the right to own weapons such as an AK47 so that we can protect ourselves from an abusive government.

I would argue that this is not true.


1...Our military takes an oath to defend the constitution or in other words the rights of the people. In Nazi Germany they took an oath to Hitler, etc...not the rights of the people. Our military is staffed by good people overall who hold the protection of the constitution in high value.

2...In similar countries with similar constitutional values like France, the UK, Australia....which have reduced gun rights...you don't see an oppressive government beating up the people. Because as above, the military would turn on the government if it ever did that.

3...The military has high tech weapons and vehicles...an AK47 wouldn't be effective for fighting against that either.

4...The same reason that many don't want Iran to have nuclear weapons is the same reason that many don't want anyone to have AK47s. The more weapons of mass destruction out there the more likely they are to fall into wrong hands and be used for evil.

I don't want an AK 47, just overpriced plus I can't shoot it in my local indoor range. I'm happy with my semi auto mag fed rifle chambered in 5.56, that is a weak enough round that I can shoot at the local range.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-06-2019, 05:18 AM
 
Location: Great Britain
12,071 posts, read 4,119,441 times
Reputation: 7459
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loveshiscountry View Post
Then you don't understand rights. No one is being forced to defend themselves.
There is also no legal right to not carry a firearm, if there were then lots of people who fought war in places such as Vietnam might have just said no I don't want to carry a gun when they were intially conscripted.

As for firearms, most countries don't have this debate, indeed people can have guns for sport, hunting, pest control etc, however these guns are restricted in terms of sei-automatic centre fire weapons that can be used to commit massacres.

You can carry out all the above activities without weapons that can kill 9 people in 26 seconds, indeed at the time of the Second Amendment guns were largely clumsy muskets.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-06-2019, 05:19 AM
 
165 posts, read 16,556 times
Reputation: 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brave New World View Post
This isn't about the right to carry or not to carry a gun, it's the type of weapon and calibre that you are allowed to legally own and bringing in proper checks to ensure that gun owners are responsible individuals, who don't have any current mental health issues or other such problems relating to drugs and alcohol addiction, or a history of serious violence.

As for the right not to be armed, I am not aware of any such right, indeed there has been periods of compulsory military conscription in most western countries.
Any gun used for home self defense can be used to kill many people in a crowded setting. The Virginia Tech shooter used handguns. The Santa Fe shooter used a shotgun and revolver. The shooter in Dayton used a 22 caliber rifle - one of the smallest calibers.

Of course we're not stupid. You ban one caliber. Some years pass, and some mass shootings are carried out by other calibers and you ban them too and pretty soon there are no guns allowed.

No thank you. We don't want UK gun laws here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-06-2019, 05:20 AM
 
30,050 posts, read 15,669,622 times
Reputation: 20281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brave New World View Post
I think you will find vehicles are highly regulated.

Firstly you have to have a licence to drive a car and pass a test, indeed in the UK you have to pass both a practical and a written test.

Your driving licence may be withdrawn due to medical problems or if you are on certain medication, and if you drink and drive or continually go over the speed limit you can be banned from driving.

Whilst cars can go faster, they are limited to speed limits by law and those that break such laws are brought before the courts.

Furthermore all vehicles must be registered for road tax, and must have insurance in order to cover any accident.

Finally a car is a mode of transport, and must be road worthy, and certain types of vehicle are not road worthy, and ever car must have a log book and ownership details as well as regular annual checks in order to check that the vechile it is still safe to go out on to the roads. This is known as an MoT in the UK.
If vehicles are regulated enough, how come they are responsible for mire innocent deaths than guns?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-06-2019, 05:23 AM
 
30,050 posts, read 15,669,622 times
Reputation: 20281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brave New World View Post
There is also no legal right to not carry a firearm, if there were then lots of people who fought war in places such as Vietnam might have just said no I don't want to carry a gun when they were intially conscripted.

As for firearms, most countries don't have this debate, indeed people can have guns for sport, hunting, pest control etc, however these guns are restricted in terms of sei-automatic centre fire weapons that can be used to commit massacres.

You can carry out all the above activities without weapons that can kill 9 people in 26 seconds, indeed at the time of the Second Amendment guns were largely clumsy muskets.
I noticed how you point out that the government can force you to go fight and kill in an unjust war while saying we should not have the right to resist that force.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-06-2019, 05:29 AM
 
Location: Great Britain
12,071 posts, read 4,119,441 times
Reputation: 7459
Quote:
Originally Posted by PedroMartinez View Post
If vehicles are regulated enough, how come they are responsible for mire innocent deaths than guns?
Road deaths have declined in many countries including my own due to compulsory seat belt laws, increased speed restrictions, speed calming measures and speed cameras espoecially near schools, as wel as better car technology and improved testing in relation to fitness to drive. There as been a 40% reduction in road deaths in the last decade due to these meaures and numerous other such measures.

New report says UK roads are still the safest in Europe | Autocar

UK roads remain amongst safest in EU | United Kingdom

In terms of the last figures avialable, 25,000 people died in road deaths in Europe in 2016, whilst 38,000 died as a result of guns in the US.

America's gun culture in charts - BBC News - BBC.com
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-06-2019, 05:32 AM
 
Location: annandale, va & slidell, la
7,558 posts, read 3,109,241 times
Reputation: 6368
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuakerBaker View Post
Many people say that we need the right to own weapons such as an AK47 so that we can protect ourselves from an abusive government.

I would argue that this is not true.


1...Our military takes an oath to defend the constitution or in other words the rights of the people. In Nazi Germany they took an oath to Hitler, etc...not the rights of the people. Our military is staffed by good people overall who hold the protection of the constitution in high value.

2...In similar countries with similar constitutional values like France, the UK, Australia....which have reduced gun rights...you don't see an oppressive government beating up the people. Because as above, the military would turn on the government if it ever did that.

3...The military has high tech weapons and vehicles...an AK47 wouldn't be effective for fighting against that either.

4...The same reason that many don't want Iran to have nuclear weapons is the same reason that many don't want anyone to have AK47s. The more weapons of mass destruction out there the more likely they are to fall into wrong hands and be used for evil.
You must be very young. Russia and the US has been fighting and dying in Afganistan for decades against primitives with AKs.

Your comfort level with government control over your life is naive.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-06-2019, 05:34 AM
 
30,050 posts, read 15,669,622 times
Reputation: 20281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brave New World View Post
Road deaths have declined in many countries including my own due to compulsory seat belt laws, increased speed restrictions, speed calming measures and speed cameras espoecially near schools, as wel as better car technology and improved testing in relation to fitness to drive. There as been a 40% reduction in road deaths in the last decade due to these meaures and numerous other such measures.

New report says UK roads are still the safest in Europe | Autocar

UK roads remain amongst safest in EU | United Kingdom

And yet cars are still responsible for many times more innocent deaths than guns.

You aren't calling for a sensibke restriction like a max speed if 30 mph that will save thousands of lives.

Sorry if I don't believe your big concern is about reducing deaths.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-06-2019, 05:35 AM
 
Location: Just over the horizon
8,231 posts, read 2,830,763 times
Reputation: 4457
Quote:
Originally Posted by dman72 View Post
BS. It is not "as capable". The Dayton shooter shot over a dozen people in about a minute just walking on the street. To kill that many people with a 3 shot integral mag would take a highly trained military sniper stationed on top of a building.

Enough with the gun nut garbage please.


1 pump action shotgun + 2 revolvers = 20 rounds without reloading.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


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 > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

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