Gun Control

Discuss events that have an impact on you and the world today. A home for honest, serious, and open discussion.

Should Gun control be allowed?

Yes
120
52%
No
84
36%
Other (please explain)
27
12%
 
Total votes : 231

Unread postby James » Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:58 am

Fan Kong wrote:Thanks for explaining guns Ryubbi. I guess I would have to say that gun control is fine where it is right now. I guess we just need stricter rules on acquisition and ownership of guns. I don't really see why people make a stink about the 5-day waiting period. I guess those who complain needed to kill someone within 5 days?

Background information could be more carefully considered when purchasing a weapon, in my opinion. There is currently a one-week waiting period (correct, right?) as well. I think the system is pretty good, as it does keep American citizens armed.

I think it is important to keep American citizens armed, because banishing guns will not take them away from criminals. People who use guns for brutal crimes tend not to use registered guns in the first place (if they are smart), and that alone is proof that they are able to attain them through illegal means.
Kongming’s Archives – Romance of the Three Kingdoms Novel, History and Games
“ They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
  — Ben Franklin
User avatar
James
Sausaged Fish
Sausaged Fish
 
Posts: 18003
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2002 3:21 pm
Location: Happy Valley, UT

wrong

Unread postby Justin » Mon Nov 11, 2002 6:17 am

I agree with everthing you guys have said about waiting periods. Unlike the NRA I believe that certain people shouldn't be able to own guns, like convicted felons (and some misdemeanor offenses) and people who are mentally ill.

When I bought my .357 magnum one of the meanest hand guns ever made I did so from a local gun dealer. I had the terrible inconveniance of waiting 15 minutes for a background check. The salesman told me it was the same for rifles as well. There is no waiting period in Utah, I don't know what it is elsewhere but I think it's about the same. I have no problem with people having to wait a dew days to purchase a fiream. If you have a legitimate need you can stand to wait a few days before you get your gun.

However you go to a gun shows or pawn shops and there is no waiting period or background check at all. This is not right, I have been to several gun shows and seen things that I know were not legal to sell but no one seemed to care. I have no problem with laws that severly restrict these kind of no background check sales from happening.

I can see the NRA's worry though, once you start down a road where will it end? That is why they fight so hard against any gun laws. They worry once the government imposes a waiting period it's just a matter of time before all guns are banned and the 2nd amendment is repealed.
My Website

My Blog

The Dungeon

Trouble maker extraordinaire!
User avatar
Justin
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 3356
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2002 2:08 am
Location: Dropping it like it's hot

Unread postby Jimayo » Mon Nov 11, 2002 6:41 am

I believe people should be able to have any gun they want. They should be able to walk into a convenience store and buy an AK-47, or a Bazooka, or a Rocket Launcher.

However, I think only I, should have ammunition. Cause frankly, I wouldn't trust the rest of you goobers with anything more dangerous than string.
98% of the internet population has a Myspace. If you're part of the 2% that isn't an emo bastard, copy and paste this into your sig.
Jimayo
Lord of the Thirteen Hells
 
Posts: 3308
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2002 1:38 am
Location: Nothingness. And that's where I'll be returning in oh, about 15 minutes.

Unread postby James » Mon Nov 11, 2002 7:02 am

Jimayo Oyamitch wrote:I believe people should be able to have any gun they want. They should be able to walk into a convenience store and buy an AK-47, or a Bazooka, or a Rocket Launcher.

However, I think only I, should have ammunition. Cause frankly, I wouldn't trust the rest of you goobers with anything more dangerous than string.

Yeah, and we can change your name to dictator, king, or lord and live happily ever after? Hahah. The last thing I want is a kid going into a school with an AK-47, rocket launcher, or Bazooka.
Kongming’s Archives – Romance of the Three Kingdoms Novel, History and Games
“ They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
  — Ben Franklin
User avatar
James
Sausaged Fish
Sausaged Fish
 
Posts: 18003
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2002 3:21 pm
Location: Happy Valley, UT

Unread postby Iznoach, Legendary Dragon » Mon Nov 11, 2002 8:03 am

Jimayo Oyamitch wrote:I believe people should be able to have any gun they want. They should be able to walk into a convenience store and buy an AK-47, or a Bazooka, or a Rocket Launcher.

However, I think only I, should have ammunition. Cause frankly, I wouldn't trust the rest of you goobers with anything more dangerous than string.


Rather silly, isn't it? But it's your opinion...

I have similar beliefs to Jimayo on this actually. I think that any adult should have the right to do whatever they please...as long as they are responsible for their actions. However, I think it is a little rediculous to own a bazooka, rocket launcher, anti-tank gun or anti-personnel mines, etc. (I think you get the point). I mean, what do you hope to accomplish with such weapons, outside of taking out an enemy platoon :lol: ? Not only that, but as a former member of the armed forces, I know that it takes a lot of training to become proficient with these weapons; I further know that automatic weapons (when switched to fully automatic) are very difficult to control. If you were to use such a weapon even against one target, without training, you'd be just as likely to shoot everyone around him/her than the person you're actually targetting...

What that all boils down to, for me, is that assault rifles, and anything more powerful, should be restricted (or downright banned), but handguns, semi-automatic rifles, and shotguns shouldn't be.
"Armed and dangerous, ain't too many can hang wit us
straight up weed no angel dust, label us Notorious..."--Biggie
User avatar
Iznoach, Legendary Dragon
Gunslinger
 
Posts: 1674
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2002 7:28 am
Location: French Landing, WI

Unread postby Cao Zhi » Mon Nov 11, 2002 11:10 am

I am in favor of buying and properly maintaining any firearms that one sees fit, as long as one is responsible for them. Guns are used to kill one's fellow man, but they also serve as a deterrent; criminals tend to shy away from neighborhoods that have known gun owners will not burglarize or rob those people, since the would-be-criminals do not want to get shot. To give a humerous example, I recall a story that my freind's uncle told me: a group of soliciters came to his door one day to prostletyze whatever it is they were selling/saying/whatever. The uncle answerd the door wearing a large shirt with an eagle and the words "Charleton Heston is my president." The soliciters, upon seeing the shirt, immediately fled.

In a more extreme example, guns are also used to protect one's self against a tyrannical government. I give the example of the Armenians during the First World War; the Ottoman government murdered over half of the Armenian population, but one Armenian outpost bravely defended itself until the end, since the occupants had firearms and fired back at the Turks. When you are able to defend yourself, you can. If not, then you have to take whatever it is that Big Brother does to you, since he has a monopoly on force.
User avatar
Cao Zhi
Princely Poet of Wei
 
Posts: 942
Joined: Mon Aug 12, 2002 10:33 pm
Location: Vote Cao in 2004!

Unread postby James » Mon Nov 11, 2002 12:35 pm

Cao Zhi wrote:In a more extreme example, guns are also used to protect one's self against a tyrannical government. I give the example of the Armenians during the First World War; the Ottoman government murdered over half of the Armenian population, but one Armenian outpost bravely defended itself until the end, since the occupants had firearms and fired back at the Turks. When you are able to defend yourself, you can. If not, then you have to take whatever it is that Big Brother does to you, since he has a monopoly on force.

Very true, and not to mention the fact that Big Brother will be less likely to seriously harm an armed population. A rather extreme scenario, but something that may actually be relevant over time.
Kongming’s Archives – Romance of the Three Kingdoms Novel, History and Games
“ They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
  — Ben Franklin
User avatar
James
Sausaged Fish
Sausaged Fish
 
Posts: 18003
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2002 3:21 pm
Location: Happy Valley, UT

so true

Unread postby Justin » Mon Nov 11, 2002 11:08 pm

Zhuge Kongming wrote:
Cao Zhi wrote:In a more extreme example, guns are also used to protect one's self against a tyrannical government. I give the example of the Armenians during the First World War; the Ottoman government murdered over half of the Armenian population, but one Armenian outpost bravely defended itself until the end, since the occupants had firearms and fired back at the Turks. When you are able to defend yourself, you can. If not, then you have to take whatever it is that Big Brother does to you, since he has a monopoly on force.

Very true, and not to mention the fact that Big Brother will be less likely to seriously harm an armed population. A rather extreme scenario, but something that may actually be relevant over time.


This mere fact has deterred any serious though of land invasion of the united states by many countries. Not only do you have to contend with the US military you have to worry about MILLIONS of armed civilians. Of course that could be bad for the government if things ever get to out of hand but I don't think that will be happening in my lifetime, well I hope not.
My Website

My Blog

The Dungeon

Trouble maker extraordinaire!
User avatar
Justin
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 3356
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2002 2:08 am
Location: Dropping it like it's hot

Unread postby Glaucon » Sat Nov 23, 2002 12:09 am

I see nothing wrong with gun ownership. I have grown up around them my entire life, all my friends did, heck my entire community did. The problem is not in the gun it is in the people who use them irresponsibly. From about the age of 3, whenever i was tall enough to reach a dresser drawer, my father taught me what a gun was and what it could do. I understood right away that it was a deadly weapon. (my father, brother and I all hunt.) That is the most important part to gun control.

Also, historically the first steps to many dictarships is to limit the access civilians have to firearms. An armed populace is a decent deterrant to despotic rule.

So basically i think civilians (excludeding convicted felons, and people convicted of a misdemeanor involving a violent act on someone else) should have access to semi-auto rifles, shotguns, and handguns.
Justice is merely the advantage of the strong.
Glaucon
Apprentice
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2002 4:19 pm
Location: Fishbowl, D.C.

Unread postby Seven at One Stroke » Sat Nov 23, 2002 1:28 am

Glaucon wrote:Also, historically the first steps to many dictarships is to limit the access civilians have to firearms. An armed populace is a decent deterrant to despotic rule.


An armed populace isn't a decent deterrant to despotic rule, an enlightned populace and democracy is a deterrant to despotic rule.
Glaucon wrote:So basically i think civilians (excludeding convicted felons, and people convicted of a misdemeanor involving a violent act on someone else) should have access to semi-auto rifles, shotguns, and handguns.

I fully agree that guns don't kill people, people kill people. And I'm glad that you and your family fully understand how devastating guns are to people. Unfortunately, not all people are like your family. There are too many people who have the potential of killing others using firearms to devastating effects. By the time a gun-owner has commited a crime using his gun, it's already too late for gun control and crime prevention.
Moderation in pursuit of actual work is no vice.
User avatar
Seven at One Stroke
Sei's Slave
 
Posts: 1852
Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2002 4:16 am

PreviousNext

Return to Current Affairs

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests

Copyright © 2002–2008 Kongming’s Archives. All Rights Reserved