Ban on Gun Ownership?

[negator]

No Matter What The Laws Say Or Might Say In The Future I'll Never Give Up My Guns

Which means you are only a law abiding citizen when it suits your needs/wants.

I see nothing absurd about stating that it is excessive to own more then 2 or 3 firearms. If the point is to protect one's family against crime, why would you reasonably need more then 2 or 3?

the point is to keep and bear arms. if you want to protect your family against crime, that's fine. you should judge the appropriate quantity to keep personally. why arbitrarily choose the number 2 or the number 3 for everyone?

I believe many gun owners feel as you do. The old 'Cold Dead Hands' thing.
It is interesting that gun owners use the Constitution as a reason for gun ownership. But were that legal framework to be taken away, that they (including yourself) would knowingly break the law to keep your weapons.
So it's not that you want your guns exclusively because it is your Constitutional Right to own one. You just want your guns; whether it is legal or not.

maybe you answered your own question?

The more unfair a government treats it's citizens. The more the citizens want to hurt the government.

ok, let's say a constitutional amendment was ratified that repealed the second amendment, or prohibited repeating arms, or infringed gun ownership in some significant way.
it is already documented what happens alongside prohibition: a profitable black market, and a huge body count.
as long as i'm not hurting anyone else, i'm going to do whatever i want, the rule of man notwithstanding.

prisons are full of people like me.

 

[dave_rhino]

giving up your guns means you have no wish and no will to protect your beloved ones

I don't have any guns, does that mean I don't want to protect my loved ones?

Sweet Jesus, man kind is doomed...

 

[Nomad 800]

prisons are full of people like me.

My guess is you haven't spend much time in jail.

Because if you had, I highly doubt you would be willing to go back simply because you want to keep your guns even though you live in one of the safer countries in the World.

 

[sputnikgirl]

1. your first statement is absurd. substitute the word "cars", "drinks", or "children" for "firearms" and you'll see both the irrationality and hopelessness of it.

2. an intelligence test? does the army use such a test? the men who designed our constitutional government knew about dumb, and planned for it. that's why they decided against direct democracy. they simultaneously recognized the right of the people to keep and bear arms. the mental test i believe is already on the books. implementing it is the trick (columbine, virginia tech, hundreds of others).

3. pawn shops and gun dealers are very heavily regulated and severely punished for even the slightest errors in paperwork. here is a gun shop in phoenix that got shut down:
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/0507akbust0507.html

i don't mean to sound disrespectful, but i intend to own as many firearms as i can comfortably accomadate.
and yes, if they were prohibited, i'd be 'in the speakeasy.'

If gun owners were law-abiding in the first place, there wouldn't be a need for half the regulations. The majority of us have to live in fear because gun-owners won't stick to the most basic of rules regarding gun ownership. You're not supposed to conceal and carry...but people do. You're also not supposed to even own unregistered weapons...but people do. Pawn shops alter & forge paperwork just to make a sale. If they can't follow the regulations already in place, why should they be allowed more freedom?

I see nothing absurd about stating that it is excessive to own more then 2 or 3 firearms. If the point is to protect one's family against crime, why would you reasonably need more then 2 or 3?

I believe many gun owners feel as you do. The old 'Cold Dead Hands' thing.
It is interesting that gun owners use the Constitution as a reason for gun ownership. But were that legal framework to be taken away, that they (including yourself) would knowingly break the law to keep your weapons.
So it's not that you want your guns exclusively because it is your Constitutional Right to own one. You just want your guns; whether it is legal or not.

Exactly. If the aim is to protect your family, then how do you justify owning more than a few? Like Nomad points out, gun owners want more freedom and less regulations on gun ownership...but in the next breath they willingly admit they'll break the law no matter what. Individual rights shouldn't extend to a device that is primarily used to take away others' human rights.

I don't have any guns, does that mean I don't want to protect my loved ones?

Sweet Jesus, man kind is doomed...

FACT. :yesyes:

 

[ninetysixcavy]

If gun owners were law-abiding in the first place, there wouldn't be a need for half the regulations. The majority of us have to live in fear because gun-owners won't stick to the most basic of rules regarding gun ownership. You're not supposed to conceal and carry...but people do. You're also not supposed to even own unregistered weapons...but people do. Pawn shops alter & forge paperwork just to make a sale. If they can't follow the regulations already in place, why should they be allowed more freedom?

:

It's legal to C&C in many states. It's a state thing, not federal. As far as being in places where legal ownership is off the scale, I honestly feel far safer in my aunts rural town (with hunters driving up and down her dirt road) than I do when I am at home, in my inner-city.

 

[Facetious]

What's the big deal ? Life is a game of chance :dunno:

http://board.freeones.com/showpost.php?p=2174608&postcount=12

Pretty damn good odds to me !

Devils Advo -
So why do you need your guns then ? :yawns:



In the end, it's not about our safety, not one bit ! When and where has the govt. honestly demonstrated that they're dogmatic with respect to the preservation of life ?

 

[Facetious]

1. It's reasonable to own 2 or 3 firearms, but anything more is simply excessive and shouldn't be tolerated.

2. There should be an intelligence test and a psychological test administered as part of the application process. If you fail either part, then no guns for you. If they find you with one after your application has been denied, $10,000 fine per firearm that's found in your possession.

3. Crackdown on pawn shops and other facilities who try to sell guns "under the table". Loss of business license permanently for anyone found guilty of illegal gun sales. Heavy fines (and possible jail time) for individuals who run illegal operations.

There are too many stupid and psychotic people running around with firearms. Too many innocent people have been victims of senseless gun violence, whether gang-related or domestic. Nobody, I don't care who you are, needs to own an excessive amount of firearms.

5.5 people per 100,000 is nothing ! At ease. Cancer is going to wipe out about 1/3 of us prematurely.

NO DEAL !
Respect your opine though

 

[bombardier52]

I am totally confused by the discussion of how many guns is enough or reasonable or whatever. You can really only shoot one at a time so what does it matter how many you have?

I think sputnikgirl has too many glass unicorns in her apartment but I totally support her right to have them.

 

[sputnikgirl]

5.5 people per 100,000 is nothing ! At ease. Cancer is going to wipe out about 1/3 of us prematurely.

NO DEAL !
Respect your opine though

Until it happens to you or someone you love...then let's see if you're singing a different tune.

 

[Marlo Manson]

I am a gun supporter; a gun lover; a gun collector; and their is no way in this lifetime the CORRUPT A$$ GOVERNMENT OF THE USA is gonna make me handover; dispose of ; or limit my guns!! the USA is so infested with handguns and firearms that it would be virtually impossible to enforce such a absurd attempt to ban handguns/firearms..

Wouldn't that also be a MAJOR WASTE OF TAX PAYERS $$$ TO EVEN try to pass a bill through congress cuz their would be millions upon millions of court cases of civilians VS. the state of so and so protecting their right to buy; collect and bear arms that its an outlandish idea to even consider!! it would be tied up in court for years and years!! regardless of what kind of bills or laws they manufacture; implement; or try to enforce I am keepin my guns until the day I die!! they would have to deploy the entire military into every state and city in the USA to try and recover civilian contraband!! they will never deploy our military against its own citizens!! I don't think we have to worry to much about any of these gun bans!! I keeps one in the chamber in case you ponderin!! later peoples!!

eric

 

[Facetious]

Until it happens to you or someone you love...then let's see if you're singing a different tune.

If you continue to endure a loss in your life, I sincerely sympathize.
There are those, particularly women, who gun - up if their state allows, following a traumatic incident ie rape attempt, murder of a loved one etc

But I have also argued that the idea that more guns somehow makes us safer is not supported at all by the facts.

We really have no idea as to how much safer law abiding citizens are with firearms because confrontational incidents are not reported to authorities, for the most part the parties typically go their separate ways once the perpetrator understands that their potential victim has equal or greater force. Why get the police involved in an extensive investigation when the baron is long gone ?

The majority of shooting in this country are not by people commiting crimes or by people defending themselves from crimes.They are the product of things like domestic disputes where a handy gun gets used in a fit of rage

Negative ! 99.---% of shooting in this country is at steel or paper targets[/QUOTE]

and also guns are used in a high percentage of suicides.

good ! less global warming w/out them (after decomp)

IMO way less guns would make society much safer in day to day living.Problem is there are so many out there now that it would be very difficult to reduce the amount of guns out there.

Again, and I'm delighted marquis provided the stat - 5.5 deaths : 100,000 citizens as a result of guns. This is totally negligible ! I wouldn't even play a weekly 1 million dollar lottery with these odds it's so remote.

But when people talk about illegal guns they must keep in mind they were all legal once.

Not entirely true - What percentage of all shipping containers that come into America's ports are legitimately, thoroughly inspected ? Less than 10 %. Also, chicom ak 47s are surreptitiously making their way into America from guess where ? The wide open, porous southern border :doh: !

 

[Mr. Daystar]

If gun owners were law-abiding in the first place, there wouldn't be a need for half the regulations. The majority of us have to live in fear because gun-owners won't stick to the most basic of rules regarding gun ownership. You're not supposed to conceal and carry...but people do. You're also not supposed to even own unregistered weapons...but people do. Pawn shops alter & forge paperwork just to make a sale. If they can't follow the regulations already in place, why should they be allowed more freedom?





Exactly. If the aim is to protect your family, then how do you justify owning more than a few? Like Nomad points out, gun owners want more freedom and less regulations on gun ownership...but in the next breath they willingly admit they'll break the law no matter what. Individual rights shouldn't extend to a device that is primarily used to take away others' human rights.



FACT. :yesyes:

It's not the law abiding gun owners that cause laws to be put into place, it's criminals, and paranoid anti gun lobbies that are mis informed.

If you live in fear of law abiding people, it must be a pretty unhappy life

Concealed carry is allowed in ABOUT 46 of 48 states, and you have to take instruction and get a permit in most of them. Which is, ironically a violation of the Second Amendment.

There is no Federal law regarding registration, other then the ownership of "class A" weapons. Some cities require you register your guns, again, a violation of the Second Amendment

Dealers that break the law SHOULD be punished, you'll get no argument there

In case you are unaware, the first person to use gun registration successfully, was Adolf Hitler. I think we all know how that turned out.

The aim is not also to protect yourself, and your property, but defend, and stand up to a tyrannical, and oppressive Government. It's hard to fight fire with fire, when they limit, and restrict your rights on what you can own. And make no mistake, gun laws ARE NOT for your safety, or to protect the children, or the community, they're to limit our power, and increase the Governments. They started with, the Federal Firearms Act of 1934, and they're still steadily working on taking the rest.

There's a big difference between breaking the law, and standing up for your rights, and what is right.

If you are a criminal, and your intent is to harm me, or my family, I don't think you deserve rights, not a single one, because you obviously have disregarded mine, don't fault me because I have a stronger desire to remain alive, and the means to insure that happens.

 

[Nomad 800]

It's not the law abiding gun owners that cause laws to be put into place, it's criminals, and paranoid anti gun lobbies that are mis informed.

The aim is not also to protect yourself, and your property, but defend, and stand up to a tyrannical, and oppressive Government.

Sounds like the anti gun lobbies aren't the only paranoid ones.

 

[Mr. Daystar]

Sounds like the anti gun lobbies aren't the only paranoid ones.

You're right. The Government is too, me, I'm just cautious, I see whats going on, if you choose to ignore it, by all means, bend over at wait patiently.

 

[Nomad 800]

You're right. The Government is too, me, I'm just cautious, I see whats going on, if you choose to ignore it, by all means, bend over at wait patiently.

And what are you going to do? Take on the whole US military with 2 assault rifles, 4 hand guns and a few grenades?
If they want you dead, you are dead. And they wouldn't even have to break a sweat to do it.

No, I don't trust them myself. But I know my limits.

 

[dave_rhino]

If you continue to endure a loss in your life, I sincerely sympathize.
There are those, particularly women, who gun - up if their state allows, following a traumatic incident ie rape attempt, murder of a loved one etc

You don't need a gun, or any weapon, to defend yourself or others. Learn a martial art. Good way to stay fit and to defend yourself.

Fighting fire with fire isn't a wise idea.

 

[Friday on my mind]

Negative ! 99.---% of shooting in this country is at steel or paper targets

You know when I say shooting I am refering to people being shot not shoots fired at the range.

Again, and I'm delighted marquis provided the stat - 5.5 deaths : 100,000 citizens as a result of guns. This is totally negligible ! I wouldn't even play a weekly 1 million dollar lottery with these odds it's so remote.

Well if that is your view then doesn't that kind of say there is not a real valid arguement that guns are needed reasonably to provide self defense?
Since the odds are so low that you will be shot.:dunno:

 

[marquis2]

My figures were for the overall murder rate in the US, not the gunshot deaths.Firearms death rate is about three times this.You can be shot by accident and still be just as dead.If I remember correctly during the Vietnam War there were many more US citizens shot in the US than soldiers shot by the Viet Cong.There are also over 200 000 non fatal gunshot injuries a year in America.
http://library.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUTORIAL/GUNS/GUNSTAT.html
An interesting extract from the above link ;The issue of "home defense" or protection against intruders may well be misrepresented. Of 626 shootings in or around a residence in three U.S. cities revealed that, for every time a gun in the home was used in a self-defense or legally justifiable shooting, there were four unintentional shootings, seven criminal assaults or homicides, and 11 attempted or completed suicides (Kellermann et al, 1998)

 

[georges]

You don't need a gun, or any weapon, to defend yourself or others. Learn a martial art. Good way to stay fit and to defend yourself.

Fighting fire with fire isn't a wise idea.

Sadly, scumbags never attack alone, they attack in group. You wining against 10 other people, impossible. That is why a gun or any large blade knife can save your life. Scumbags attack like cowards and always in group.

 

[Rattrap]

As a fence-sitter on his topic, I just wanted to address some holes.

In case you are unaware, the first person to use gun registration successfully, was Adolf Hitler. I think we all know how that turned out.

I don't. We all know he lost the war, but how did his registration work out before then?

The aim is not also to protect yourself, and your property, but defend, and stand up to a tyrannical, and oppressive Government. It's hard to fight fire with fire, when they limit, and restrict your rights on what you can own. And make no mistake, gun laws ARE NOT for your safety, or to protect the children, or the community, they're to limit our power, and increase the Governments. They started with, the Federal Firearms Act of 1934, and they're still steadily working on taking the rest.

Emphasis added.

The first outlined sentence there seems to be a favorite of the pro-gun camp, but to be quite honest, it sucks. As Nomad said,

And what are you going to do? Take on the whole US military with 2 assault rifles, 4 hand guns and a few grenades?
If they want you dead, you are dead. And they wouldn't even have to break a sweat to do it.

Your firearm is perhaps the weakest weapon you have against the United States government. You're better off taking the time getting educated, educating others to make your vote and time count. Stop an oppressive government from ever taking place. Because once they're in place with intent to do what they will to you, they're going to do what they will with you regardless of how much of a Rambo armory you've built up.

As to the second point, I'm a little skeptical that the US Government (if they are malicious as opposed to, say, inept or simple misguided) would try to disarm its citizens physically to give themselves more power when they have a far better and successful strategy already in place: poor education and media saturation. Even if the US Government cracked down big time, suspending all sorts of rights, many would sit complacently at home eating whatever rubbish the news was feeding them. The few that don't (such as the gun-toting Rambos) are going to get picked off in no time.

My figures were for the overall murder rate in the US, not the gunshot deaths.Firearms death rate is about three times this.You can be shot by accident and still be just as dead.If I remember correctly during the Vietnam War there were many more US citizens shot in the US than soldiers shot by the Viet Cong.There are also over 200 000 non fatal gunshot injuries a year in America.
http://library.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUTORIAL/GUNS/GUNSTAT.html
An interesting extract from the above link ;The issue of "home defense" or protection against intruders may well be misrepresented. Of 626 shootings in or around a residence in three U.S. cities revealed that, for every time a gun in the home was used in a self-defense or legally justifiable shooting, there were four unintentional shootings, seven criminal assaults or homicides, and 11 attempted or completed suicides (Kellermann et al, 1998)

Emphasis added, again.

Oh context, you argument destroyer.

I just read in the paper today that a crazy fellow (as in, life-long mental illness) started shooting into the freeway (I-205 for those of you that have been up in the area) and hit some poor woman in the chest. She lived, but she's pained for her life and her kids are afraid of getting shot at any moment.

This isn't a shot at guns, per se (as it very clearly has implications into mental health institutions as well), but yet another illustration that something needs to be changed. Whether it's the availability or harsher penalties or what-have-you, I don't know.

I can say, for what it's worth, that I felt much safer wondering around England without any fear that someone might pull a gun on me (I know there are still guns in the UK, but of course to a greatly lesser extent). Sure, plenty of areas I was in had high possibilities of mugging by knifepoint, but I'm pretty confident I can outrun any shmuck with a knife (or just kick the stuffing out of them. As a bicyclist, I have strong legs ). I definitely can't outrun bullets.