How do you feel about that everybody have the right to own guns?

  • bluecrow

    Posts: 166

    Jul 02, 2010 6:28 PM GMT
    Just watched the movie "Remember Me". There's a gun shot scene at the beginning of the movie.

    I was literally shocked! I know that someone people can become violent easily, but the mother was shot to death in front of her own daughter was so extreme. It wouldn't happen if the guy who rubbered her didn't have a gun.

    I have read so many stories that people was shot to death in the US recently. I also know that it's a legal right for an American citizen to have guns. However, not everybody can manage their anger well, and when there are guns involves, it can end up pretty bad.

    So what do you think about the legal right of owning guns?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 02, 2010 6:29 PM GMT
    bluecrow said
    So what do you think about the legal right of owning guns?
    Outlaws don't give a fuck about the laws...that's why they're called outlaws.
    Now take away guns from people who can LEGALLY have them, and the only thing you're left with is armed outlaws.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 02, 2010 6:34 PM GMT
    paulflexes said
    bluecrow said
    So what do you think about the legal right of owning guns?
    Outlaws don't give a fuck about the laws...that's why they're called outlaws.
    Now take away guns from people who can LEGALLY have them, and the only thing you're left with is armed outlaws.


    But at the same time too many of those (even decent people) who legally own guns are irresponsible in storing them, making them prone to being stolen and re-circulated amongst bad people.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 02, 2010 6:39 PM GMT
    BuddyinNYC said
    paulflexes said
    bluecrow said
    So what do you think about the legal right of owning guns?
    Outlaws don't give a fuck about the laws...that's why they're called outlaws.
    Now take away guns from people who can LEGALLY have them, and the only thing you're left with is armed outlaws.


    But at the same time too many of those (even decent people) who legally own guns are irresponsible in storing them, making them prone to being stolen and re-circulated amongst bad people.
    That is by far the worst argument I've ever seen.
    With that logic, people who get robbed should be held accountable for being stupid enough to get robbed.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 02, 2010 6:45 PM GMT
    The US Constitution protected the right to bear arms when much of the US was a wilderness, and the threat from the British and other foreign powers was very real. Consider the War of 1812.

    But the original Constitution retained the principle of slavery, that was subsequently amended out of existence, and likewise didn't allow for women's suffrage, also later permitted by amendment. So why is the Second Amendment out of bounds for a re-look, in today's world?

    Because a bunch of red-necks think weapons make them men? Because they think we're about to be invaded by Communists?

    Or do they paranoically believe they have to be ready to defend themselves against their own government, as the Teabaggers hold? Right, the US Army is about to march into your living room. And if they did, do you think your Smith & Wesson would stop them? icon_rolleyes.gif

    And as to the argument that we need protection against the bad guys, what if the bad guys couldn't get weapons, either? What an elegant solution. If the bad guys can't get guns, why do I need guns, too? To play John Wayne?

    So I find this a stupid argument, an emotional argument, a red-neck trailer-trash argument. You want guns because they make you feel like a man. How about acting like a real man, without the need for guns?
  • bluecrow

    Posts: 166

    Jul 02, 2010 6:52 PM GMT
    In comparison, take the example of other countries where owning guns is illegal. The amount of guns are dramatically reduced. You don't usually expect someone you bumped into has a gun in those countries, or maybe most likely he could take out a knife. Knives are a lot less dangerous compare to guns.

    I have lived in China and I am living in Australia now, I feel both of the countries are quite safe. What about US?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 02, 2010 6:58 PM GMT
    paulflexes said
    BuddyinNYC said
    paulflexes said
    bluecrow said
    So what do you think about the legal right of owning guns?
    Outlaws don't give a fuck about the laws...that's why they're called outlaws.
    Now take away guns from people who can LEGALLY have them, and the only thing you're left with is armed outlaws.


    But at the same time too many of those (even decent people) who legally own guns are irresponsible in storing them, making them prone to being stolen and re-circulated amongst bad people.


    That is by far the worst argument I've ever seen.
    With that logic, people who get robbed should be held accountable for being stupid enough to get robbed.


    This was a statement of fact, not an argument meant to sway people one way or the other. Personally I don't have a solution. What I can say is that I had colleagues who had pistols which were meant to be on them at all times, with clear stipulations that they were not to be 'hidden' in their vehicle, or night table during the day. Lo and behold several were stolen, because the licensed gun bearers were completely irresponsible. Getting back to your response- when a person getting robbed makes an attempt to live through it, and hopefully turn the table on the robber, he did all he could, and that is desirable. When a licensed gun bearer is irresponsible and doesn't take the appropriate precautions, he is guilty and puts other good people at risk. People have to be accountable.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 02, 2010 7:00 PM GMT
    Outlawing guns will not stop guns from being produced and used. It will only limit their use to outlaws.
    I grew up hunting for food and shooting for sport...both with bow/arrow and guns. I've also disarmed a person who attempted to shoot me. Not everyone who fights for gun rights is a person who relies on them for safety.

    Currently I do not own a gun. But if someone breaks into my house with a gun, then I'll have a gun. icon_wink.gif
  • Daniepwils

    Posts: 151

    Jul 02, 2010 7:07 PM GMT
    To outlaw guns because some people use it to harm others is ridiculous. If we are going by that logic then we should outlaw fast food and alcohol before we outlaw guns....They by far kill more people than guns do. In fact lets outlaw cars too...

    I do not own a gun, I grew up hunting with guns and bos though.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 02, 2010 7:16 PM GMT
    paulflexes said...But if someone breaks into my house with a gun, then I'll have a gun. icon_wink.gif

    I don't suppose you ever considered laws that would prevent a person breaking into your house with a gun in the first place? You wouldn't need a gun if the intruder didn't have one, either. The is why the rest of the world thinks the US has a crazy Wild-West mentality.

    I taught weaponry. I am rated an Expert on just about any kind of personal weapon you can name, plus machine guns. But I don't own a single weapon today. I fail to understand this US obsession with owning guns. I think it's a phallic thing, that developmentally-challenged males buy into.

    I don't need a pseudo-dick to make me a man, the one I have between my legs is quite adequate, thank you. If you have to buy your dick, you're not a real man as far as I'm concerned.

    (And I'm speaking rhetorically, not a personal slam on paulflexes, whom I greatly admire here)
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 02, 2010 7:20 PM GMT
    Personally..I think guns should be loaded with non lethal rounds...but that's me.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 02, 2010 7:20 PM GMT
    Wilton saidThe US Constitution protected the right to bear arms when much of the US was a wilderness, and the threat from the British and other foreign powers was very real. Consider the War of 1812.

    But the original Constitution retained the principle of slavery, that was subsequently amended out of existence, and likewise didn't allow for women's suffrage, also later permitted by amendment. So why is the Second Amendment out of bounds for a re-look, in today's world?

    Because a bunch of red-necks think weapons make them men? Because they think we're about to be invaded by Communists?

    Or do they paranoically believe they have to be ready to defend themselves against their own government, as the Teabaggers hold? Right, the US Army is about to march into your living room. And if they did, do you think your Smith & Wesson would stop them? icon_rolleyes.gif

    And as to the argument that we need protection against the bad guys, what if the bad guys couldn't get weapons, either? What an elegant solution. If the bad guys can't get guns, why do I need guns, too? To play John Wayne?

    So I find this a stupid argument, an emotional argument, a red-neck trailer-trash argument. You want guns because they make you feel like a man. How about acting like a real man, without the need for guns?


    And this isn't an emotional argument? Questioning someone's masculinity because he happens to like and own guns? Where does that leave the growing number of women gun owners who purchase pistols for self protection?

    Would you rather see a gay man have his head split like a melon on the curb, or see him kicked to death in an alley than allow him to defend himself with a gun?

    Sometimes a gun is the only thing that gives a person a chance against someone who is physically stronger or who has the advantage of numbers.

    Read the text of the Supreme Court ruling. It quite clearly presents the history of gun control during the post civil war period, when laws were put in place to deny blacks (freemen) from possessing guns. God forbid that the Klan be endangered while terrorizing black families. It's so inconvenient when the people you intend to lynch start shooting at you.

    Even today, the idea of a black man with a gun scares the hell out of some people, and not all of them from the deep south.
  • Daniepwils

    Posts: 151

    Jul 02, 2010 7:23 PM GMT
    Wilton said
    paulflexes said...But if someone breaks into my house with a gun, then I'll have a gun. icon_wink.gif

    I don't suppose you ever considered laws that would prevent a person breaking into your house with a gun in the first place? You wouldn't need a gun if the intruder didn't have one, either. The is why the rest of the world thinks the US has a crazy Wild-West mentality.

    I taught weaponry. I am rated an Expert on just about any kind of personal weapon you can name, plus machine guns. But I don't own a single weapon today. I fail to understand this US obsession with owning guns. I think it's a phallic thing, that developmentally-challenged males buy into.

    I don't need a pseudo-dick to make me a man, the one I have between my legs is quite adequate, thank you. If you have to buy your dick, you're not a real man as far as I'm concerned.


    I have to disagree with you as far as it being a pseudo-dick, some people yes. But the majority of people owning guns legally in the US have them for one of two reasons: One, for sporting, hunting, etc. Two, for personal protection.

    I can honestly see someone having their house robbed and feeling threatened after the robbery, one of the first things they would do is probably go and get a weapon.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 02, 2010 7:24 PM GMT
    rkyjockdn said
    Wilton saidThe US Constitution protected the right to bear arms when much of the US was a wilderness, and the threat from the British and other foreign powers was very real. Consider the War of 1812.

    But the original Constitution retained the principle of slavery, that was subsequently amended out of existence, and likewise didn't allow for women's suffrage, also later permitted by amendment. So why is the Second Amendment out of bounds for a re-look, in today's world?

    Because a bunch of red-necks think weapons make them men? Because they think we're about to be invaded by Communists?

    Or do they paranoically believe they have to be ready to defend themselves against their own government, as the Teabaggers hold? Right, the US Army is about to march into your living room. And if they did, do you think your Smith & Wesson would stop them? icon_rolleyes.gif

    And as to the argument that we need protection against the bad guys, what if the bad guys couldn't get weapons, either? What an elegant solution. If the bad guys can't get guns, why do I need guns, too? To play John Wayne?

    So I find this a stupid argument, an emotional argument, a red-neck trailer-trash argument. You want guns because they make you feel like a man. How about acting like a real man, without the need for guns?


    And this isn't an emotional argument? Questioning someone's masculinity because he happens to like and own guns? Where does that leave the growing number of women gun owners who purchase pistols for self protection?

    Would you rather see a gay man have his head split like a melon on the curb, or see him kicked to death in an alley than allow him to defend himself with a gun?

    Sometimes a gun is the only thing that gives a person a chance against someone who is physically stronger or who has the advantage of numbers.

    Read the text of the Supreme Court ruling. It quite clearly presents the history of gun control during the post civil war period, when laws were put in place to deny blacks (freemen) from possessing guns. God forbid that the Klan be endangered while terrorizing black families. It's so inconvenient when the people you intend to lynch start shooting at you.

    Even today, the idea of a black man with a gun scares the hell out of some people, and not all of them from the deep south.


    I acutally asked a group of conservatives if they ever saw a black man around my age open carry.

    They said no, but their reactions were priceless. Its like the thought of it scared the hell out of them. Which kind of scares me..I keep my wallet in my back pocket (like most people) so if I open carry and reach for my wallet whats to stop someone from thinking I am going for my gun and opening fire on me?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 02, 2010 7:32 PM GMT
    rkyjockdn said]And this isn't an emotional argument? Questioning someone's masculinity because he happens to like and own guns? Where does that leave the growing number of women gun owners who purchase pistols for self protection?

    Women and men both wouldn't need guns in the first place if guns were not so easily available to criminals.

    But I continue to contend that the motivating factor in this US pro-gun movement isn't about women, but about male machismo. Guys who wanna be like John Wayne, and shoot anyone who crosses their path. What a civilized attitude that is!

    So don't talk about women, who have little to do with any of this. It's a male macho thing, and you know it is. Mentioning the fact that some women also shoot guns is a diversion that fails to address the core issues here.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 02, 2010 7:33 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    Wilton saidI don't suppose you ever considered laws that would prevent a person breaking into your house with a gun in the first place? You wouldn't need a gun if the intruder didn't have one, either.

    Right... Because we all know criminals obey the law. icon_rolleyes.gif

    If criminals couldn't obtain guns, that would be a moot point.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 02, 2010 7:35 PM GMT
    Wilton said
    paulflexes said...But if someone breaks into my house with a gun, then I'll have a gun. icon_wink.gif

    I don't suppose you ever considered laws that would prevent a person breaking into your house with a gun in the first place?
    There are already laws against breaking into my house, with or without a gun.
    And as an expert, you probably know how easy it is to make a very powerful gun using basic household plumbing pipe and gasoline and marbles and duct tape (yeah I was a bored child and made weird stuff).
    Outlawing guns will not stop criminals from having them. They'll just improvise.

    And for the record, I have no intention of owning a gun. It would be fun to have one just to go shoot at the range, but I have enough other expensive hobbies. That's the only thing stopping me from getting one. icon_lol.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 02, 2010 7:38 PM GMT
    I have very mixed feelings on this. If it's in the Constitution, it should be upheld. But, times have changed too.

    I think the percentage of wacos out there has increased significantly. I can see landowners using their guns to shoot down someone who wants to use their phone in a heartbeat. Or domestic disputes turning deadly. Many people just aren't capable of stopping themselves when at the brink. And a gun is not like a knife that takes effort and close proximity to kill a person. A gun is distant, clean, separated.

    My last roommate had a gun; he kept it in his walk-in closet. I felt both uncomfortable and safe.

    I guess I would be for gun ownership if the people who owned guns required intense training, both how to use it, and psychological evaluation.
  • bluecrow

    Posts: 166

    Jul 02, 2010 7:39 PM GMT
    What about nobody uses guns in a fight? Guns can only escalate the level of violence.
  • jgymnast733

    Posts: 1783

    Jul 02, 2010 7:54 PM GMT
    Yes your right, guns in the wrong hands is not a good thing, but the reality of it all is that: Its easier to obtain a Gun than it is to get a library card...
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 02, 2010 8:06 PM GMT
    At the moment, the right to bear arms is in the constitution. If this is outdated, then the constitution must be updated, not ignored.

    Personally, I like guns and the vast majority of guns in this country are never used in a crime. It's just that when they are used in a crime it makes for such great media. The problem with guns is people. I live in a part of the country where guns are all over, but there is very little gun crime.

    This is rather like the people who are afraid to fly because of their fear of plane crashes...but have no trouble driving. The latter actually kills more people.


    Does it make sense to take away the freedoms of those who follow the law because of the few who do not?
  • bluecrow

    Posts: 166

    Jul 02, 2010 8:10 PM GMT
    Guns are not something essential like FOOD, you don't need guns to carry on your daily life. There are so many other countries where having guns is illegal. People in those countries are fine without having guns.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 02, 2010 8:27 PM GMT
    Wilton said
    rkyjockdn said]And this isn't an emotional argument? Questioning someone's masculinity because he happens to like and own guns? Where does that leave the growing number of women gun owners who purchase pistols for self protection?

    Women and men both wouldn't need guns in the first place if guns were not so easily available to criminals.

    But I continue to contend that the motivating factor in this US pro-gun movement isn't about women, but about male machismo. Guys who wanna be like John Wayne, and shoot anyone who crosses their path. What a civilized attitude that is!

    So don't talk about women, who have little to do with any of this. It's a male macho thing, and you know it is. Mentioning the fact that some women also shoot guns is a diversion that fails to address the core issues here.


    Yes, for some guys, it is a machismo thing. I see that attitude at the range sometimes, and it's something that causes both me, the staff, and a lot of the other shooters there to roll their eyes.

    I really think you're stereotyping. I can say that I take more crap from gay people for being a gun owner than I do from gun owners for being gay. In fact mostly the reaction is "You're gay AND you shoot? Cool!" There are a few crusty old farts who sort of turn purple and walk away, but most are supportive.

    I note that you didn't address my comments about gay bashing or the racist origin of gun control laws. Are you opposed to self defense?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 02, 2010 10:09 PM GMT
    Wilton Said: "what if the bad guys couldn't get weapons, either? "

    What part of Oz do YOU live in?? What if the sky DID fall, Chicken Little?
    In a perfect world...guns would never have been invented...or needed... because we all are so at peace with the rest of the world that no harm should come to anyone...
    You need to spend more time AWAY from your computer and TV and start living in the REAL world.
    I do not personally own a gun...but there have been times, living in Palm Springs...with all the "snow-birds" and over-the-legal-age drivers... it would probably make for a lot less traffic congestion!!! icon_lol.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 02, 2010 10:32 PM GMT
    Take away our weapons, take away our ability to resist tyranny. Sure, inner-city thugs will shoot each other. Unfortunate, but the solution is not banning the instrument of murder, rather examining and addressing the causes that lead to such behavior. Funding education would probably stop more gun crimes than trying to restrict guns. If criminals want something badly enough, they will generally find a way to get it.