Should the average citizen be allowed a firearm?

Introduce the topic better than that, put an initial point of view

dur no cuz it onle cozes violense n if we dont hav da rite den no1 wil have gunz!!!!!!!!! DURRRRRRRR

hey guys look at me i live in a country where i'll be shot if i don't have a gun to defend myself with


woh wait, no i don't, i live in australia

I think Australia's gun laws work just fine. You can get guns, you just need to get a license, which isn't very hard.

Also we manage to not have gangs shooting up the place every 2 hours.

Myself, you have to get a license in the US also.

Quote from Ustartin

The Right to Bare Arms

i.e. this is a poorly constructed debate, bub.

Yes .

Quote from Ash

Myself, you have to get a license in the US also.

Yeah but I'm pretty sure they're a lot stricter.

Otherwise Americans are just bad at not shooting each other.

Its mostly just blacks, and they really JUST became Americans when you think about it...

I don't think anyone should be allowed to have a gun unless you're in the police or some other armed force. All this "we needz de guns for defensss" is bullshit. If someone breaks into your house, what is it going to matter whether you STAB the guy breaking in or shoot him? Except that with a gun you might miss and he might shoot you, there isn't one. If no guns were allowed, I do believe the gun crime would go down, but then the police will have to focus on people getting the guns illegaly, and find out where all the supplies are coming from.

Or they could just focus on stopping illegal gun suppliers now...

I'm not entirely sure I want to start on this again.

I'll outline my arguments but I won't bother arguing with Jeremy since we went through the whole thing before. If someone else pops up I may decide to refute.

1. Guns with the public are useless for defence of the country due to lack of organisation and tanks.

2. I recognise that a gun can be obtained illegally, HOWEVER; when the average citizen does not carry a gun, the average criminal does not carry one either because he sees no point and it's easier to take a knife, plus the sentance for carrying one either is less or is thought to be less. This make the average criminal less dangerous.
2.5 Americans like them which automatically makes them bad.[/troll]
3. Most murders are spur of the moment things carried out by otherwise law abiding citizens who will not have guns giving the victims a better chance to defend themselves.

4. Man up. Use a machete.

5. School shootings are done with legal guns. Hence the grand total of zero in Britain compared to those in America.

6. If the criminal has a gun you will not have time to get yours out and shoot him before you're dead.

7. If you're using a gun to defend yourself there is far too high a chance of collateral damage.

Quote from Zed

1. Guns with the public are useless for defence of the country due to lack of organisation and tanks.

Not really, think guerrilla warfare.


It would be interesting if we cleaned up the system enough that only common citizens with no criminal record could obtain guns, and criminals would have no way of obtaining them. Bad guy attacks you with a knife, bang, dead or wounded. Sucks for him. But then that might encourage robbery of unarmed citizens. On second thought, I like the way it works now.

Not all criminals have criminal records.