Stick Page Forums Archive

Freedom to have a gun

Started by: Camila | Replies: 164 | Views: 8,137

Camila
2

Posts: 10,258
Joined: Feb 2012
Rep: 10

View Profile
Dec 24, 2012 3:56 PM #827876
Quote from Alien Anims
FACTS:

Oh, what is this? Do I see a recent death rate here? Lets check it out

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/oct/17/death-rate-lowest-england-wales

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3147241/

^^What is that? I dont know. Now, lets check it with guns.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

U.S-10.2
(DEATH RATE for firearms)
UK-.25

but wait........the U.K was recorded in 2011 while the U.S was 2009. Now its basically 2013, so could it have changed?Who knows....



Explain your point about this, I just see rankings and news, but I didn't read anything about your opinion.
and woah, my country is in the last place n.n
Alien
2

Posts: 1,710
Joined: Oct 2012
Rep: 10

View Profile
Dec 24, 2012 3:58 PM #827878
No, I already explained my point, I just wanted to be a "fact page" guy person whatever so people could use in their arguements.
Camila
2

Posts: 10,258
Joined: Feb 2012
Rep: 10

View Profile
Dec 24, 2012 4:05 PM #827887
Quote from Alien Anims
No, I already explained my point, I just wanted to be a "fact page" guy person whatever so people could use in their arguements.


Anyone can get their own sources. If you post pages like that, is to make an argument based on those sources, to debate about them.
Scooty
2

Posts: 650
Joined: Oct 2012
Rep: 10

View Profile
Dec 24, 2012 6:59 PM #828086
Quote from Zed
Less than 100 people are shot dead in Britain every year. More than 10,000 are in the US. Are you seriously saying that it isn't worthwhile reducing deaths by 99%* just because it isn't 100%?

*Actually I guess it would only be 96% once you account for population differences. Point stands.

Are you saying we could achieve those statistics by banning guns? Because if you are, that's not going to happen. I've said it before and I'll say it again, the people would consider a ban on firearms as an infringement of their rights.
Zed
2

Posts: 11,572
Joined: Feb 2009
Rep: 10

View Profile
Dec 24, 2012 7:34 PM #828110
1. Those people are retarded. Genuinely, clinically mentally sub-normal. I'm not going to try to skirt around the feelings of Americans any more, anyone who believes they should have a "right" to own a gun should not even have a right to oxygen.

2. No, I'm sure you could't, because those people exist. I was just arguing against xDonnyx who seemed to think the UK gun ban didn't lower the murder rate enough to be worth it.
Alien
2

Posts: 1,710
Joined: Oct 2012
Rep: 10

View Profile
Dec 24, 2012 8:51 PM #828141
Zed, why are getting so angry, its just the internet. Sheesh.....they act like someone has a gun to their head.....

And again, does that include the military and local police? To tell you the truth, I doubt you would want to come where I live without a gun. Hell, your going to be lit up for farting or breathing in the wrong direction.
Zed
2

Posts: 11,572
Joined: Feb 2009
Rep: 10

View Profile
Dec 24, 2012 9:02 PM #828147
Of course it doesn't include the military. Police should have an armed response unit but shouldn't be armed as a matter of course. I'm advocating the British system.

Whether this is the internet or not makes no difference. It's still a group of real people exchanging views. If someone does something which would make me angry in real life I'm not going to give them a pass just because they said it out of punching distance - that's the kind of attitude which makes people think they should only obey rules because they'll be punished for not doing it.
Cobalt
2

Posts: 797
Joined: Jun 2009
Rep: 10

View Profile
Dec 24, 2012 11:13 PM #828224
Quote from xDonnyx
How is my example a fail.People still die in those countries due to guns(I am aware much fewer people die in those country's, but that could be due a better government system).I am trying to point out making gun's illegal won't stop gun-related deaths, reduce it? Sure, but since the people who are shooting are can still get guns "illegally" the same way people get drugs, by smuggling them, in the end of the day people still die. Most of the gun-related violence is most common in poor urban areas.It could also be due to the sheer amount of lack off morals in a country. USA, for example, has really poor morals, while countries like the one's you listed, have great morals.


Zed has already made my case for me. It's obvious that a gun ban would help, there is plenty of evidence based on other countries with a gun ban.
And are we really going to start measuring something as subjective as which country has better morals? WTF?!
Scooty
2

Posts: 650
Joined: Oct 2012
Rep: 10

View Profile
Dec 25, 2012 12:26 AM #828291
Quote from Cobalt
And are we really going to start measuring something as subjective as which country has better morals? WTF?!

In defense, America does have some pretty shitty morals, and that's part of the reason a gun ban hasn't been put into effect yet. People are gonna fight tooth and nail for a useless right as long as they feel it "preserves their way of life".
Cobalt
2

Posts: 797
Joined: Jun 2009
Rep: 10

View Profile
Dec 25, 2012 4:18 AM #828451
Quote from Scooty
In defense, America does have some pretty shitty morals, and that's part of the reason a gun ban hasn't been put into effect yet. People are gonna fight tooth and nail for a useless right as long as they feel it "preserves their way of life".


I don't see how people fighting for a right they think they need, or deserve is shitty morals.
There is really no way to measure morals, it's just too subjective.
Exile
Administrator
2

Posts: 8,404
Joined: Dec 2005
Rep: 10

View Profile
Dec 26, 2012 4:25 AM #829478
Quote from Zed
1. Those people are retarded. Genuinely, clinically mentally sub-normal. I'm not going to try to skirt around the feelings of Americans any more, anyone who believes they should have a "right" to own a gun should not even have a right to oxygen.


There's a legitimate fear of the precedent it'd set. The right to bear arms is right there in the constitution. It wouldn't be the first constitutional right to be slowly whittled away, but people see it as the right for citizens to own weaponry to defend themselves, even from a corrupt government if necessary. A government saying "No, you don't have that right" and declaring your property illegal seems Orwellian to people who put the constitution first.

It's hard to relate to that ideology. I've lived in Illinois all my life, and concealed carry is illegal here, so I guess I'm more apprehensive about guns than most Americans. I think we're the only state to criminalize it, which seems odd considering all of the gang violence in south Chicago.

But, either way, it's hard to tell people they have no ground to stand on when they have their government's constitution to point to.
Scooty
2

Posts: 650
Joined: Oct 2012
Rep: 10

View Profile
Dec 26, 2012 6:23 AM #829575
Quote from Exilement
But, either way, it's hard to tell people they have no ground to stand on when they have their government's constitution to point to.


The Constitution was made as a temporary system of government by our founding fathers to tide us over until we found the flaws in it and made the necessary changes or revisions to keep up with the times, just like the Constitution itself came from the destruction of The Articles of Confederation. This is ignored by most people, who tend to only see parts of history that coincide with their beliefs. Sure they can point to the Constitution for justification, but that doesn't make it any less outdated.
Exile
Administrator
2

Posts: 8,404
Joined: Dec 2005
Rep: 10

View Profile
Dec 26, 2012 3:10 PM #829932
The right to bear arms is one of the amended rights added to the constitution specifically to prevent congress from abusing its power.

In any case, what you're saying doesn't invalidate the importance and relevance the entire government gives the constitution today. You make it seem like any pro-gun advocate is just selectively paying attention to whatever aspects of history are compatible with their views. The same could be said about you for trying to downplay the importance of the constitution using the perspective of people who you consider "outdated" when they disagree with you.
Imada
2

Posts: 1,518
Joined: Aug 2012
Rep: 10

View Profile
Dec 26, 2012 4:25 PM #829970
Quote from Exilement
The right to bear arms is one of the amended rights added to the constitution specifically to prevent congress from abusing its power.


Someone's been looking at Wikipedia
Joke


Anyway, if there were no guns then people would strive harder to obtain the gun resulting in even more violence
(In my opinion)
stone

Posts: 1,959
Joined: Mar 2008
Rep: 10

View Profile
Dec 26, 2012 4:51 PM #829983
Guys, I think some of you might be coming from an ill-informed point of view. In many states it is not very simple to get a weapon and their are guidelines and regulations that you have to follow in order to get one. I myself have multiple weapons that I use for recreational use and for home defense. You have to go through a 2 week waiting period that is also accompanied by a full FBI background check. In states like CA, where I live, we are not allowed to own any form of automatic weapons, of any kind. Also, no weapon may ever be loaded with more than 10 bullets- regardless of capacity unless you are an officer of the law.

You also have to transport your ammo and weapon separately. Ammo in the trunk or back seat if you don't have a trunk ( like a truck ) with the weapon in the front seat in plain view.

These are just some of the guidelines and rules I have to follow to have and my weapon. I cannot open carry ( like have it at my side ) at any point in CA. I CAN carry it in my pocket IF I get a CCW (california concealed weapons) which is an entirely different process which does include a police investigation and interview along with a couple hundred dollars.

Many have come to the conclusion that it is the weapons fault for these tragedies when it is not. It's the mental stability of those with access to weapons when they should not, or have illegal access to these weapons. You cannot punish law abiding citizens for the actions of specific cases on those who choose to disobey the law and or are completely mentally unstable.

The tragedy that occurred at the elementary school happened because of a few different reasons combining together into one hot mess of a time bomb. You had a neglected young adult with known anger and very unstable mental health while his parents chose to expose him to weapons when they indefinitely should not have. That alone is against the law and just isn't using good common sense. However, if you WERE to be that naive to permit such a person with mental instability the use of a weapon for recreational use you sure as HELL better make sure that they don't know where the weapons are kept after use and or do not know the password to the safe to access the weapons.

You can't keep the world safe from all the crazy's and choices people with bad intentions decide to make. However, if you allow law abiding citizens to continue to have their right to defend themselves, many less lives will be taken. Making laws doesn't punish those who intend to commit crimes anyways. Since when do criminals obey the law? It just makes it more known and easier for them with the knowledge that their fellow law abiding citizens will be helpless to defend themselves. I urge you all to watch these two links below to help even further understand the other side in which I'm trying to show.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=4125338260006
^ If you only choose to watch one of these. I strongly suggest watching this one. It's about a womens struggle with her mother and father in a public place. The laws had changed recently and citizens were not allowed to carry their weapon in their purse. This is one law change that changed the lives of a few people in just this one event alone.The one quote that stands with me is this;

"I'd much rather be sitting in jail with a felony then to have lost my mother and father."
Wouldn't anyone else feel the very same?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wWoLGC-n4i4

I myself have also taken measures of safety in my home to ensure my weapons are safe and locked up. I also have measures and procedures for me and my family in the event of a home invasion. This isn't because i'm some crazed lunatic who wants to kill people, this is because I am a SANE person who wants to ensure I can keep myself, and my family safe from harm.

Quote from Zed
1. Those people are retarded. Genuinely, clinically mentally sub-normal. I'm not going to try to skirt around the feelings of Americans any more, anyone who believes they should have a "right" to own a gun should not even have a right to oxygen.

2. No, I'm sure you could't, because those people exist. I was just arguing against xDonnyx who seemed to think the UK gun ban didn't lower the murder rate enough to be worth it.


Guess this retard doesn't deserve oxygen. At least my retarded purple-faced family and I wont get raped and murdered in our sleep. I should just let the cops take care of the bad guys, after they've had their way with us.

Quote from Scooty
The point of the 2nd Amendment was to make sure that the people would always have the power necessary to overthrow the government if it ever became corrupt, or stopped serving the people in general. That's severely outdated considering the firepower that they're packing nowadays, but people still cling to it with a death grip.


That is true, however it does make the United States the most feared people to overthrow simply because of the fact that any citizen has the right to protect and defend themselves. Essentially, if our entire country went into chaos without structure and order, we wouldn't entirely get steam-rolled by another country because the citizens can in fact become a force on their own. Worst case scenario, of course.

Quote from Leokill
You could say the same about USA's economy. Things are pretty shitty there, and it's hard to fix. Drastic changes will do more harm than good, because the people wouldn't be ready for them. If they could get a decent president or something, they could start improving education and providing mental care and such to people who need it. When USA actually is inhabited by somewhat moral and civilized human beings, we can talk about gun control. There's no point in having a civilization if the people aren't civilized.


Spoken clearly by someone who hasn't ever even been to America. Just like most things, you only hear of the bad. Yeah, there are literally millions of crazies out there who I'm frankly tired of even dealing with on a day to day. You think your country is any better? PEOPLE are crazy in general. Just because its all you hear in your news doesn't mean we are all 250 LB pieces of shit with the IQ of a potato.

STATES WITH THE LOWEST CRIME RATES:
http://www.areavibes.com/library/10-cities-lowest-crime/

Believe it or not, states that have more open guidelines for firearm ownership are actually safer than most. Why? Basic common sense, people know that others are more than likely carrying. It makes most criminals think twice about trying to steal your $43 in your wallet or bust open your car for a stereo or break in to get a new TV.

Image
Image
Website Version: 1.0.4
© 2025 Max Games. All rights reserved.