Moonlit_Angel
Blue Crack Addict
all_i_want said:ok, we get it, there are MANY ways to kill people. you can stab them to death, but that would be kinda messy. a gun is so much easier!
right, we can not ban all lethal objects. but the ones we can, we must. guns are not like knives or baseball bats, they serve only one purpose, to kill!
I fully understand that. All we're saying is that while knives and baseball bats and that have purposes other than killing, they can still pose just as much danger if they fall into the wrong hands as a gun can. And accidents can just as easily happen with them, too.
Originally posted by all_i_want
also, i do see your point that if a high school student who has undergone commando training wanted to kill a bunch of his classmates, he could very well do so with a swiss army knife. but then, it just isnt as easy as killing them with a gun - not that spectacular either. and the worst part, you cant cause the same kind of damage, you'll have all these potential victims that might be able to run away, and you sure as hell are not gonna stand that!
True. Very true. But some people will still try and kill people with knives anyway. Gangs carry knives around as a means of protecting themselves. Some people will use guns to get the job done, but others aren't into the whole spectacle thing and don't intend to kill just anyone they see, they have their specific targets, so they'll use something smaller, like a knife. Again, I know knives have non-violent purposes, too, but they've still fallen into the wrong hands before, so what do we do to stop those who use knives to kill people instead of guns?
Originally posted by all_i_want
lets talk about this the other way around. why do people need guns? constitutionally, against the king of england. but really, is it because the like shooting? is it for self protection? or is it because it is a device that gives them the ultimate decision making power - a decision between life and death. now, i dont see WHY people would need magnums or shotguns. could someone please tell this to me? is there any way to justify this?
gun control will not stop murders. it will only REDUCE them. the way i see it, less dead people is BETTER than more dead people! what is so hard to grasp about here?
Oh, I'm all for gun control, definitely. And I've stated numerous times in this thread that I think having assault rifles and that is rather extreme, and I've also said that I'm personally terrified of guns, too-I think it's a shame they have to exist in this world, so you won't get any argument from me on that aspect of it all. It's just that some people do think banning guns solves the problems, and that's not true. Like VertigoGal said, that's a nice idea, sure, but looking at this realistically, a gun ban just wouldn't work. The best thing we can do now is have good gun control laws and do everything in our power to make sure that people who have criminal backgrounds and all that are kept away from guns (matter of fact, if they have a nasty criminal background, they should be in jail, not out and about where they're able to easily get a hold of a gun). And those that keep them in their homes have to be responsible with them and make sure their family and friends don't mess around with them, either.
Originally posted by all_i_want
there are non-lethal weapons out there. stuff like electric batons such. there are other means of protecting yourself and your family if you are feeling extremely threatened. dont tell me guns are simply for self protection. if we are talking about a civil society here, the citizens CAN NOT take law into their own hands. people who want guns want them because they are power obsessed megalomaniacs who think they cant go wrong.
While it's true that guns aren't just used for self-protection, and while it's true that there are people out there who use them for purposes that are very dangerous and scary, there are some people out there who do guns for self-protection and self-protection only, and so if they want to keep a handgun in their home for that purpose, that's their choice. And you could use non-lethal weapons, sure, but depending on what you use, the attacker could be out for a short time, but then be back up and trying to hurt the family again. If someone's attacking me, m family, or my friends, I'm going to do everything in my power to stop the attacker, even if it means killing them in the process.
originally posted by all_i_want
as for people who see hunting as a 'sport' and need to keep their hunting rifles around just in case they see something nice to shoot, i have got two words for you
Hunting for sport, I agree, is dumb. But hunting for food purposes, I don't have a problem with that.
Originally posted by all_i_want
also, on another note, for those of you who havent watched the last daily show, something from NYT:
dozens of terror suspects on federal watch lists were allowed to purchase firearms in the US last year.
And as long as we have good gun control laws in place, we can work hard to make sure that doesn't happen.
Originally posted by all_i_want
and as NRA president wayne lapierre told CBS, it is shameful, it is shameful that those suspects' right to bear arms is being threatened.
interviewer: if its good enough for FBI to put them on a watch list, why isnt it good enough for NRA to say dont sell them a gun?
lapierre: because what is a watch list after all?
I'm going to say this right now-the NRA scare me. Seriously. They're just as bad as those who think a flat out ban on guns will solve all the problems. And that LaPierre guy is a moron-we watched a video on the NRA in my American Government class my senior year when we were talking about special interest groups, and...yeah...that guy has issues.
Angela