How can anyone believe in gun control?

Seriously, I just don't understand. Now the only caveat for me are WMDs. It seems to work to keep them out of the hands of criminals.

Bur for anything else, gun control just means keeping them out of the hands of law abiding people. Black markets work. Sniper rifles, fully automatic weapons, silencers, etc. can be obtained on the black market, which is where criminals will buy them.

Gun free zones are gun free only for law abiding people. Utah, the only state in the country where concealed weapons are allowed in all public schools, has never had a mass school shooting. There seems to be a pretty strong correlation here between allowing guns in schools and not having mass school shootings.

I don't get not letting former felons have guns. They served their time. If they aren't safe to be released into the general population, than they shouldn't be released. If they are safe to be released, than they should be able to legally get guns.

I don't think its that hard to understand, even though I disagree. "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."

I used to be VERY anti-gun, I hated the fact that they even existed, I hated everyone involved in their creation. The idea that people could own a thing that they could just point at me and I'm gone was abhorrent to me. Witnessing a murder as a child cemented this fear of and hatred of guns.

It took decades and having a gun owning roommate to change my perception of them. Before I graduated college I cared little about the 2nd Amendment or what it safeguards, I just wanted to keep having a good time and the idea of guns making things safer would have been counter intuitive for me.

Although my values have changed, I still understand the revoltion some have towards guns. I even used to look down on hunters, ignorance can do that to you.

Ace300 said:

Seriously, I just don't understand. Now the only caveat for me are WMDs. It seems to work to keep them out of the hands of criminals.

Bur for anything else, gun control just means keeping them out of the hands of law abiding people. Black markets work. Sniper rifles, fully automatic weapons, silencers, etc. can be obtained on the black market, which is where criminals will buy them.

Gun free zones are gun free only for law abiding people. Utah, the only state in the country where concealed weapons are allowed in all public schools, has never had a mass school shooting. There seems to be a pretty strong correlation here between allowing guns in schools and not having mass school shootings.

I don't get not letting former felons have guns. They served their time. If they aren't safe to be released into the general population, than they shouldn't be released. If they are safe to be released, than they should be able to legally get guns.

Click to expand...

the two main purposes of gun control are to

1) allow criminal loving politicians to pander to the low intellect sheeple without hurting criminals

2) to disarm people who don't vote for them

Ace300 said:

Seriously, I just don't understand. Now the only caveat for me are WMDs. It seems to work to keep them out of the hands of criminals.

Bur for anything else, gun control just means keeping them out of the hands of law abiding people. Black markets work. Sniper rifles, fully automatic weapons, silencers, etc. can be obtained on the black market, which is where criminals will buy them.

Gun free zones are gun free only for law abiding people. Utah, the only state in the country where concealed weapons are allowed in all public schools, has never had a mass school shooting. There seems to be a pretty strong correlation here between allowing guns in schools and not having mass school shootings.

I don't get not letting former felons have guns. They served their time. If they aren't safe to be released into the general population, than they shouldn't be released. If they are safe to be released, than they should be able to legally get guns.

Click to expand...

The point of a sentence is first of all punishment for committing the criminal act and supposedly as a deterrent. Cesare Bacceria way beck in 1764 noted that the swiftness and certainty of punishment was a far better deterrent and it is. Harsh punishments really serve no more purpose than equitable punishments. Lets say the conviction rate for murder is 15% and the punishment is public flaying until dead. The murder rate will remain at close to 15% with hardly any impact of such a terrible punishment. Thus a felon with a gun is going to do no more or less than a felon without legal access to a gun. It is one of those feel good laws that serve no real purpose other than as harassment to hold a previous felon and as leverage to interrogation.

Not understanding what gun control is is entirely due to a very poor controlled education system. One of the largest propaganda operations in the world is never discussed. One of the most common dangerous items in a house is never discussed. Matches power tools, electricity, knives and all other things will be part of our education. If guns mentioned are it is only to instil fear or punishment. Even children's vital fantasy play is subject to this oppression of guns.

Yet gun control is so simple to understand if and only if a open mind unfettered by gun controls propaganda is used. If gun control worked where are all the success gun control should list as examples of the supposed function and promise gun control makes? They will shout out one and claim it as proof but there are not just two gun control laws in two countries in this world. Just one more country or one more law makes a mockery of any success claimed. A very long list is needed. Which gun control advocate has seen this list of successes?

I take my hat off to you for having the intelligence to examine your fears and understand them.

Not me ... I never leave home without my CCW ... there's way too many people out there who are in fear for their lives, and I want to make sure I'm protected from those cowards. :lamo

Ace300 said:

Seriously, I just don't understand. Now the only caveat for me are WMDs. It seems to work to keep them out of the hands of criminals.

Bur for anything else, gun control just means keeping them out of the hands of law abiding people. Black markets work. Sniper rifles, fully automatic weapons, silencers, etc. can be obtained on the black market, which is where criminals will buy them.

Gun free zones are gun free only for law abiding people. Utah, the only state in the country where concealed weapons are allowed in all public schools, has never had a mass school shooting. There seems to be a pretty strong correlation here between allowing guns in schools and not having mass school shootings.

I don't get not letting former felons have guns. They served their time. If they aren't safe to be released into the general population, than they shouldn't be released. If they are safe to be released, than they should be able to legally get guns.

Click to expand...

Gee, you don't think somebody whose already proven that they can't abide by the rules of society is suddenly going to miraculously develop sound judgment and not be a horrific asshole if they get their hands on a firearm?

Unless you live someplace where saber-tooth tigers are a going concern, you simply don't need, say, a M249 SAW or a .50 machine gun. Or an RPG.

Collateral damage is also a thing, and nothing spreads that faster than some asshole with a machine gun blazing away trying to play hero.

Cigar said:

Not me ... I never leave home without my CCW ... there's way too many people out there who are in fear for their lives, and I want to make sure I'm protected from those cowards. :lamo

Click to expand...

What do you mean?

Tigerace117 said:

Gee, you don't think somebody whose already proven that they can't abide by the rules of society is suddenly going to miraculously develop sound judgment and not be a horrific asshole if they get their hands on a firearm?

Unless you live someplace where saber-tooth tigers are a going concern, you simply don't need, say, a M249 SAW or a .50 machine gun. Or an RPG.

Collateral damage is also a thing, and nothing spreads that faster than some asshole with a machine gun blazing away trying to play hero.

Click to expand...

It's the cops that cause collateral damage.

Why do you use the word "need"?

Tigerace117 said:

What do you mean?

Click to expand...

There's a lot of people dying from Fear ... I'm not going to be one of them.

Rucker61 said:

It's the cops that cause collateral damage.

Why do you use the word "need"?

Click to expand...

Nope, an armed citizen can just as easily cause collateral damage.

Because I believe that necessity is the most important factor in deciding whether or not somebody should be allowed to purchase a type of firearm.

Tigerace117 said:

Nope, an armed citizen can just as easily cause collateral damage.

Click to expand...

Can, but seldom do.

Because I believe that necessity is the most important factor in deciding whether or not somebody should be allowed to purchase a type of firearm.

Click to expand...

Where is "necessity" based in the Constitution? Who gets to decide what is sufficient need?

Ace300 said:

Seriously, I just don't understand. Now the only caveat for me are WMDs. It seems to work to keep them out of the hands of criminals.

Bur for anything else, gun control just means keeping them out of the hands of law abiding people. Black markets work. Sniper rifles, fully automatic weapons, silencers, etc. can be obtained on the black market, which is where criminals will buy them.

Gun free zones are gun free only for law abiding people. Utah, the only state in the country where concealed weapons are allowed in all public schools, has never had a mass school shooting. There seems to be a pretty strong correlation here between allowing guns in schools and not having mass school shootings.

I don't get not letting former felons have guns. They served their time. If they aren't safe to be released into the general population, than they shouldn't be released. If they are safe to be released, than they should be able to legally get guns.

Click to expand...

I have always thought taking away a felons right to vote, and own a gun were borderline unconstitional. Regardless of there crimes, they are rights given to all legal citizens.

Rucker61 said:

Can, but seldom do.



Where is "necessity" based in the Constitution? Who gets to decide what is sufficient need?

Click to expand...

Gee, maybe because your average citizen isn't allowed to own heavy machine guns. That just might have something to do with cutting down on that rate.

The government does.

Tigerace117 said:

Gee, maybe because your average citizen isn't allowed to own heavy machine guns. That just might have something to do with cutting down on that rate.

Click to expand...

The average citizen can and does own machine guns. There's an M1919 converted to .308 for sale about 40 miles away. Anyone who can pass a regular background check that has $200 can get government permission to own one.

The government does.

Click to expand...

No it does not. And where in the Constitution is the government empowered to determine which citizens need to exercise which rights?

Rucker61 said:

The average citizen can and does own machine guns. There's an M1919 converted to .308 for sale about 40 miles away. Anyone who can pass a regular background check that has $200 can get government permission to own one.



No it does not. And where in the Constitution is the government empowered to determine which citizens need to exercise which rights?

Click to expand...

The exception does not prove the rule. I don't see anybody hauling their machine gun down to the bank to fight bank robbers or stopping break ins with a gun which was routinely mounted on vehicles, do you?

Though that is a interesting point for those Brits who like to talk about how their police aren't armed to consider; this is a country where any nutjob can, with a little planning, acquire a ****ing machine gun.

The part where it says "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". Getting shot in the face by somebody deprives one of all three.

Ace300 said:

Seriously, I just don't understand. Now the only caveat for me are WMDs. It seems to work to keep them out of the hands of criminals.

Bur for anything else, gun control just means keeping them out of the hands of law abiding people. Black markets work. Sniper rifles, fully automatic weapons, silencers, etc. can be obtained on the black market, which is where criminals will buy them.

Gun free zones are gun free only for law abiding people. Utah, the only state in the country where concealed weapons are allowed in all public schools, has never had a mass school shooting. There seems to be a pretty strong correlation here between allowing guns in schools and not having mass school shootings.

I don't get not letting former felons have guns. They served their time. If they aren't safe to be released into the general population, than they shouldn't be released. .

Click to expand...

Sigh! A libertarian and a xenophobe, no wonder you do not understand. Here is a fun fact, except for america and the countries run by war lords most western countries do have gun control laws that do work and do not keep guns out of reach of the ordinary citizen. Legally you can go to a legal shooting ground and hire an uzi or a bazooka or even a tank for a few shots if you want to.

Laws are not created to stop crime from happening. There has never been a case of a criminal thinking that he will have to stop what he is doing just because the government made a law making it illegal. Hence the name, criminal.

Laws are created to define between what is accepted and what is not.

If they are safe to be released, than they should be able to legally get guns

Click to expand...

Would you like some statistics on recidivism from jails as they are now run to help rip that point to shreds.

Ace300 said:

Seriously, I just don't understand. Now the only caveat for me are WMDs. It seems to work to keep them out of the hands of criminals.

Bur for anything else, gun control just means keeping them out of the hands of law abiding people. Black markets work. Sniper rifles, fully automatic weapons, silencers, etc. can be obtained on the black market, which is where criminals will buy them.

Gun free zones are gun free only for law abiding people. Utah, the only state in the country where concealed weapons are allowed in all public schools, has never had a mass school shooting. There seems to be a pretty strong correlation here between allowing guns in schools and not having mass school shootings.

I don't get not letting former felons have guns. They served their time. If they aren't safe to be released into the general population, than they shouldn't be released. If they are safe to be released, than they should be able to legally get guns.

Click to expand...

Well, it does, actually. Developed countries that have heavier restrictions on guns generally have very few shootings; a tiny fraction of the amount America has, even after you adjust for population.

Guns are relatively difficult to smuggle, and armament tends to be a game of escalation (meaning that a criminal who knows it's unlikely their opponent has a gun is less likely to feel they need one; there's plenty of criminals in the UK, and yet almost none of them have guns). It even works in places that formerly had little restriction and a lot of guns in circulation. See: Australia.

There's all kinds of debates to be had about gun control: whether it's compatible with American culture, whether it's necessary to reduce crime, etc. But it really isn't debatable that gun control is one way of effectively reducing gun crime dramatically. That's simply an established reality.

Tigerace117 said:

Nope, an armed citizen can just as easily cause collateral damage.

Because I believe that necessity is the most important factor in deciding whether or not somebody should be allowed to purchase a type of firearm.

Click to expand...

In Illinois I had to go through 12 hours of Safety training and 4 hours of shooting skills ... based on the knuckleheads I had in my class, I would recommended tripping the shooting skills part. In addition, I have had over 20 yours of Defensive Shooting courses and I highly recommend anyone who going to carry a Gun take those type of classes. Because in most shooting situations, most people heart rate will be well above 160. I had to do exercises to get my heart rate above 125 and still have to hit targets within two rings at 10 and 15 yards.

Ace300 said:

Seriously, I just don't understand. Now the only caveat for me are WMDs. It seems to work to keep them out of the hands of criminals.

Bur for anything else, gun control just means keeping them out of the hands of law abiding people. Black markets work. Sniper rifles, fully automatic weapons, silencers, etc. can be obtained on the black market, which is where criminals will buy them.

Gun free zones are gun free only for law abiding people. Utah, the only state in the country where concealed weapons are allowed in all public schools, has never had a mass school shooting. There seems to be a pretty strong correlation here between allowing guns in schools and not having mass school shootings.

I don't get not letting former felons have guns. They served their time. If they aren't safe to be released into the general population, than they shouldn't be released. If they are safe to be released, than they should be able to legally get guns.

Click to expand...

You'd have to be near brain dead to honestly try and still not be able to understand the appeal of gun control. Look at places like Japan that have amazingly strict gun control and in 2014 had 6 gun deaths in the entire country as opposed to over 30,000 in the US. I'm not saying that this proves we need further gun control or that any particular form of gun control will be effective or not, but how on earth could you not understand that some americans see numbers like that and don't wonder "hmm, what can we do to reduce that 30,000+ number?"

Also, there are plenty of gun crimes every year that occur that if the person had to go to a black market in order to get a gun, would not have happened. So just simply saying "well there would be black markets!" isn't really an honest argument IMO. You could apply that logic to just about every law ever passed and you're providing no proof for your claims.

Cigar said:

In Illinois I had to go through 12 hours of Safety training and 4 hours of shooting skills ... based on the knuckleheads I had in my class, I would recommended tripping the shooting skills part. In addition, I have had over 20 yours of Defensive Shooting courses and I highly recommend anyone who going to carry a Gun take those type of classes. Because in most shooting situations, most people heart rate will be well above 160. I had to do exercises to get my heart rate above 125 and still have to hit targets within two rings at 10 and 15 yards.

Click to expand...

It's one thing to target shoot, another to do it for real.

roughdraft274 said:

You'd have to be near brain dead to honestly try and still not be able to understand the appeal of gun control. Look at places like Japan that have amazingly strict gun control and in 2014 had 6 gun deaths in the entire country as opposed to over 30,000 in the US. I'm not saying that this proves we need further gun control or that any particular form of gun control will be effective or not, but how on earth could you not understand that some americans see numbers like that and don't wonder "hmm, what can we do to reduce that 30,000+ number?"

Also, there are plenty of gun crimes every year that occur that if the person had to go to a black market in order to get a gun, would not have happened. So just simply saying "well there would be black markets!" isn't really an honest argument IMO. You could apply that logic to just about every law ever passed and you're providing no proof for your claims.

Click to expand...

But Japan still has had serious crime and terrorist problems.

Between the Yakuza and the Japanese Red Army, plus toss in North Korean agents....

Tigerace117 said:

It's one thing to target shoot, another to do it for real.

Click to expand...

Muscle Memory and tactical skill is important, but situational awareness gives you the edge to ...

A) know when to reach for the Gun and ...
B) but when you clear your weapon from the holster, you better be ready to shoot.

roughdraft274 said:

You'd have to be near brain dead to honestly try and still not be able to understand the appeal of gun control. Look at places like Japan that have amazingly strict gun control and in 2014 had 6 gun deaths in the entire country as opposed to over 30,000 in the US.

Click to expand...

The Tokugawa Shogunate banned civilian gun ownership in the 17th century; over the course of a few centuries a certain mindset takes root. Of course, the Japanese people lost all other civil rights at that time, too. Curiously, Japan's intentional death rate is still 30% higher than that of the US.

More on Japan: Japan: Gun Control and People Control

I'm not saying that this proves we need further gun control or that any particular form of gun control will be effective or not, but how on earth could you not understand that some americans see numbers like that and don't wonder "hmm, what can we do to reduce that 30,000+ number?"

Click to expand...

We all ask that. We just have different answers.

Tigerace117 said:

The part where it says "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". Getting shot in the face by somebody deprives one of all three.

Click to expand...

When someone shoots someone, we prosecute them for the crime. Prior restraint is unconstitutional. If we could ban guns to prevent someone from getting shot, we could ban everything used to kill someone.

SmokeAndMirrors said:

Guns are relatively difficult to smuggle, and armament tends to be a game of escalation (meaning that a criminal who knows it's unlikely their opponent has a gun is less likely to feel they need one; there's plenty of criminals in the UK, and yet almost none of them have guns). It even works in places that formerly had little restriction and a lot of guns in circulation. See: Australia.

Click to expand...

The decline in Australia's homicide rate since 1996 matches the US homicide rate decline over the same time period. Australia has more guns now than they did before the ban. Australia proves nothing. The UK's homicide rate used to be 1/10 that of the US - now it's about 1/4 the same rate. How did that ratio improve for the US so much?

There's all kinds of debates to be had about gun control: whether it's compatible with American culture, whether it's necessary to reduce crime, etc. But it really isn't debatable that gun control is one way of effectively reducing gun crime dramatically. That's simply an established reality.

Click to expand...

No, it's not been shown to be the case at all.