| | Just wondering what the position tended to be here... I'm an NRA member, so naturally, I'm against it. |
| Astahost.com | Mar 22, 2010 |
Where do I stand on gun control? Break into my house about 3 in the morning and you will not be leaving alive.I’m not going to try and convince someone to change their mind because this is much like religion in that once you have made up your mind you will not change it. I grew up in a household where guns were the norm and I learned how to shoot at an early age. Three points that I would like to make. •You can’t outlaw everything that can be used to kill someone, if so baseball bats would b...
read more.
I'm for gun control.
I just don't see the sport in hunting animals with a gun or the need to protect myself by having a gun in the house. And I believe that the right to bear arms in the second amendment was taken out of context. From my point of view it refers to the maintainence of the state militia. But that's just me. A somewhat liberal asian guy.
Well, let me just give you a little example.
You're sleeping in your hosue one night, and you wake up and hear some violent psycopath trying to break into your house. Of course, you could call the police, but they usually don't get there until the resident in this type of situation is dead, unless the resident does one thing: defend themselves with whatever means necessary. That is why law-abiding citizens should have guns.
And without gun control what would keep people who are not law-abiding citizens from obtaining guns? What if that psychopath you mentioned about had a gun, thanks to the lack of sufficient controls on guns?
I think we both agree that limitations and restrictions should be put on guns, judging from your post above. But I still believe that a lot of people are underestimating the destructive power that a gun has. One shot will kill you. This isn't the Matrix or some action movie or game where you can get hit as many times as you want before you die. Oh well. At least we can both agree about the law-abiding citizen part. There are grey areas where gun control will be seen as something of a bad thing if you anti gun and good if you are pro gun. Carry permit, if you are a law abiding citizen you only carry you gun in the area legal for you to carry guns. As a criminal you don't care if it's legal to carry or not. If you have a gun and carry it for your whole life and never fire a shot to protect you or someone else. Then someone may say "Why carry in the first place". My answer is I rather carry a gun for the rest of my life and never need to use it than to be in a situation where I can't defend myself. Question to Xaine, what would you do if someone threatened the life of a family member and you if you had access to a gun. Would you pick up the gun and shoot to defend the innocent person or would you stand there watching while that person was gunned down? Would you pick up a knife to defend that person? maybe a baseball bat or a rock? Most people will never need a gun to defend their own life or the life of another. If all guns where outlawed, who would still be carrying guns and where would the guns come from. Do you think criminals will leave the "illegal gun at home" when they go to rob you? I am Pro gun, pro the right to carry. And I will defend myself. As for hunting that is another issue. It's a free country, you don't have to hunt. Or should we put the rule in place that If we don't agree with something it should be outlawed. Because if that is true I think "Xbox" should be outlawed. And as you said in another post: QUOTE (Xaine @ Jan 28 2005, 06:09 PM) "I pledge alliegance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God indivisible, with liberty and justice for all." =[ I think Liberty and justice for all can only be protected if you have the means to enforce it. Xaine, it's not an attack on you or your beliefs. I'm stating my beliefs and responding to your statement. Peace Nils
In response to your first sentence.
I agree with it. I am from S. Korea, and there is very strict gun control there. Even policemen rarely carry guns. Our citizens don't really make a fuss over the need or the right to carry a gun. Possession of an illegal weapon, and then you're just in jail and in S. Korea there is no such thing as bail. We even live right next door to N. Korea, where there is a communist army over 3 million strong, and the S. Koreans don't really cry for the right to possess a gun. Surely you would need a gun when the red army is marching down Seoul more urgently than when a single person who may or may not be in possession of a lethal weapon threatens a loved one. So America really doesn't make much sense to me. QUOTE (NilsC @ Jan 28 2005, 10:55 PM) Question to Xaine, what would you do if someone threatened the life of a family member and you if you had access to a gun. Would you pick up the gun and shoot to defend the innocent person or would you stand there watching while that person was gunned down? Would you pick up a knife to defend that person? maybe a baseball bat or a rock? A valid question. If in that situation, I doubt I would have the courage to attack another human being with a deadly weapon, even to protect a loved one. And I doubt many people would. Maybe a baseball bat. Just because a shot kills, and a person can probably take a couple of twacks with a large wooden stick. Yeah I know it isn't personal. =] This exchange of ideas is good really, it reminds you that there are different people out there, with different backgrounds and different opinions. Thanks for your complete response.
Xaine, I grew up in Norway during the cold war. We were less than 10 years after WWII and growing up I was introduced to guns as a way of life. In Norway there are (was) a minimum of one rifle per family. Every man after his military service was issued the rifle so he would be armed in case of war. (The "was" statement is because I'm not sure what the rules are now, it's a long time since I was there)
I do believe the murder and crime rate in Norway is one of the lowest in the world. I'm not saying that is because of the guns but because it's common knowledge that everyone have the means to defend them self. If I lived in an area like s. korea and I had the "right to carry arms" I would, and that goes for any country I was living in. If it's illegal I would follow the rules and not carry or own a gun! BTW, on the hunting issue! do you eat meat? if you do then you should approve of hunting. Same if you have a leather coat or shoes made out of leather. Don't you think life is better for a moose or deer that run free on the range or in the woods enjoying life until the day it dies of natural cause or a hunters bullet. The opposite is a cow or sheep or a pig that are penned up their whole short life until they are slaughtered for food. Is that a better way of dying than from a hunters bullet after a satisfying life. If you eat fish, then you are breaking the rules also, a hook is to the fish as a bullet is to the deer. Unless you fish catch and release and that can be constituted cruel and unusual punishment to the fish. Here is a kicker. In two hours and 4 minuter serial killer Michael Ross will be put to death in a prison less than 3 miles from me. Do you think I shed a tear, no I don't. If any of the girls he killed had a gun to defend them self with and had shot the bastard we would have been spared the media circus we see traveling down the road to cover the execution of "poor" Michael. He is getting what he should have gotten a long time ago. I take my hat off for the supreme court who lifted the stay and are sending him to the needle. God may forgive him for his crimes, our job is just to get him there on time. I did go off topic there but I'm listening to the meadia and are watching all the "news" crews setting up for the show. Nils
For my senior thesis in college as a Psych student, I did a study about arguments involving gun control and their effect on people's opinions. What I found was sad. The quality of the argument, either way, had basically no effect. There were some trends in the data that were even more alarming, but since I had a small data set, they were not statistically significant(or weren't there and were a hicup of the data). In any case, the one KNOWN thing was that people basically don't think anymore when it comes to guns. They pick a side and go with it for other reasons. Even creating the study was hard for those reasons.
Its sad really. Gun control or not is not what we should be talking about. It should be about what are ALL the different things we can try and affect to lower crime. For instance, a waiting period keeps people who are angry and want to go buy a gun in a fit of anger to kill someone from doing so, while not being a huge inconvenience to gun owners. Everything is the middle ground. Frankly, I think guns are mainly irrelevant. The problem is that people have a need for them at all, for defence or for crime (I am not saying that you can magically end ALL crime, just that much crime is motivated by reasons that CAN be dealt with). For instance, violence rises in poor areas, even if gun ownership rates stay constant... Hmmm, lets see. There are cultural things going on in poor areas, economic things in poor areas, and educational things in poor areas that could all be the REAL causes of violent crime. THOSE are what we should be dealing with.
I am for gun control. Being able to buy guns off the shops on the streets is an extremely dangerous thing. They should not allow the use of guns for self defense as it is so dangerous.. =/.. Imagine a robber buys a gun from a shop and robs that shop instantly after getting his gun.. scary.. and having crazy people carrying guns around is totally scary.. imagine a bad student who doesn't like his teacher, he can just take out his gun and threaten his teacher.. OMG.. this is scary.. they should ban the use of guns for civilians
It's my last post in this topic, it's one of the topics you are for or against and whatewer the other side say will not change your mind.
If guns are outlawed, only outlaws have guns And to the angry person looking to buy a gun, he'll not wait the waiting period. He'll go on the street corner and buy one. (Did prohibition work? no alcohol sold in the US during that time?) If you knew that everyone around may carry a gun, maybe the teachers should have to carry guns the same way policemen do. If they did carry guns maybe we would have less school killings. More Guns Less Crime If you look at the statistics on states with a "Shall Issue Concealed Carry" as opposed to "Discretionary Concealed Carry" and states with "No Concealed Carry" you will see that the murder and rape rates are higher in the Discretionary and No consealed carry states. QUOTE A law abiding citizen with a concealed gun can ruin a criminal's day. The more concealed guns in a community, the more a criminal is apt to go elsewhere, or seek another line of work. One cannot directly measure the criminal's perception of the numbers of guns in a community. It is also hard to measure the actual number of guns being carried. One can learn the number of conceal carry permits that have been issued in an area. That is what John Lott measured. He found that the more concealed gun permits issued, the fewer crimes committed. If this isn't quite "More Guns Less Crime," it is certainly cause to issue more conceal carry permits, and to encourage those with the permits to carry. Drugs are illegal, it kills milions of people. Who have drugs, criminals and they sell it with no regard to the law. Outlawing guns is not the answer. Educate everyone in the use and handling of a gun should be mandatory and be a part of the education system. Nils Latest Entries
Where do I stand on gun control? Break into my house about 3 in the morning and you will not be leaving alive.
I’m not going to try and convince someone to change their mind because this is much like religion in that once you have made up your mind you will not change it. I grew up in a household where guns were the norm and I learned how to shoot at an early age. Three points that I would like to make. •You can’t outlaw everything that can be used to kill someone, if so baseball bats would be illegal. •I also agree that some misinterpret the second amendment (in the US) but I am on the other side of the argument. The second amendment is not there for personal protection or hunting but to keep the government in line. If the government becomes corrupt then the people have the means to overthrow it and once again establish a government by the people. This means that each citizen should not only own a gun but have a grenade launcher in their basement and a tank parked in their front yard. •Freakonomics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freakonomics) by Steven Levitt showed that statistically swimming pools are 100 times more deadly to children than a loaded gun in the house. This is a great book and I highly recommend it.
Gun Control
What Is Your Position On Gun Control ? Replying to Xaine I know you are afraid of guns because you don't have any knowledge of them but think about this, every country without exception that has banned guns or highly restricted guns has experienced a drastic increase in violent crime. You talk about the criminal not having a gun well two things about that, One, if guns were banned, none of the criminals would turn their's in! Two, even if the criminal didn't have a gun, what would stop them from coming and beating you to death with a baseball bat, slashing you with a knife, or tying you up asaulting, raping or strangling you? How are you going to defend yourself? To put it another way, I carry a gun every day because I cannot carry a police officer in my pocket. The police will tell you they are not there to keep a crime from happening or stopping a violent crime they will do everything they can to solve that crime and then arrest them. It doesn't do you alot of good though if you are dead. - Rick
Gun Control
What Is Your Position On Gun Control ? Replying to Xaine Actually you have to have your facts straight. There was no state militia or national guard when the second amendment was written. The founding fathers were very aware of what they were writing and they knew it was individuals they were referring to. Just a point I would also like to make, non of the particular men that wrote the second amendment were sportsman. They were afraid that the United States government would become like England and they didn't want that so they gave the private citizens the ability to have arms in case they would have to over throw the government. - Rick QUOTE(Sarah81 @ Nov 19 2005, 10:28 AM) You're right - there's more to it than just pro- or anti-gun. Actually, waiting periods are just hassles for the law-abiding. Think about it: if someone REALLY needs a gun, that day, to defend themself, they can't get it that day, if there's a waiting period. (That does happen.) A criminal, on the other hand, wouldn't care about waiting periods, and would just get it illegally.
Personally, I think the waiting period should apply to all types of firearms, no matter where they're sold. I shouldn't be able to walk into a pawn shop here in Texas, give the guy 200 bucks, and walk out just a few minutes later with a shotgun. That's stupid. Make everyone wait for any type of firearm, instead of just saying, "Okay well, if you want a handgun you have to wait a few days, but there's a nice rack of shotguns you can check out in the meantime." But getting rid of guns won't actually make them go away. There will be plenty of illegal firearms all over the country, and more imported illegally (just like during Prohibition with liquor). It seems like we're focusing on trying to get rid of one symptom of the overall problem, instead of looking for the actual problem and doing something to change things. QUOTE(MajesticTreeFrog @ Jan 29 2005, 12:02 PM) Its sad really. Gun control or not is not what we should be talking about. It should be about what are ALL the different things we can try and affect to lower crime. For instance, a waiting period keeps people who are angry and want to go buy a gun in a fit of anger to kill someone from doing so, while not being a huge inconvenience to gun owners. You're right - there's more to it than just pro- or anti-gun. Personally, I think the waiting period should apply to all types of firearms, no matter where they're sold. I shouldn't be able to walk into a pawn shop here in Texas, give the guy 200 bucks, and walk out just a few minutes later with a shotgun. That's stupid. Make everyone wait for any type of firearm, instead of just saying, "Okay well, if you want a handgun you have to wait a few days, but there's a nice rack of shotguns you can check out in the meantime." But getting rid of guns won't actually make them go away. There will be plenty of illegal firearms all over the country, and more imported illegally (just like during Prohibition with liquor). It seems like we're focusing on trying to get rid of one symptom of the overall problem, instead of looking for the actual problem and doing something to change things. |
![]() What Is Your Position On Gun Control ? |
Affordable Web Hosting, Low cost Web Hosting - ComputingHost.com