People with guns kill people....
Guns are much a more efficient means of killing. you can kill more people much more quickly and you can do it from a distance....
Yes gun's are one way to efficiently kill a selected person, But to take gun's out of the hand's of the average citizen has proven throughout history since they were a significant weapon to kill, only leaves the innocent with no way to defend themselves against the government which is the most corrupt entity on earth. So if you are dumb enough to want to surrender your guns, then you, when you object to something the government does, can become one of it's first casulties.
The Austrians gave up their gun's when Hitler came to power, many of their political leaders who objected to Hitler's policies were executed, or imprisoned. If they had kept their gun's then perhaps Hitler would never have become as successful at killing millions. Certainly when Italy's Benito Mussolini, tried the italian mafia put him down, so that show's it can work.
It is the stupid liberal who think's that everyone in power is honest and just that want's to give away his only effective bargaining chip to keep the tyrants at bay. Not anyone who seriously know's the history of the world. Most of those know that we need more gun's of higher power in the hands of the honest citizen.
Gun are a way to effectively kill a large number of people, most of them selected randomly and innocent like in Sandy Hook and far to to many other similar incidents in the USA!
You're right, though, the reason behind the Second Amendment was so the citizens could protect themselves against a corrupt government.
If that ever happens let me know how your guns fare against an assault by drones that will kill you from miles above before you even know what's happening. You're reasoning is outdated and irrelevant today - and you're calling me stupid?!
Why don't you hop on your horse drawn buggy and go home?
So today we now need to have the same level of drone attack capability, to match the governments. Other wise, like in ww2, we will be rounded up and put in detention camp's like the Japanese were, or in germany the jew's were. The point is, the weapons need to match that of the military's so that they don't have a greater advantage. And the People should have the right to demand redress from the liars in Washington, and they are now making that harder to do as well, so what we really have is a fascist government now. And you are arguing that we remove the gun's from the hands of honest citizens, that does not make a lot of sense.
Yes, let's arm all the 5th graders with assault weapons and make drone technology available to all.
You're arguments are in the same vein that brought about the Cold War and the proliferation of nuclear weapons. Of course you weren't born or weren't old enough to remember the feeling of terror and impending doom of a world gone mad!
The proliferation of guns has got to stop. Look at the example of Australia today. While you mentioned the example if Australia 70 years ago, you seem to be avoiding the example it sets today!
said guns kill people, not ONLY guns kill people genius
Please don't use logical responses in this thread. It's not allowed. :-)
I agree. Just cause theres a few physco's out there doesnt mean they have to renforce gun laws.
Of course not only guns kill people. If you understood my last reply, you would get my point....
No problem :)
You got that right, Nigel :)
there's been a needless killing every few weeks recently. If you have a better dolution, please let me know
Yes there is a better solution, put a law into effect, you use a gun to kill Inocente people, you are publicly brought out into the town square and executed for your crime, no more of this pandering for 30 years to then be released into society. Then you will actually have a real deterrent to those fence sitters, of "should I use a killing strategy or not", when they want to get their own way for economic or sexual gain. Because, if part of our school education included, individual x, killed person y, ( yes I still want a clear trial, with guilt proven, beyond reasonable doubt) but then x is put to death, and the school boy's see that their is a good chance that loosing one's temper is a way to get yourself killed. Not 3 square, a roof and a cot for the next undefined number of years, only to be released on good behavior. So when they get out, and get pissed off they can kill a 2nd time, and repeat the procedure.
Yes and let's bring back the Guillotine while we're at it! You fail to understand that the killers who massacre large groups of innocent people do not think about the consequences of their actions.
A two fold program consisting of making assault weapons harder to get and providing better mental health care would be much more effective! However people like you would rather save money by cutting back on mental health care.
Americans live in a violent society mainly due to our fascination with guns! You mentioned Australia but the example you gave was from 70 years ago when the times were quite different. Today, gun control in Australia has cut back the number of gun related killings so much that the the people in the USA ought to be ashamed of the society we have created,
The world is always changing, quite rapidly in recent years, but your ideas are steeped in a past that is long gone which makes them quite irrelevant and your thinking is outdated and ancient! Wake up and take a look at the world around you!
we live in a violent society, because it is a microcosm of the world, which weather we like it or not is violent. The only significant difference in the USA is that we have the tool of gun's to some level more prolific than many other countries. But if you want to see real violence, try going to the Sudan, somalia or many other african nations. Try North Korea, where the uncle of the current ruler was just executed and now the rulers aunt is also missing. Or pick any other war torn country out there, there are a few to look at currently. Many of those have those exact assult rifles. Yet we in this country have had weapons since our inception, with relatively few incidents of these kinds of violence. There is no perfect solution. And I don't believe that when you look at the hard numbers we ought to be ashamed as a whole. If you are going to start making the real analysis, you have to use Cencus 2010 data and FBI crime stat's. There I am beginning to see that you are about 1 out of 6500 to be a murder victim if you are black in the USA. in 2012, we don't have any numbers for totals for the current year, and wont until probably end of 1st quarter 2014, for this year.
Black's in the USA are the highest % by far to be murdered, but considering they are also one of the populations highest arrested, charged and convicted of assault with a deadly weapon there is a correlation to that. Which bring's us to the data I can't find. What percentage of murder is same race, vs what percentage of murder is of different race. In other words how many blacks kill blacks. compaired with how many whites kill whites. and the other ethnic groups respectively. Then to be examined is cross racial killings, to be further filtered by in family or outside of. Weather it is criminal against criminal or criminal against innocent. All of those statistics I have not yet found sources to. With out those exact numbers, you are only serving up guesses, and that in truth creates nothing but straw man arguments, and logical errors in thought.
the same as people with sharp objects and poison and bare hands kill people...........!!!!
knives, hands, poison etc kill people also.........
people with hammers kill people
people with baseball bats kill people
people with poison kill people
people with cars kill people
people with hands kill people
one repeating theme.... people kill people...
not the tool used
You people are driving me crazy *pulls out AK47 and blows away EVERYONE on EP in 10 minutes*
youtube.com/watch?v=xC03hmS1Brk ... pow
Fantastic...so all we have to do is eliminate him and....problem solved....GENIUS!!! :)
For the record..of the 10% of murders caused by guns...around 4% of those involve rifles..the oh so scary guns they are focusing on. The other 6% involve handguns, a majority of which are illegally acquired to begin with.
guns make it easier for people to kill. The stats dont lie. China, a man with a knife walks into a school 25 kids stabbed, total dead ZERO. America, a man with a gun walks into Sandy hooks elementary total dead 25! I rest my case! BTW China happened 2 days after sandy hook. NUFF SAID!
defend themselves and not kill? did you see sandy hook? Virginia tech? aurora? imagine there was no guns, students would have gone to school and back home for dinner, couples would have gone to the movies and back home.what about the contract between America and China? Doesn't that make enough sense? WOW!
check your self on China, there they may not have guns but recall the American who was at the Olympics, and a loonie cut him to pieces with a carving knife. people will find a way to kill if they are determined to do so. But if you want a clear advantage, make sure many honest citizens have gun's. Otherwise you will only have people slaughtered who cannot defend them selves.
Like most peasant classes who are wiped out, when they face a modern army.
lower murder maybe, but not lower violence. In most places where you have high control over gun's, you actually have higher violence levels.
I know knives and suchlike can be used to kill as well. But the fact is that if someone is coming at me with a knife, he has to catch me first! If I can run faster than him, he won't be able to touch me. But if he has a gun I could never outrun the bullet he fires! And that is the whole point - you have to get up close to kill with knives or most other things, but with guns you can kill from distance. It is too damn easy to kill with guns.
I propose immediate knife control to protect the lives of the slow or directionally challenged or at least removal of all knives that are clearly designed to kill people. I know clubs and stones can kill people, but first they have to catch me. While I'm not to fast, I'm faster than some and I could outrun the bigger rocks and thugs carrying the largest clubs designed for bigger prey.
People kill people with guns, and if there were never any guns there would be just as many deaths with swords, axes, and rocks. It doesnt matter. Now our only problem is criminals getting guns and shooting someone, but there isnt anything we can do about it lol. guns will still be here, no matter what. If anything we should make it easier to get guns. Robbers will think twice if the old lady theyre about to rob has a AK-47 strapped to her back lol.
We were talking about banning guns in sociology, and one person brought up that if they were banned, there'd be a huge criminal blackmarket for them, and all the gangs, robbers, etc. would have them and normal citizens wouldn't.
Exactly lol We wouldnt get rid of them, we'd just be painting big signs on our heads that say "Rob me! Im definitely helpless!" Lol
Hahahaha!!!! Peace love bleeeeh I'm dead :(
Wow, you think you could defend yourself against a person who unexpectedly enters your home. Are you going to carry your gun around all day every day waiting for the unexpected to happen. The person breaking in, sees you with a gun, you don;t see him/her - bye bye
You think it would be different if I didnt have a gun? lol They would still shoot me. Your logic is pointless. I have a big chance of dying either way so why defend myself? That doesnt solve anything it just makes me die faster.
I couldn't have said that better my dear. Its nice to know that the govt hasn't brainwashed all of america
Many even more subtle things kill people as well. For instance, the creation of a black market due to prohibition of a product that has a significant demand. And why are people avoiding the fact that there are other methods of killing people: Asphyxiation, crow bar, knives, fire, bombs I mean there are a myriad of ways to kill someone... If someone is intent on killing someone they are going to and it would make more sense to get rid of the incentive to kill someone rather than the instruments involved: i.e. Legalize all drugs, regulate, and tax them so it will lower the incentive for gangs to shoot each other over territory to sell their drugs and to cripple their funds for their criminal enterprise... Also, if you look at the stats on murder, it is ranked number 15, where it is tied with parkinson's disease, while Heart disease and malignant tumors are sitting at the 1 and 2 leading causes of death in America. So, why aren't we looking into regulating McDonalds or Marlboro? One, they kill slowly.. Two, personal liberty. Oh, I have one more thing to add... Why is suicide at number 11. on the causes of death rate and murder is at 15... If we are more likely to kill ourselves... Why aren't we trying to shine more light on that issue? I cited information from CDC/NHS National Vital Statistics System.
Okay, I have yet another addendum to add to the previous thread. People who decry multiculturalism have also served as a basis of shootings or other forms of killings. One example of this is the Utoya massacre in Norway, where a right-wing fundamentalist Christian shot up a Norwegian Labour Party Youth Camp.
This is America. The government is legally bound to give us the right to bare arms. Any restrictions made on this right is an infringement upon our rights. As much as people want to argue this point, guns will always exist, be bought, be sold, and be used, either for the good or bad, in America. Gun control laws will not solve anything and for those who think that it will make a drastic difference need to take a shot of reality. If someone wants to get a gun, it doesnt matter if its legal or not, they will get a gun. Yeah it might make it more difficult, but they will get that weapon. Also look at the stats where guns have been used as murder and then at where they saved multiple lives in defense.
People who live in countries where there IS gun control do not understand the reluctance of Americans to adopt these reasonable prohibitions. We live with FAR fewer gun related incidents. I have never felt the need to have a gun in order to feel "safe" - nor have I known anyone else who felt that way.<br />
WE have rules to protect us from the dangers of drink driving an/ or speed on the road. No sensible person ob<x>jects to having laws that require a driver to be sober. Why do sensible people ob<x>ject to laws that require people to have guns ONLY if they need them for reasonable purposes. . . . ?<br />
As for the Second Amendment in the Constitution, Americans should check on the type of "arms" that were around in the days that this was promulgated. I doubt the Founding Fathers would be a party to that clause today IF they knew what sort of arms are readily available. <br />
When it takes two minutes to reload a gun before firing, the person shooting has time to seriously consider the situation before shooting. With automatic and repeating fire-arms, there is NO "cause for pause".
The reasonable purpose is to serve as a defense against my own government if, God forbid, they attempt to deny basic human rights.
The intent of the founders was to equip "the people" - that is individual citizens - with exactly the same weapons available to the military to stand as a last defense against tyranny.
Why? We had just finished a 2 year bloody war against such a government. One of the reasons we were able to be successful was the existence of an armed citizenry.
We actually have already restricted that basic human right to the point that it is unlikely that the citizens would stand much of a chance against our own military. But we still have the principle in place. I believe the founding fathers would actually be very disappointed that we stood by and allowed those rights to be as eroded as they currently are.
Applying this same logic to that the 1st amendment would suggest that free speech be restricted to direct verbal speech and the quill and ink or at the most a manually operated printing press limited to only the wealthy.
Finally, automatic weapons have been highly restricted for regular citizens to own since the 1934 and again in 1968. You can own them but only by paying huge fees, filling out reams of onerous government forms and being watched like a hawk. There are very few legal automatic weapons in the US.
Great response Zip. EIT, I know you are a father. Do you really fear your government more than you fear for your children's safety in the event of another school massacre?
For Christ's sake, enough of these inane questions about guns. Everyone is a ******* expert but no one has the answers. It's a debate, like abortion and illegal immigration; once you make up your mind, that's it. The rest is the sound of flapping jaws. <br />
In case you're wondering: I'm against guns, abortion and illegal immigration, and my mind was made up years ago.
Restricting people's freedom doesn't protect people. A violent culture desensitized us to violence. If you want to change things find ways to emphasis the importance of life... I find it insulting when people preach no guns because of gun violence when 800,000 babies are aborted annually. You can't keep all means of killing away from those that would kill. You can daily strive to preserve the sanctity of life.
I maintain the device isn't the problem, the lack of respect for life or mainstreaming of violence is.
If it's mainstreaming, then it was done at the dawn of the Mammals, wait no, reptiles do violence, birds do violence, fish do violence. Hmm
the lack of respect for life seem's to have begun with life.
the gun debate come up every time there is shooting. The death of a child because of a drunk driver never does.<br />
According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in 2010, 211 children were killed in drunk driving crashes. Out of those 211 deaths, 131 were riding with the drunk driver.<br />
Guns can do evil and they also can be used for protection from evil. Drunk drivers have no positive side at all.
Here , this is a list of BAD things that need to be banned forever and EVER so we can live in peace together! Wheeee<br />
Guns- like out of the US Constitution thing... Lol<br />
Cell phones<br />
All metal kinds of knives and stabby things<br />
All materials that could possibly be used to make bombs<br />
I dunno, let's just ban everything and live in grass huts. That way we can just slowly beat each other to death.
lol! Agreed, let's throw out every piece of technology that we have.. I'm sure I can find a sharp object in my xbox too! Back to the caveman age.
Lol! That's right.. stone and wood.. We'd have to burn down all the trees so we cannot carve handled weapons and then throw every stone in an isolated region in which you will be beaten to death(considering we will get rid of every possible weapon) if you go near that area.. Hooray brutality is right! We will eventually be left with throwing dirt and sand at each other.
The kid at Sandy Hook would've killed 5 people tops if all he had was a knife instead.
Are you telling me you would watch a scrawny kid with a knife stab 5 people and not try to do something?
I'd knock him out. Probably before the 5th kid.
Somehow that scrawny kid handled that "assault weapon" with ease and not missing a single shot like he was an expert. Do not under estimate the evil intentions of man.
Here is something to think about. Same person goes into that place with bottles of bleach and amonia or brings in fertilizer ect same result. But no one crying to ban thoses items. Same results if not worse. More dead. Yet no one would be yelling ban it. Hmmm. If guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns....
If we give up our guns, we give up our freedom. The whole point about the 2nd amendment, is to keep our govt in line and never allow the few whom we appoint our leaders to become intoxicated with power and greed over the masses. Thomas Jefferson stated that rebellion is good for our country inorder to keep greed to a minimum.
Agree with Zip.
People kill people.<br />
Guns make it easier, perhaps..but the ones who are being punished for the actions of those who ILLEGALLY ACQUIRED AND USED THEIR FIREARMS are going to be citizens who are law abiding and legally own their weapons.<br />
The sudden push for "gun control" is simply reactionary bullshít in its most loathsome and grotesque form. Fed by pure ignorance.
Guns just help people kill people.
Yep, People kill people with guns, knives, screwdrivers, icepicks. People have used tools for killing since picking up rocks and bashing heads with them. The gun is the best and easiest tool for killing. Some of them are built just for killing people. Guns can be very dangerous. But just because I have a gun intended for killing doesn't mean that I wish to kill. It means I wish to live.
There is no doubt that there is a problem, but taking guns away from honest people is not the answer. Maybe we need to start looking at what makes People want to kill. Just look at all of the video games where kids, and adults get points for killing. We need to work on why it happens, not take away our rights. Look at all of the alcohol related traffic deaths. Do we want to outlaw cars, or help people stop drinking, and driving?
That's right. And if you take away the guns people will use knives, rocks, hammers, cars, spears. etc. etc. etc.
Now that is a answer.
The Second Amendment was written at a time when 'arms' consisted of a single shot musket that took time to load, aim and shoot. The founding fathers had NO IDEA that one day there would be guns that could shoot 6 or 8 shots a second. It is antiquated. <br />
The Second Amendment talks about a well regulated militia, the right of the people to bear arms which has been interpreted by many constitutional scholars to mean the people who participated as militia had the right to keep and bear arms, because the militia was made up of ordinary citizens, as we didn't have a 'standing' army nor police force. <br />
It is sad to me that people who claim to be 'patriotic Americans' are terrified of their own government... not sure how one reconciles those two positions. <br />
Regardless of how one defines 'right of the people to keep and bear arms', the constitution specifically says "well regulated", therefore even the founding fathers understood that there had to be some controls and restrictions to keep the populous safe.
Jeezzzz, a person after my own heart.
You make a great deal of sense. Thank you for being rational about this issue.