Because it works? In Japan, which as implemented some of the strictest gun controls (and even ammunition controls) in the civilized world they average about TWO gun deaths per year.
Ah yes. True. However, having lived in Japan, I happen to know that the never have had a "gun culture." In Japan, their relevant culture goes back to Bushido, or the culture of the Samurai Warrior. Thus in Japan, many of the killings and murders are committed with blades. Furthermore, Japan is almost one hundred percent pure Japanese with almost no immigration. Therefore they do not have the problem with the clash of cultures in most parts of the country. The areas in Japan with the highest violent crime rates, unfortunately happen to be areas in close proximity to US military bases. They are not "gun crimes" because of the non-availability of guns, but rapes, robberies, muggings, drug-related violence, etc. occur at a significantly high rate of occurrence.
Ah yes...blame it on the brown people. Who couldn't have seen that coming....
You madam are a complete cretin. I never said nor did I imply an issue with "brown people." I referred to a clash of culture without reference to race. So guess who is the racist here -- Gnat.
Yeah...like you weren't implying that the blacks and hispanics in america are the reason for crime...Which cultures do you blame if not them? the irish?
it's a lot easier to control weapons than the people who use them
According to the N.I.H a little over a quarter of all Americans suffer from some form of mental illness that's almost 60 million people! By contrast there's 7.2 million right now either in Jail or on Parole just 3% of the population... Are you seriously proposing an 8 times growth of the prison system? That's an obscenely expensive idea.
The majority of "mental hospitals" were closed or privatised by conservatives in the 1980s, so unless you have the money or have committed a crime that lands you there, you CAN'T "try it". That's why there are so many mentally ill homeless now.
Bijoux -- that is not an accurate statement. Many of the mental hospitals were closed in the late 70s and early 80s, but not by conservatives. They were closed as a result of liberal policies that opposed the involuntary hospitalization of individuals as a violation of individual rights.
In my state they were privatised by Reagan (as governor), because they wanted to be able to charge money, like private hospitals in general. We have the largest homeless population in the country because other states were sending their mental patients here to Napa and Vacaville facilities---many of them were turned out practically overnight when families couldn't pay.
you are right. there aren't nearly enough mental health faciliities to house everyone that should be in one.
Thay is logical reason to restrict gun ownership in it's self!
Because when you give every half wit an assault rifle ***** going down.
How be--That styorage of guns should be at secure gun club or the like& when you want to use them you go take them out?
Because most people are idiots. I live in the UK and I love or gun laws. I know that there isn't some ******* down my road with an assault rifle.
Cos criminals that break into people's houses can grab those guns. Or someone could get pissed off and shoot their brother (jettys pointed that out). Maybe someone w/ a concealed carry permit could've stopped this guy, but if he hadn't gotten a gun in the first place this wouldn't have happened. Btw, Britain isn't going 2 conquer us (and we've got nukes 2 blow up threats with), so we don't need militia.
Oh. So an Angry brother or someone else cannot murder his brother with a kitchen knife, a hammer, or a car? It happens all of the time. People who want to kill others find a way, no matter the laws.
the criminal kills with the gun.. if the criminal cannot get his/her hands on a gun they cannot kill with a gun.. if guns are more difficult to acquire, fewer criminals would have access to them, leading to less shooting murders..
Allmost ALL black market guns in the USA are stolden from legal gun owers IN the USA!!!
Which is sustained by STOLEN firearms and International Army Surplus.
All gun were once legaly owned by someone!!
More guns(Legaly owned) in society--More Guns for people to steal.borrow or for people to go crazy with!
Even black market guns were once legaly owned!
Not in the USA or Canada--They are stolden from Legal gun owners in these countries--Not from other countries!
Including America. We sell millions of dollars of weapons and equipment to armies all over the world including Israel, India (who also we sold the nuclear secret to), and also the Anti-Leftists in Central America and the middle East. We funded Quaddafi. We installed the Shah of Iran, We installed the Saudi monarchy. We installed Saddam, We sold drugs to buy weapons to fight commies. We trained Osama Bin laden and his buddies in the 80s We paid him, armed him, and he turned around and taught everyone he could to fight us using our tactics once the Russians left. And you expect me to accept that America Doesn't sell weapons...Wow......
You are 100% wrong, the more difficult guns are to get the more only criminals will have
When's the last time you heard of someone shooting up a place using an automatic weapon? Prohibition. Gee, it's almost like banning the sale of automatic firearms to just anyone got rid of the problem of criminals with automatic weapons....Wow. Who would have thought that registering and regulating the sale of weapons worked?
That argument is just Dumb--the Fact is--The more restrictive gun laws are the safer people are from gun violence!
There is not one single analyst on any side of this argument who honestly believes that the US ever could eliminate most guns. The most they ever can achieve is to disarm responsible owners. Furthermore, the right to keep and bear arms is one of the most fundamental rights granted by the US Constitution and Bill of Rights. Would you easily give up your right to free speech or expression? Would you give up your right not to have a state religion imposed upon you? Would you give up your right to free assembly? I am unwilling to give up any of my rights, including the right to keep and bear arms. You have every right not to avail yourself of your Second Amendment right but you do not have the right to prevent me from doing so.
Guns don't kill, people do. But guns make it much too easy for people to kill people, and what makes you trust people with a gun?<br />
Yes, the criminal kills. So you're going to trust him with a gun, because that's wise.
What about the cop that kills and 10 of his gang member budys lie and say he did the right thing. You trust them right?
"Dear 2012 Gun manufacturers,<br />
Thank you sooo much! Do you have any idea how exhausting it is to hack twenty deer to death with a hatchet? Let alone tracking them for hours if I use a bow. I'm so glad guns came on the market when they did. Without them I wouldn't be able to kill ten buffalo without having to reload. I used to spend hours Training with my Rifle to hit vital areas, now I can just Point, Click, and Kill. By the way these things might be dangerous if they were too widely available. I mean If i can shoot twenty ducks in three and a half seconds what's to stop me from shooting that many people that pissed me off at that Scottish place that sells Ham-burgers. Just a thought.<br />
The Time Travelling Clone of Theodore Roosevelt"
Lady -- as usual you are a total loon. You comment makes no sense whatsoever. Automatic weapons are illegal and mostly unavailable in the US. They never have been used for hunting and the number of times they have been used in the commission of a crime is so low as to not even show up in the Justice Department statistics. The ability to shoot accurately is no different that it was 50 or more years ago.
Actually self-righteous idiot person, fully automatic weapons in america are LEGAL. It's just that you need to pass several checks to apply for the permit, then apply for the tax stamp, as well as register it with the federal government. http://www.ehow.com/how_6742869_fully-automatic-gun-license.html Strangely even though automatic weapons are heavily regulated, require registration of the firearm, and a $200 tax stamp Outlaws do not have access to them. It's almost as if practical regulations and registrations on automatic firearms makes it very difficult for criminals to get them...you know...like what every 1st world developed country has figured out. Oh...and the registration of automatic weapons did not lead to them being confiscated! Imagine that!
Thats like saying--Why should people have drivers licences--because careful considerate drivers won't do anything wrong if they are good members of society!<br />
Guns in a home(or on your person) risk-Someone using them in a fit of temper-Children getting ahold of them-them being stolden& used for bad things-Someone(mabe a family member ) going though some sort of upset-using them on someone(Anyone)& last but not least-Easy suicide!<br />
Automatic or semi auto-Just make matters worse!<br />
Why is it that Gun owners are so against ANY rules/restrictions to help protect the public-(Including the children-Not banning guns-But some protection for the public?<br />
Most people would say we don't need to ban public ownership-But having some-hard& fast(Effective) rules just makes good sense for society!
There are no hard & fast effective rules for the cops other than manditory paid vacation after a lethal shooting.
So-Your saying that because there is a Rare cop who abuses his power- that everyone& anyone should be allowed to do the same?
In your mind-How many Wrongs-make a right?
Because the Second Amendment does not say "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed EXCEPT..."
As an American who had to use a gun at the age of 15 to protect myself from a knife-wielding home-invader, I will fight to my very last breath to protect our right to keep and bear arms.
That's what folks keep saying-On the far out possibility that a knife wielding nutcase breaks into my home-I need a gun-
&--My right to own a gun with few or No rules or regulations -Is far more important than Public SAFETY!
The "Public safety" argument is a canard. The people causing mayhem are criminals, not law abiding folks. By definition, criminals defy the law. They do not register guns when required and they obtain their guns through illegal means. There are thousands of anti-gun laws on the books in the US. But look at some of the cities with the highest rates of crimes committed with guns and there is a clear correlation between tougher gun laws and higher rates of crime. Washington DC has some of the toughest anti-gun laws on the books, yet their crime rate is sky high as is the rate of crimes involving guns. What about Chicago? Chicago also has some of the most stringent anti-gun laws. Yet, the criminals run rampant.
As for what you call "the far out possibility," it actually happened to me. Luckily I had a .22 rifle and when the guy lunged at me with a hunting knife, I shot him in the shoulder causing him to drop the knife and run away. Thank God for that gun.
&-just what %age of these Mass shootings were done with Legal vrs. ilegal guns?
Did you know that every mass shooting in the US since 1963 involved a person who was under psychiatric treatment with Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitor (SSRI) antidepressants. Every one could have been stopped in advance had the mental health persons providing the treatment done their job and reported the individuals as dangerous and delusional?
In light of what just happened in America,,, maybe if there wasnt any weapons available to that young looney ,, then it may have not happened,,,
Sure, but it's totaly ok for them to walk around with machine guns right?
No its not alright,,, people dont need machine guns,,, even hunters dont need them,,
Because they are dangerous and tools not holy ob<x>jects that someone has a divine right to. Why should government regulate explosives? Seems kind of obvious. We regulate the use of cars because you can kill a lot of people if you are unfit to use one safely. And with all due respect people are not committing massacres with steak knives. Claiming it is all about the criminal and not the weapon is a complete cop out. Also there is no legitimate reason for a civilian to have military grade weaponry unless you have a citizen militia like some European nations. In fact you should have to be in a form of militia or reserve force before you are allowed anywhere near them. That is likely why you don't see masse slaughters in many European nations because the people that do have assault rifles don't think they are a toy.
You are absolutly right. police are civilians too so what do they need them for? and you forgot to mention the fact that if you form a militia like the US constitution says you have a right to do they allready have laws against it and if that don't work they call you a terrorist group and bring in the military to kill you and by the way the US constitution says they can't use the military against US citizens but they do it anyway and no budy says anything about it.
Because maybe we love our children more than we love guns ? Clearly what we're doing now isn't working. The people who are fighting against getting rid of semi-automatic weapons are delusional, or maybe they just don't care. Maybe it's exciting to them to see people having to bury family members. I really don't know. I'm even willing to concede to a single weapon for self protection in the home, even though all the stats around indicate it's more likely to be used on a family member than an intruder (even police officers will tell you that). But trying to justify keeping military style assault weapons or an arsenal is crazy and paranoid.
First of all the police are the bigest lieing peices of sh*t on the planet, second, without private gun owners these same cops are going to be shooting our children dead or beating them to death and if you try to stop them, guess what, they will shoot you cause you don't have a gun.
guns take themselves of the shelf and kill ppl do they?...
Yes and also according to redredred and a couple other people So do books and cars apparantly murder people when we aren't looking.
What "EXCATLY" is wrong with a few rules/regulations& even restrictions to protect the inocent citizens?
nothing at all. but when the gov't wants to implement a 17,000 word "gun law". think back to right after katrina happened. remember when the military went down their to "HELP THE COMMUNITY" ? They weren't there to help anyone, they were their for only one thing, and if you didnt give them up their orders were to shoot to kill on site no matter how old that person maybe. if the person tries to reach for their gun orders were shoot to kill.
A society that is afraid of their gov't is an unhealthy Country. The gov't should always fear the people, not the other way around.
Cos we suck at keeping crazy people from getting guns. We can lock someone up if they're gonna kill themselves or someone else, but not if they're just crazy. And we can't force crazy people 2 take their meds. There r ways around the regulations we have now, so we need 2 do something else. If no one wants 2 keep an eye on the crazy people, we need 2 ban all guns 2 keep them out of their hands. If no one wants 2 regulate guns, we need 2 keep an eye on the crazy people so they don't kill anyone. Take ur pick.
What about the crazy power drunk cops that murder and criple inocent people every day? Who watches them? How are you going to feel when they bust down your door and kick the sh*t out of you just because they say you might be doing something illegal and you can't do anthing about it because they just make up probable cause? You don't realize you don't have to be braking the law for them to do this, they only have to say you might be or are just thinking about it and if they take your guns they know they can do it when ever they want because they know you can't defend yourself. what are you going to do, hit them with a broom while they put 40 cal holes in you and your family???
Are you aware that in the Mall shootings in Portland Oregon a couple of months ago, it was a 20 year old man with a concealed carry permit and a weapon who confronted the shooter and appears to have caused the perpetrator to kill himself, almost certainly saving a large number of innocent lives?<br />
Why was this fact not widely reported by the media? Obviously, the facts of the case did not fit the liberal media's established narrative.<br />
Having personally used a gun when I was 15 to save myself from a drug-crazed home invader who said he was going to cut my throat, it will be a cold day in hell before I willingly give up my right to own and bear arms.
Well, here is the posting from KGW News Television website with the story.
We shouldnt have any gun control. The 2nd ammendment was created to allow citizens to own guns, even assault rifles, in order to establish militias to prevent foreign powers from taking over our government. It was created during a time when the British crown controlled america. If I were china or Iran, I would invade america if Americans outlawed guns. I have the right to own any gun I want,,suffer the padawahns.
So--Your saying-that because you have a RIGHT- there should be few if any rules/regulation& or limitations?
Your RIGHT trumps public safety?
This is a rediculous concept that other countries will attack if there are (ANY) restrictions on guns-
Wars(except for third world countries) will be economic--Not old fashion wars!
Its not just my right but the rights of all americans. If we start taking away rights whats next? Why dont we get rid of freedom of speech so no one will get hurt feelings. Why dont we get rid of voting rights for people on welfare, they dont pay taxes. People like you are so quick to outlaw everything because it doesnt affect you. Kinda selfish point of view.
We should allow short range portable missiles and hand bombs also!
Yes and Gaza, Syria, and Iran love their fireworks don't they?
Why does no one say anything about the number of unarmed people shot dead by the police and government orgs every year and they are the ones that don't want you to have anthing semi auto or that holds more than 10 shot mags when every cop has a pistol that holds 15 to 17 shots and also those bullets are special made to cause death and flesh damage Oh, and by the way they have these bullets special made just for them and make it illegal for you to have them and if thats not enough they break out the full auto H&K .308 with armor peircing bullets that have mags that hold 20, 30, 50 and 100 bullets. Also why do they have silencers issued to them? What possable reason does the police need to silence their gun when upholdin the law??? Think about it, If these guns are made just for killing lots of people all at once what are they doing with them??? When is the last time 50 or 100 people robbed a bank or liquor store all at the same time. Did you know that just buy being a cop they have access to and use military grade high powerd wepons with no regulation or record of there use where they go or who they can use them on??? But they dont want you to have any gun at all. Wake up and smell the gun smoke people.
Washington D.C. and Chicago have the strictest gun control laws in the nation and they are considered to have the highest crime rates in the nation. States that have right to carry laws have the lowest crime rates. By the way, twelve kids were killed in a classroom in China and the killer didn't use a gun, he used a knife. Maybe the best thing to do is have teachers and school officials carry concealed weapons. Blaming guns does not solve the problem. The problem is society itself has lost any type of social barrier.
Crime involves things other than gun violence you know.
Also the guy in china wounded 22 kids. not killed 12. Do you read headlines or just make them up after you read a word or two?
Listing crimes by state hardly matters; people certainly travel and can easily take guns past state borders. The situation in China really illustrates a lack of supervision: if a killer was given the leisure to kill 12 people with a knife (pretty labour-intensive), as awful as that is, imagine how many more would've died from a firearm ? There's a reason you don't hear about drive-by "knifings".
Surely, you can't be serious?
You read that WRONG--12 kids were injured in that classroom in china--No deaths-
They get to go home to thier parents!
we shouldnt but logically someone needs to pull the trigger on a weapon in order for it to function so what do u think about requiring some form of background check on potential users of lethal weapons<br />
yes i know the weapons used in conn were bought and owned by a person who had passed a background check so really im stuck for an answer
Why should the Government regulate and control Explosives then? Just because I like to blow stuff up in my spare time doesn't mean I'm gonna blow anything up.
Explosives are weapons of mass destruction. Do I really need to explain this? Shurley you can come up with something better then that.
Funny, we're saying the same thing to you. Yet you don't get it.
Thats because we think differently. We understand the limitations. Yall dont.
And don't call me shirley.
@Gnatfree So what do I call you :P
You can call me the woman who's leading the blue tide of EP along with Chipmunk Ernie. Who I usually bow to. (don't get a complex you striped rodent)
Thats quite a long title you are unworthy of. HA. Raising yourself to petty attacks now eh?
38 kids were killed back in a school in Michigan back in 1927. That was the largest school massacre in US history. A gun was not used. The killer used dynamite and he was also killed.
Yes and criminals will find a way to get guns or use IEDs like the do in the middle east, it won't matter, gun control has done enough damage as it is, one decent person with is all it would have taken to have stopped these nuts, but every one was afraid to carry a gun.