Gun Rights
- Thread starter Nerowannabe
- Start date
GoodSarmatian
Jokerfied Western Male
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2006
- Messages
- 9,408
I feel safer without a gun and knowing most people don't have one either than I would if I and everyone else had one.
I am for guns to everyone who will show that hes not maniac, drug-user, has skills for using it properly and able to lock weapon.
On the other hand, knowing how are people idiots, I would feel endangered in country where are weapons widespread like in USA. I would try enforce more strict rules.
On the other hand, knowing how are people idiots, I would feel endangered in country where are weapons widespread like in USA. I would try enforce more strict rules.
I honestly have no idea what the attitudes towards guns are in Ireland, nor what the laws are.
Though overall I will say that the world isn't a one approach fits best everywhere when it comes to guns. FOr the US, I think our system is pretty good, but it obviously won't fly everywhere. Whatever you all's views and laws are over there may be best for Ireland while possibly not (depending on what they are) in any way appropriate for America (or Missouri!)
Though overall I will say that the world isn't a one approach fits best everywhere when it comes to guns. FOr the US, I think our system is pretty good, but it obviously won't fly everywhere. Whatever you all's views and laws are over there may be best for Ireland while possibly not (depending on what they are) in any way appropriate for America (or Missouri!)
By and large that's how it has been - DC had a de facto gun ban, Chicago and NYC currently very nearly the same, and other states, counties, and cities have varied greatly in what they allow. There's two issues with that, though. On the one hand the city folk (Mayor Bloomberg being far and away the most vocal of them) complaining that the guns are being bought elsewhere and funneled into the cities, thus the restrictive sales and bans should be nationwide for the good of the cities. On the other hand, there's a sense that the right to own a gun should not be subject to regional interpretation any more than the other rights in the Bill of Rights - "oh, the Bible Belt really should be able to treat/interpret freedom of religion differently than the more secular NorthEast or the hippie Pacific coast."
Quackers
The Frog
Well Switzerland is pretty damn safe and they have guns, so does Norway and the like. If your looking at US figures it's skewed by black / hispanic urbanites who kill each other in gangs - I'm not in a gang I don't want too I'm not going to deliberatly murder someone I will use it when needed.
How many crimes are stopped or prevented every year due to private citizens having guns? There is no count for that!
Obviously only English protestant men can have it
j/ks
RedRalph
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2007
- Messages
- 20,708
Obviously only English protestant men can have it
That also means northerners... I think it should be just people from small villages in the Home Counties
Quackers
The Frog
if we did that then the north of the country would be overun by scots and other celtic rabble! even worse than northernes
RedRalph
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2007
- Messages
- 20,708
Just build a big wall at Watford and you'll be fine.
Formaldehyde
Both Fair And Balanced
We are 24th in murder per capita. Colombia has a rate which is 14 times higher than ours and Finland's rate is only 50% lower than ours.
And as far as total crime rate is concerned, Finland, Denmark, and the UK have higher rates than we do.
Our crime rates simply do not justify our incarceration rates, especially blacks. Many blacks in prison are really political prisoners more than they are serious criminals.
When I seriously considered singlehandling a sailboat in the Caribbean, I looked into taking a gun or two with me. I came to the conclusion that is simply wasn't worth all the additional hassles when sailing outside of US waters. Many countries have very draconian laws and treat anybody with firearms as potential troublemakers. And if you do not declare your weapons and they find them, you are really in trouble. They will likely sentence you to a lengthy prison term and confiscate your sailboat.
Not positive but I wouldn't be shocked if crime is just better reported in these places. Looking at the data, it shows places like Azerbaijan very low and I would certainly say they have more crime than us.
azzaman333
meh
FWIW, A lack of gun rights doesn't stop children getting stabbed by other children at school.
Mad Man
Your lord and master
All weapons should be legalized with the exceptions of WMDs, Rocket Launchers, Biological weapons (if not included with WMDs), Genetically engineered Velociraptors and Space weapons (armed satellites and space ships/stations. And yes I'm being deadly serious here.
I basically agree. In the United States, the right to bear arms doesn't say which arms so constitutionally actually everything, even what you mentioned should be allowed...
Does that mean that mean from a moral standpoint we should allow them however?
Now they could make possessing nuclear material and genetically engineering things without a license and etc illegal to essentially ban said things though.
Instead of banning machine guns, maybe they should just ban a required part of a machine gun so no one can complain about the constitutionality.
Sure. And let's not ban printing presses, we'll just ban ink.
Well it would technically be constitutional even if its not "the spirit of the law".
Japanrocks12
tired of being a man
guns are cool, people who misuse them aren't, the gun culture of rifle shows and having ten different kinds of pistols is sort of disturbing, but much of the anti-gun argumentation is based on emotion.
those are pretty much all my thoughts on this issue, stream of consciousness style
those are pretty much all my thoughts on this issue, stream of consciousness style
If I had a gun, I would never use it under any circumstance, as I am not violent. Therefore to have one would be useless.
Equally, if I had a gun in America, I would never use it under any circumstance, as I am not violent. Therefore to have one would still be useless.
Equally, if I had a gun in America, I would never use it under any circumstance, as I am not violent. Therefore to have one would still be useless.
MagisterCultuum
Great Sage
I think the most honest ans straightforward interpretation of the 2nd amendment is that the Federal Government has no right to regulate arms at all, apart from regulating their sale/movement from one state to another to help enforce state and local regulations. At the Federal level, even privately owned nuclear weapons ought to be legal. (Well, I suppose the Federal governments involvement with developing nukes could grant them patent rights letting them prevent others from making or selling nukes.) State and local governments however have a duty to make and enforce reasonable restrictions, which are also an important part of having a well regulated militia.
Sure. And let's not ban printing presses, we'll just ban ink.
No, it wouldn't be. SCOTUS is able to add 2+2 just as easily as anyone else (excepting a few in the Senate and about half of the House, that keep coming up with 3 or 5).
Similar threads
- Locked
