Inevitable gun control argument thread....

[sonorakitch]

I am curious how many in the anti-gun crowd would react if all alcohol was banned in a certain radius around school campuses. Imagine...no more fraternity toga parties.

After all, binge drinking kills more on college campuses every year than mass shootings.

~Chris

 

[mdwh]

The government should have no power over our right to bear arms. It's that simple.

Any arms? I mean, if you support private ownership of explosives, missiles and nuclear bombs, that's a fair viewpoint, I'm just clarifying here.

 

[downtown]

I am curious how many in the anti-gun crowd would react if all alcohol was banned in a certain radius around school campuses. Imagine...no more fraternity toga parties.

After all, binge drinking kills more on college campuses every year than mass shootings.

~Chris

I agree, and tons of schools do that. Mine does. Nobody has died from bringe drinking here, at least not in a loooong time.

 

[mdwh]

Ah.....You mean countries like the Scotland and Australia? Both have more violent crime than the USA. Pretty sure I saw a story before that said the UK was more violent as well.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/4257966.stm



Ooops. So much for you looking down your nose at other countries.

Well, it says excluding murder. Not much consolation to be dead instead. How do murder rates compare?

And if the UK is so violent, that's all the more reason not to give us guns and turn assault into murder!

 

[mdwh]

If you guys want guns, then have guns... its none of my business. I just find the idea that some higher power has imbued the right to gun ownership upon mankind hilarious... more so if people actually believe it. Gun ownership is allowed because that what the majority wants.

The same can be said for any "right".

 

[mdwh]

I am curious how many in the anti-gun crowd would react if all alcohol was banned in a certain radius around school campuses. Imagine...no more fraternity toga parties.

After all, binge drinking kills more on college campuses every year than mass shootings.

If guns only killed their owners, you might have a point.

 

[Atlas14]

If guns only killed their owners, you might have a point.

Drunk drivers don't kill more than just themselves?

 

[sonorakitch]

If guns only killed their owners, you might have a point.

I don't know about you, but in my college days...most of my drinking was forced upon me and against my will.

*remembers the viscious students holding my legs for the kegstands*

~Chris

 

[mdwh]

Drunk drivers don't kill more than just themselves?

That's not what he said.

But if you're changing the argument to that, then indirect deaths is a significant step from direct deaths. What is the purpose of guns? What is the purpose of drink - or driving, come to that?

Note, I'm not totally pro-gun-control - if someone said they wanted a gun for sport, I'd accept that. I respect the right to have something even if other people may misuse it, and in this sense is more comparable to drink or driving.

But instead we hear people saying they want to carry guns in case they need to kill someone. Whether or not that killing might be justified is beside the point - the point is this is different to alcohol, where people do not say "I support alcohol so I can drink and drive".

 

[Atlas14]

That's not what he said.

But if you're changing the argument to that, then indirect deaths is a significant step from direct deaths. What is the purpose of guns? What is the purpose of drink - or driving, come to that?

Note, I'm not totally pro-gun-control - if someone said they wanted a gun for sport, I'd accept that. I respect the right to have something even if other people may misuse it, and in this sense is more comparable to drink or driving.

But instead we hear people saying they want to carry guns in case they need to kill someone. Whether or not that killing might be justified is beside the point - the point is this is different to alcohol, where people do not say "I support alcohol so I can drink and drive".

Ahh, I see. Sorry, bit of misunderstanding on my part.

But instead we hear people saying they want to carry guns in case they need to kill someone. Whether or not that killing might be justified is beside the point

Why would protection through killing not be a legitimate call for carrying a gun? Not all gun carriers would even necessarily shoot to kill.

 

[sonorakitch]

If guns only killed their owners, you might have a point.

Seriously, that is a good and valid point. I actually agree that people choose whether or not to live or die based of life choices, but the fact still remains many more die of alcohol poisoning, and many probably don't understand the inherant risks involved.

Now I am starting to sound like a left-winger. Maybe I should scratch that whole analogy.

~Chris

 

[Smidlee]

One thing seems very obvious to me; laws are not very effective in stopping suicide killers.

 

[SewerStarFish]

Okay I'm in:
Pro gun -- Until war,crime and insanity are eliminated each and every person's life and liberty is at some level of risk. It is simply each person's responsibility to protect their life and liberty. When we walk unarmed we are essentially surrendering all such responsibilty to someone else.

We can hold hands, sing kumbya and pray all we wish but the reality is there is always someone who will find a way. The best we can do is minimize their impact. Hundreds of armed police could not stop the gunman, there wasn't time. It is sophistry to argue that one armed student or professeor couldn't because he could.

Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are dependent on a number of things.
Freedom of religon, speech and thought are primary but number two on the list really is the unabridged right to keep and bear arms. Choose for yourself but understand each choice carries its own risk.

 

[CaptainF]

Gun Control just doesn't work.

Fact of the matter, ladies and gentlemen.

 

[Zardnaar]

Gun Control just doesn't work.

Fact of the matter, ladies and gentlemen.

Works here. Full automatic weapons and semi automatics are banned, pistols heavily restricted, police are unarmed. We haven't had a massacre like that in 17 years.

 

[Tykinruoka]

Works pretty well here too. Wikipedia article about finnish gun politics

We can hold hands, sing kumbya and pray all we wish but the reality is there is always someone who will find a way. The best we can do is minimize their impact. Hundreds of armed police could not stop the gunman, there wasn't time. It is sophistry to argue that one armed student or professeor couldn't because he could.

Gun control lowers the change of a casual gunman getting a gun quite a lot. Over here all firearm owners have to keep their guns in safes.

 

[Bugfatty300]

Gun control lowers the change of a casual gunman getting a gun quite a lot. Over here all firearm owners have to keep their guns in safes.

Such laws won't work here.

 

[Zardnaar]

Works pretty well here too. Wikipedia article about finnish gun politics



Gun control lowers the change of a casual gunman getting a gun quite a lot. Over here all firearm owners have to keep their guns in safes.

I remember watching a video on Finland when I was a child. It showed a boy leaving his skies in a village and returning several weeks later and no one had stolen them. Seemed like a very practical country as well. Nice scenary to.

 

[Tykinruoka]

Such laws won't work here.

Well, too bad.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

"Excluding murder"
"Yeah? So?"


Comedy gold on CFC-OT, what a way to wake up

Good morning by the way