Out of control gun control

How can you "learn" that something that something is God-given without subscribing to a religion?

However, trying to control people is a governmental right, which is probably not what you intended to say.
 
Your friend could've been shot instead.
Had that been me in his place, they would've been shot.
The gangsters couldn't legally have firearms, by the way (not that that always stops them). I could, therefore, I could legally protect myself from those who would mean harm that could not legally own the same weapon...
If it went to court, I would be free, and they would not.

If I had that gun illegally, I would have survived, but went to jail (probably with them!).

How can you "learn" that something that something is God-given without subscribing to a religion?

However, trying to control people is a governmental right, which is probably not what you intended to say.
Government is for the people, by the people, not the other way around.
The government doesn't decide what rights to give us, we decide what rights to give the government.
 
Well, your rabid anti-gun position is noted...
I disagree that a gun is not essential, I have lived in bad neighborhoods where having a gun has afforded me daily protection...
The point is, waaaaaaaaay more people die from other things, but they are legal.
Get over your hatred and fear of firearms and learn that trying to control people's right to defend themselves and their loved ones is a God given right. Guns just happen to be the best tool for it these days.

A. That point is irrelevant. Guns aren't dangerous simply because people die from them. They're dangerous because they are use to expedite murders, and their only purpose is killing others.

B. The availability of guns would make a bad neighbourhood even worse. If criminals can legally obtain firearms without going through illegal sources and risking getting caught, then your criminals just got a whole lot more dangerous. This isn't a movie where you can go on a big shoot-out with some bad guys because you have a gun.

C. God gives no rights because God is imaginary.

D. Rights are granted by the state, for what is best for the people. Having guns be readily available for people is not what's best, so if that is the case (and it is if you compare nations), then it shouldn't be a right.
 
If guns only protect innocent people from extreme violence, then sure, allow people to carry them. Otherwise, you need to start asking what the social costs are.
 
Example... my friend, in said neighborhood... he was beat to death by a gang of teenagers who wanted to rob him, 2 blocks from his house. They took his $20 in the end.

That's more indicative of American cultural norms and economic ghettoisation than it is of the state of gun control.
 
A. That point is irrelevant. Guns aren't dangerous simply because people die from them. They're dangerous because they are use to expedite murders, and their only purpose is killing others.
First, you are not the arbiter of relevance. It is relevant.
Many things are used to murder, guns also prevent murder.
Some people need killing before they kill, and "killing others" is NOT the only purpose of guns. Guns are used for hunting, for example. They are also used for self-defense, and that doesn't have to be lethal.
Killings animals for food is also something that many people enjoy, and some do to keep costs down.

B. The availability of guns would make a bad neighbourhood even worse. If criminals can legally obtain firearms without going through illegal sources and risking getting caught, then your criminals just got a whole lot more dangerous. This isn't a movie where you can go on a big shoot-out with some bad guys because you have a gun.
Criminals cannot legally obtain firearms in the USA. There are background checks by the FBI. No one is saying it should be a fun free for all.
Criminals get guns whether they are illegal or not... when they are illegal, such as your rabid anti-gun stance would prefer, it only takes the guns out of the hands of law-abiding citizens, people like me who have served their country and only desire to protect myself and my loved ones from criminals (armed with firearms or otherwise, criminals are potentially lethal).

C. God gives no rights because God is imaginary.
Uh, that's just like, your opinion. I realize that government is your god, but it isn't mine. Please don't make such arrogant statements because it is offensive.

D. Rights are granted by the state, for what is best for the people. Having guns be readily available for people is not what's best, so if that is the case (and it is if you compare nations), then it shouldn't be a right.
The people grant the state the power to grant rights.
Your opinions are not absolute, I am afraid to tell you. I cannot continue a debate with someone who is so close minded, my apologies.
 
I don't even know what's happening ITT anymore, but the concept that you have a "god given right" to carry firearms is scary, and actually quite similar to something a member of the Taliban would say.
 
I don't even know what's happening ITT anymore, but the concept that you have a "god given right" to carry firearms is scary, and actually quite similar to something a member of the Taliban would say.
Oh, let's completely exaggerate now... Taliban... It's actually something the USA is founded on, so, relax there, fearmonger.

God given right to protect yourself.
Firearms are just a tool... I know you guys are scared of them, but that's all they are in the end. Tools.
 
Oh, let's completely exaggerate now... Taliban... It's actually something the USA is founded on, so, relax there, fearmonger.

Actually, it's not, since it's an amendment to your constitution, not the basic document.

You're calling me a fearmonger, yet you seem to be the one terrified of walking through a dark alley without packing a semi-auto.

God given right to protect yourself.
Firearms are just a tool... I know you guys are scared of them, but that's all they are in the end. Tools.
Oh, we're not particularly scared of firearms, I mean, we're still fairly liberal with regards to them, we just don't see much point in being armed, since we're not particularly worried about whatever it is you people are scared of.

Though I guess a petrolbomb is just a tool too?
 
Actually, it's not, since it's an amendment to your constitution, not the basic document.
Actually, since you want to get technical, the Constitution would not have been signed without the Bill of Rights, aka, the 1st 10 Amendments. The 2nd of those is the right to own.
Thank you so bloody much for trying to edumacate me.

You're calling me a fearmonger, yet you seem to be the one terrified of walking through a dark alley without packing a semi-auto.
I like the personal attack there! Thanks.
You go on living in your quaint little "Canterbury", and telling people who they should live their lives.

Oh, we're not particularly scared of firearms, I mean, we're still fairly liberal with regards to them, we just don't see much point in being armed, since we're not particularly worried about whatever it is you people are scared of.
You seem particularly afraid of them... you'd rather brave a dark alley than own a gun. Or, is it, you just don't want others having guns?
Just watch out for that wild gun walking around in those alleys, just ready to go off all by itself.

Home invasions, carjackings, etc.
It's about personal freedom. Something you guys in the UK rarely understand anymore, since you don't even have our first 1st, 2nd, or 4th rights.
How many video cameras have you been seen on today?

What bothers me isn't that people like you are scared of guns, it is that you are so scared of guns you insist that other people shouldn't have the right to them. I don't like when anyone tries to infringe upon my rights, and I surely don't try to infringe upon your rights.

Moderator Action: Please cut back on the trollish statements.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
 
I like the personal attack there! Thanks.
You go on living in your quaint little "Canterbury", and telling people who they should live their lives.
I'm actually not in Canterbury, though yeah, it does happen to be one of the safest places in the world....our entire saturday night police contingent comprises 6 officers for a population of ~80,000

You seem particularly afraid of them... you'd rather brave a dark alley than own a gun. Or, is it, you just don't want others having guns?
Actually, I'm trained in firearm handling and have been on police firearms seminars, so I'll assume you're just being facetious.

Nice try, but yeah, generally, I would not desire civilians to pack firearms, nor the police force.

Home invasions, carjackings, etc.

Well, let's see:
in the entirety of the UK, between 2010-2011, there were an entire 642 homicides in the entirety of the UK, a country of ~60 million, including 12 victims from the Cumbria shootings.

I don't think there are any carjacking statistics (carjacking just doesn't really happen in the UK, I'd be surprised if more than ~10 happened in a single year), but I *can* tell you, only 84 vehicles were reported stolen between 2010-2011.

In terms of "Home Invasion", we record "burglary", which is significantly different, of which there were 745 recorded attempts, or successes.

There were a total of 7006 firearms offences in the Uk during this period.
For the record, there were 7202 offences of voyeurism in the same period.

In other words, we don't actually need firearms for safety in the UK.


It's about personal freedom. Something you guys in the UK rarely understand anymore, since you don't even have our first 1st, 2nd, or 4th rights.

Haha, nice one, we're not the ones who signed the Patriot Act into existence, and we still have the Human Rights Act.

Oh, and you're just showing yourself up to be quite ignorant of this sceptred isle. We had those constitutional rights 500 years before the US did.



What bothers me isn't that people like you are scared of guns, it is that you are so scared of guns you insist that other people shouldn't have the right to them. I don't like when anyone tries to infringe upon my rights, and I surely don't try to infringe upon your rights.
Any gun related murder is an infringement of the right to life as codified in the UK constitution, and the UN charter of human rights.
 
The 2nd of those is the right to own.
It's not the right to own, it's the right to keep and bear. Theoretically, the government could supply you a gun under a license. Historically however, the government is more likely to mandate gun ownership than strip ownership as a form of keeping and bearing.
 
It's not the right to own, it's the right to keep and bear. Theoretically, the government could supply you a gun under a license.
In fact, given that the text of the Second Amendment specifies that it is with the intent of maintaining "a well-regulated militia" on the one hand, and that it attributes the right to "the people"- a notoriously ambiguous political concept- on the other, you could quite easily make the case that something closer to the Swiss system would more properly represent the spirit of the text, which would render the purely private ownership of firearms a non-constitutional issue.

It's about personal freedom. Something you guys in the UK rarely understand anymore, since you don't even have our first 1st, 2nd, or 4th rights.
How many video cameras have you been seen on today?
I really don't think that liberal chappies like Nonconformist are responsible for the UK's rather shoddy record of securing individual liberties, simply because they happen to concur on the issue of gun control. That's a reductio ad Blairum, if y'will.
 
Oh, and you're just showing yourself up to be quite ignorant of this sceptred isle. We had those constitutional rights 500 years before the US did.
But now, you don't. I'm not referring to history here, I am talking about today.

Any gun related murder is an infringement of the right to life as codified in the UK constitution, and the UN charter of human rights.
Murder is also illegal in America, no matter what the weapon.

It's not the right to own, it's the right to keep and bear. Theoretically, the government could supply you a gun under a license. Historically however, the government is more likely to mandate gun ownership than strip ownership as a form of keeping and bearing.
Well... while that's quite debateable... I hate to admit, I've had enough of debating guns now for a good two to three months.
In the USA, it's the law of the land, it isn't changing any time soon, moot point really.
 
But now, you don't. I'm not referring to history here, I am talking about today.

Uh....yes we do, we've had constitutionally mandated 1st and 4th amendments since the 13th century, and our second amendment is buried in the offensive weapons legislation.

Wanna try again?

Murder is also illegal in America, no matter what the weapon.

In that case, I'll just assume you're for anyone within American territories being allowed to pack firearms, regardless of extrataneous factors.
 
Uh....yes we do, we've had constitutionally mandated 1st and 4th amendments since the 13th century, and our second amendment is buried in the offensive weapons legislation.
You guys are unlawfully searched every time you go out on the street with all those cameras...
And, 1st amendment... you guys don't allow hate speech, that is therefore not free speech, sorry.

In that case, I'll just assume you're for anyone within American territories being allowed to pack firearms, regardless of extrataneous factors.
As I said above, I'm done with the gun control argument, especially with the rabidly anti-gun who would restrict my freedom to protect myself and my loved ones. I don't infringe on your rights, don't infringe upon mine. Thank you very much.
 
Back
Top Bottom