Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by CIVPhilzilla, Jan 5, 2004.
Why ? Read the thread.
Freedom of religion doesnt kill people.
Freedom of speech doesnt kill people.
I'm against. I don't understand why anyone would need a gun - ever. And I wonder if the image of US as one of the worst crime-related places (thus in many other ways the US is great!) in the world could have any link to guns being free sold in that country
So what about the 95+% (I believe it's 99%, but I'm not positive) of gun owners who manage to keep from killing people? If that 1-5% is enough reason to get rid of guns, we damn well need to save ourselves from cars while we're at it.
We're all utilitarians at heart - cars are risky to some degree but essential to our way of life, so we tolerate but restrict them.
We take the same approach with guns, however in the UK unless you are a farmer or a drug dealer its almost impossible to claim credibly that they are essential to your way of life. They are also of great use to criminals in proseution of crimes. Hence the strict controls on guns.
The US may be different - there is no 'universal' truth on this one.
Speedo, yes I think we need to save ourselves from cars. I think I'll open a thread about that.
I agree bigfatron on this one: there is no universal truth. However I believe that the US, as a place where the rule of the law is applied, is along with western europe among the countries where guns should be very strictly restricted.
Oh, and Akka if you're reading this please check your PMs.
My point is that licensing, registering, and obeying usage laws is acceptable for car ownership, why should guns, which are far less deadly per capita, be banned when cars are allowed?
Statistically, every legal driver will be involved in one accident in their lifetime.
Statistically, 1% of legal gun owners will use their gun to commit a crime.
And in the US, none of this matters. States can make whatever gun control laws they like; the federal government has no right to do so until the Constitution is changed. This is an unimpeachable fact. 'Should' doesn't enter into it. It's a simple matter of black and white, as in black ink on white pages of law.
Well... i am not a U.S citizen though.. if i were i would feel extremely insecure knowing that there are no gun controls enforced.
Bowling for columbine portrayed this problem very well by comparing diffrent countries and their death rates per year. He (Michael More) emphasises that although Canadians are gun lovers there are hardly any homicides in Canada.
One should be able to aquire guns, although that same person must prove that it's use are only for recreative purposes being: hunting ect.
Guns for security.... i would categorize that as an oxymoron...
Michael Moore and Bowling for Columbine have already been thoroughly debunked and discredited. His rather underhanded methods of twisting and splicing words from people like Heston is well-documented, and his credibility is zero.
Well, that was my point, why should guns be treated differently from cars ?
Sure... he may have twisted someones words.. that was part of the comic side of the film.. his message should not me undermined due to this.
No, the outright fabrications and deliberate misquoting do the undermining. Those who don't bother to do some research probably won't notice, though.
Here We Go Again I Should Just Bookmark The Blasted Thing Or Put It In My Signature
Moore's award should definitely be yanked. Bowling is not a documentary.
We should make Moore an ambassador to Europe, since they all love him so much.
Moore tells it like it isn't.
The trouble is, yes that movie has been thoroughly debunked on many many points,
those figures about gun deaths were not. So, why do Americans like shooting each other so much?
Vicious circle. They have guns because people get shot, they get shot because people have guns.
Those caught in it of course rather not see their predicament. They'd have to take initiative by standing up and hoping their countrymen do likewise. So the root problem is they distrust each other, aren't prepared to make the sacrifice, or both.
I'll bet lots of Americans had this thought already, and some of them did choose to defy fear.
I am truly and honestly not afraid of getting shot.
(...but it matches your preconceptions about those gun happy Americans? I think Moore intended that to happen.)
For the most part, they don't. There are tens of millions of gun owners in the US; most don't shoot their friends, neighbors or strangers. You're taking the acts of a small percentage of the population and presuming the rest are like that.
Oh, btw, by your logic, you could say Americans "like" getting into car wrecks with each other too. Or "like" dying of heart disease. You might "like" to avoid misusing that word, even if it is to your "liking".
Sean Lindstrom: Do you think most people would steal if they had the chance?
Separate names with a comma.