Your opinion of guns

[Napalmbrain]

Meh, I can't see what the point is using a gun for recreation. Maybe it's just me, but I wouldn't be having any fun. I wouldn't even have much to use it for, given the hunting laws in the UK, and the fact I wouldn't go hunting anyway.

 

[Brawny]

I also laugh at your inability to trust anyone who would find anything enjoyable about a firearm. You honestly believe that anyone who likes guns is a crazy person? I suppose it can go the other way, people saying "The second amendment is just as important as the 1st".

 

[sremick]

Guns kill people. A hell of a lot of them.

Cars kill people also. A hell of a lot more than guns do.

Example: in 2005, there were 12,352 firearm-related homicides in the USA (source: http://www.cdc.gov/ ). In that same year, there were 43,200 traffic-related deaths (source). So vehicles are 3.5X more-deadly than firearms. Why aren't you 3.5X more adamant about banning vehicles? Sure, they've got positive uses (like guns), but that can't hardly justify the massive difference in how deadly they are?

Meanwhile, approximately 440,000 deaths were caused by smoking (source). That makes cigarettes over 35 times more-deadly than firearms. So why aren't you proportionally against tobacco?

Your "black and white" feelings don't weight in regards to the facts. Unfortunately too many people let emotion get in the way of reality, no matter how much truth, facts, and statistics you present them. That's how the UK is in the mess it's in (see the earlier article I linked to for reference).

Sure, there are instances where it'd be handy for the "good guy" to get a gun, but the "bad guy" would also be quite likely to have one.

So? Think about the possible situations:

1) Bad guy has gun, good guy has gun = good guy is on equal-footing with bad guy, forcing bad guy to rethink the situation.

2) Bad guy doesn't have gun, good guy has gun = good guy is at advantage, crime deterred

3) Bad guy has gun, good guy does not = good guy loses

It blows me away that people advocate #3. And if they think gun laws will prevent #3, they are delusional and ignoring the facts.

Like the stats say... less guns... less murders.

Murder isn't the only crime out there. Rape, theft, physical assault without death... the stats actually prove that a tremendous amount of other crime increases when you take away the ability for the average citizen to protect themselves. But it's convenient to overlook that.

In the UK and Australia, it's hard to get hold of a gun.

It's hard for you (a law-abiding citizen) to get ahold of a gun. Rest assured the criminals have them, just like in the UK.

Pot is illegal in the USA, guns are not. I think more people own pot than guns. Prohibition of alcohol failed, and so do gun laws.

In my city - the capital of the state - I can only remember one shooting.

Because shooting is the only way someone can kill someone? Once again, you are overlook the simple fact that if someone wants to kill someone, they will find a way to do it, with or without a gun. Sure, gun control might reduce gun-related deaths, but when murder remains high in Adelaide, what can you actually brag about?

http://www.abc.net.au/pm/stories/s635701.htm

You'll find that frequency of murder and availability to guns are proportional in many parts of the world.

I've already provided real statistics and research that dispute that.

I can only see it logically from my point of view...

Somewhat akin to pluging yours ears in the face of contrary evidence.

No guns -> Less murder.

Disproven by real statistics.

Isn't that good?

Maybe if it were true. It ignores "no guns in the hands of innocent civilian target -> more violence against victims with no way to protect themselves", which actually does line-up with the statistics.

 

[Frogger]

Whew, that was a lot of reading.

-I like guns, I am gun knowledgable, I am an above average shot, I am in a gun club...yay

Not yay.

Just to get this straight, I'll outline the points and counter points...just to straighten it out for myself.


-I believe that gun availability DOES increase gun crime potential.
-But I also believe criminals overwhelmingly achieve their guns through illegal means, and stronger anti(eye)-gun laws would do virtually nothing to deter them. Not to mention the force that is the victim also carrying a gun.

It's a really slim chance that you would even find a gun here, my friend got her belt taken off her when she was at the airport in America because it was an image of two guns... But they let her take back her bullets. Odd.

It'll decrease their availability to them in the first place. What's wrong with that?

-Completely off the topic of crime.

Hunting:
-I hunt occasionally, and have killed a deer, few rabbits, squirrels...I don't see what the difference in that and supermarket meat is. (other than the fact that i know my meat is fresh, and they taste so much better than packaged crap). A bullet to the head is probably just, if not more, humane than butcher practices.

I'll only let you do that if you make everything from scratch, and no doubt that will cost much more and be damn time consuming, if you do that, then you may shoot Bambi. But I do believe you buy that supermarket junk for every other type of food. Killing something, wow, go make a pastry!

Target practice:
-Recreational shooting IS a valid activity! How else would you explain shooter videogames, and A REAL GUN IS EVEN MORE SATISFYING. No feeling like shooting a quarter sized group from 100 yds. (91.4 metres...)



If we wind up in America, (and you so know I'm buying a gun even if I come over there) I'm taking you to a range. One shot is all I ask.

...No.

Take me paintballing or archery or something!

I also laugh at your inability to trust anyone who would find anything enjoyable about a firearm. You honestly believe that anyone who likes guns is a crazy person? I suppose it can go the other way, people saying "The second amendment is just as important as the 1st".

People don't trust people, unlock your house while you go out, there's a chance not many people will break into it! But you'll be sorry when someone does, sweetie.

 

[sremick]

The problem that most people would find here (in the UK), if they were allowed to use a gun, is that if someone broke into their house and they shot them, they would probably get sued by the robber. It sounds pathetic, but it happens.

Then that is a result of even more broken laws in the UK.

The boneheaded UK legal system is not the gun's fault. As messed up as the USA is at times, at least the legal system understands the concept of "self-defense".

 

[sremick]

Exactly, that is the advantage of living in a country with minimal gun usage.

That's why I like living in Australia, I feel secure. I can feel safe going to University every day without the threat of some delusional student gunning down me or my peers.

Because that never happens?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monash_University_shooting

I feel more-secure knowing that should a similar dipshit pull that stunt around here, lots of people have a gun stashed somewhere they could grab within seconds in order to fight back and reduce the number of innocent victims.

 

[sremick]

Meh, I can't see what the point is using a gun for recreation. Maybe it's just me, but I wouldn't be having any fun.

I don't really have "fun" target practicing any more than I have "fun" practicing fire alarm tests. I do both with a serious tone because I know the real purpose behind them.

 

[Brawny]

May I ask your view on fishing, then, dear?

Now paintballing...I don't want you bruised! Archery, I like bows, we can do that!

You don't need a license for the bow, do you? -_-;

Let me make it clear, I'll live just fine without, I just don't like the holier-than-thou view that *some* English folks are taking.

I'm moving to Vermont. <<

 

[LevesqueIsKing]

May I ask your view on powerlifting, then, dear?

Ah, good question.

 

[Frogger]

May I ask your view on fishing, then, dear?

Now paintballing...I don't want you bruised! Archery, I like bows, we can do that!

You don't need a license for the bow, do you? -_-;

Let me make it clear, I'll live just fine without, I just don't like the holier-than-thou view that *some* English folks are taking.

I'm moving to Vermont. <<

Are you seriously asking me to go near water!?

 

[Brawny]

No, but fishing is killing little animals, and they suffocate. By your logic, you'd be against that too?

 

[Frogger]

No, but fishing is killing little animals, and they suffocate. By your logic, you'd be against that too?

By my logic I should be vegetarian. Hell, meat tastes good, I'm pretty much down to eating all different types of food, but I couldn't bring myself to killing something, and seeing it die in front of me... And sometimes having to break it's neck... Like... EUH.

Fishing's legal here for a reason, I don't see any fishermen trying to catch people's eyes around here. I've been asked to go fishing by one of my aunty's ex's, but I didn't go for the fact that it's incredibly boring and I'm uneasy near water.

Seeing something you've killed, nothing like fishing which is under water, and you know the Bible, deary, no meat on Fridays, but fish is allowed.

And I hate fish, the hell!

 

[Byuakuya]

"Guns don't kill people. People kill people."
I personally think that guns should not be allowed in the hands of anyone who is not in a position of authority, or else everything will simply get out of hand.

 

[Brawny]

I don't see any hunters shooting anyone either.

@ Pras...oh you mean like Vermont? -_-;

 

[Frogger]

I don't see any hunters shooting anyone either.

@ Pras...oh you mean like Vermont? -_-;

And I don't see anyone shooting anyone here.