guns or no guns?

Sockimobi

Pointless.

Using a spoon to stuff your face makes *you* fat, over time. You can remedy this by joining MFP.

Guns though... (you fill the rest in, I'm having a protein shake and going to bed!)

moosegt35

Ya because these shootings ONLY happen in the US.....

They don't happen here! It's great. Only shootings in Ireland are drug dealers ****ing each other up
But like I said, you're gonna have to put up with them because there are too many in circulation to get rid of them and people are too stubborn. They're useless for anything but killing, and if people can't control themselves enough over chocolate cake, I don't trust them with a gun.

So only the drug dealers have guns? That sounds fun.

FretheMJsmokingcannibal

Guns do not blow your 6 year old brains across the floor.

The argument's pointless. I know you are tired of hearing it but a gun doesn't kill people. People kill people. People pull out a gun. People are capable of evil. A gun however is not.

If using a spoon to stuff yourself is what made you fat. Then how does a gun kill people? It can't pull its own trigger and it can't shoot off on its own to blast a child's brain out. It's the person behind the gun that does that.

I hate to break it to you most gun owners in the U.S. are legal gun owners who register their gun. They actually follow the law. No, they are not paranoid nut cases, they understand people can be bad and they will do bad things and those gun owners refuse to be a victim. What is so hard about that concept?

Plus I don't know if you've noticed but mass shooting's are actually quiet rare. I also don't know if you've noticed where there is gun control there is more violence and more murders vs where there are people who are armed legally can protect themselves against illegal gun owners. Someone say Chicago.

TadaGanIarracht

Pointless.

Using a spoon to stuff your face makes *you* fat, over time. You can remedy this by joining MFP.

Guns though... (you fill the rest in, I'm having a protein shake and going to bed!)

You can choose to remedy being fat just as you can choose not to murder.

Even though I have access to a shotgun doesn't mean I'm going to go out and shoot people.

There are ways to get weaponry even if selling them were illegal. I don't think someone who broke the law murdering innocent people is going to just abide by it all of a sudden.

TinkrBelz

Pro-Gun and Pro-responsible use and ownership of said gun.

Should I be anti-fertilizer so that people can't make home-made bombs to blow the **** out of a building full of inncoent workers. Or would I be wrong because that is not fair to the farmers who use it as it is intended.

Snipped for brevity since my own post is long, but I agree with the entire post. It's very easy for people to point at the guns and gasp about things, and anytime that there's a murder - particularly such a public one - this inevitably comes up.

People want something to blame and they focus on the easiest thing to focus on. "Guns" are a concept with a physicality that they can latch onto, point fingers at, and comprehend. Mental illness? Not so much. What do you do about mental illness? How do you fix that? So much easier to attack the weapon used, and it's so much easier for the politicians to use and the news to make headlines with.

Reality, conversely, is difficult and messy and nebulous.

It's a circular debate, with people saying to "ban guns" and the rest saying that in banning the guns only the criminals will have them. Agreeing or disagreeing with the possession of guns tends to come down to the perspective that one has on life, and there's rarely any changing of that.

Me, I look at the 2nd Amendment for what it is. To stand up to the police force or the government as need be, if need be. I see the wisdom in this, particularly based on how the U.S. was founded, and it saddens me when people try to argue "hunting" as the only reason to possess firearms. Why should anyone need bigger guns? Simple: Because the government & police forces have access to bigger guns, and you can't stand up to them if you're not on equal ground.

That's me, though. Others scoff at the idea that such a thing would ever be necessary. Honestly, there's a part of me that's happy for that. Why? Because they CAN feel right saying those things. As messed up as our U.S. government is - and it is seriously messed up IMO - it's still incredibly far fetched to say that we'd need to ever exercise the purpose behind the 2nd amendment: For the security of a free state.

With all of that said, I absolutely believe that training should be a requirement to gun ownership. Others would argue that this would be a "tax" on the possession of firearms and therefore would be an indirect way to limit them. I say make training a requirement at least to anything over the most basic hand gun because people need to respect the weapon that they own. IMO you can't respect the weapon if you don't know the weapon.

Ultimately, most people who own guns are responsible people, and they go through the process of obtaining the guns (all of the background checking nonsense, the months of waiting, and so on) because they're law abiding citizens. Their guns aren't used unless absolutely necessary, much like I don't go around beating random people up with my martial arts training just because I have said training.

Anyway, this is an issue that a single person could write a small book about, and I can only look at this from the perspective of a U.S. citizen as it is. I have my perspective, others have their own. I respect the emotions and the thoughts of those who disagree with me, but they will no sooner convince me that guns should be banned than I will convince them that every house hold should have at least one firearm.

What a great post!!! I have read all of the comments and this has been my favorite.

mfp_junkie

I've got no problems with guns. It's the bullets that seem to be the problem....

Bakkasan

No matter what you do, guns have been an integrated part of history and they exist. You can pass 10,000 laws with life in prison or worse for possession of anything more than a thumbtack. Guess what the end result is?

Criminals and crazies will STILL HAVE GUNS.

Now I'm gonna loose some fats because it weighs less than muscles. (intentional yes)

jg627

So this thread is obviously knee jerk reaction crap to the Colorado shootings, here's the thing, if the dude wanted to shoot the place up and couldn't buy his guns legally he would have gotten the illegally. If you want to stop acts such as this here the key, go after the news groups. Jack offs like this want the fame, if you report the crime but never utter the person's name, never show his picture, only refer to him as coward, sissy, *****, loser, or other derogatory names then focus on the names of the victims you will take away the thing all this pathetic little losers are chasing, 15 min of fame. If we as a nation could come together and agree to do that you would deter so many in the future. I bet pretty much everyone on this thread can name the shooter, how many can name the victims without googling it right now? exactly.
I can already tell you what the next few months will bring. Victims families and lawmakers will seek to tighten up laws on gun control, because not breaking the law is clearly on the top of every criminals to do list. They will then pass a law or 90 to prove that we care, this dog and pony show will run for about a month before everyone moves on to the next shiney bell the Media shakes in front of us. We will then continue to be no safer than we were before. Movie theaters are already banning costumes in theaters, the shooter didn't even show up in a costume. He propped a back door, went to get his gear, came back and went on the attack, so how has not letting a kid dress as batman to see batman make us any safer?
For those who think a stricter gun law is what we need lets pose this question. In many states a sex offender must remain 100yards or more from schools, parks, and other places kids congregate. Violating this can result in a class A misdermeanor or by a far stretch maybe a felony. This person is going to a park with the intention of attacking a child and commiting multiple felonies as well as destroyiong that childs life, do you think the thing stopping them is a law that says they cannot go to where the kid is? wake up and quit being so stupid, pass all the gun laws you want, that just means only the criminals will be armed.

i didn't read all of this, but your first paragraph is false

mental health issues are so commonplace and governments around the globe deal with them in very ****ty ways.

So why are politicians going after guns instead of addressing the real issues? Why are they parading around in the blood of innocent people?

Why do dentists work on teeth? They just do.

Icelandic_Saga

Lots of opinions on this subject, truthfully I don't believe guns are the issue, you could just as easily kill an unsuspecting crowd by driving your truck through the lot of them, should we not drive?

Icelandic_Saga

So this thread is obviously knee jerk reaction crap to the Colorado shootings, here's the thing, if the dude wanted to shoot the place up and couldn't buy his guns legally he would have gotten the illegally. If you want to stop acts such as this here the key, go after the news groups. Jack offs like this want the fame, if you report the crime but never utter the person's name, never show his picture, only refer to him as coward, sissy, *****, loser, or other derogatory names then focus on the names of the victims you will take away the thing all this pathetic little losers are chasing, 15 min of fame. If we as a nation could come together and agree to do that you would deter so many in the future. I bet pretty much everyone on this thread can name the shooter, how many can name the victims without googling it right now? exactly.
I can already tell you what the next few months will bring. Victims families and lawmakers will seek to tighten up laws on gun control, because not breaking the law is clearly on the top of every criminals to do list. They will then pass a law or 90 to prove that we care, this dog and pony show will run for about a month before everyone moves on to the next shiney bell the Media shakes in front of us. We will then continue to be no safer than we were before. Movie theaters are already banning costumes in theaters, the shooter didn't even show up in a costume. He propped a back door, went to get his gear, came back and went on the attack, so how has not letting a kid dress as batman to see batman make us any safer?
For those who think a stricter gun law is what we need lets pose this question. In many states a sex offender must remain 100yards or more from schools, parks, and other places kids congregate. Violating this can result in a class A misdermeanor or by a far stretch maybe a felony. This person is going to a park with the intention of attacking a child and commiting multiple felonies as well as destroyiong that childs life, do you think the thing stopping them is a law that says they cannot go to where the kid is? wake up and quit being so stupid, pass all the gun laws you want, that just means only the criminals will be armed.

i didn't read all of this, but your first paragraph is false

mental health issues are so commonplace and governments around the globe deal with them in very ****ty ways.

So why are politicians going after guns instead of addressing the real issues? Why are they parading around in the blood of innocent people?

Why do dentists work on teeth? They just do.

LOL that's awesome

blytheandbonnie

"... the ability to kill someone is basically a mental stance, and not a question of physical means; a serial killer armed with a couple of feet of clothesline is far more dangerous than a cheerleader with a bazooka. ...and that is the problem in a nutshell. The bad guys tend to have the means." - Neal Stephenson

I am pro gun.

kwest_4_fitness

Ow. My head hurts and I haven't even read all of these posts. Why does it have to be all or nothing? Why can't we just agree that there should be smarter gun controls and regulations. No one needs military style weaponry to protect their home. When did we become such cowards that we need large caliber weapons for home protection. If you want a hand gun, fine, a standard semi-auto 9mm is great. And hunters need to hunt, so standard rifles and shot guns are ok. Who the *kitten* needs a 50 caliber to shoot a deer?

I think there should also longer waiting periods and more stringent background checks. We just need to be smarter (operative word being smart) about who gets weapons of public destruction.

My weapon of choice is a paintball gun. I've never liked handguns simply because I'm always afraid my clumsy butt is going to shoot my toe off or something equally stupid. I figured that a rapid-fire paintball gun would be just as effective, wouldn't require me keeping bullets separate from gun, and wouldn't kill anyone should I make a mistake and shoot my husband coming in late from work or my son coming home from a night out. And whoever gets hit with 10 to 20 paintballs at a close distance is going to hurt like a muther AND be relatively conspicuous from the yellow neon paint on their clothes.

FretheMJsmokingcannibal

Ow. My head hurts and I haven't even read all of these posts. Why does it have to be all or nothing? Why can't we just agree that there should be smarter gun controls and regulations. No one needs military style weaponry to protect their home. When did we become such cowards that we need large caliber weapons for home protection. If you want a hand gun, fine, a standard semi-auto 9mm is great. And hunters need to hunt, so standard rifles and shot guns are ok. Who the *kitten* needs a 50 caliber to shoot a deer?

I think there should also longer waiting periods and more stringent background checks. We just need to be smarter (operative word being smart) about who gets weapons of public destruction.

My weapon of choice is a paintball gun. I've never liked handguns simply because I'm always afraid my clumsy butt is going to shoot my toe off or something equally stupid. I figured that a rapid-fire paintball gun would be just as effective, wouldn't require me keeping bullets separate from gun, and wouldn't kill anyone should I make a mistake and shoot my husband coming in late from work or my son coming home from a night out. And whoever gets hit with 10 to 20 paintballs at a close distance is going to hurt like a muther AND be relatively conspicuous from the yellow neon paint on their clothes.

Kwest Thank you.

masked_habit

no guns, I've never liked guns

Hezzietiger1

criminals don't follow laws.. increasing gun laws is stupid.

Bring back the constitution.

wingshooter2004

I have a lot of guns. My dad was a collector and so am I. We also all enjoy hunting and competitive shooting sports. None of our guns has ever hurt anyone.

TheFitFireman

I haven't read what anyone has said on here, but I'll post my two cents. I'll first of all say that my opinion is a bit biased because I am a member of the National Rifle Association as well as an owner of several different guns; but you can't really argue with common sense.

If guns are to blame for killing people, than spoons are to blame for making people fat. A gun is just a tool, something that is used when necessary. Guns don't shoot people, it's the psychotic person that shoots people, unless it's self-defense obviously. Just like guns don't shoot people, spoons don't make people fat, it's the person and their bad eating habits that make them fat.

To ban guns would be counter intuitive; why would you ban guns which would take away a civilians ability to protect themself. Someone who is going to use a gun to commit crimes or murders will get a hold of a gun regardless of whether they are banned or not. Banning guns takes them away from responsible owners like myself and only makes us the victim to a crime. Take away guns and criminals have it even easier to commit their crimes and take advantage of their victims...

mfp_junkie

I haven't read what anyone has said on here, but I'll post my two cents. I'll first of all say that my opinion is a bit biased because I am a member of the National Rifle Association as well as an owner of several different guns; but you can't really argue with common sense.

If guns are to blame for killing people, than spoons are to blame for making people fat. A gun is just a tool, something that is used when necessary. Guns don't shoot people, it's the psychotic person that shoots people, unless it's self-defense obviously. Just like guns don't shoot people, spoons don't make people fat, it's the person and their bad eating habits that make them fat.

To ban guns would be counter intuitive; why would you ban guns which would take away a civilians ability to protect themself. Someone who is going to use a gun to commit crimes or murders will get a hold of a gun regardless of whether they are banned or not. Banning guns takes them away from responsible owners like myself and only makes us the victim to a crime. Take away guns and criminals have it even easier to commit their crimes and take advantage of their victims...

Can you explain for me, then, why Canada, a country with strict gun laws, and virtually no hand guns in the public's hands, has 1/6th the rate of murders by gun per 100,000 people than the USA does? Murders by other means are lower, too. Nothing to do with population - I've already reduced it to a ratio to normalize the data.

wingshooter2004

No one needs military style weaponry to protect their home. When did we become such cowards that we need large caliber weapons for home protection. If you want a hand gun, fine, a standard semi-auto 9mm is great. And hunters need to hunt, so standard rifles and shot guns are ok. Who the *kitten* needs a 50 caliber to shoot a deer?

I think there should also longer waiting periods and more stringent background checks. We just need to be smarter (operative word being smart) about who gets weapons of public destruction.

Kwest Thank you.

Most people speak of what they do not know. None of your ideas would have prevented what happened. The guy had no record that would have stopped him from getting the guns. We already have background checks in place that are instant anyway.

Secondly, a standard 9mm semi-automatic pistol is a "military-style" weapon. It's called the Beretta M9. In fact the 9mm is a NATO spec cartridge, originally called the 9mm parabellum. Parabellum is latin for war. Furthermore, the most important point is that our gun rights are not about hunting; they are about defending ourselves from criminals and tyrants.

mesickofwork

Ill pick the guns..............foxyforce well written.............the problem is and always will be law makers in the U.S. and the news both....
Law makers try passing laws to get the yes vote and they will jump on any ban wagon they can to get that yes vote.........the news: Stop putting this news on the front page or your leading stories. I dont dont turn on any news. start sending the law makers the messages vote them out..........and stop watching the junk news.

tabulator32

"When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns."

Law-abiding folks will be defenseless.

TheFitFireman

Can you explain for me, then, why Canada, a country with strict gun laws, and virtually no hand guns in the public's hands, has 1/6th the rate of murders by gun per 100,000 people than the USA does? Murders by other means are lower, too. Nothing to do with population - I've already reduced it to a ratio to normalize the data.

If you make a claim then you need to provide a source, otherwise it's just numbers that you made up. You can't really compare a frozen wasteland to America either, they're completely different.

Welshie_girl

I am very pro guns... Guns don't kill people, people kill people.... I have a right to defend myself and I will if someone will break into my house. I will protect my baby , my husband and myself... It's my right and don't you dare take it away from me... Dictators take away right to bear arms because they like unarmed people ... easier to control unarmed crowd... Don't like smoking don't smoke ! Don't like drinking ? Don't drink. You don't like guns ? Don't buy them...

Bakkasan

Can you explain for me, then, why Canada, a country with strict gun laws, and virtually no hand guns in the public's hands, has 1/6th the rate of murders by gun per 100,000 people than the USA does? Murders by other means are lower, too. Nothing to do with population - I've already reduced it to a ratio to normalize the data.

Because we have Detroit Chicago NYC LA and Washington DC? All of which have the strictest laws in the country BTW.

MissC787

Pro-Gun and Pro-responsible use and ownership of said gun.

Should I be anti-fertilizer so that people can't make home-made bombs to blow the **** out of a building full of inncoent workers. Or would I be wrong because that is not fair to the farmers who use it as it is intended.

Should I be anti-knife so that chefs can properly slice foods or butchers cut meat or even a boy learn to whittle from his grandfather. But wait, don't rapists tend to use knives on their victims?

Should I be anti-bat so that we can't pay Barry Bonds millions of dollars to swing it at a baseball. Better not sell them at a store for some gang member may initiate another one in with a beat-down.

Should I be anti-music/movie/video games-with-violent-themes? Seems those have been blamed for a lot of the rise in underage crime?

Point is just about anything you touch can be used as a weapon. There are always going to be irresponsible people and criminals that are going to use stuff what it is not intended for. Educate yourselves and your family in the proper use of a firearm or any other weapon for that matter.

Why don't we worry about something that would have more of a positive impact on our population? Un-employment? Food shortage? Homeless people?

Instead we are worried about something that is a problem with maybe %0.5 of the population.

Well said.

wingshooter2004

Can you explain for me, then, why Canada, a country with strict gun laws, and virtually no hand guns in the public's hands, has 1/6th the rate of murders by gun per 100,000 people than the USA does? Murders by other means are lower, too. Nothing to do with population - I've already reduced it to a ratio to normalize the data.

If you make a claim then you need to provide a source, otherwise it's just numbers that you made up. You can't really compare a frozen wasteland to America either, they're completely different.

+1 ROFL

mfp_junkie

Can you explain for me, then, why Canada, a country with strict gun laws, and virtually no hand guns in the public's hands, has 1/6th the rate of murders by gun per 100,000 people than the USA does? Murders by other means are lower, too. Nothing to do with population - I've already reduced it to a ratio to normalize the data.

If you make a claim then you need to provide a source, otherwise it's just numbers that you made up. You can't really compare a frozen wasteland to America either, they're completely different.

How about from the United Nations?

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

If your counter argument is to paint an entire country as a "frozen wasteland" then I have nothing to argue about with you. I made zero comments about the US, its people or what it stands for. I simply asked why gun related deaths are lower in a country just to your north with strict gun laws. Apparently, you have nothing to add.

TheFitFireman

Can you explain for me, then, why Canada, a country with strict gun laws, and virtually no hand guns in the public's hands, has 1/6th the rate of murders by gun per 100,000 people than the USA does? Murders by other means are lower, too. Nothing to do with population - I've already reduced it to a ratio to normalize the data.

If you make a claim then you need to provide a source, otherwise it's just numbers that you made up. You can't really compare a frozen wasteland to America either, they're completely different.

How about from the United Nations?

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

If your counter argument is to paint an entire country as a "frozen wasteland" then I have nothing to argue about with you. I made zero comments about the US, its people or what it stands for. I simply asked why gun related deaths are lower in a country just to your north with strict gun laws. Apparently, you have nothing to add.

LOL, a wikipedia "source", now that's funny. Provide a source to a reputable website, not a website that I can go onto and change the numbers myself.

You're comparing Canada that has 1/10 the population of the US. This is going to sound racist, which I'm not, but I wonder what the crime rate percentages would look like for just the minorities. With illegal immigrants spreading like wildfire a lot of these murders come from them. Which add to the total number of homicides in our country. I'm willing to bet that America has a lot more illegal immigrants than Canada does. Does Canada have Mexican cartels fighting their wars on your borders? I don't think so...

Tropical_Turtle

Ya because these shootings ONLY happen in the US.....

They don't happen here! It's great. Only shootings in Ireland are drug dealers ****ing each other up
But like I said, you're gonna have to put up with them because there are too many in circulation to get rid of them and people are too stubborn. They're useless for anything but killing, and if people can't control themselves enough over chocolate cake, I don't trust them with a gun.

Guns are useless for anything but killing which is not true. There are sports where guns are used where no one gets hurt, One example is skeet shooting. I know I LOVE going to the range for target practice - never with the intent to hurt or kill anyone. However, if it came down to them or me, it will be them going down, without thinking twice.

DarthH8

The reason we have guns is because of greed. Technology is where it is today because the need to expand. That need leads to conflict. That conflict leads to conquest. Conquest leads to progress. Stop being fcking greedy and maybe people wont need the guns.