Guns in the home

[MoogleViper]

The founding farthers created the second amendment for a very good reason, so they need to carefully make their own minds up, and not worry about what the rest of the world thinks about them.

 

A very good reason that was valid 250 years ago.

 

Using text that old as an argument is about as logical as using the bible to justify homophobia (or any other religious based argument).

[Jonnas]

I appreciate America has high gun deaths, but the issue should be America's violent deaths full stop, who cares if a gun was used or not? America wouldn't be any better off if it simply converted it's gun deaths to knife deaths instead.

 

It's much harder to kill somebody with a knife, though. With a gun, you pull a trigger and the bullet can hit anybody, even ricochet and hit an innocent (in fact, it can hit innocents due to a misunderstanding, bad aim, and other factors).

With a knife, you need to get close, and the one being attacked can still run or counter the attack. It's less likely that a someone attacking with a knife will be successful, compared with someone attacking with a gun.

[pratty]

It's much harder to kill somebody with a knife...

with a knife, you need to get close, and the one being attacked can still run or counter the attack. It's less likely that a someone attacking with a knife will be successful, compared with someone attacking with a gun.

 

Equally though that's all the more reason then to be able to defend yourself with a gun instead of just a kitchen knife.

 

The point I was making though is that it would be better to tackle the reasons why someone would want to commit a violent crime, not just take away one tool which they might use.

 

It isn't lost on me how much more efficient a gun is than a knife or a club, but if someone is hell bent on murdering someone they'll use their bare hands if they have to.

 

America, just like anywhere, needs to lower it's murder rate full stop, not just it's gun murder rate. But as long as guns are demonised they can be used as an excuse for not tackling the real roots of violent crime. Do that and they might actually create a soceity were people just can keep their arms and never need to bare them.

 

Anyway I said I'm not going to go on arguing about it, the second amendment is Amercia's issue to worry about.

[Dannyboy-the-Dane]

I do see the logic that making guns less available would potentially make it more difficult for criminals to aquire guns, but criminals by definition don't obey the law. So outlawing guns puts the law abiding citizen at more of a disadvantage than the criminal, as you're totally taking away the victim's guns, while only inconveniencing the criminal who may still aquire one illegally, or just commit their crimes with anything else safe in the knowlege that their victim can't shoot back. So what might be more inconvenient to a criminal than the banning of legally owned guns, is a bullet coming the other way.

 

But that's no basis for a legal system; we can't simply avoid making laws because people are going to break them. That's counterintuitive.

 

It isn't lost on me how much more efficient a gun is than a knife or a club, but if someone is hell bent on murdering someone they'll use their bare hands if they have to.

 

So? That doesn't change the fact that it's much more difficult, takes far longer and is much easier to defend yourself against. Bottom line is that their chance of success is greatly reduced.

 

America, just like anywhere, needs to lower it's murder rate full stop, not just it's gun murder rate. But as long as guns are demonised they can be used as an excuse for not tackling the real roots of violent crime. Do that and they might actually create a soceity were people just can keep their arms and never need to bare them.

 

The thought of a society where everyone can kill each other in an instant and where that fact is supposed to be what's keeping people from doing so terrifies me.

 

---

 

All that being said, I do acknowledge that the problem with guns in the US isn't simply soluble with gun restrictions and bans. The problem goes much deeper, and what needs to be tackled is the root of crime itself: We need to start caring more about people than money. Unfortunately I don't see that happening in the US for a while.

 

I actually read an article not too long ago pointing out a very likely candidate for the leading cause of criminal behaviour: lead. The article can be read here.

[Cube]

A very good reason that was valid 250 years ago.

 

Using text that old as an argument is about as logical as using the bible to justify homophobia (or any other religious based argument).

 

Not to mention that it didn't seem important enough to put into the original document.

[Rummy]

It isn't lost on me how much more efficient a gun is than a knife or a club, but if someone is hell bent on murdering someone they'll use their bare hands if they have to.

 

America, just like anywhere, needs to lower it's murder rate full stop, not just it's gun murder rate. But as long as guns are demonised they can be used as an excuse for not tackling the real roots of violent crime. Do that and they might actually create a soceity were people just can keep their arms and never need to bare them.

 

What if they're not hell bent on murdering someone, but they end up doing so? Or accidentally kill someone? This isn't just about murder, it's about guns in the home. What about the kids that get hold of their parent's guns, and accidentalyl shoot themselves/someone else? That happens. That happens because the guns exist, there, in the homes. I'd also hazard a guess that America's gun murder figures are still much higher(even corrected and whatnot) than our knife murder figures. Or compare just gun deaths to knife deaths.

 

I'd seen quite a nice little picture back in January from a crowdsourcing project about gun deaths in the US in the wake of the Sandy Hook shooting. There was loads of gun deaths on it! A few of which were kids, and accidents! Wish I could find it now though.

 

Heres the one I saw originally - http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/01/15/graphic-31-days-later-u-s-gun-deaths-since-newtown/

 

Apparently it's still on going and more up to date here(though doesn't list as much info, you need to look through) - http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/crime/2012/12/gun_death_tally_every_american_gun_death_since_newtown_sandy_hook_shooting.html

 

It uses twitter crowdsourcing, which will have its flaws. I'd still think it's an under-representation however.

Edited February 25, 2013 by Rummy

[Jonnas]

I've wondered before: if we have a gun to defend ourselves, it needs to be in a readily accessible place, so we can reach it before any assailant can find us. But what kind of readily accessible place is also inaccessible for children?

[pratty]

I've wondered before: if we have a gun to defend ourselves, it needs to be in a readily accessible place, so we can reach it before any assailant can find us. But what kind of readily accessible place is also inaccessible for children?

 

That's a good point, the first thing that I thought of was a bedside comination safe, the safe may be visible to the child but if it's a combination lock it would be virtually impossible for them to get it open. You could even keep a pistol and it's magazine in seperate safes.

 

Of course that makes getting the gun a little fiddlier to get hold of in an emergency but I think that's a fair balance between having a gun for your increased protection and owning a gun responsibly.

 

As I said before America is still learning the responsibilities that come with the freedom to own a firearm, but I would suggest it's still not as bad as it was, people aren't exactly drawing their six-shooters on each other in the street everyday just cus somebody knocked someone's beer over in the saloon.

 

It's utterly tragic and a disgrace that children have been allowed to use guns to kill themselves. Yes those accidents wouldn't have happened if those guns weren't there, but they are equally the result of poor parenting and irresponisble gun ownership. Equally shooting your own girlfriend in the bathroom by accident is irresponsible gun ownership. I don't think that alone is a reason to abolish the second ammendment, however I agree that people should be able to demonstrate that they are able to own a gun responsibly.

 

A gun could be kept in a safe away from children. If nobody breaks into your home, and no government tries to oppress you, then that gun never need see the light of day. Heck keep your gun in a safe buried in the back garden if you want, the second amendment is simply the right to keep and bear arms, not the right to let your children shoot semselves, or the right to shoot up a classroom of kids. You should still be judged on how you use/abuse your second amendment.

 

An unwarranted gun death is always regretable, but to simply point out the gun death total doesn't tell the full story of each death, for example are we really meant to feel bad about the death of a rapist shot in the prevention of a rape?

 

How many of those other guns deaths were premeditated murders (which would have occured with or without guns)? How many gun deaths were as a result police and security personel going about their lawful duties? How many of those gun deaths were as a result of somebody protecting themselves or others, successuflly or otherwise? How many were reported suicides?

 

As I said we can argue back and forth all day long about whether people kill people or guns kill people, you can make great arguments for both. I tried and failed to just have my say and be done, I really don't want to argue about it.

 

The second amendment is American issue, and I just don't think it's as clear cut as people make out. It ensures that the people are free to use firearms to defend their freedom, from individuals, their government, and foreign invaders, and I think that's lot to ask the Americans to give up just because some Americans abuse that right. In my opinon it's better to learn not to abuse that right.

 

However if Amercia decides that with all things considered they're better off without guns then I think we should let them decide that for themselves, as they're the ones that will have to live with the consequences, the good and the bad.

[Agent Gibbs]

I must ask, when people want to bash gun ownership or argue for it, why is America always the example? MANY other countries allow gun ownership and you never hear of them having problems, for example those in europe;

• 
  Austria
  

• 
  Finland
  

• 
  France
  

• 
  Germany
  

• 
  Hungry
  

• 
  Italy
  

• 
  Poland
  

• 
  Slovakia
  

• 
  Slovenia
  

• 
  Spain
  

• 
  Sweden
  

 

for more see here

 

honorable note for Kenya where anyone who is 12 years or older can apply to privately own a gun.

 

apart from obvious war torn/third world countries, you never really hear of gun problems in these countries, its always America brought up, when they are far from a shining example for or against it

 

 

look at all those European countries, they manage fine, how come the UK couldn't?

 

just wondering you see::shrug:

[Rummy]

That's a good point, the first thing that I thought of was a bedside comination safe, the safe may be visible to the child but if it's a combination lock it would be virtually impossible for them to get it open. You could even keep a pistol and it's magazine in seperate safes.

 

Of course that makes getting the gun a little fiddlier to get hold of in an emergency but I think that's a fair balance between having a gun for your increased protection and owning a gun responsibly.

 

As I said before America is still learning the responsibilities that come with the freedom to own a firearm, but I would suggest it's still not as bad as it was, people aren't exactly drawing their six-shooters on each other in the street everyday just cus somebody knocked someone's beer over in the saloon.

 

It's utterly tragic and a disgrace that children have been allowed to use guns to kill themselves. Yes those accidents wouldn't have happened if those guns weren't there, but they are equally the result of poor parenting and irresponisble gun ownership. Equally shooting your own girlfriend in the bathroom by accident is irresponsible gun ownership. I don't think that alone is a reason to abolish the second ammendment, however I agree that people should be able to demonstrate that they are able to own a gun responsibly.

 

A gun could be kept in a safe away from children. If nobody breaks into your home, and no government tries to oppress you, then that gun never need see the light of day. Heck keep your gun in a safe buried in the back garden if you want, the second amendment is simply the right to keep and bear arms, not the right to let your children shoot semselves, or the right to shoot up a classroom of kids. You should still be judged on how you use/abuse your second amendment.

 

An unwarranted gun death is always regretable, but to simply point out the gun death total doesn't tell the full story of each death, for example are we really meant to feel bad about the death of a rapist shot in the prevention of a rape?

 

How many of those other guns deaths were premeditated murders (which would have occured with or without guns)? How many gun deaths were as a result police and security personel going about their lawful duties? How many of those gun deaths were as a result of somebody protecting themselves or others, successuflly or otherwise? How many were reported suicides?

 

As I said we can argue back and forth all day long about whether people kill people or guns kill people, you can make great arguments for both. I tried and failed to just have my say and be done, I really don't want to argue about it.

 

The second amendment is American issue, and I just don't think it's as clear cut as people make out. It ensures that the people are free to use firearms to defend their freedom, from individuals, their government, and foreign invaders, and I think that's lot to ask the Americans to give up just because some Americans abuse that right. In my opinon it's better to learn not to abuse that right.

 

However if Amercia decides that with all things considered they're better off without guns then I think we should let them decide that for themselves, as they're the ones that will have to live with the consequences, the good and the bad.

 

It's all good discussion. I agree somewhat with the safety/responsibility; but don't forget one was even somebody who KNEW their gun safety and STILL managed to kill themselves. Imo, it's also much harder to accidentally knife yourself fatally.

I'll agree with the flaw in the figures though, they don't at all show the source/cause and circumstance - they do however show the total gun related deaths which I think IS relevant. It's a lot, and without guns, do you truly believe anywhere near the same number of people would still be dead?

 

I've wondered before: if we have a gun to defend ourselves, it needs to be in a readily accessible place, so we can reach it before any assailant can find us. But what kind of readily accessible place is also inaccessible for children?

 

If it was the case here, I hold a very certain thought that I would probably have been one of those idiot children to shoot themselves.

 

I must ask, when people want to bash gun ownership or argue for it, why is America always the example? MANY other countries allow gun ownership and you never hear of them having problems, for example those in europe;

• 
  Austria
  

• 
  Finland
  

• 
  France
  

• 
  Germany
  

• 
  Hungry
  

• 
  Italy
  

• 
  Poland
  

• 
  Slovakia
  

• 
  Slovenia
  

• 
  Spain
  

• 
  Sweden
  

 

for more see here

 

honorable note for Kenya where anyone who is 12 years or older can apply to privately own a gun.

 

apart from obvious war torn/third world countries, you never really hear of gun problems in these countries, its always America brought up, when they are far from a shining example for or against it

 

 

look at all those European countries, they manage fine, how come the UK couldn't?

 

just wondering you see::shrug:

 

Hmm, good point! Are the gun laws for those countries the same as US? Are they more, less, or as stringent?

 

look at all those European countries, they manage fine, how come the UK couldn't?

 

Because, unfortunately, I think we're more like the americans that we would like to admit. Deadly weapons in the hands of stupidity is a recipe for disaster.

[Agent Gibbs]

Hmm, good point! Are the gun laws for those countries the same as US? Are they more, less, or as stringent?

 

 

 

Because, unfortunately, I think we're more like the americans that we would like to admit. Deadly weapons in the hands of stupidity is a recipe for disaster.

 

They have wildly different laws to the US in some countries and very similar in others.

I just find it very interesting how both the for and against argument us the US when there are other countries with very similar laws, or better handling of laws (more stringent psychological tests) that would better fight the case for gun ownership, and also aid those wanting tighter controls, to use as an example of keeping guns but having a better system

 

The media are terrible for it, whenever someone brings up the issue, or the side issue of routinely arming the police they all go "omg look at america its like the wild west, we can't have that", and completely ignore all the european countries that have armed police and allow guns that manage perfectly fine

 

as for your second point.....i think i already knew the answer to that lol :p

Edited February 25, 2013 by Agent Gibbs

[Dannyboy-the-Dane]

The media are terrible for it, whenever someone brings up the issue, or the side issue of routinely arming the police they all go "omg look at america its like the wild west, we can't have that", and completely ignore all the european countries that have armed police and allow guns that manage perfectly fine

 

Well, I actually think that comment hits the nail on the head. It's the culture in America that's the problem. They actually do have that Wild West mentality, owing to their history, which I believe is why the problem is so massive over there compared to other countries with similar gun laws.

[MoogleViper]

I must ask, when people want to bash gun ownership or argue for it, why is America always the example? MANY other countries allow gun ownership and you never hear of them having problems, for example those in europe;

• 
  Austria
  

• 
  Finland
  

• 
  France
  

• 
  Germany
  

• 
  Hungry
  

• 
  Italy
  

• 
  Poland
  

• 
  Slovakia
  

• 
  Slovenia
  

• 
  Spain
  

• 
  Sweden
  

 

for more see here

 

honorable note for Kenya where anyone who is 12 years or older can apply to privately own a gun.

 

apart from obvious war torn/third world countries, you never really hear of gun problems in these countries, its always America brought up, when they are far from a shining example for or against it

 

 

look at all those European countries, they manage fine, how come the UK couldn't?

 

just wondering you see::shrug:

 

Finland's homicide (not just gun related) rate is 6.5 times higher than the UK's. France - 5.5; Austria - 4.5; Sweden - 4.75; Denmark 5.5; Italy - 9; Germany - 1.5. Pretty resounding victory for not allowing guns.

 

Out of that list, the only one that was lower was Poland at 0.5 times. Though I'd wager that has something to do with inaccurate crime figures.

[bob]

They should just ban assault rifles and machine guns. Handguns and shotguns, fine. Everything else is a bit unnecessary and just seem geared towards rampages.

[MoogleViper]

They should just ban assault rifles and machine guns. Handguns and shotguns, fine. Everything else is a bit unnecessary and just seem geared towards rampages.

 

What? America restricts hand guns. Guns are legal here with a licence, but handguns are never permitted.

[bob]

What? America restricts hand guns. Guns are legal here with a licence, but handguns are never permitted.

 

I don't get your point?

[MoogleViper]

I don't get your point?

 

Handguns, which can be easily concealed and carried around in public, are far more dangerous, and cause far more deaths (despite the control/restriction) than assault rifles.

[bob]

Ah i see! Yeah maybe, but just because they don't kill as many people, there's no reason why assault rifles should be legal. Unless you're fighting a war, why would you need one of those?

 

My point was that assault rifles should be illegal, rather than handguns should be legal.

[Magnus]

Ah i see! Yeah maybe, but just because they don't kill as many people, there's no reason why assault rifles should be legal. Unless you're fighting a war, why would you need one of those?

For hunting?

 

Ain't no deer that's going to survive that.

[Jonnas]

If it was the case here, I hold a very certain thought that I would probably have been one of those idiot children to shoot themselves.

 

One time, at a cousin's place, I entered his room and went through his stuff without his permission. I found an old rifle that belonged to his grandfather (I think). It had no bullets and no gunpowder. I thought it was a toy, and started "shooting" with it, even pointing it at my cousin's back before he took it and explained that it was a real hunting rifle.

 

I can imagine all sorts of tragic accidents happening with loaded handguns.