Handguns.
Living in Canada, I often get the feeling I did looking over the fence to my neighbours house as a kid, and yelling "But dad/prime minister! they get to have a dog/handgun".
I mean, my entire arguement towards pro-guns can be summed up with the old and overused statement:
[I]GUNS DON'T KILL PEOPLE. PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE[/I]
I agree with that completly. I understand that it is much easier to kill when you have a gun. For instance, that guy that shot up his work with a shot gun killing seven people probably wouldn't have been able to without a gun. He may have only killed two or three. But to counter that arguement I can simply mention the death toll with cars/cigarettes/alcohol.
I feel almost raped of freedom knowing that I can't have a handgun. Or that I have to go through so much to get one. I don't even really want one to be truthful. I would probably buy one and keep it around the house, but I would never use it. My cousin was recently attacked and almost raped, though, and I would feel much better if she had a small handgun.
What's your opinion on this?
Workshop privileges only.
I don't like guns at all. Guns are only for the military and the police.
Noone exept them should own a gun.
Not even hunters?
Don't you worry about a power imbalance if the only people permitted to own guns are the ones that tell you that you can't?
No not really.
Guns scare me shitless that's all.
Had an encounter with a gunman once, that shaped my opnion of gun ownership.
It's very easy to use a gun to solve your problems.
so you trust the military and the police?
"I loves my gun. Loves my gun."
Handguns are alright with me. I mean. The crooks and cops have them...we should too. I just don't agree in owning an AK-47 for 'protection'. Hunting is a sport now...and like all the other games it should be regulated to a pansy two divison cross country team thingy with a superbowl called: The Hunter's Ball.
Yes, don't you?
They are constantly scrutinized. Watched by different authority's.
different authorities [b]besides[/b] the military and the police? Like who?
I'm asking 'cause you don't live in my country and I'm curious about how things run where you are...
And, no, I do not trust our police and military. Certainly not to be the ONLY ones allowed to own guns.
Yes, we are a people who are always nagging about this and that. Because of this, we have rules for everything. Everything is written in rules, there are ofcourse authorities that maintain these rules.
In the case of the police and the military: the authorities that check up on them are independend of them.
Lately, because of the recession and all, there is a discussion going on about making less rules and even abolishing some rules.
Rules cost money, because they have to be maintained.
we could have as many guns as we want, but this isn't the 1800's, they have planes and bombs, so if we had to worry about the military, I doubt our little handguns were really gong to help, I mean look at saddam... he had a handgun
Menno, I'm sorry that you had a bad experience on the wrong side of a gun. I can imagine it must have been very frightening to you. I am not aware of the gun laws in your country, but I found a quote that essentially sums up the way I feel about your statement that only police and military should be allowed to own guns. I don't know who this guy is, but this is in line with the way I think:
-- Edward Abbey, "Abbey's Road", 1979[/b]
Bah! Saddam was ready to be taken into custody...where would you rather be? Three hots and a cot or lying down in a hole in the dirt...?
Although gun's are forbidden to anyone who does'nt have a permit, possession of a gun seems to be quite commonplace nowadays.
Gun's tend to end up in inexperienced --people with low self- control-- hands; last week a teacher was shot through the head by one of his students (17 years old).
To name one example of why I think gun's should be forbidden totally.
Ofcourse I do understand your point of view, possession of a gun is a right stated in the Bill of Rights.
Gun possession is an integral part of your history.
By the way if you're interested in Edward Abbey, pay this site a visit: [url]http://www.abbeyweb.net/[/url]
Are 17 year old people permitted to own guns in your country?
No, they are'nt. He bougth it from a junkie.
Then the point is irrelevant. You can make guns illegal all you want, criminally minded people will still be able to get a hold of them.
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Xk3zofrenik [/i]
[B]
I have it for my use. For my head. For that last bullet.
Which reminds me i need to go buy that gun soon... [/B][/QUOTE]
Oh no! honey, do you need to talk?
Yes indeed they will, but if they are forbidden totally, they can't be bought in gunstores, stores which can't get robbed of their gun collections (which frequently happened a few years ago).
Then you only have to deal with gun's coming from abroad, which is the main problem here in the Netherlands. Gun's coming from Eastern Europe sweep the black market's here.
There aren't many gunshops here. I only know one in Amsterdam.
It isn't easy to get a permit either, I believe you have to be a member of a shooting club for two years to be able to purchase a gun legally. To become a member of a shooting club you are screened very thoroughly.
How is this in the US, you have to have a permit, don't you?
I grew up in a gun owning household. My father is a lifetime member of the NRA and collects antique weaponry. We don't buy meat in the store; we get it all from his hunting. He gave me a handgun for my 18th birthday, which was my wish.
Building on what Tuffy said, I have been hit by 2 cars. Bodily. I have never had someone stick a gun in my face. Sometimes I wonder where the hell our priorities are in modern society.
There is hope, but not for us.
Yes, you have to have a permit in America. But criminals are not concerned with permits. And don't believe that just because there are no "gun stores" criminals won't be able to buy guns, or steal guns. You said yourself that "Guns coming from Eastern Europe sweep the black markets here." Those are already illegal guns, that no laws will be able to restrict. I guess that's my point.
"If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns."
It would be a shame to restrict people that are responsible gunowners and keep guns to protect themselves from armed criminals just because criminals don't follow the laws that are in place already.
You don't necessarily have to have a permit in America. In most urban states, you do. It's almost impossible to get one in New York State, for example. In my home state of Nebraska, the only limitations are thus:
1. You must be 18
2. You cannot be a felon
3. You cannot carry a concealed weapon (which is, of course, a HUGE issue of contention)
4. You cannot have a fully automatic weapon (like an AK 47)
Other than that, you can do pretty much anything you want, gun-wise. As it should be, imo.
There is hope, but not for us.
so you can buy any gun that is not fully automatic, on the spot, no waiting period, no permit, no background check? In Nebraska?
Yes.
There is hope, but not for us.
gawddamn, and that's the one place I can't drive...
_________________________
[url]http://www.chuckpalahniuk.net/community/showthread.php?s=&postid=224249#post224249[/url]
shameless plug
but mostly for the thread and not so much for my stupid story...
Oh yeah, I meant to take up the Nebraska bashing with you but I forgot.
Um.
You suck! 
There is hope, but not for us.
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Prensa Taladradora [/i]
[B]so you can buy any gun that is not fully automatic, on the spot, no waiting period, no permit, no background check? In Nebraska? [/B][/QUOTE]
gun control is regulated primarily by the state. here in ohio they just passed the conceal and carry law, which allows you to have a concealed weapon on your person (with the proper permits) anywhere in the state, excepting public buildings such as courthouses, city hall, libraries etc...
i don't see the point in this law, even though i think gun ownership is an important issue.
There's a [i]huge[/i] point in that law, trypd! I think it's really bad that women in my state aren't allowed to carry concealed weapons. I think the crime rate against women would drop dramatically if individuals were allowed to carry concealed handguns.
There is hope, but not for us.
I have to say, I am very surprised that I haven't heard anyone who's against handguns.
Have none of you seen Bowling for Colombine?
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Menno Jorissen [/i]
[B]I have to say, I am very surprised that I haven't heard anyone who's against handguns.
Have none of you seen Bowling for Colombine? [/B][/QUOTE]
i think the initial point of this thread was "guns don't kill people, people kill people." most people are inclined to agree with that.
if you don't, explain why.
Bowling for Columbine was a skewed movie to cater to the fears of urbanites.
There is hope, but not for us.
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by jane s. [/i]
[B]There's a [i]huge[/i] point in that law, trypd! I think it's really bad that women in my state aren't allowed to carry concealed weapons. I think the crime rate against women would drop dramatically if individuals were allowed to carry concealed handguns. [/B][/QUOTE]
but this law allows everyone to legally carry a concealed weapon, men and women alike.
i think it will not impact the crime rate against women at all.
Well, I think it will. One of us should really dig up some statistics on other states who have tried this.
There is hope, but not for us.
I'm against handguns. First of all, they're to easy to get. Yes, people kill people, but people are stupid and irrational...we haven't proven ourselves responsible enough to be deserving of that right. Kids get killed with their parents' guns everyday, and more and more dipshit teenagers are shooting each other over trivial matters. If we lived in a more informed and intelligent society, then I'd have a different opinion. But we don't, there's too many dumbasses out there.
Then again, I might be wrong.
I'm sorry my intentions are rather shallow. I just want to be able to beat the shit out of someone at school and not have to worry about getting shot later on.
Then again, I might be wrong.
You forgot God and The Church - most dangerous of all.
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by plastic [/i]
[B]I'm sorry my intentions are rather shallow. I just want to be able to beat the shit out of someone at school and not have to worry about getting shot later on. [/B][/QUOTE]
Translation: "I want to be a bully without repercussions."
Well, "Abe Lincoln may have freed all men, but Sam Colt made them equal."
God bless America (etc.)
You can get by in life without a gun...cars well...we're too dependent on them. Not many people are dependent on firearms. Televangelists...we might as well just gas them...I'm down with that.
Then again, I might be wrong.
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Tuffy the Dump Truck [/i]
[B]Translation: "I want to be a bully without repercussions."
Well, "Abe Lincoln may have freed all men, but Sam Colt made them equal."
God bless America (etc.) [/B][/QUOTE]
Don't tell me you thought I was serious.
Then again, I might be wrong.
People are too dependent on cars because they are lazy. Whether you were serious or not in your previous statement is irrelevant; it's true enough for most.
I'm with you, plastic and Menno.
Everyone who isn't a violent criminal should be allowed a handgun. You never know when you'll need it. Preventing people from protecting themselves because some meathead in suburbia might be more likely to accidentally kill his kid in the middle of the night is the first and worst sign of a psychotic society.
I don't really understand the "concealed weapon" law. If I legally owned a gun, could I carry it around in my hand, walking down the street?
It's not easy having a good time.
Even smiling makes my face ache.
Yes. In my state it's legal to walk down the street with a shotgun over your shoulder. It is, however, illegal to carry a small handgun in your purse or glove compartment for your own safety and well being.
Makes a lot of sense, huh.
There is hope, but not for us.
you never know when dinner might come hopping down the street, janers.
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by plastic [/i]
[B]I'm sorry my intentions are rather shallow. I just want to be able to beat the shit out of someone at school and not have to worry about getting shot later on. [/B][/QUOTE]
Try to steer your agression into socially accepted behavior, like martial arts or boxing.
Learn how to fight so you don't have to beat up that small kid every time and can kick some big guys ass.
Since most violent crimes are commited between people who know each other, it's probably more tasteful to blast your relative's head clean off with your shotgun.
What does it feel to be the domestic market of a flourishing industry ?
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Random [/i]
[B]I feel almost raped of freedom knowing that I can't have a handgun.[/B][/QUOTE]
You poor bastard.
Kill yourself now.
I don't trust a country where the only people who can own guns are the law. It stops being a peaceful concession to leadership. Your chances of dying by a gun are small, I just think it is an easy issue to attack and identify. You need to fix the person and not the possession, me thinks.
you know, everyone says that the argument that we need guns to defend ourselves against an 'uppity guvmint' is ridiculous, cos even if we've got a mass of automatic weapons - they've still got planes, tanks, bombs, etc...
if it ever actually did come down to it - where there's a revolt and the government needs to 'put it down'. well, it certainly would be really hard for them to justify to the rest of the country/world the use of those planes, tanks, bombs, etc., while it would be a lot easier to justify sending in troops. so in that situation, those guns would be useful.
just a thought. [img]http://www.houstonraves.com/board/images/smilies/dunno.gif[/img]
Lawmen and soldiers are not robots. They come from the people. Tyrannical regimes come up, but they cannot subsist only with their own forces. Without the help of foreigh occupation (Germans in occupied Europe, Soviets in socialist republics), they absolutely need the support of a substantial part of the population : the fascist parties in Italy, Spain, Germany, communists in USSR corrupted entire groups with policies in favour of their particular interests, at the expense of the general interest. This is why dictatorships need strong propaganda outfits : they cannot rely on threat alone.
More recently, in Greece, Portugal, Romania, the police and army chanded sides from the leaders to the people to overthrow the former.
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by franc tireur [/i]
[B]Lawmen and soldiers are not robots.[/B][/QUOTE]
in america they are trained to act like robots. in the US military you do not do anything unless told to, and you do not act independently. it just doesn't happen.
in the police force they are trained as well, but there is more leeway in the police force due to the fact that they are supposed to act on independant thought. but, they are also watched over heavily, and are not supposed to do anything without their captain's say-so.
In France, the military discipline book says it is a duty not to obey an obviously illegal order.
Not to say that we are more vituous or something, but the war in Algeria (1954-1962) was a huge trauma. We came that close to a military coup at the time. After the war, the army was cleansed of most of its extremist elements who had been involved in torture and other atrocities, and military justice was suppressed.
As Georges Clemenceau (French leader during WW1) said : "Military justice is to Justice what military music is to music".
More people are killed each year by automobiles. Well, okay, more people are killed each year by people driving them, yet:
1) People who kill others with a car because of their stupidity, ignorance, recklessness, and/or lack of basic ability/skill are invariably "given a second chance" and treated more as a victim than if they had simply wantonly fired a gun into a crowd.
2) There is no concerted effort to take automobiles out of the hands of the People.
I am not a gun nut; just noting an interesting paradox.