Gun Laws- Positive or Negative?

[Ausgirl]

I'm an Australian which means that it's very difficult for me to get my hands on a gun, and the same goes with everyone else. This actually makes me feel safer cos I know that there's only like 1% chance that I'm gonna get shot.

Besides if an Australian with a knife decided to go crazy and attack a bunch of people, chances are they'll be stopped pretty quickly. Whereas if an American with a gun decided to go crazy and attack a bunch of people, chances are many lives will be lost in a matter of seconds and the attack could last for days at a time.

 

[littlea53]

I'm an Australian which means that it's very difficult for me to get my hands on a gun, and the same goes with everyone else. This actually makes me feel safer because <---(spelling error) I know that there's only like 1% chance that I'm gonna get shot.

I bet Australia has a black market. And the chance of getting shot is not 1%. Its less than that everyday (unless your in Iran or Libya). If someone has a gun they're most likely to be stopped unless they kill your military, (your version of) SWAT, law enforcement, etc..., all at one time.

Whereas if an American with a gun decided to go crazy and attack a bunch of people, chances are many lives will be lost in a matter of seconds and the attack could last for days at a time.

Days at a time? I think that's an over exaggeration. Is the media feeding you with this anti-gun ****? Honestly you need to hear some POSITIVES about guns. This is a personal experience.

When I was in Virginia for my Masters, I was walking to the local pizza parlor for dinner. I go in right before closing (The place was deserted. Just me and my buddy cashier.) and order a Large Meat Lovers. I went to the restroom and while washing my hands, I heard screams, panic and the cash register opening. I draw my pistol (.32 ACP Beretta Tomcat) and went out of the restroom. Hands shaking, I peek around the corner and see a "Deranged Hysteric Old Man taking Psychiatric Pills" <---(Police Report) with a taser robing the store! I jumped from my cover and fired 3 rounds into his chest and head. I stopped a forcible felony using the firearm and possible saved the parlors business. Do you think what I did there was right?

And here's a true case where a firearm would have been extremely helpful. This is an actual Florida Supreme Court case.
Henyard v. State, 689 So.2d 239 FLA 1996
Ms. Lewis noticed a few people sitting on a bench near the doors of a Winn-Dixie as she and her daughters entered the store. When Ms. Lewis left the store, she went to her car and put her daughters in the front passenger seat. As she walked behind the car to the drivers side, Ms. Lewis noticed Alfonza Small coming towards her. As Smalls approached, he pulled up his shirt and revealed a gun in his waistband. Smalls ordered the woman into the back passenger seats. Long story short; Henyard was called over, they were raped and murdered in the middle of nowhere. Would a gun be useful there?

 

[SilentMemento]

I'm fine with guns. I've used them, and I think that people have the right to defend themselves with guns if necessary. I'm not fine with it when the gun has no purpose other than making it easier to kill people (i.e., sub-machine guns, assault rifles, fully-automatic weapons, et al.) Suppressors could also count in that category; you don't normally use one unless you don't want people to know you've been firing off shots.

Believe me, things like shotguns, rifles, and handguns make life a lot easier. Shotguns and hunting rifles are used every day by hunters in order to kill animals. Handguns are primarily used in self-defense. But the only people who should be allowed full access to automatic guns are current and former military personel; they know how to use them properly. Military weapons are never going to be used for anything other than killing a human being. They're useless for hunting; they don't normally have the precision of a shotgun or a hunting rifle. They're not as good for self-defense as a handgun would be - and let's face it; if you did need a bigger gun to defend yourself, a shotgun would work perfectly.

Banning all guns is stupid; there are plenty of reliable gun-owners who don't use them in a stupid manner. But the sale of automatic weaponry makes no sense.

Just my honest opinion.

 

[VizardBlue]

All these arguments about how people burst in with a gun, and if etc etc would of had one, they would of saved people, is kind of stupid. You can't rob a bank with a knife. If they would just ban the production, ownership, and right to fire guns in the first place, no one would have a gun. No more robbing banks, no more people holding people up with guns. No "they didn't have a gun, and if they did, they could of saved people" type arguments. If no one has guns, everyone's equal. Arguments like "They relieve stress, their awesome" etc etc, are not good points at all. And hunting? Hunting is NOT worth all the trouble gun ownership causes. The cons outweigh the pros.

 

[dragoniteKnight]

All these arguments about how people burst in with a gun, and if etc etc would of had one, they would of saved people, is kind of stupid.

ill look for this in a bit, but ive read statistics done by interviewing those in prison and a large number of crimes is deterred just by the KNOWLEDGE the victim potentially has a gun. no body likes getting shot, this includes criminals. if they know that guy has a gun, and COULD shoot him, theyll probably leave him alone.

You can't rob a bank with a knife.

you can and people have done stranger things before, a recent example in my area is a guy robbed a bank with an aids infested needle. A NEEDLE.

besides, the best way to go around reducing robberys is hiring wall mart greeters

If they would just ban the production, ownership, and right to fire guns in the first place, no one would have a gun.

where have i heard this before? oh yeah... " If they would just ban the production, ownership, and right to drink alcohol in the first place, no one would be drinking in the first place". yeah history has shown how that backfired. alot.

 

[Sasholon]

I am a firearms supporter.

As far as gun laws, do all the background checks you want on these people, it still wont prevent a criminal from getting a gun illegally.

 

[ebilly99]

All gun laws do is keep inocent people inocent. If a person wants a gun baddly enough he will get around any laws you put up.

 

[Sasholon]

of course. Guns are usually the first things to get stolen unless your smart and have a gun safe.

 

[.TraX.]

Gun laws work just fine in Australia (getting a handgun here is borderline impossible unless you're an active pistol shooter, and getting a semi-automatic is very difficult also).

All gun laws do is keep inocent people inocent. If a person wants a gun baddly enough he will get around any laws you put up.

Sure, but you can't really stop someone who is going to that length of tactical planning from killing anyway.

 

[Ausgirl]

Gun laws work just fine in Australia (getting a handgun here is borderline impossible unless you're an active pistol shooter, and getting a semi-automatic is very difficult also).

Exactly. Don't you feel a lot safer knowing this?

 

[.TraX.]

Exactly. Don't you feel a lot safer knowing this?

Not really, what makes me feel safer is our low homicide rate

That said, I'm pretty sure they're related what with homicides dropping since the gun laws Australia enacted in 1996.

 

[littlea53]

I just did some research, here's California's law on Assault Rifles.
Illegal to possess, import, or purchase assault weapons and .50 BMG rifles, unless such weapons were acquired by the owner prior to June 1, 1989. Legally defined assault weapons and .50 BMG rifles listed by make and model by the DOJ must be registered. Their sale and transfer is prohibited. Military look-alike rifles that are not chambered for .50 BMG and are not on the DOJ roster are legal to purchase or possess, with some restrictions in configuration—known as "banned features." Active-duty military members residing out of state and assigned to duty in California may bring personally-owned assault weapons into the state. The military member's residence must be in a state that permits private citizens to own and possess assault weapons, and the firearms must be registered with the California Department of Justice prior to the service member's arrival in California by submitting the registration form with a copy of the member's Permanent Change of Station (PCS) orders.

My buddy legally acquired them in 1978 so that was his argument.

 

[Clipps]

Think about making Guns illegal, it would be like marijuana. Whether it's illegal or not, people still have ways of getting their hands on one. So keeping fire-arms legal would make sense. If guns were illegal, someone can still break into your house with a gun and attempt to rob you and you happen to have a gun on you too and you use it... Guess what, you're going to prison despite saving your life along your family's lives. It is unfortunate that the wrong people get their hands on fire arms and it's saddening hearing about innocent people getting killed because of it, but that's going to happen whether guns are legal or illegal. Just like Marijuana and other illegal drugs. Sure, they are illegal, but doesn't mean people don't possess them.

And the stupid arguement that went on the first page of this thread. GTFO with that stupid stun gun BS. If someone breaks in your house with a loaded firearm and you shoot him with a stun gun, guess what's going to happen.... You and your family are dead. And whoever said that loading a round in the chamber takes too long and is too loud, go on wikipedia and see how a gun works and when you're done, go slap yourself. Are you serious? It takes a split second to load a round in the chamber. If a gun man enterred your house, load the magazine with the slide already backwards, and then hit the slide release and there, you have a round in the chamber ready to fire.

 

[Rezzo]

And the stupid arguement that went on the first page of this thread. GTFO with that stupid stun gun BS. If someone breaks in your house with a loaded firearm and you shoot him with a stun gun, guess what's going to happen.... You and your family are dead. And whoever said that loading a round in the chamber takes too long and is too loud, go on wikipedia and see how a gun works and when you're done, go slap yourself. Are you serious? It takes a split second to load a round in the chamber. If a gun man enterred your house, load the magazine with the slide already backwards, and then hit the slide release and there, you have a round in the chamber ready to fire.

[IMG139]http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i304/iskatebad914/u-mad1.jpg[/IMG139]

 

[Clipps]

Nope. I'm peachy

 

[Moneyy]

Crazy criminals end up getting a gun anyway, and if no one else (other than the police) have one it could get bad before it was stopped. I think guns should be allowed for this reason.

 

[Mankanshoku Mako]

It's good to have an old Desert Eagle on you when there's a zombie opocalypse.

Broken wrists do help in combating the endless waves of the undead.

 

[Megaton666]

While I'm not against posessing guns, gun laws in the US are way to loose, to a point where one can buy a gun at a grocery store. There needs to be more supervision, because the US allows any random nutjob to have a gun

 

[dragoniteKnight]

While I'm not against posessing guns, gun laws in the US are way to loose, to a point where one can buy a gun at a grocery store. There needs to be more supervision, because the US allows any random nutjob to have a gun

ohohoho, Yeah on my grocery list theres 3 melons, a gallon of milk and a S&W 500 magnum.

 

[Megaton666]

ohohoho, Yeah on my grocery list theres 3 melons, a gallon of milk and a S&W 500 magnum.

I read in an article a few years ago that there's a bank where you get a free shotgun for opening an acount.