Off Topic: The Flood
This topic has moved here: Subject: America, open your eyes
  • Subject: America, open your eyes
Subject: America, open your eyes
  •  | 
  • Fabled Legendary Member

They call me graland.

Posted by: Gruntzilla24
Posted by: oaklandp8ntbalr
If you limit production...there are still HUNDREDS of MILLIONS of pre-existing guns in America.
Source?
Seriously?

There are 192 million registered firearms in the United States. There are certainly more than that if you count unregistered antiques and illegally-acquired firearms.

  • 12.16.2012 11:47 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Fabled Legendary Member

They call me graland.

Posted by: ParagonRenegade
The majority of weapons illegally purchased are manufactured legally somewhere else. Cutting off production will quickly cripple gun use in the country. Will it be enough on its own? no, not even close, but it's a good start
And what about when those weapons come from government/military manufacturers?

  • 12.16.2012 11:49 AM PDT

why did he get reported? were gun pro americans butt hurt? no wonder shootings every other day in america. in uk i have never heard of anything like this. damn kids.....just wow somthing must be done in america new law and scrap that pathetic gun law.

  • 12.16.2012 11:49 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

All that is needed for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.

You can't have as many guns as we have and have a peaceful society.

Guns are like minefields. Extremely effective for the time being, but impossible to get rid of and just as dangerous even in times of peace. If we keep throwing guns into the mix, the entire country will be a minefield. I doubt anyone here wants that.

  • 12.16.2012 11:52 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

All that is needed for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.


Posted by: Garland
Posted by: Gruntzilla24
Posted by: oaklandp8ntbalr
If you limit production...there are still HUNDREDS of MILLIONS of pre-existing guns in America.
Source?
Seriously?

There are 192 million registered firearms in the United States. There are certainly more than that if you count unregistered antiques and illegally-acquired firearms.
Yeah, seriously. If you're going to say a number in all caps, you have to provide a source. Its just common courtesy.

  • 12.16.2012 11:53 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Fabled Legendary Member

They call me graland.

Posted by: Gruntzilla24
You can't have as many guns as we have and have a peaceful society.

The Gun Is Civilization

By Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret)

Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force.

If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that's it.

In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some. When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force.

The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gang banger, and a single -blam!- guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.

There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations. These are the people who think that we'd be more civilized if all guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a [armed] mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger's potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat--it has no validity when most of a mugger's potential marks are armed. People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that's the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.

Then there's the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser. People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don't constitute lethal force watch too much TV, where people take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level.

The gun is the only weapon that's as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weight lifter. It simply wouldn't work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn't both lethal and easily employable.

When I carry a gun, I don't do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I'm looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don't carry it because I'm afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn't limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force.

It removes force from the equation...and that's why carrying a gun is a civilized act.

  • 12.16.2012 11:54 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Fabled Legendary Member

They call me graland.

Posted by: Gruntzilla24
Posted by: Garland
Posted by: Gruntzilla24
Posted by: oaklandp8ntbalr
If you limit production...there are still HUNDREDS of MILLIONS of pre-existing guns in America.
Source?
Seriously?

There are 192 million registered firearms in the United States. There are certainly more than that if you count unregistered antiques and illegally-acquired firearms.
Yeah, seriously. If you're going to say a number in all caps, you have to provide a source. Its just common courtesy.
I thought it was common knowledge.

After all, anti-gun advocates on here constantly complain that Americans have way too many guns.

  • 12.16.2012 11:55 AM PDT

Posted by: CultMiester4000
I'm not really an Apple person (Bananas forever) but damn, that's kinda sad.


Posted by: Garland
Posted by: ParagonRenegade
The majority of weapons illegally purchased are manufactured legally somewhere else. Cutting off production will quickly cripple gun use in the country. Will it be enough on its own? no, not even close, but it's a good start
And what about when those weapons come from government/military manufacturers?


I'll just be straight with you Garland; I speak from experience when I say that the majority of weapons used/obtained illegally are small arms like handguns or "neutered" rifles. Only very rarely will you see a "Heavy" weapon, such as a fully-automatic rifles or a Single-use RPG getting used, and those are only used with any frequency by large gangs.

In fact, I think the only time I heard of those being used were in assaults on armoured trucks that ferry money.

Ah, whatever.

We should really tackle the core issues here; paranoia about the government, increasing awareness of criminal action and poor stnadards of living. A larger police force would help also

  • 12.16.2012 11:55 AM PDT

Please stop complaining about the 'death of a loved one' it's my job. They probably deserved it anyways. Here's a warning, if you keep making pentagrams out of the neighbors livestock I will personally come to your house and kill everyone you love. Now leave me alone, I got to get back to work.
~M.D~

Firearms are a necessary evil.

  • 12.16.2012 11:59 AM PDT

Generalizations.
Helping idiots hate other idiots since people have existed.


Posted by: ParagonRenegade

Guns require constant maintenance and replacement, to the point where the majority of one must be replaced/repaired after a certain time (Depends on amount of use).

Cut off people's ability to repair or otherwise replace their weapons, and they will begin to disappear


I wish this was true. But it's not.

All you have to do is look at war-torn Africa.

  • 12.16.2012 11:59 AM PDT

Posted by: CultMiester4000
I'm not really an Apple person (Bananas forever) but damn, that's kinda sad.


Posted by: Garland
[quote]The Gun Is Civilization

By Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret)

Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force.

If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that's it.

In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some. When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force.

The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gang banger, and a single -blam!- guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.

There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations. These are the people who think that we'd be more civilized if all guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a [armed] mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger's potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat--it has no validity when most of a mugger's potential marks are armed. People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that's the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.

Then there's the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser. People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don't constitute lethal force watch too much TV, where people take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level.

The gun is the only weapon that's as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weight lifter. It simply wouldn't work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn't both lethal and easily employable.

When I carry a gun, I don't do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I'm looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don't carry it because I'm afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn't limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force.

It removes force from the equation...and that's why carrying a gun is a civilized act.


"Peace through Power"

No

  • 12.16.2012 12:00 PM PDT



A larger police force would help also

I've always wondered why cities would reduce the amount of police to save money. Like they couldn't find something else to cut?

  • 12.16.2012 12:00 PM PDT

Key


Posted by: Garland
Posted by: MyNameIsCharlie
Posted by: Garland
Posted by: MyNameIsCharlie
Yet it IS known that every single rampage shooting was committed with a legally obtained firearm.
The Connecticut killer was in illegal possession of two handguns.
what, the ones he stole from his mother, who did buy them legally?
It doesn't matter if his mother bought them legally; he was under 21 and could not legally possess handguns. He was breaking existing gun control laws before he ever set foot on school grounds.
That's a stupid rationale. The point is they were in legal possession of his mother, and he stole them from someone who'd obtained those guns legally.

  • 12.16.2012 12:00 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Fabled Legendary Member

They call me graland.

Posted by: ParagonRenegade
I'll just be straight with you Garland; I speak from experience when I say that the majority of weapons used/obtained illegally are small arms like handguns or "neutered" rifles. Only very rarely will you see a "Heavy" weapon, such as a fully-automatic rifles or a Single-use RPG getting used, and those are only used with any frequency by large gangs.
I won't argue with that. However, the military still uses a lot of handguns and such.
Posted by: ParagonRenegade
We should really tackle the core issues here; paranoia about the government, increasing awareness of criminal action and poor stnadards of living. A larger police force would help also
I agree (though I think mistrust of government is a good trait to have). There are other, larger, more important factors at work than just gun control.

  • 12.16.2012 12:00 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

"I know not what weapons World War III will be fought with, but I do know that World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones."

-Albert Einstein


Posted by: omg a bannana
but we r need teh guns to pretect us from the othir gunz

  • 12.16.2012 12:01 PM PDT

Here to end the borrowed time you've all been living on.

Posted by: CrazzySnipe55

Posted by: Garland
Posted by: MyNameIsCharlie
Posted by: Garland
Posted by: MyNameIsCharlie
Yet it IS known that every single rampage shooting was committed with a legally obtained firearm.
The Connecticut killer was in illegal possession of two handguns.
what, the ones he stole from his mother, who did buy them legally?
It doesn't matter if his mother bought them legally; he was under 21 and could not legally possess handguns. He was breaking existing gun control laws before he ever set foot on school grounds.
That's a stupid rationale. The point is they were in legal possession of his mother, and he stole them from someone who'd obtained those guns legally.

Not really, no matter how strict gun laws are you can still steal from someone

  • 12.16.2012 12:01 PM PDT

Posted by: CultMiester4000
I'm not really an Apple person (Bananas forever) but damn, that's kinda sad.


Posted by: oaklandp8ntbalr

Posted by: ParagonRenegade

Guns require constant maintenance and replacement, to the point where the majority of one must be replaced/repaired after a certain time (Depends on amount of use).

Cut off people's ability to repair or otherwise replace their weapons, and they will begin to disappear


I wish this was true. But it's not.

All you have to do is look at war-torn Africa.


The majority of African weapons are produced in poorly-maintained sheds with very basic amenities. The weapons they churn out are also notoriously unreliable and very poor quality. Ever wonder why the AK-47 and its variants are so popular? They're "easy" to maintain and build, and even then the ones they make are bad.

  • 12.16.2012 12:02 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

All that is needed for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.


Posted by: ParagonRenegade
"Peace through Power"

No
This.

[Edited on 12.16.2012 12:04 PM PST]

  • 12.16.2012 12:03 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Fabled Legendary Member

They call me graland.

Posted by: CrazzySnipe55
Posted by: Garland
Posted by: MyNameIsCharlie
Posted by: Garland
Posted by: MyNameIsCharlie
Yet it IS known that every single rampage shooting was committed with a legally obtained firearm.
The Connecticut killer was in illegal possession of two handguns.
what, the ones he stole from his mother, who did buy them legally?
It doesn't matter if his mother bought them legally; he was under 21 and could not legally possess handguns. He was breaking existing gun control laws before he ever set foot on school grounds.
That's a stupid rationale.
No, it's not.
Posted by: CrazzySnipe55
The point is they were in legal possession of his mother, and he stole them from someone who'd obtained those guns legally.
I underlined the key point. He stole them. On top of that, he couldn't legally carry or posses a handgun anyways. There is no way that you can argue that he legally acquired those handguns.

  • 12.16.2012 12:03 PM PDT

Posted by: CultMiester4000
I'm not really an Apple person (Bananas forever) but damn, that's kinda sad.


Posted by: Garland
There are other, larger, more important factors at work than just gun control.


People disagree with this? lmao

Those people are stupid, frankly. People ho fail to see how things are interconnected more often than not

  • 12.16.2012 12:03 PM PDT

Generalizations.
Helping idiots hate other idiots since people have existed.


Posted by: ParagonRenegade

Posted by: oaklandp8ntbalr

Posted by: ParagonRenegade

Guns require constant maintenance and replacement, to the point where the majority of one must be replaced/repaired after a certain time (Depends on amount of use).

Cut off people's ability to repair or otherwise replace their weapons, and they will begin to disappear


I wish this was true. But it's not.

All you have to do is look at war-torn Africa.


The majority of African weapons are produced in poorly-maintained sheds with very basic amenities. The weapons they churn out are also notoriously unreliable and very poor quality. Ever wonder why the AK-47 and its variants are so popular? They're "easy" to maintain and build, and even then the ones they make are bad.


My point wasn't that guns are being made in Africa.

My point was that firearms in Africa ended up in Africa a very long time ago, and are still there today. 95% of the weapons in Africa came from outside of Africa. Guns are very durable pieces of equipment and can last a very, very long time.

[Edited on 12.16.2012 12:07 PM PST]

  • 12.16.2012 12:06 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Fabled Legendary Member

They call me graland.

Posted by: ParagonRenegade
Posted by: Garland
There are other, larger, more important factors at work than just gun control.

People disagree with this? lmao

Those people are stupid, frankly. People ho fail to see how things are interconnected more often than not
Looking at the news, all I see is people scapegoating Mass Effect 3 and screaming for a new ban on "assault weapons."

Nobody is talking about anything substantial; it's all mass hysteria and knee-jerk reactions that let emotions override logic.

  • 12.16.2012 12:07 PM PDT


Posted by: halo04
Are American citizens allowed to buy tanks?


You can buy Russian Cold War vehicles of all kinds.

You just can't install any weapon systems on them.

  • 12.16.2012 12:08 PM PDT


Posted by: blackhawk945
I very much agree with you. Taking all guns from the equation would mean people wont need a gun to defend themselves from other people with guns. Unfortunately this wont work, with Americans believing it is a fundamental right to own a firearm. Riot or something similar would occur if the government attempted to remove all the firearms. But it is pretty stupid how obsessed they are with their guns and they think more guns in society would make it safer.


Criminals could still get guns, while it may (or may not) affect mass shootings, there would still be a need to defend one's self.

That aside, OP, your suggestion wouldn't work. Do you have any idea just how many handguns, semi-automatic rifles, and shotguns are already in the hands of American citizens? Enough that even if people stopped selling guns here, they'd still be common for an EXTREMELY long time. How do you take that many guns from that many people AND do it without starting a war? We do not need to ban guns because there are crazies who misuse them, we need increased security, and less "gun free zones". A shooter doesn't give two f**ks about a "gun free zone" but armed citizens/security guards would make em think twice before doing anything, it'd stop or at least reduce the amount of damage done.

  • 12.16.2012 12:09 PM PDT

Posted by: CultMiester4000
I'm not really an Apple person (Bananas forever) but damn, that's kinda sad.

Posted by: Garland
Looking at the news, all I see is people scapegoating Mass Effect 3 and screaming for a new ban on "assault weapons."

Nobody is talking about anything substantial; it's all mass hysteria and knee-jerk reactions that let emotions override logic.


...
Posted by: Garland
Looking at the news, all I see is people scapegoating Mass Effect 3


For the school shootings?...

Wat

Even though I personally agree with gun control, too often people deride it or sackride it without really understanding the actual problems

  • 12.16.2012 12:10 PM PDT