RE: Guns

RE: Guns (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

[Poll]

Guns

There is too much regulation already.

10% (28)

There should be far more stringent background checks.

15% (39)

Reinstate the ban on assault guns.

11% (29)

Make conceal and carry the law in all 50 states.

10% (28)

Make gun classes mandatory.

16% (42)

The only guns availible to the public should be hunting rifles.

4% (12)

The 2nd amendment includes individuals owning firearms.

21% (54)

The 2nd amendment does not include individuals, it's been distorted.

3% (8)

I wish my country had gun laws similar to the US

0% (1)

I don't want my country to have gun laws like the US

6% (16)

Total Votes : 257

(last vote on : 2/2/2013 9:53:19 PM)
(Poll will run till: -- )

Message

Level -> RE: Guns (1/22/2013 6:25:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl I see it as a problem from both sides. Homes are easy to break into.. so are cars... the two places most people keep guns. I hear all the complaining about the love of guns, the rights to have guns, the money spent on guns... and they trust all that to a flimsy lock on a door? I certainly don't think there's anything wrong with gun safes, etc, I'm just not going to legislate it. What if someone breaks into my house and steals a butcher knife, and slaughters the family next door?

tazzygirl -> RE: Guns (1/22/2013 6:39:32 PM)
The chances of someone defending themselves from a knife are far greater than against a gun. And that has become too common an argument to try and work anymore. Cars kill, knives kill, guns kill, childbirth kills, medications kill, food kills, water can kill. I dont see any of you advocating for drink driving, yet drunk driving related deaths have dropped by half as a result of new laws. Can we ever completely stop deaths related to anything? Not at all and to suggest that is what anyone is trying to do is rather ridiculous as an assertion. But demanding that gun owners become more responsible for the deadly weapons they posses... much like we demand drivers become more responsible for the vehicles they drive... only makes sense. As far as legislating it.... when has the country done anything without the push of legislation behind it?

slvemike4u -> RE: Guns (1/22/2013 6:50:20 PM)
No,no ,no tazzy this discussion must be had in terms of absolutes. If one can not get rid of all guns there is no need to try to get rid of some. If all deaths can not be protected,no sense in trying to prevent any at all.

Level -> RE: Guns (1/22/2013 7:01:41 PM)
All those things can indeed kill, but I don't want to see new laws stretching to the horizon; the personal responsibility I want to see is raising your kids with ethics; I want to see mental health programs for those in need, criminals not being released back out on the streets halphazardly. As for drunk driving, the driver is morally responsible, as he is taking the car/weapon into the public, after becoming inebriated, vs the homeowner, who imo, has done due dilligence, by keeping his weapons inside his home.

tazzygirl -> RE: Guns (1/22/2013 7:09:19 PM)
quote: the personal responsibility I want to see is raising your kids with ethics; Agreed.. what do we do with the ones who were raised without them who are of that age now? quote: I want to see mental health programs for those in need, Agreed, how long do you suppose that will take? Im willing to say at least 10 years. quote: criminals not being released back out on the streets haphazardly. Agreed... yet felons can get gun rights returned. quote: As for drunk driving, the driver is morally responsible, as he is taking the car/weapon into the public, after becoming inebriated, vs the homeowner, who imo, has done due dilligence, by keeping his weapons inside his home. You cant legislate morality. Not gonna work.. never has, never will. I dont think we should ever legislate morality because its too fluid... it changes far too often in societies. Using morality as a tool for laws makes it far too easy to legislate for things like DOMA. And a drunk driver doesnt always go into public drunk. We could argue that alcohol takes away his critical thinking skills, making him unable to make a conscious decision on a moral level to be responsible for his actions. We tried prohibition. We saw how well that moral legislation attempt worked. Gun safety and responsibility isnt a "moral issue". Btw, Im all in favor of breathalyzers being required equipment on cars too.

Real0ne -> RE: Guns (1/22/2013 7:19:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: the personal responsibility I want to see is raising your kids with ethics; Agreed.. what do we do with the ones who were raised without them who are of that age now? quote: I want to see mental health programs for those in need, Agreed, how long do you suppose that will take? Im willing to say at least 10 years. quote: criminals not being released back out on the streets haphazardly. Agreed... yet felons can get gun rights returned. quote: As for drunk driving, the driver is morally responsible, as he is taking the car/weapon into the public, after becoming inebriated, vs the homeowner, who imo, has done due dilligence, by keeping his weapons inside his home. You cant legislate morality. Not gonna work.. never has, never will. I dont think we should ever legislate morality because its too fluid... it changes far too often in societies. Using morality as a tool for laws makes it far too easy to legislate for things like DOMA. And a drunk driver doesnt always go into public drunk. We could argue that alcohol takes away his critical thinking skills, making him unable to make a conscious decision on a moral level to be responsible for his actions. We tried prohibition. We saw how well that moral legislation attempt worked. Gun safety and responsibility isnt a "moral issue". Btw, Im all in favor of breathalyzers being required equipment on cars too. responsibility certainly is a moral issue and you most certainly can and they most certainly do legislate morality, just try letting your lawn go to seed sometime and see how long it takes for the city to enforce morality upon you.

Real0ne -> RE: Guns (1/22/2013 7:24:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Level All those things can indeed kill, but I don't want to see new laws stretching to the horizon; the personal responsibility I want to see is raising your kids with ethics; I want to see mental health programs for those in need, criminals not being released back out on the streets halphazardly. [image]http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o296/nine_one_one/stuff/yesbig-1.gif[/image] but then that is much easier said than done, since the whole of society sets the opposite eample starting with our el' prazzi dante on down. tHat would fix nearly everything, so how do we fix the government so we can get that trickle down effect?

Level -> RE: Guns (1/22/2013 7:30:57 PM)
The ones raised without ethics - use the carrot & stick approach. Carrot, you get to stay out of jail. Stick, you go to jail. We make jail much more unpleasant than it is now. If we have decent mental health care in TWENTY years, I'd be stunned. I'd be open to making it where a violent felon could never have the right to own a gun again. And no, we can't legislate morality. No can do.

tazzygirl -> RE: Guns (1/22/2013 7:33:19 PM)
quote: The ones raised without ethics - use the carrot & stick approach. Carrot, you get to stay out of jail. Stick, you go to jail. We make jail much more unpleasant than it is now. So we are going to jail people based upon ethics? Interesting.... people have different ethics... which do we use? quote: And no, we can't legislate morality. No can do. And yet all your solutions will take generations to see any changes, if then. How long do you think legislating responsible gun ownership would take before we started seeing changes?

Real0ne -> RE: Guns (1/22/2013 7:45:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: The ones raised without ethics - use the carrot & stick approach. Carrot, you get to stay out of jail. Stick, you go to jail. We make jail much more unpleasant than it is now. So we are going to jail people based upon ethics? Interesting.... people have different ethics... which do we use? quote: And no, we can't legislate morality. No can do. And yet all your solutions will take generations to see any changes, if then. How long do you think legislating responsible gun ownership would take before we started seeing changes? how is that not legislating ethics?

PeonForHer -> RE: Guns (1/22/2013 7:47:29 PM)
FR As at 3.43am GMT: "I wish my country had gun laws similar to the US - 0% (0)" Oh dear. Surely somebody outside the USA likes its gun laws?

Real0ne -> RE: Guns (1/22/2013 7:48:53 PM)
are you waiting for the swiss to jump online? lol

tazzygirl -> RE: Guns (1/22/2013 7:55:50 PM)
Because ethics has close ties to morality. What I may consider ethical, you may not. What is considered legal is typically not supposed to be based upon morals. Ethically, you are not responsible for what I do. As in, you see me stealing a gun from your neighbors house, you know I am breaking the law, you know I am a convicted felon who should not possess a weapon. Ethically, are you required to do anything? Perhaps. Legally, no. The SC has stated that its within the governments discretion to insist how someone may keep a firearm. 2) Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons. Pp. 54–56. This means, to me, that the government cannot arbitraily ban "handguns" - a whole class of weapons. They have to be specific and allow for ownership of some weapons. Just because you want a gun doesnt mean it has to be a tommy gun. And the fact that the courts upheld the trigger locks for handguns points to the courts willingness to place conditions upon keeping a weapon in a safe, responsible manner, thus legislating that manner without bias on any one group.

thishereboi -> RE: Guns (1/22/2013 7:57:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer FR As at 3.43am GMT: "I wish my country had gun laws similar to the US - 0% (0)" Oh dear. Surely somebody outside the USA likes its gun laws? Are you suggesting that the posters who come to this forum from outside the US represent the entire rest of the world? And I am sorry but I really don't care what people who don't live here feel about guns and I don't care what the gun laws are in other countries.

Level -> RE: Guns (1/22/2013 8:23:44 PM)
They should only be jailed if their lack if ethics results in breaking the law, of course. As for results, I believe that if someone wants in that safe badly enough, then they'll do so. How much are you willing to legislate, for what you gain? Anyway, I'm sure we'll get all this ironed out [:D]

Aynne88 -> RE: Guns (1/22/2013 8:28:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 I couldn't vote in the poll - there's no "I think all guns should be banned" option. Because you live in the UK.

Aynne88 -> RE: Guns (1/22/2013 8:34:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: ORIGINAL: itsSIRtou but the gun owner IS to blame, he bought it....unintentionally made it available by not making it secure enough to NOT have it be stolen, and IS the person who started to process for that gun to be used on another human being by buying it in the first place. We keep giving the responseablity away to anybody other than the people involved ......the thief,...the gun owner he stole from, and the seller of the gun, and lastly the maker of the gun who knows damn well the only reason for making that gun to exist, IS to kill another human being. He would be to blame for not securing it (or she). Not for any murders committed. Tazzy we usually agree on most things but how the fuck do I defend myself dead asleep when some criminal busts in with their own gun? Do I run down to my gun safe, spin the padlock or key it open or do I reach 12 inches to my left and grab my loaded piece and shoot him? right. That one saves my life. I keep my jewelry and passport safe and secure not my gun. It's never out of arms reach or basically it's useless.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Guns (1/22/2013 8:44:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: What, then, does "legally responsible"mean? Civil trials only? So, had the mother not been killed, she'd have been open for civil lawsuits because her son attempted to kill her and then steal her stuff? Dunno... did she have them in a gun safe? If not, then yes. If she did, then no. Legally responsible.... you think there should be no ramifications for breaking the law? The loss of weapons, fine and jail term for failure to comply. Awesome! Mandating more purchases! The Corporate Overlords will be happy. quote: quote: However, being open to civil suit(s) could very easily destroy someone who had thought they had their firearm secure. Had thought????? Thats good enough for you? Someone "thinks"? Their guns are stolen, 20 plus people die... sorry... shrug it off and move on? What level of security is necessary, Tazzy? A gun safe? You'll mandate a gun safe? What happens if the gun safe is broken into? What happens if the person is shot while getting the gun out of the safe, and now, the safe is open for the thief? quote: quote: So, again, I ask you, what lock isn't pickable? Is there a lock that is guaranteed to never be broken into? I watched a video of a Master Lock padlock opened using an utility knife (could have been a pair of scissors; I saw it early last year) and an aluminum can. Repeating this wont change the answer. There is a massive difference between someone actually making an effort and someone being too lazy and hiding behind the... its my right... meme. I'm not saying that people who own guns shouldn't be responsible and leave their guns loaded and out with the kids' toys. Shit. I'm just saying that there is a point in which you can go too far with this stuff. I've never had anything more than a door lock and deadbolt and I've never been broken into. I live in a fairly quiet area with low crime. If I have a gun (and it would be registered), what are you going to require of me to consider my gun "secure enough" to not warrant civil suit liability if the gun gets stolen? The questions you didn't answer were asked again because they speak directly to securing a gun. What is going to be required for a gun to be secured, legally? Isn't there some point in time when securing a gun will render it useless in defending oneself because it's so damn difficult to get to?

BamaD -> RE: Guns (1/22/2013 9:28:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: What, then, does "legally responsible"mean? Civil trials only? So, had the mother not been killed, she'd have been open for civil lawsuits because her son attempted to kill her and then steal her stuff? Dunno... did she have them in a gun safe? If not, then yes. If she did, then no. Legally responsible.... you think there should be no ramifications for breaking the law? The loss of weapons, fine and jail term for failure to comply. Awesome! Mandating more purchases! The Corporate Overlords will be happy. quote: quote: However, being open to civil suit(s) could very easily destroy someone who had thought they had their firearm secure. Had thought????? Thats good enough for you? Someone "thinks"? Their guns are stolen, 20 plus people die... sorry... shrug it off and move on? What level of security is necessary, Tazzy? A gun safe? You'll mandate a gun safe? What happens if the gun safe is broken into? What happens if the person is shot while getting the gun out of the safe, and now, the safe is open for the thief? quote: quote: So, again, I ask you, what lock isn't pickable? Is there a lock that is guaranteed to never be broken into? I watched a video of a Master Lock padlock opened using an utility knife (could have been a pair of scissors; I saw it early last year) and an aluminum can. Repeating this wont change the answer. There is a massive difference between someone actually making an effort and someone being too lazy and hiding behind the... its my right... meme. I'm not saying that people who own guns shouldn't be responsible and leave their guns loaded and out with the kids' toys. Shit. I'm just saying that there is a point in which you can go too far with this stuff. I've never had anything more than a door lock and deadbolt and I've never been broken into. I live in a fairly quiet area with low crime. If I have a gun (and it would be registered), what are you going to require of me to consider my gun "secure enough" to not warrant civil suit liability if the gun gets stolen? The questions you didn't answer were asked again because they speak directly to securing a gun. What is going to be required for a gun to be secured, legally? Isn't there some point in time when securing a gun will render it useless in defending oneself because it's so damn difficult to get to? What if,as happened to a person on another thread the gun safe is stolen? I believe in gun safty I believe in keeping guns away from kids. I belive in using gun safes. What I don't believe in is big brother.

tazzygirl -> RE: Guns (1/22/2013 9:31:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aynne88 quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: ORIGINAL: itsSIRtou but the gun owner IS to blame, he bought it....unintentionally made it available by not making it secure enough to NOT have it be stolen, and IS the person who started to process for that gun to be used on another human being by buying it in the first place. We keep giving the responseablity away to anybody other than the people involved ......the thief,...the gun owner he stole from, and the seller of the gun, and lastly the maker of the gun who knows damn well the only reason for making that gun to exist, IS to kill another human being. He would be to blame for not securing it (or she). Not for any murders committed. Tazzy we usually agree on most things but how the fuck do I defend myself dead asleep when some criminal busts in with their own gun? Do I run down to my gun safe, spin the padlock or key it open or do I reach 12 inches to my left and grab my loaded piece and shoot him? right. That one saves my life. I keep my jewelry and passport safe and secure not my gun. It's never out of arms reach or basically it's useless. Nope. Do you need all 21 guns out to defend yourself when you are sound asleep or just one by your bedside? ETA Wouldnt a security alarm alert you before the intruder gets to you?

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Spam Policy

0.046875