Gun Control

Gun Control will just take guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens.

Agen Kolar wrote:

Gun Control will just take guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens.

Every killer is a law abiding citizen until they commit their first crime. The dude who shot everyone up at Sandy Hook was a law abiding citizen, but then went batshit and here we have our results.

Strider Zero wrote:

Agen Kolar wrote:

Gun Control will just take guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens.

Every killer is a law abiding citizen until they commit their first crime. The dude who shot everyone up at Sandy Hook was a law abiding citizen, but then went batshit and here we have our results.

Put more guards up at the schools. Like 3 per school then theres no way the murderer can strike. More Gun Control laws will hurt good everyday gun owners who 98% are good people.

Those guard jobs would be perfect for the soldiers returning from the Middle East.

Also, people who want to hurt others or take their lives will find ways to do so. They'll use blunt objects or IED's. Do you have any idea how simple it is to make your own frag grenade?

Children learning while armed guards are all around them makes for a great learning environment.

Politicians have armed guards surrounding them. Why don't children get that same protection? The life of one student is worth 50 of the schmucks on Capitol Hill.

Big Bird wrote:

Children learning while armed guards are all around them makes for a great learning environment.

The Guards wont even shoot though. They'll just stand there and only attack if someone attacks. Its perfect.

Prince Doebler wrote:

Politicians have armed guards surrounding them. Why don't children get that same protection? The life of one student is worth 50 of the schmucks on Capitol Hill.

Agreed 100%.

On paper, it's not a bad idea, but when you start desensitizing kids to guns, we could have some problems. Could also go the other way and scare the living shit out of kids that people have guns around them. To me, guns and children in the same building just don't mix well. Who's to say a guard isn't the one to go apeshit and shoot the school up? Politicians have armed guards because everything they say pisses someone off (usually from the opposite political party). Didn't stop a few certain presidents from being killed.

Strider Zero wrote:

On paper, it's not a bad idea, but when you start desensitizing kids to guns, we could have some problems. Could also go the other way and scare the living shit out of kids that people have guns around them. To me, guns and children in the same building just don't mix well. Who's to say a guard isn't the one to go apeshit and shoot the school up? Politicians have armed guards because everything they say pisses someone off (usually from the opposite political party). Didn't stop a few certain presidents from being killed.

the thing is though the guards will have there guns conceled and the kids cant see them. Besides if presidents and congressmen get guards so should kids. Shootings are very very rare when guards surrond.

Israel's schoolteachers are armed. And no school shootings happen there.

They're not going to give some random schmuck a gun, too. You can bet that they'll be doing extensive background checks on their security personnel.

It also provides an opportunity to properly teach students about gun safety/awareness. It will teach them to respect them as tools, as they should be treated.

You train with a gun in the hopes that you don't have to use it.

Why stop there? Give every child a gun so they can defend themselves. Hand them out with birth certificates, that way you can be sure that no evil immigrants get them too.

Raz wrote:

Why stop there? Give every child a gun so they can defend themselves. Hand them out with birth certificates, that way you can be sure that no evil immigrants get them too.

Your ability to blow things out of proportion/misrepresent a person's words would make the liberal mainstream media proud.

I just find it funny that you people don't see that if you try to fight fire with fire you just get a bigger fire.

It's adorable how you think that analogy applies here.

It's not about fighting back. It's about preventative measures.

Prevent people from getting shot by giving people guns? Genius.

Would you just think about what you're saying, for like a second. Fighting back is exactly what you're talking about. So many shootings end with the killer turning the gun on themselves at the end anyway, why on earth would more guns around prevent that?

More to the point, if you are minding your own business, eating at a restaurant or something let's say, and I have a gun and wish to shoot you. You have no chance to defend yourself, so what use is your gun? You're gonna get shot first no matter how fast your reflexes are. Guns are not for protection, they can only be for offence, so that metaphor makes perfect sense.

Finally, regardless of how adorable I am, please try not to flirt with me, I'm not interested.

Shootings like the schmucks from Colorado and Connecticut do end up that way. Not all of them do. And the neighbors surrounding me who also have guns would like to have a word with you. If you do try to shoot me, don't do it out in the open.

Also, that crack about not being for offense--in the words of Dr. House, "SHUT UP YOU IDIOT". The US Bureau of Justice Statistics show that guns are the safest and most effective means of defense. Using a gun for protection results in fewer injuries to the defender than using any other means of defense and is safer than not resisting at all. The myth that "guns are only used for killing" and the myth that "guns are dangerous when used for protection" melt when exposed to scientific examination and data. The myths persist because they are repeated so frequently and dogmatically that few think to question the myths by examining the mountains of data available.

We're not talking about what happens afterwards, we're talking about the act itself. What way do you have of preventing it? The crime rates in your country show that immediate consequences don't particularly bother people who are going to shoot someone. Common sense can tell you that in crimes of passion, in the heat of the moment, people don't think about what comes next. So do you genuinely feel that it's a good idea for anyone to be able to kill anyone with a snap of their fingers?

Your idealogical bullshit crumbles in the face of facts.

http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp

Guns save more lives than they take. Gun control laws create more violence than they prevent. Take note of the dates ban laws came into effect. How about these rates?

Gun control is proven not to work and is false.

Agen Kolar wrote:

Gun control is proven not to work and is false.

No, there needs to be gun control. Almost nobody argues otherwise. To what degree is what is being debated on. We shouldn't just hand out guns to every citizen. There needs to be control in everything involving the government, to what degree is what people argue about. As much as I want a gun for myself, I shudder at the thought of every lame brained person that I pass having the potential to just pull out a gun and kill someone just because they're wearing a green shirt. And there are lunatics like that out there. Take the George Zimmerman case, for instance. His trial will be in June, but this guy is charged for Second Degree Murder, Voluntary Manslaughter (i.e Heat of the moment kills) by a firearm. Shot the guy just because he was black.

Honestly though, the U.S needs to find a good happy medium.

Chicago has the strictest gun control laws in our country. And they have the highest crime rates. By January 18, they had 27 homicides and 94 people shot in 2013.

We have measures in place to prevent convicted criminals from buying them legally. We don't need anything else. We need to make sure that law-abiding citizens are encouraged to own guns.

Prince Doebler wrote:

Chicago has the strictest gun control laws in our country. And they have the highest crime rates. By January 18, they had 27 homicides and 94 people shot in 2013.

We have measures in place to prevent convicted criminals from buying them legally. We don't need anything else. We need to make sure that law-abiding citizens are encouraged to own guns.

We need psychological tests as well. Heavy ones. That would also create quite a few psychology jobs.