What's your opinion of gun control?

[tvbcof]

I'm for gun control in the means that convicted criminals and children should not have access to it. Besides that people have the right to protect themselves and should be able to own guns.

And how do you ensure that children have no access to guns?

Sadly enough, around 60 children die each year just because they found a gun somewhere. I know it seems not a lot, and it sure isn't compared to the millions of inhabitants. But what does a life is worth? Especially a child life.

And 60 is the federal estimation, most other institutes have MUCH HIGHER data. But even the federal one is too much I think 

http://everytownresearch.org/reports/innocents_lost/

I don't understand how a child can kill himself or hurt anyone with a gun.

I mean, I'm not a gun specialist but most firearm aren't exactly easy to use! You need some strength in the fingers to pull the trigger!
I'm not sure I would have been able to do it when I was a child xD

Pro gun rights people should not use this argument because it is fairly invalid.  Children finding guns and mis-using guns is a problem which can and does occur, and they are simple enough to use that a child can do it.  Especially if stored in a manner that is conducive to protecting one's family from home invasion crime and such.

That said, it can be expected that anti-gun propagandists will horribly distort this issue since it involves children.  There are many many things in the environment which have the potential to cause harm to children or facilitate them harming themselves.  In fact, if the goal is to protect kids from bodily harm, it is probably more 'irresponsible' to take one's kids on a hike or even to a shopping center (depending on the driving route) than it is to have a firearm in the household for personal protection.  Or maybe even to allow them to attend public school!  That would be my guess.

[TECSHARE]

I just don't exactly see other reasons explaining such a difference, and especially not the "USA is more diversified" bullshit of Tecshare which is not only insulting for the whole EU but also based on absolutely nothing as far as I can see.

I already explained why my statement was correct.

He who claims proves, and your proof is not very compelling, especially considering how large and diverse the US is compared to these other countries.

EU has twice the population of USA, 28 times the legislation complexity, numerous different cultures and etcnics groups, dense history, more or less 25 different languages, and you just come here and caim that it's "not so much diversified, especially compared to the US".

Unfortunately all of Europe is not a country. Europe is a collection of countries all with different policies, laws, cultures, ethnic groups, population densities, taxes, and national budgets. Europe is subdivided into many smaller nations. The USA is ONE SINGLE NATION composed of more than 300 million people, all of them from different places all over the globe.

In France there are native French who all share a common culture. In Spain there are native Spanish that all share a common culture. In Sweden there are Swedish who all share a common culture. This provides for more cooperation and understanding within local communities that the USA does not share because it consists of one single, very large nation upon which it is illogical to impose laws which might otherwise be effective for your otherwise tiny and more culturally homogeneous nations. Of course this whole side topic itself is a strawman argument, but this time I actually did make this claim, so I felt I should defend it regardless of your fallacious diversionary tactics.

[lolgato]

I think if you teach your kids about guns they will be much less likely to want to mess with them when they shouldn't. They are probably more attracted to guns if they just think they are taboo and mysterious.

If you take your kid out and teach them how to shoot and operate the gun they will no longer be as curious because they already know what they are about..

You can tell a kid all you want that guns are dangerous and not to be payed with but they don't really know. Take them out shooting and let them hear and see the BANG and the kick and then they KNOW they are dangerous and to be respected first hand.

Have them shoot a .22 while your at it. I am often surprised by how well and fast a kid can can learn to shoot.

[TheButterZone]

Note how there are NEVER any reports of any child firing a gun WITHOUT an "accidental" fatality, NEVER just an injury, NEVER zero bloodshed at all, even. This is because children find the few guns with feather trigger pulls that fire magic bullets that instantly kill with a single shot when pointed in a safe direction.

Of course there are not... How would you want the feds to report that?

If there is no accident and everything is fine, who is gonna warn the police? This is a stupid remark!
I mean you could apply that to everyone and everything...

"why doesn't any report about homicides talk about all the times when two people argue without shooting each other?"
Well just because I'm not going to report the police "hey! Nothing happen, we argued a lot but didn't shoot!"

That's random dude.

All discharges of a gun held by a child could be reported regardless of the bullet's trajectory, but propagandists want us to believe that it is not possible for children to handle a gun unattended without killing themselves or others "accidentally", so they can "justify" their laws that criminalize children effectively defending themselves in the absence of adults (and the adults for allowing their children to effectively defend themselves alone), plus adults from teaching gun safety & self-defense marksmanship, even if the children they teach never have unsupervised access to guns at any time.

[mOgliE]

I'm for gun control in the means that convicted criminals and children should not have access to it. Besides that people have the right to protect themselves and should be able to own guns.

And how do you ensure that children have no access to guns?

Sadly enough, around 60 children die each year just because they found a gun somewhere. I know it seems not a lot, and it sure isn't compared to the millions of inhabitants. But what does a life is worth? Especially a child life.

And 60 is the federal estimation, most other institutes have MUCH HIGHER data. But even the federal one is too much I think  

http://everytownresearch.org/reports/innocents_lost/

Thousands of children drown each year, why is it people such as yourself are not rallying to ban swimming pools? Would banning swimming pools not reduce the rate of accidental child deaths much more than banning guns? Why is this less of an issue to you? Perhaps your own bias against and ignorance of firearms?

http://www.cdc.gov/Features/dsSafeSwimmingPool/

Again you're just stupidly stalking me.
Why wouldn't you, maybe, read my post again and the post it refers to.

I was answering someone saying he wants gun control to be put in place for convicted citizens and children. He literally says "children shouldn't be able to access them". To this I answer that it's sadly not possible to ensure such a thing, and that at the moment most children already can't access guns legally but still dozens of them die anyway every year.
Your answer is totally out of the subjects. i never said that gun control should be put in place because 60 children die every year. I simply says that you can't prevent that AND keep gun freedom. After it's your concern to see if 60 children lifes is worth gun freedom.

[mOgliE]

I just don't exactly see other reasons explaining such a difference, and especially not the "USA is more diversified" bullshit of Tecshare which is not only insulting for the whole EU but also based on absolutely nothing as far as I can see.

I already explained why my statement was correct.

He who claims proves, and your proof is not very compelling, especially considering how large and diverse the US is compared to these other countries.

EU has twice the population of USA, 28 times the legislation complexity, numerous different cultures and etcnics groups, dense history, more or less 25 different languages, and you just come here and caim that it's "not so much diversified, especially compared to the US".

Unfortunately all of Europe is not a country. Europe is a collection of countries all with different policies, laws, cultures, ethnic groups, population densities, taxes, and national budgets. Europe is subdivided into many smaller nations. The USA is ONE SINGLE NATION composed of more than 300 million people, all of them from different places all over the globe.

In France there are native French who all share a common culture. In Spain there are native Spanish that all share a common culture. In Sweden there are Swedish who all share a common culture. This provides for more cooperation and understanding within local communities that the USA does not share because it consists of one single, very large nation upon which it is illogical to impose laws which might otherwise be effective for your otherwise tiny and more culturally homogeneous nations. Of course this whole side topic itself is a strawman argument, but this time I actually did make this claim, so I felt I should defend it regardless of your fallacious diversionary tactics.

Sorry in the midst of your long, boring, most of the time stupidly precise posts (but also insulting don't worry) I feel like I missed this part which is rather interesting.
So maybe we could say exactly the same thing from the USA? It's as easy to go from Spain to France than to go from California to Texas.

The EU is totally free in terms of work and movement. it would be interesting to look in details the concentration of races/cultures in each countries and compare it to the one of the USA but it's a rather important amount of work which I don't think we're ready to provide.

Hence your statement is absolutely not proven. You're just making the assumption that each European nation is less diversified than the USA itself. If that's not a logical fallacy... You're just moving the problem from a greater scale to a lesser one that's all.

[yugo23]

Problem with the idea of gun control in the USA is that it's too late...

Of course gun control is a rather good thing I think. It brings more security in  a society. But for that you need to be in a society where guns aren't already spread absolutely EVRYWHERE else control can't be applied!

[BADecker]

Problem with the idea of gun control in the USA is that it's too late...

Of course gun control is a rather good thing I think. It brings more security in  a society. But for that you need to be in a society where guns aren't already spread absolutely EVRYWHERE else control can't be applied!

The only gun control that works is removal of the knowledge worldwide about guns and the making of them.

The gun is the equalizer. A little, 90 pound woman can fight off a 250 pound, big brute of a man with a gun. Even if the brute has a gun, she still has a better chance against him than she would if neither had guns.

It would be wonderful if all people were honest and loving. But since they aren't, guns are way better than no guns. The only people who want no guns, are the people who want to control the world for their own benefit, and the idiots who believe their propaganda.

[Spendulus]

It's as easy to go from Spain to France than to go from California to Texas.

no, it is not....

[valta4065]

It's as easy to go from Spain to France than to go from California to Texas.

no, it is not....

Actually... It is. There is no border, no control, and a Spanish passport allows you to live and work in France/Germany/Italia and every other country in Shengen.
You wouldn't have the right to vote though. But that's the only main difference. You could just decide to go here and live there, your kids could got to French school and all...
You wouldn't have to ask permission to anyone. EU is really closed to Federal State country but without any government

But it doesn't mean it'll stay this way. When you see the result of the first waves of migrants, I got the idea the borders won't stay oppen for long!
A country gotta protect itself. Especially if the population isn't armed!

[af_newbie]

Guns are made for one purpose, and that purpose is to kill.
I believe that guns are not weapons, they are tools. How they are used is up to the person holding it.
Guns are especially dangerous in the hands of people who don't know how to use them (i.e., kids and teenagers) as well as those who are mentally ill and/or have a temper problem.
Gun control will not stop violence because a violent person doesn’t need a gun to be violent.
After the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, support for gun control increased dramatically.

Generally in America, the support for gun control has outweighed the support for gun rights.
Are gun control laws constitutional?
What would be your ideal set of laws regarding firearms?

Background checks, medical history, maybe interviews with psychologists/psychiatrists...

BTW, people who think their Glock or Mossberg will save them from violent home invasions have no imagination.

Get one small dog as a watchdog and a German Shepherd to keep intruders busy.  B&E kids will not enter your house if they hear big dog barking, even if they are armed.  They will go down the street to find an easier target.

Sure if you still want to buy a piece for "protection", np.

[TheButterZone]

BTW, people who think their Glock or Mossberg will save them from violent home invasions have no imagination.

Get one small dog as a watchdog and a German Shepherd to keep intruders busy.  B&E kids will not enter your house if they hear big dog barking, even if they are armed.  They will go down the street to find an easier target.

"No imagination" LOL. You apparently won't even "imagine" admitting there are countless instances of barking dogs NOT being a deterrent, let alone "keeping intruders busy" for longer than the few seconds it takes to feed them meat and/or corral them off. Barking rarely correlates with escalation to defensive/territorial biting, and anybody who hasn't lived in a dog-free bubble knows that.

Hell, I would even say houses with barking dogs are the safest places to target, if known to be 24/7/365 barkers; nothing will seem out of the ordinary when they bark at actual invaders instead of, for example, just leaves falling off trees (yes, I've lived next to a dog like that).

For further reading, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Boy_Who_Cried_Wolf , or The Wolf Who Cried Boy

[af_newbie]

BTW, people who think their Glock or Mossberg will save them from violent home invasions have no imagination.

Get one small dog as a watchdog and a German Shepherd to keep intruders busy.  B&E kids will not enter your house if they hear big dog barking, even if they are armed.  They will go down the street to find an easier target.

"No imagination" LOL. You apparently won't even "imagine" admitting there are countless instances of barking dogs NOT being a deterrent, let alone "keeping intruders busy" for longer than the few seconds it takes to feed them meat and/or corral them off. Barking rarely correlates with escalation to defensive/territorial biting, and anybody who hasn't lived in a dog-free bubble knows that.

Hell, I would even say houses with barking dogs are the safest places to target, if known to be 24/7/365 barkers; nothing will seem out of the ordinary when they bark at actual invaders instead of, for example, just leaves falling off trees (yes, I've lived next to a dog like that).

For further reading, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Boy_Who_Cried_Wolf , or The Wolf Who Cried Boy

Get the right dog, train it.  My dog detects strangers within 20-30 ft of my house.  Only barks when there is danger (in his mind).  You would not want to challenge him even if you were packing.  He would finish any intruder in matter of seconds.  Before you could squeeze that trigger he would be tearing your aorta apart. I've seen him in action once with porcupine, it was less than a second affair. I was standing 10-15 ft away looking at it, but could not understand what happened.  Before I realized what happened, the porcupine was lying next to my leg dead.  I remember a big jump, few moves left/right and boom, game over.

Of course there are dogs that bark for 'no reason'.  They are not stupid dogs, their owners don't know how to read them, clueless how to interact with dogs, so that poor dog tries over and over to talk to their owners, but nobody is home :-). 

Of course, having that Glock close by 'just in case' is a good idea.

[TheButterZone]

BTW, people who think their Glock or Mossberg will save them from violent home invasions have no imagination.

Get one small dog as a watchdog and a German Shepherd to keep intruders busy.  B&E kids will not enter your house if they hear big dog barking, even if they are armed.  They will go down the street to find an easier target.

"No imagination" LOL. You apparently won't even "imagine" admitting there are countless instances of barking dogs NOT being a deterrent, let alone "keeping intruders busy" for longer than the few seconds it takes to feed them meat and/or corral them off. Barking rarely correlates with escalation to defensive/territorial biting, and anybody who hasn't lived in a dog-free bubble knows that.

Hell, I would even say houses with barking dogs are the safest places to target, if known to be 24/7/365 barkers; nothing will seem out of the ordinary when they bark at actual invaders instead of, for example, just leaves falling off trees (yes, I've lived next to a dog like that).

For further reading, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Boy_Who_Cried_Wolf , or The Wolf Who Cried Boy

Get the right dog, train it.  My dog detects strangers within 20-30 ft of my house.  Only barks when there is danger (in his mind).  You would not want to challenge him even if you were packing.  He would finish any intruder in matter of seconds.  Before you could squeeze that trigger he would be tearing your aorta apart. I've seen him in action once with porcupine, it was less than a second affair. I was standing 10-15 ft away looking at it, but could not understand what happened.  Before I realized what happened, the porcupine was lying next to my leg dead.  I remember a big jump, few moves left/right and boom, game over.

If your dog is as dangerous to apples as he is to oranges, I'm afraid your last post on this subject will be saying you're going to prison, after it killed an innocent, and your admission to training an autonomous lethal weapon was Exhibit A.

I hope we'll just be able to laugh at this someday, and not lament the loss of another bitcoiner because background checks were false positived, medical history was abused to disqualify for having sneezed or another irrelevant malady, and/or interviews with psychologists/psychiatrists were politically abused in a repeat of history.

What the fuck did you just fucking say about me, you little bitch? I’ll have you know I graduated top of my class in the Navy Seals, and I’ve been involved in numerous secret raids on Al-Quaeda, and I have over 300 confirmed kills. I am trained in gorilla warfare and I’m the top sniper in the entire US armed forces. You are nothing to me but just another target. I will wipe you the fuck out with precision the likes of which has never been seen before on this Earth, mark my fucking words. You think you can get away with saying that shit to me over the Internet? Think again, fucker. As we speak I am contacting my secret network of spies across the USA and your IP is being traced right now so you better prepare for the storm, maggot. The storm that wipes out the pathetic little thing you call your life. You’re fucking dead, kid. I can be anywhere, anytime, and I can kill you in over seven hundred ways, and that’s just with my bare hands. Not only am I extensively trained in unarmed combat, but I have access to the entire arsenal of the United States Marine Corps and I will use it to its full extent to wipe your miserable ass off the face of the continent, you little shit. If only you could have known what unholy retribution your little “clever” comment was about to bring down upon you, maybe you would have held your fucking tongue. But you couldn’t, you didn’t, and now you’re paying the price, you goddamn idiot. I will shit fury all over you and you will drown in it. You’re fucking dead, kiddo.

[mOgliE]

It's as easy to go from Spain to France than to go from California to Texas.

no, it is not....

It is. Roads are open, no control, no border. You get the same rights, the same possibilities. You can open a bank account, buy a house, work...

Just the civic duties and rights which are not the same. You wouldn't have the right to take an election for example, and some works are forbiden to stranger too, like being a judge or working at the government.

But it's more or less all the same.

[yugo23]

It's as easy to go from Spain to France than to go from California to Texas.

no, it is not....

It is. Roads are open, no control, no border. You get the same rights, the same possibilities. You can open a bank account, buy a house, work...

Just the civic duties and rights which are not the same. You wouldn't have the right to take an election for example, and some works are forbiden to stranger too, like being a judge or working at the government.

But it's more or less all the same.

Could it have a link with the problems Europe is facing concerning migrants that can't be controled?

You should enforce your national borders, then maybe think about giving lessons to the USA.

[af_newbie]

BTW, people who think their Glock or Mossberg will save them from violent home invasions have no imagination.

Get one small dog as a watchdog and a German Shepherd to keep intruders busy.  B&E kids will not enter your house if they hear big dog barking, even if they are armed.  They will go down the street to find an easier target.

"No imagination" LOL. You apparently won't even "imagine" admitting there are countless instances of barking dogs NOT being a deterrent, let alone "keeping intruders busy" for longer than the few seconds it takes to feed them meat and/or corral them off. Barking rarely correlates with escalation to defensive/territorial biting, and anybody who hasn't lived in a dog-free bubble knows that.

Hell, I would even say houses with barking dogs are the safest places to target, if known to be 24/7/365 barkers; nothing will seem out of the ordinary when they bark at actual invaders instead of, for example, just leaves falling off trees (yes, I've lived next to a dog like that).

For further reading, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Boy_Who_Cried_Wolf , or The Wolf Who Cried Boy

Get the right dog, train it.  My dog detects strangers within 20-30 ft of my house.  Only barks when there is danger (in his mind).  You would not want to challenge him even if you were packing.  He would finish any intruder in matter of seconds.  Before you could squeeze that trigger he would be tearing your aorta apart. I've seen him in action once with porcupine, it was less than a second affair. I was standing 10-15 ft away looking at it, but could not understand what happened.  Before I realized what happened, the porcupine was lying next to my leg dead.  I remember a big jump, few moves left/right and boom, game over.

If your dog is as dangerous to apples as he is to oranges, I'm afraid your last post on this subject will be saying you're going to prison, after it killed an innocent, and your admission to training an autonomous lethal weapon was Exhibit A.

I hope we'll just be able to laugh at this someday, and not lament the loss of another bitcoiner because background checks were false positived, medical history was abused to disqualify for having sneezed or another irrelevant malady, and/or interviews with psychologists/psychiatrists were politically abused in a repeat of history.

My dog did not need training.  He is a good watchdog and will attack anyone who attacks me.
Autonomous lethal weapon?  What are you talking about?  I guess you hate dogs.

A simple fact is that it is always better to go into a gun fight with a gun in your hand.  So if you preach banning of guns you are preaching killing of innocent people who cannot defend themselves.  Banning gun laws only apply to people who obey the laws.  Criminals don't obey them.
You still should control who is allowed (by law) to own a gun but you cannot control who gets the gun illegally.

My advise was to get a good watchdog dog and a dog for personal protection (like German Shepherd).  What is wrong with that?  

[mrflibblehat]

BTW, people who think their Glock or Mossberg will save them from violent home invasions have no imagination.

Get one small dog as a watchdog and a German Shepherd to keep intruders busy.  B&E kids will not enter your house if they hear big dog barking, even if they are armed.  They will go down the street to find an easier target.

"No imagination" LOL. You apparently won't even "imagine" admitting there are countless instances of barking dogs NOT being a deterrent, let alone "keeping intruders busy" for longer than the few seconds it takes to feed them meat and/or corral them off. Barking rarely correlates with escalation to defensive/territorial biting, and anybody who hasn't lived in a dog-free bubble knows that.

Hell, I would even say houses with barking dogs are the safest places to target, if known to be 24/7/365 barkers; nothing will seem out of the ordinary when they bark at actual invaders instead of, for example, just leaves falling off trees (yes, I've lived next to a dog like that).

For further reading, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Boy_Who_Cried_Wolf , or The Wolf Who Cried Boy

Get the right dog, train it.  My dog detects strangers within 20-30 ft of my house.  Only barks when there is danger (in his mind).  You would not want to challenge him even if you were packing.  He would finish any intruder in matter of seconds.  Before you could squeeze that trigger he would be tearing your aorta apart. I've seen him in action once with porcupine, it was less than a second affair. I was standing 10-15 ft away looking at it, but could not understand what happened.  Before I realized what happened, the porcupine was lying next to my leg dead.  I remember a big jump, few moves left/right and boom, game over.

If your dog is as dangerous to apples as he is to oranges, I'm afraid your last post on this subject will be saying you're going to prison, after it killed an innocent, and your admission to training an autonomous lethal weapon was Exhibit A.

I hope we'll just be able to laugh at this someday, and not lament the loss of another bitcoiner because background checks were false positived, medical history was abused to disqualify for having sneezed or another irrelevant malady, and/or interviews with psychologists/psychiatrists were politically abused in a repeat of history.

My dog did not need training.  He is a good watchdog and will attack anyone who attacks me.
Autonomous lethal weapon?  What are you talking about?  I guess you hate dogs.

A simple fact is that it is always better to go into a gun fight with a gun in your hand.  So if you preach banning of guns you are preaching killing of innocent people who cannot defend themselves.  Banning gun laws only apply to people who obey the laws.  Criminals don't obey them.
You still should control who is allowed (by law) to own a gun but you cannot control who gets the gun illegally.

My advise was to get a good watchdog dog and a dog for personal protection (like German Shepherd).  What is wrong with that?  

Agreed. Criminals won't apply to this law. And I'm saying this even if I, personally, am against guns.
And a dog will always be a better alternative to a gun. No doubt about it.

[tvbcof]

...
Agreed. Criminals won't apply to this law. And I'm saying this even if I, personally, am against guns.
And a dog will always be a better alternative to a gun. No doubt about it.

From seemingly valid research that I've read, in an area like mine (rural, and most people owning defensive firearms) criminals studiously avoid occupied homes.  This matches my personal experience.  When I lived in the Bay Area and my rural property was not obviously occupied there were a lot of problems.  Now that I live here full time and the word is out, no problems at all.  The problems I did have were in at least one case from professional criminals who knew what they were doing and had scouted ahead of time.

Anyway, the study says that dogs are a near perfect proxy for a human occupied home in terms of how likely criminals are to attempt an assault.  I would suspect that to some extent a criminal would be worried that the presence of a dog would increase the likelihood of encountering a locked and loaded homeowner or a similarly configured neighbor.  So, although dogs are clearly quite effective, the effectiveness might be, in part, a symbiosis between dogs and guns.

[BADecker]

...
Agreed. Criminals won't apply to this law. And I'm saying this even if I, personally, am against guns.
And a dog will always be a better alternative to a gun. No doubt about it.

From seemingly valid research that I've read, in an area like mine (rural, and most people owning defensive firearms) criminals studiously avoid occupied homes.  This matches my personal experience.  When I lived in the Bay Area and my rural property was not obviously occupied there were a lot of problems.  Now that I live here full time and the word is out, no problems at all.  The problems I did have were in at least one case from professional criminals who knew what they were doing and had scouted ahead of time.

Anyway, the study says that dogs are a near perfect proxy for a human occupied home in terms of how likely criminals are to attempt an assault.  I would suspect that to some extent a criminal would be worried that the presence of a dog would increase the likelihood of encountering a locked and loaded homeowner or a similarly configured neighbor.  So, although dogs are clearly quite effective, the effectiveness might be, in part, a symbiosis between dogs and guns.

Right. And contrary to the movies, criminals are not particularly bright. Otherwise they would shoot the dogs. After all, it doesn't take much to make a silencer.

The dangerous criminals are the ones in government, trying to make us think that gun control is the way to go. After all, they already steal our money in the form of taxes. Why not make us complete slaves so that they can live off more of our labor... maybe all of it.

These criminals should move to Northwestern Africa where it is easy to buy slaves who are already trained into complete submission.