Assault weapon bans

[Rampion]

Nobody who doesn't covet a gun would consider carrying one around to not be an encumbrance. And we're not just talking about weight here. But it wouldn't surprise me that you, one who covets guns, wouldn't understand.

Is the source of the encumbrance the gun itself? Or the crime ridden area they live in where they may actually need a gun for self defense? I mean, really, I just don't get you. Are you honestly claiming that if we reduce the number of guns, crime will go down, and everyone will become more civil???

Well, with guns there is a sort of vicious circle going on in the US. As you said, its true that criminals DO have guns in Europe, and its not so difficult to buy one on the black market... But criminals (mostly drug dealers, "mafia" members, etc.) just do not carry guns around, they have them to kill other criminals or defend themselves from other criminals (or the police, if needed). In Europe, Spain, etc. you won't read about a random guy killed in his house (or on the street) because a robbery/assault, you will read about a drug dealer being executed by another drug dealer (just happened not so long ago near my house), russian gang members killing each other, etc... And still this happens just a few dozens times per year in countries with +50 million inhabitants, and nobody in my country feels unsafe or with the need to carry a gun.

Why? Well, as ALL citizens are unarmed, criminals are just less violent, especially with normal citizens. They do not fear for their life when they steal your call/break into your house (they know nobody will shoot at them... Not even the police!), so they really do not need to carry a gun, considering that committing a crime using a gun (even if you do not fire it) might get you tenfold the time of jail you would get if you commit the same crime unarmed. See, there is no need for criminals to use guns against unarmed citizens, from one side they are "safe" and there is no threat for their lifes, from the other side going around with a loaded gun is a huge crime in Europe which would get them A LOT of additional jail time, so its just plain stupid to carry guns.

So, there you have the vicious circle - you say criminals are violent, so you arm yourselves and prepare for the fight and criminals get more violent and prepare for the fight. Honestly, the fact you have people like Holliday, who just carries a gun by default, makes a society violent, because you have a lot of random citizens carrying deadly weapons and they are ready (and it seems even proud) to use them.

Last but not least, I honestly do not believe there are "bad" and "good" guys. The best people in the world do stupid things at times. The point is that the less violent is a society, the better for everybody - and the US is a very violent society. I acknowledge there are some areas where you NEED a gun, but that is sick and should be addressed ASAP.

[PrintMule]

Just a little perspective from someone who has seen both sides of this (and, just to be transparent here, yes I do own a gun.. as well as a crossbow and several swords and knives). I grew up in and around Los Angeles, California. As most of you probably know, gun control there is pretty strict by American standards. Even if you're transporting a gun legally, you can expect a lot of hassle from the police if you get pulled over. In spite of California's "may issue" concealed carry laws, it's virtually impossible for anyone who isn't a police officer, politician or celebrity to get a concealed carry license. Purchasing and owning a gun legally is hard, carrying or transporting it legally is even harder. Growing up in L.A. gun violence was an almost every day occurrence. It wasn't too uncommon to see a neighbour’s house sprayed with automatic weapons (typically an Uzi or an AK-47). The gang members had pretty easy access to these weapons, and even easier access to handguns and semi-auto rifles, while law abiding citizens had to jump through hoops to protect themselves and the police were unwilling and/or unable to help.

Now I live in a small rural desert town. Everybody here owns a gun, most people here carry since it's legal to open carry and a concealed carry license is pretty easy to get (self-defense is considered a legitimate reason for a license by the local Sheriff's department). Even with nearly everyone carrying guns, either openly or concealed, shootings are rare. In the 5 years I've lived here, two people have been shot, one was an accident and the other was a legitimate case of self-defense. There are far more stabbings than shootings. There are also legitimate reasons to own and carry a gun even in the absence of gun violence, there are wild animals here that can and will kill an unarmed person, I've personally fired my gun twice in self-defense against wild animals (a rattlesnake and a mountain lion).

I feel safer and more comfortable here than I ever did in L.A., I'd even go as far as to say that even if I didn't own a gun myself I'd still feel safer and more comfortable knowing that the criminals and the police weren't the only people carrying them.

While you posted a very good example, I must say that rural areas are generally more safe than urban ones. In rural areas of my country people leave their properties unlocked and unattended, while in the city you cannot even leave an empty baby stroller near some shop for 10 minutes.

[mdude77]

You seem to fail that a large majority of non gun owners don't want a gun, nor feel the need for a gun. It's only gun lovers who keep calling for more guns, which translates to more guns for criminals.

I'm not sure why you continue to repeat that fallacy.

M

[mdude77]

Nobody who doesn't covet a gun would consider carrying one around to not be an encumbrance. And we're not just talking about weight here. But it wouldn't surprise me that you, one who covets guns, wouldn't understand.

Wow, you have some really twisted logic.  Driving a car would be an encumbrance too.  One mistake, and people get injured!  Oh, and walking is an encumbrance too.  You can trip!

M

[mdude77]

I can sort of see how you might consider a gun an encumbrance.

Carrying a gun is a huge pain in my ass, not to mention a heavy responsibility. So far, as far as I know, it has been a pointless exercise. Hopefully that never changes.

That said, I will continue to carry a gun every day for the rest of my life.

There you go, mdude77. Doc Holliday has spoken, and he knows.

I'd carry one everywhere if I was allowed.  Instead I work for a corporation who thinks that a no gun policy makes us safer.  A whole floor in the office building could be killed by someone who ignores that policy before the police arrive.

Yes, it's a responsibility.  EVERYTHING is a responsibility.  Get over it.

M

[mdude77]

Last but not least, I honestly do not believe there are "bad" and "good" guys. The best people in the world do stupid things at times. The point is that the less violent is a society, the better for everybody - and the US is a very violent society. I acknowledge there are some areas where you NEED a gun, but that is sick and should be addressed ASAP.

I think that's the flaw in your logic.  There are good and bad guys.  You can't protect people from stupidity, and punishing everyone because of one is erroneous, because the outcome will be worse.

M

[mdude77]

Why? Well, as ALL citizens are unarmed, criminals are just less violent, especially with normal citizens. They do not fear for their life when they steal your call/break into your house (they know nobody will shoot at them... Not even the police!), so they really do not need to carry a gun, considering that committing a crime using a gun (even if you do not fire it) might get you tenfold the time of jail you would get if you commit the same crime unarmed. See, there is no need for criminals to use guns against unarmed citizens, from one side they are "safe" and there is no threat for their lifes, from the other side going around with a loaded gun is a huge crime in Europe which would get them A LOT of additional jail time, so its just plain stupid to carry guns.

That's more twisted logic.  It's okay for bad guys to break into your house because they know you aren't armed and can't defend yourself.  Them raping your wife and children in front of you when you, then killing them and you (with a knife) because you aren't allowed to defend yourself is much better than you be able to use a gun to protect your family.  Not!

So, there you have the vicious circle - you say criminals are violent, so you arm yourselves and prepare for the fight and criminals get more violent and prepare for the fight. Honestly, the fact you have people like Holliday, who just carries a gun by default, makes a society violent, because you have a lot of random citizens carrying deadly weapons and they are ready (and it seems even proud) to use them.

That's wrong.  Law abiding citizens exercising their God given right to defend themselves by carrying a gun is NOT the cause of crime.  It's unlawful individuals that lack morals (which stems from a lack of godliness).  The solution, as others have said, is to take care of the cause which is lack of morality.  Guns have nothing to do with it.

M

[Spendulus]

.....I honestly do not believe there are "bad" and "good" guys. The best people in the world do stupid things at times. The point is that the less violent is a society, the better for everybody - and the US is a very violent society. I acknowledge there are some areas where you NEED a gun, but that is sick and should be addressed ASAP.

SO....

you haven't had any little encounters with the 'bad guys', have you?

LOL...

[mdude77]

Law abiding citizens exercising their God given right to defend themselves by carrying a gun is NOT the cause of crime.  It's unlawful individuals that lack morals (which stems from a lack of godliness).  The solution, as others have said, is to take care of the cause which is lack of morality.  Guns have nothing to do with it.

The law, which is as corrupt as those who create it, caters to a select few at the expense of many.

God did not give me my rights nor my morals.

You are born free.  What you choose to do from there, and whether the government(s) that exists in your jurisdiction honors that or not is a different story.  Where do you think morality comes from if not godliness?

M

[mdude77]

.....I honestly do not believe there are "bad" and "good" guys. The best people in the world do stupid things at times. The point is that the less violent is a society, the better for everybody - and the US is a very violent society. I acknowledge there are some areas where you NEED a gun, but that is sick and should be addressed ASAP.

SO....

you haven't had any little encounters with the 'bad guys', have you?

LOL...

What's ironic is right above that he said this:

Why? Well, as ALL citizens are unarmed, criminals are just less violent, especially with normal citizens. They do not fear for their life when they steal your call/break into your house

If criminals are not "bad guys", then therefore these said criminals are okay in his book.

M

[FirstAscent]

Just a little perspective from someone who has seen both sides of this (and, just to be transparent here, yes I do own a gun.. as well as a crossbow and several swords and knives). I grew up in and around Los Angeles, California. As most of you probably know, gun control there is pretty strict by American standards. Even if you're transporting a gun legally, you can expect a lot of hassle from the police if you get pulled over. In spite of California's "may issue" concealed carry laws, it's virtually impossible for anyone who isn't a police officer, politician or celebrity to get a concealed carry license. Purchasing and owning a gun legally is hard, carrying or transporting it legally is even harder. Growing up in L.A. gun violence was an almost every day occurrence. It wasn't too uncommon to see a neighbour’s house sprayed with automatic weapons (typically an Uzi or an AK-47). The gang members had pretty easy access to these weapons, and even easier access to handguns and semi-auto rifles, while law abiding citizens had to jump through hoops to protect themselves and the police were unwilling and/or unable to help.

Now I live in a small rural desert town. Everybody here owns a gun, most people here carry since it's legal to open carry and a concealed carry license is pretty easy to get (self-defense is considered a legitimate reason for a license by the local Sheriff's department). Even with nearly everyone carrying guns, either openly or concealed, shootings are rare. In the 5 years I've lived here, two people have been shot, one was an accident and the other was a legitimate case of self-defense. There are far more stabbings than shootings. There are also legitimate reasons to own and carry a gun even in the absence of gun violence, there are wild animals here that can and will kill an unarmed person, I've personally fired my gun twice in self-defense against wild animals (a rattlesnake and a mountain lion).

I feel safer and more comfortable here than I ever did in L.A., I'd even go as far as to say that even if I didn't own a gun myself I'd still feel safer and more comfortable knowing that the criminals and the police weren't the only people carrying them.

While you posted a very good example, I must say that rural areas are generally more safe than urban ones. In rural areas of my country people leave their properties unlocked and unattended, while in the city you cannot even leave an empty baby stroller near some shop for 10 minutes.

I wouldn't consider his example good by a long shot. When evaluating his post, and the many things he said, please use some knowledge and common sense.

[Spendulus]

.....I honestly do not believe there are "bad" and "good" guys. The best people in the world do stupid things at times. The point is that the less violent is a society, the better for everybody - and the US is a very violent society. I acknowledge there are some areas where you NEED a gun, but that is sick and should be addressed ASAP.

SO....

you haven't had any little encounters with the 'bad guys', have you?

LOL...

What's ironic is right above that he said this:

Why? Well, as ALL citizens are unarmed, criminals are just less violent, especially with normal citizens. They do not fear for their life when they steal your call/break into your house

If criminals are not "bad guys", then therefore these said criminals are okay in his book.

M

LOL yeah......no bad guys....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SWvWyYz9ttk

You know, as an example take the poor victims in this Kubrick movie.

They might have lived in a place where guns were not allowed.

Or they might have had some internal morality that told them guns were bad.

I really, really don't care.

Ain't happening to me or those in my care.

Meanwhile poseurs lecture ponderously about how WE SHOULD BEHAVE and how GUNS ARE BAD and how WE SHOULD GET WITH THE PROGRAM.

So...does it pay well, to project such on the Internet?  Just curious....

[Spendulus]

....Everybody here owns a gun, most people here carry since it's legal to open carry and a concealed carry license is pretty easy to get (self-defense is considered a legitimate reason for a license by the local Sheriff's department). Even with nearly everyone carrying guns, either openly or concealed, shootings are rare. In the 5 years I've lived here, two people have been shot, one was an accident and the other was a legitimate case of self-defense. There are far more stabbings than shootings. There are also legitimate reasons to own and carry a gun even in the absence of gun violence, there are wild animals here that can and will kill an unarmed person, I've personally fired my gun twice in self-defense against wild animals (a rattlesnake and a mountain lion).....

I've had a few animal encounters too.  One was with a fucking shovel against a rabid thing that was in attack mode.  That consisted of my bashing the head in.  And if I'd even been able to get away, it would likely have gone after someone else, maybe a kid.

It was dangerous, and totally sickening and gross.

That caused me to go get a 22 rifle and subsonic hollow point for it.  Yeah, there was a background check but no real difficult hoops to jump through.

Some of these people posting who know it all, they just need to shut up sometimes.

[TheButterZone]

Maybe they just want to be martyrs. If they simply didn't say anything about their Darwin award-winningly moronic choice to be defenseless, then they'd just be another statistic of a defenseless person (and anyone in their negligent care) victimized with impunity by a criminal.

The victim disarmament movement needs martyrs/martyr creators, like Gabby Giffords, who held her event in a "federal gun free school zone*" without any law enforcement present, so, utterly predictably, only a criminal had a gun to use to help her further circularly justify disarming only innocents with "gun control" via a horrific death toll of disarmed innocents. Couldn't appear any more like a bloody conspiracy to eliminate civil rights if anyone tried.

*of which the only exemption for civilians being able to carry a gun inside is to have an unconstitutional carry permit, which, under Arizona's Constitutional Carry law, is not required everywhere else.

[mdude77]

Where do you think morality comes from if not godliness?

The ability to reason.

Religion, in my opinion, typically dulls that ability as opposed to enhancing it.

Mainstream religion is awful.  I'll agree with that.  Don't mix up godliness with religion, they are typically as different as water and oil.

M

[Rampion]

Last but not least, I honestly do not believe there are "bad" and "good" guys. The best people in the world do stupid things at times. The point is that the less violent is a society, the better for everybody - and the US is a very violent society. I acknowledge there are some areas where you NEED a gun, but that is sick and should be addressed ASAP.

I think that's the flaw in your logic.  There are good and bad guys.  You can't protect people from stupidity, and punishing everyone because of one is erroneous, because the outcome will be worse.

M

Really? So what are the US soldiers on the "collateral murder" video leaked by B. Manning? They killed +10 unarmed civilians and seriously injured two kids (which are probably dead now), and they really enjoyed the view of the corpses of the people they just killed... "look at that... Nice" they said to each other while admiring the torn apart bodies on their chopper screen.

Sad thing is they are no different from all other soldiers deployed in war zones, those guys are probably heroes in their neighborhoods, and are the best example of proud American soldier who went to defend their country for their friends.

On a side note, its pitiful to see how obsessed are some of you about random people raping your wife and kids. Is the world so fucked up where you live that you really fear that?

I guess the US is founded on fear. You fear some evil bearded men that will come and try to take your beloved freedom away, so your government can just strip you of the most basic rights (what an irony), while the US military can justify horrendous crimes commited all over the world. You fear your neighbour, so you end up violence as some necessary evil you need to master to protect, again, your freedom.

[mdude77]

Last but not least, I honestly do not believe there are "bad" and "good" guys. The best people in the world do stupid things at times. The point is that the less violent is a society, the better for everybody - and the US is a very violent society. I acknowledge there are some areas where you NEED a gun, but that is sick and should be addressed ASAP.

I think that's the flaw in your logic.  There are good and bad guys.  You can't protect people from stupidity, and punishing everyone because of one is erroneous, because the outcome will be worse.

M

Really? So what are the US soldiers on the "collateral murder" video leaked by B. Manning? They killed +10 unarmed civilians and seriously injured two kids (which are probably dead now), and they really enjoyed the view of the corpses of the people they just killed... "look at that... Nice" they said to each other while admiring the torn apart bodies on their chopper screen.

Sad thing is they are no different from all other soldiers deployed in war zones, those guys are probably heroes in their neighborhoods, and are the best example of proud American soldier who went to defend their country for their friends.

On a side note, its pitiful to see how obsessed are some of you about random people raping your wife and kids. Is the world so fucked up where you live that you really fear that?

I guess the US is founded on fear. You fear some evil bearded men that will come and try to take your beloved freedom away, so your government can just strip you of the most basic rights (what an irony), while the US military can justify horrendous crimes commited all over the world. You fear your neighbor, so you end up violence as some necessary evil you need to master to protect, again, your freedom.

Just for reference, the average US citizen (note: not a "subject" in most states) has no control over the Federal government, or the goons/soldiers it employs.  Regardless, I fail to see how goons involved in war have anything to do with my right to defend myself?  Also note I certainly did not, and do not, condone the actions of those in war.

I gave one of the worse case scenarios.  If a thug, government employed or not, came to your house and decided to do bodily harm to you and yours, would you be able to stop him without a gun?  How about two thugs?  Five?  I'd put my chances at 50/50 if it was one on one.  It decreases significantly when the thug count increases.  However, add a gun to that equation, and suddenly I have something called a force equalizer.  It's not 100% in my favor, but it significantly makes it MORE likely that I and mine will survive the situation.

There are monsters in the world, two legged and four.  Your referenced YouTube video shows that.  If you choose to believe otherwise, and live believing that you are perfectly safe and that police are only "minutes away", be my guest.  I hope you never regret your decision.  I however, will not relinquish that right.  It is my job to protect my family and children, because I'm the most likely one able to do so.  Will I ever need to do so?  I hope to God in heaven not.  But if the day comes that I do, I have the ability to do so.  

There are millions like me.  And we will stand up when misinformed individuals such as yourself try to remove that right.

M

EDIT: I'd like to add that, as others have stated here multiple times, the chances of me needing to employ lethal force decreases significantly when said goons suspect that I am my family are armed, and know how to use it.

[Rampion]

Last but not least, I honestly do not believe there are "bad" and "good" guys. The best people in the world do stupid things at times. The point is that the less violent is a society, the better for everybody - and the US is a very violent society. I acknowledge there are some areas where you NEED a gun, but that is sick and should be addressed ASAP.

I think that's the flaw in your logic.  There are good and bad guys.  You can't protect people from stupidity, and punishing everyone because of one is erroneous, because the outcome will be worse.

M

Really? So what are the US soldiers on the "collateral murder" video leaked by B. Manning? They killed +10 unarmed civilians and seriously injured two kids (which are probably dead now), and they really enjoyed the view of the corpses of the people they just killed... "look at that... Nice" they said to each other while admiring the torn apart bodies on their chopper screen.

Sad thing is they are no different from all other soldiers deployed in war zones, those guys are probably heroes in their neighborhoods, and are the best example of proud American soldier who went to defend their country for their friends.

On a side note, its pitiful to see how obsessed are some of you about random people raping your wife and kids. Is the world so fucked up where you live that you really fear that?

I guess the US is founded on fear. You fear some evil bearded men that will come and try to take your beloved freedom away, so your government can just strip you of the most basic rights (what an irony), while the US military can justify horrendous crimes commited all over the world. You fear your neighbor, so you end up violence as some necessary evil you need to master to protect, again, your freedom.

Just for reference, the average US citizen (note: not a "subject" in most states) has no control over the Federal government, or the goons/soldiers it employs.  Regardless, I fail to see how goons involved in war have anything to do with my right to defend myself?  Also note I certainly did not, and do not, condone the actions of those in war.

I gave one of the worse case scenarios.  If a thug, government employed or not, came to your house and decided to do bodily harm to you and yours, would you be able to stop him without a gun?  How about two thugs?  Five?  I'd put my chances at 50/50 if it was one on one.  It decreases significantly when the thug count increases.  However, add a gun to that equation, and suddenly I have something called a force equalizer.  It's not 100% in my favor, but it significantly makes it MORE likely that I and mine will survive the situation.

There are monsters in the world, two legged and four.  Your referenced YouTube video shows that.  If you choose to believe otherwise, and live believing that you are perfectly safe and that police are only "minutes away", be my guest.  I hope you never regret your decision.  I however, will not relinquish that right.  It is my job to protect my family and children, because I'm the most likely one able to do so.  Will I ever need to do so?  I hope to God in heaven not.  But if the day comes that I do, I have the ability to do so.  

There are millions like me.  And we will stand up when misinformed individuals such as yourself try to remove that right.

M

EDIT: I'd like to add that, as others have stated here multiple times, the chances of me needing to employ lethal force decreases significantly when said goons suspect that I am my family are armed, and know how to use it.

So, the military (as the ones in my example) are generally "bad people", regardless of their country of origin, right?

[Spendulus]

.....
There are monsters in the world, two legged and four.  Your referenced YouTube video shows that.  If you choose to believe otherwise, and live believing that you are perfectly safe and that police are only "minutes away", be my guest.  I hope you never regret your decision.  I however, will not relinquish that right.  It is my job to protect my family and children, because I'm the most likely one able to do so.  Will I ever need to do so?  I hope to God in heaven not.  But if the day comes that I do, I have the ability to do so.  

There are millions like me.  And we will stand up when misinformed individuals such as yourself try to remove that right.

M

EDIT: I'd like to add that, as others have stated here multiple times, the chances of me needing to employ lethal force decreases significantly when said goons suspect that I am my family are armed, and know how to use it.

And that point needs a bit more said.  The very plot of Clockwork Orange could not exist if there was a possibility - only a possibility - that the Drogues would encounter armed citizens.  Firearms make the little old granny, or a 100 pound woman, the superior to a gang of punks.  That's a good situation, not a bad one.

So Clockwork was cast in a Gun Control Country.  Not in the USA.

[mdude77]

So, the military (as the ones in my example) are generally "bad people", regardless of their country of origin, right?

I'm not sure where you are going with this.  I'm sure the overlords who run the military industrial complex seek out the lowest meanest foulest individuals for their employment.  I'm sure there are also those there who bought the government propaganda about whatever war being good and necessary, and think they are "serving their country" and making their country a better place.  To say the military as a whole is bad is an overstatement.  I would argue that those running it and controlling it are more malicious than their employees are.

An older fellow at the gas station told me once that when he joined the army, the government gave him a gun and told him to go out and kill the enemy.  Now that he's no longer employed by them, they're trying to make sure he can't own a gun to defend his own body, family, and property.

What's your point? 

M