Cribs wrote:holy eton mess this thread has tilted me hard
You keep going on about Alaska and polar bears which I don't really get, if it really is that bad in Alaska then 1. why do people even live there,
Oh, I don't know, because it's their home? They have the right to live wherever they want and they have to right to defend themselves like any other American. Are you seriously suggesting that we forcefully take away their guns and forcefully move them to the continental US?
Cribs wrote:2. Aren't polar bears endangered and therefore protected
Polar Bears were an example, there are plenty of dangerous animals in Alaska and other similar places. Taking away the guns they use to defend themselves with is akin to murder. Ideally guns shouldn't be used to kill people, they should be used to restore order. But wild animals are a whole different game.
Cribs wrote:and 3. How does this even affect your point, people are asking for much stricter measures like they are here in the UK, I'm sure if there is reasonable danger in gooseberry fool Alaska then they will be allowed their guns but people in New Orleans for example are in a completely different scenario.
I agree, which is why different states have different gun laws - heavily republican States like Texas allow for open carry, which I personally disagree with, while liberal states like California have far stricter gun laws. The right to own a gun is universal though, for various reasons I've stated throughout this discussion.
Cribs wrote:Also I don't really buy your only other valid reason for owning guns which is for enjoyment. I can't believe that no-one has mentioned this but there are plenty of ranges in the U.K who own their own guns, there is literally no need to own your own gun in order to enjoy shooting one.
For a casual person who does it for recreation, maybe, but for somebody who partakes in it as a hobby, people should be able to own their gun, customise it and use it. I'd much rather have my own gun than have to use whatever crappy one gets provided to me at the range, and I've already given other reasons like collecting as justification for being able to keep them.
There's far more of a gun culture in America. Imagine some rural run-down village in Texas. Now imagine that somehow, for some reason, the government thinks it's a good idea to take away all the guns. Theoretically, all the guns have gone. But maybe there's one gun left, one guy who still has it. That guy pretty much has control of the town, he can go round and threaten people as much as he likes because the government took the rest of the guns away, and being rural Texas the police are pretty useless and there's not much that can be done about it. It's a fundamental imbalance - guns go from something that anyone can have to defend themselves with to something that only a select few criminals have, illegally. Those criminals then have an advantage over the unarmed population.
I'll also add that this was incredibly dumb too, why do you believe that the police would be "pretty useless" in this matter
That wasn't my best argument, but I meant was that the police can't always stop gun crime. If I live in a farmhouse far away from a Sheriff's office, I want to be able to protect my family. When you take away guns from the citizens, criminals won't be afraid to obtain them illegally, and that just causes a fundamental imbalance between the citizens and the criminals - the criminals having the higher ground, and the citizens have very little to defend themselves with. That is what the police in certain areas will struggle to deal with, both in places like where I mentioned and bad neighbourhoods in places like Detroit, where there are plenty of people not afraid to use illegal weapons. The citizens need something to defend themselves from these people, and the police can't do it alone.
Bleachyleachy wrote:Going to chime in on the guns for 'self-defence' argument
Authors name slips my mind, but they put it brilliantly once:
"Birth control can be achieved by wearing a condom or punching your balls until they're a bloody pulp. The difference is one is defensive, the other is offensive"
A tool designed specifically for terminating life is an offensive measure
A burglar alarm is a defensive measure
A sturdy door with a heavy duty lock is a defensive measure
A bright torch (enough to startle a midnight intruder if shone into the eyes) is a defensive measure
Or in the worst case scenario, putting your hands up when someone has a knife to your throat or a gun to your temple and deciding that your wallet is worth less than your life, you get the idea
I've seriously never bought the argument that guns for self-defence are legitimate, and while I can't prove it, I suspect a lot of Americans are dishonest when they say so too
Guns and shooting are fun. That is why I would want to own a gun. I'm sure I speak on the behalf of many Americans when I say this. But I would never try to justify ownership of firearms with some flimsy action hero belief that when my house is broken into I will turn into a hero capable of putting a bullet between a dude's brain
You would rather put your hands up and surrender than be able to defend yourself with a weapon? Yes, there are other defensive measures, but there are times when a gun is necessary to defend yourself. I know you haven't experienced it yourself, but people find themselves in situations where it's either be shot by a criminal, or shoot the criminal. It's a very difficult thing to do, but it's necessary. In fact, my sister's house was broken into a few days ago. She didn't have a weapon of self-defence. She couldn't do anything about it other than try to find him. If she had a gun, she now has the upper ground, and can find the criminal and restore order, ideally bringing him to justice in a responsible manner, but there are occasions where it is necessary to use a weapon to kill someone. I high recommend reading through this Reddit thread
, because in most of these cases legal guns save more lives than they kill.
How many times do I need to repeat that 736,000 Americans live in Alaska with gooseberry fool Polar Bears? Ha, good luck taking guns away from the Alaskans, 58% of people own a gun there.
No one is taking away guns!!! They're just making things safer for everyone! Why risk endangering peoples lives just so people can enjoy a hobby/ pretend they're John McClain?
I like to knit and crochet as my hobby, but you don't see me complaining that I can't take needles and hooks onto public transportation.
No, Obama isn't going too far, he's not taking away guns, but others in this thread are suggesting that we take away the guns that many people in places like that need to survive.
Aside from that, I've said before that self-defense is a better argument in the US than in the UK. I'm not talking about terrorism, I'm talking about the times where your house is being robbed, maybe in the middle of the night, and the only thing you can do to stop it is to scare them away. Not shoot them, but use your gun responsibly to make them get the gooseberry fool out of your house.
Charging at the burglar while naked is also effective.
Also while we're on the subject of midnight intruders.... Seriously, how often does this even happen?? Apart from films and TV shows....
Burglars prefer to target empty houses, much less chance of getting caught.
More often than you think, as I said before, there are numerous examples
of people having to make the difficult decision to kill a criminal for the greater good.
More guns does not mean that we'll turn into the US -- in America that's more of a societal problem and a problem with mental health than it is a problem caused by guns.
Um, actually... Our mental health and social care is also pretty bad in a lot of areas in this country. Plus various gangs. Yes, criminals tend to acquire guns illegally... Usually by stealing someone else's gun that they bought legally. Or from a black market seller. Either way, if you lessen the restrictions on buying guns legally, it's only going to make it that much easier to get hold of a gun illegally.
We don't have as many crazy Republican Christians though, as far as I'm aware. And with tighter restrictions, the civilian population is defenceless against criminals, relying only on the police, who more often than not arrive when it's too late. Instead of taking away the liberties of gun owners, we should by trying to take down the black market and prevent thefts. There's no perfect solution to gun crime, but I'd argue that the best path is the path that restores the liberties of the silent majority who support guns.