P.S.A (-ish) Crime is not never going to happen to you

[drakesdoom]

Thank you lajoswinkler

Hey Drakesdoom, why not give everyone a gun? The world would sure be a better place then, am i right?

It would be a better world then where only criminals have guns.

[Canopus]

It would be a better world then where only criminals have guns.

.....

Why not make it harder for Everyone obtain Guns? Have you ever thought about that?

[Nuke]

the gun is the great equalizer, so i think it should be mandatory for everyone to own one.

but if you dont like that i have a chainsaw. perhaps i can use that instead.

[drakesdoom]

.....

Why not make it harder for Everyone obtain Guns? Have you ever thought about that?

What do you think they are made in some super secret government black base? You can make full auto ak 47 rifles with less than $2,000 in tools from stock metal. It and many other gun designs require only basic metal working skills to make. That is before we consider zip guns. You can make a double barrel 12ga shotgun for about $15 in parts from a hardware store. So anyone that really wanted a gun could get one. Of course they really wouldn't need too they could just stab people, if you know no one has a gun a knife works just as well.

[lajoswinkler]

You are wrong on so many levels. If someone is threatening your life you are legally allowed to defend yourself in any way you see fit. Guess what armed robbery falls under that clearly, they are threatening your life in exchange for your belongings. You are also being horrendously selfish, do you think that just because you get away unscathed everyone they target in the future will?

As for saying people would be safer unarmed you are out of your mind. Guess what happens when someone bigger or stronger or a group comes along? The only thing that keeps people on a level field is being armed. All throughout the USA the most dangerous places are those where citizens are denied arms and are poor. Where open carry is legal and normal there is less violent crime because it is expected that any type of crime will be met with violent resistance. That makes it completely unworthwhile in the eyes of criminals

No, I'm not, not by the laws of the countries in European Union. You do not have a legal right to kill someone if you think that's "fit". If you're held at a gunpoint, chances are you have no choice. But sometimes you can disable him, and when you do, when you ensure he can't harm you, your duty is to offer him first aid. If you leave him unarmed, helpless, to bleed to death, you're responsible for his death.

You absolutely have no need to target his head or heart. Of course, these are all hypothetical situations and it's very difficult to be sane enough when **** hits the fan, but saying you have a right to kill a burglar no matter what, if you see it "fit", that's plain and simple advocation of a murder. You'd go to jail for a long time and you'd deserve it.

You're also advocating for a murder for crimes that someone still hasn't commited. Killing someone because you think he'll commit crimes in the future is, surprise surprise, a crime. I think it's first degree murder.

I'm not advocating for a weaponless society. If someone wants to own a gun, that's ok, but first let's see his criminal record, and let's make a psychiatric evaluation. That's how it's done. It lowers the chance that a weapon will fall into the hands of criminals, insane and unstable people. Some countries go even further, where you have to keep record of ammunition, but that's maybe too much for most situations.

We do not live in a Mad Max world of anarchy, at least I'm not.

[Canopus]

What do you think they are made in some super secret government black base? You can make full auto ak 47 rifles with less than $2,000 in tools from stock metal. It and many other gun designs require only basic metal working skills to make. That is before we consider zip guns. You can make a double barrel 12ga shotgun for about $15 in parts from a hardware store. So anyone that really wanted a gun could get one. Of course they really wouldn't need too they could just stab people, if you know no one has a gun a knife works just as well.

There is a major difference between a knife and a gun though. And yes i gues you could still build your own weapons but that requires skill not many people have. And Drakesdoom, if you say this all just because you want to keep your beloved fully automatic weapon for "defense" purposes. Let me say you this: In my country you can't just buy them, but you can get yourself a Hunters licence which is similar to a driving license. It allows you to own weapons and even shoot wildlife in some areas but at the same time it is registered who you are. So there is no reason to let everyone just have guns.

[drakesdoom]

Hey what can I say if you want to believe what ever the government tells you go ahead, that has always gone well before. Just remember what police "protection" looks like.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OoQVbaEePu8

[Sid]

.....

Why not make it harder for Everyone obtain Guns? Have you ever thought about that?

It's not too difficult to make guns with fairly basic machine tools. I should know, I am a gunsmith and I make guns myself

You can't un-invent guns any more than you can turn charcoal back into unburnt wood.

[Canopus]

It's not too difficult to make guns with fairly basic machine tools. I should know, I am a gunsmith and I make guns myself

You can't un-invent guns any more than you can turn charcoal back into unburnt wood.

Ofcourse not but its still not easy to build guns. I'm also not against guns but against the idea that everyone having access to them would be a good idea.

And also Drakesdoom, i think that video there s actually not really supportive of your argument. That attacker is probably islamic, a religion that allows you to kill people if they think different. Similar to what you think is right.

[drakesdoom]

Ofcourse not but its still not easy to build guns. I'm also not against guns but against the idea that everyone having access to them would be a good idea.

And also Drakesdoom, i think that video there s actually not really supportive of your argument. That attacker is probably islamic, a religion that allows you to kill people if they think different. Similar to what you think is right.

I don't think that it is ok to kill people. I just realize that denying yourself weapons only makes you an easy target for those that hold no such qualms. You say the police can protect you when they are not there, and when they do get there they use guns. What will you do to save your life or the lives of those you love when cops are not there, what will you do when it is a cop placing you and them in danger, what will you do when it is the army? Keep hiding in your communist dreams, you have failed to learn from history even with it literally at your door.

[Moach]

so welcome everyone to one of the most controversial debates in modern human history.

i don't think anyone really does have a good answer for the whole humans-and-guns relationship thing... how could they? different places have so many different problems...

and statistics are just numbers that can be tortured until they confess to whatever you need them... likelihood of being injured having a gun does not seem to account for a plausible chance that some of those individuals could already be in a situation that poses them a threat, and then they get a gun... (whereas not having it would be even more dangerous for them)

and people really do need firearms - just go in the woods and ask a bear.

people don't need guns for use against other people, but bad people will eventually get guns themselves - and you cannot not have guns, so what does that leave you?

welcome to earth! never mind the bullet holes

curious fact - every generations since as far as records go have been saying the world is more dangerous and violent every day... in reality, the numbers show the exact opposite as they change over time

maybe someday someone will know what to do with all those guns... for now, just try and keep safe.

and as much as possible, don't let this kinda thing affect your life too much - remember, most things are only as safe as they're not free...

and I'll be keeping an eye on this thread for any... I don't know... nothing wrong with it yet - but controversial topics seem to make internet trolls hungry... haven't seen many of those around here for a while either - but I remember someone say they can smell fear...

be safe

[Canopus]

Sorry Moach but nobody here said that guns are bad and shouldn't exist. I'm very aware that they are still important tools in this society.

[Moach]

I didn't say anyone did - but there are a lot who think that way out there... I was just making my own point, you know

I was born in a very messy country where guns are almost completely banned for regular people, and so the only way to get one is to go through an unbelievable amount of hoops of very unreasonable regulations, or to do what all the crooks usually do - go illegal... I got the hell outta there

so I've seen the effects of overbearing control regulations on this matter - it makes things far, far worse - for everyone. it's perhaps just as bad as giving guns for everybody without asking much of anything from them...

there's gotta be a point in between that works, i think

it seems: the usefulness of a weapon is inversely proportional to that of a brain

on the other hand - my career has much to gain from knowing my way around firearms, see... I'm a game programmer

Edited November 27, 2013 by Moach

[lajoswinkler]

It's not too difficult to make guns with fairly basic machine tools. I should know, I am a gunsmith and I make guns myself

You can't un-invent guns any more than you can turn charcoal back into unburnt wood.

True, but that doesn't support the idea that you should let everyone be able to buy freakin' machine guns. It's sick. If you want to own a weapon, your criminal record should be clean and you should not be insane. That's the minimum requirement that no one can talk against. There is no argument against it.

I'll say again, I'd never defend an idea that the population should be completely disarmed. That's just stupid, nanny-state policy. But if you want to own a firearm, you should be able to prove you're clean and sane. Every weapon should have a serial number and be registered and tied to a registered citizen of a state. That's a rational way of controlling this stuff.

In cases someone is a gun nut and likes to collect tons of weapons and ammunition (with clean criminal and psychiatric record), a legal add-on would be great - every year you need to account for your stash. It should be inspected because there's a large potential of weapon dealing.

I mean, if you buy a laboratory flask in some USA states, that's illegal, but if you own enough firearms and ammunition for a small army, that's ok, and no one asks you about it. That's thoroughly messed up and no way of running a country. No wonder there's a huge amount of assaults and killed people.

I'd use a similar policy for dangerous compounds. If you want to buy few kilos of some oxidizer, why not? But if you want to buy a truckload of 50 kilo bags, you better be able to explain why and then get a licence.

[Camacha]

So that's it then? Your advice is to run and hide with piss running down your leg like a hunted pig?

This is the same nonsense you hear over and over again. There is no piss running down your leg, you are making a sensible decision to retreat. That has nothing to do with being scared and everything with knowing the statistics. You are more likely to get killed or hurt if you go on the offense. Those are the facts.

If your own safety or the safety of your family is your priority, you should not go on the offensive. If you do, do that knowing you increase the chances of getting hurt.

We can muddy this discussion with talk about how it should be and whatnot, but the fact is that things like this will happen, and that your most safe, sensible approach is to avoid confrontion. Be smart, stay alive.

Edit: o, great, this turned into a gun control debate. That is it, I am out.

[Moach]

(...)

Edit: o, great, this turned into a gun control debate. That is it, I am out.

It sure did now, didn't it?

I kinda saw that coming... but being that this is the general-nonsense boards, there's no reason to lock it for going of topic... even if it did, which is kinda hard to tell

As long as everyone can keep their cool, I think it's nice to have debates on complex things. It helps people develop the skills of argumentation, and talking about things drives your brain into looking at them in possibly new ways...

just bear in mind that the chance of some brilliant insight coming out of an internet board debate is not much on the plausible side....

yet I'm kinda curious to see how far can it go before someone blows a gasket or whatever

Edited November 27, 2013 by Moach

[Cooly568]

I wouldn't say these forums are perfect, but I could see this going on for a while without anyone causing this to be locked.

It's fine to have a gun control debate, just as long as it doesn't go crazy or anyone gets angry.

[Omicron314]

I personally believe there should be very stringent restrictions on owning guns. There is no good reason why you need a lethal firearm in your possession. It could be argued that it is useful for situations in which your life is in danger, but as potentially occurred in the case of Trayvon Martin here in the United States, that leniency can be abused.

If a ban on most firearms is introduced, the number of homicides will almost certainly decline: the guns that remain in the hands of criminals will either be confiscated upon arrest or not used. Besides, it's already been conclusively proven that a greater number of guns in circulation results in a greater number of homicides, and I think we can all agree a greater number of homicides is a bad thing.

I'm not concerned about "disarming the people" either. The thing is, if the government is "out to get you," and I'm not sure why they even would be in the first place, they have the ability to. It's not as if your measly little firearm will stop highly-trained government agents or a swarm of Reaper drones.

I thought that after the Sandy Hook shootings, in which 20 kindergarten-age children were killed along with 6 teachers, this debate would be over, but apparently not. The apathy of American politicians is disappointing.

[Sid]

I'm not a United Statesian, but I'm pretty sure that the reason there are a lot of murders there is that certain sections of the urban community seem to treat 'capping' each other with 'gats' as a way of life.

Call me strange, but I think it would be more productive to find out why they are doing it and find some way to make it all stop, rather than blaming it on the tools they are using. That's the easy way out and it doesn't seem to be working.

Just as a talking point history tells us that gun registration and confiscation are essential prerequisites for genocide. Governments killed over a hundred million of their own citizens in the last century after disarming them first.

[goldenpeach]

[...]

I thought that after the Sandy Hook shootings, in which 20 kindergarten-age children were killed along with 6 teachers, this debate would be over, but apparently not. The apathy of American politicians is disappointing.

Some say that the solution is to have armed guards in school.

It only seem to be a solution(to me it's not a solution,by the way) when you are talking about firearms: try to convince someone that the solution to nuclear weapon treat is to give nuclear weapon to as much country as possible!

[Canopus]

Just as a talking point history tells us that gun registration and confiscation are essential prerequisites for genocide. Governments killed over a hundred million of their own citizens in the last century after disarming them first.

.....could you give some examples for that?

[NASAFanboy]

My house has a small stash of weapons in the attic. It's our "nuclear option".

If someone breaks in, I will not hesatiate to take the guns and open fire with every last bullet (And neither would my parents). I aim for the lungs and the kneecaps, in hopes of giving a the offender the most painful death possible, or atleast incapicating them forever. I'm not cruel-but if someone breaks into MY FAMILIES house, and starts to take OUR valuables, I would be obliged to give them a painful death. One dead murderer is one less threat on the streets.

But otherwise, my family is never going to use the guns. And we might as well not-most of my family are ardent supports of gun-control.

[Canopus]

Why so bloodthirsty? Why not try to prevent all that breaking in instead or storing all kinds of armament. I don't get that mentality.

And yes NASAFanboy, you are cruel if you think about killing someone the most painful way possible.

[drakesdoom]

Why so bloodthirsty? Why not try to prevent all that breaking in instead or storing all kinds of armament. I don't get that mentality.

And yes NASAFanboy, you are cruel if you think about killing someone the most painful way possible.

You don't get it yet. Being ready to do that is the best way to prevent it. I have lived in areas where there were shootings on my block weekly by gangs. They will target anyone who they think is worthwhile and the only thing that will always make you not worth it is if they know you are going to take some of them with you.

Humans are still animals and like any other predator it is not worth it if you get hurt. Take any wilderness survival classes and they will tell you running will get you killed because as soon as you run they know there is no reason to fear you.

[Canopus]

Wrong Drakesdoom. Animals of suffient intelligence will avoid getting themselves killed. They will not take on an enemie that they know they can't beat. And that is a fact. Quite the opposite of your "kill them before they kill you". theory.

And honestly "taking some of them with you?" This isn't some kind of movie here.