Considering the number of innocent people killed by gunmen, isn't it time guns w

1. 69

   Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years ago

   Considering the number of innocent people killed by gunmen, isn't it time guns were banned?
   
   The recent murders at the movie premiere were in a long line of multiple murders by gunmen - some occurring in schools.  Should the right to carry guns still be sacrosanct in the USA?

   replyreport
2. 0

   JThomp42posted 11 years ago

   NO. Guns don't kill people, People with guns kill people just as people drinking and driving kill people. Are we going to ban alcohol? Or automobiles? If guns were banned the bad people would find them somehow. Just because something is banned doesn't mean it's not available. What that would create is another criminal underground. Just like prohibition did.

   replyreport
   1. 69

      Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      True,  but you don't buy a car for the purpose of killing people, though you may end up killing someone by accident.   You don't drink alcohol in order to kill people, ditto.   But people do buy guns to kill people.

      replyreport
   2. 0

      JThomp42posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      More people buy guns for recreation and hunting by far than people do for killing one another. The Mexican cartels would be thrilled if the U.S. BANNED GUNS AND EVEN MORE WOULD DIE AT THEIR HANDS DUE TO COMPETITION of illegal gun running.

      replyreport
   3. 69

      Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I agree illegal gun-running could be a problem.  Similarly, illegal drug trading is a problem, but drugs haven't been legalized.  With registration, many people could still get guns but it would be controlled.

      replyreport
   4. 0

      JThomp42posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      With all due respect Mazzy. To buy a gun from a dealer you must pass a background check, For "ANY" GUN and then the gun is Registered in your name. It is not as easy as you are making it sound at all.

      replyreport
   5. 69

      Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I'm glad to hear that, JThomp42.  I saw a documentary which showed a man just walking into a store and buying a gun.  Maybe that was faked.

      replyreport
   6. 67

      davenmidtownposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      The colorado shooter bought all of his guns legally....

      replyreport
   7. 79

      junksellerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Many states require neither a permit or registration for many guns. Not all gun sales require a background check.

      replyreport
   8. 0

      JThomp42posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      ALL States do require a background check if bought from a gun dealer.
      http://ezinearticles.com/?A-Firearm-Bac … id=1514114

      replyreport
   9. 79

      junksellerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      From a gun dealer, yes, but not necessarily from private sellers, which includes some sellers at gun shows.

      replyreport
   10. 0

       CJ Sledgehammerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Jthomp42: You are right, but guns are an important ingredient to mass murder. Would-be assassins would have a hard time of it if they were only able to stick out their index finger and say, "bang...bang". So, yes, guns in the wrong hands kill people.

       replyreport
3. 93

   CWanamakerposted 11 years ago

   If you ban guns then only criminals will have them. Guns would become a black market commodity just like everything else that is illegal (like drugs). In addition to this it would likely be an impetus for an increase in robbery and burglary crimes because the criminal would have some assurance that their victims would be defenseless. There are plenty of stories that make the news where guns are used for defensive purposes. And lets not forget about shooting as a hobby or for hunting.  The problem isn't guns - its people.

   replyreport
   1. 69

      Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      In 2007 in the UK, where guns are illegal, 59 people were shot to death. In the US, where guns are legal, 10,129 people were shot to death.  The population of the US is less than six times larger than the UK's.

      replyreport
   2. 0

      JThomp42posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      The current U.S.A. population is over 311 million people (311,800,000 in mid-2011) so the United States has the world's third largest population (following China and India).

      replyreport
   3. 93

      CWanamakerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      In terms of intentional murders, a gun ban will do nothing to reduce it. If someone wants to murder someone else (or commit suicide), they will find a way.  Just look at the prison situation. Guns are banned in prison yet the intentional death rate i

      replyreport
   4. 69

      Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      JThomp42, the population of the UK is close to 60,000,000 so we can see that the figures do not support the idea that there is just as much murder without guns. CWanamaker, you mean the cinema killer would have done it some other way? How?

      replyreport
   5. 93

      CWanamakerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I see where you are coming from, but the Cinema Shooter would have been able to get a gun regardless if they were illegal or not.  That's my point.  Banning guns is not the same thing as making them all disappear from existence. People who want to co

      replyreport
   6. 69

      Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      But should it be so easy to get guns? Every so often these tragedies seem to happen in the US.  They happen elsewhere but not as often.

      replyreport
   7. 93

      CWanamakerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Honestly I don't what the solution to the problem is.  While access to guns is problem, but how do you control who gets them and who doesn't? Perhaps we need to focus on gun education, requiring permits to own guns (similar to driver's licenses), and

      replyreport
   8. 0

      JThomp42posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      HOMICIDE RATES IN U.K.
      
      2006/7    749     712    13.3
      2007/8    772     734    13.6
      2008/9    668      640    11.8
      2009/10    626      609    11.3
      2010/11    648      636    11.5
      Jan-Dec 2011    564

      replyreport
   9. 69

      Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      The figures I gave for 2007 were just for shootings, not all homicides. Total US homicides in 2007 were 16,929.  There were 1201 murders in the UK in 2007, but only 59 shootings.  Sorry I don't understand your figures.  Could you explain?

      replyreport
   10. 0

       JThomp42posted 11 years agoin reply to this

       http://www.citizensreportuk.org/news/20 … ce-mapped/
       
       
       Posted on 11/06/2012 by CitizensReport
       Table of London Gun Crime Offences by Borough – 2006 – 2011
       
       BOROUGH    Gun Crime 2006-07    Gun Crim

       replyreport
   11. 69

       Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Thanks for that - I was missing the headings. This actually gives lower figures than the site I looked at - 749 in 2006/7 for all homicides.

       replyreport
   12. 0

       JThomp42posted 11 years agoin reply to this

       That's just in London alone.

       replyreport
   13. 69

       Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       It says "Table of number of Homicides in England and Wales 2001 to 2011." That's not including Scotland and Northern Ireland, so that would explain the lower figure, but it doesn't say just London.

       replyreport
   14. 0

       JThomp42posted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Agree to disagree.

       replyreport
   15. 69

       Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publicatio … iew=Binary
       Home Office figures - 636 homicides 2010-2011 in England and Wales.

       replyreport
4. 80

   Uninvited Writerposted 11 years ago

   No, only some types of guns should not be sold to the public like AK47 rifles.

   replyreport
5. 67

   davenmidtownposted 11 years ago

   It is as if we blame the pencil for mispelling words... before there were guns... people killed people... the human historical record is littered with murders, slayings, and justifiable homicide...Even in the bible...cain killed abel.... The problem is not the guns... since before guns there were other means... the problem is man... it is apparently within our nature to kill.... the question is how do we change that if at all?

   replyreport
   1. 69

      Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      But surely, guns are made for killing.  Are there any countries which ban guns which have such a high murder rate as the USA?  It's too easy to kill people with a gun.

      replyreport
   2. 0

      JThomp42posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Table of number of Homicides in England and Wales 2001 to 2011
      
      
      YEAR
      financial year    Homicides
      recorded    Homicides
      confirmed cases    Rate
      2000/1    847    764    14.4
      2001/2    854    793    15.2
      2002/3    1041    942    17.9
      2003/4    852    772    14.6
      2004/5    834    780    14.7
      2005/6    764    708

      replyreport
   3. 67

      davenmidtownposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      you can kill with a pencil... it just takes motivation... the gun has no motivation... only purpose...

      replyreport
   4. 69

      Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      You'd have a hard time killing 12 people and injuring 71 people with a pencil.

      replyreport
   5. 67

      davenmidtownposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      It might take longer... but it could be done... how many people did Jack the Ripper kill without a gun?  It does not take a gun to kill a human... it just takes determination. restricting guns is not going to stop determined murderers...

      replyreport
   6. 69

      Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      These multiple killings in schools, cinemas and post offices could not take place without guns.

      replyreport
   7. 67

      davenmidtownposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      There were thousands killed during the crusades and nobody had a gun. Women, children, the elderly, entire villages were killed. If the intent is to kill there are swords, knives, bow and arrow, spears, and even rocks, rope, and water available.

      replyreport
   8. 69

      Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      The Crusades were carried out by gangs of military thugs - not by one person.

      replyreport
   9. 79

      junksellerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      If a crazy guy comes into a theater to kill me, I'd rather he had a rock than a tactical rifle with 100 round drum.

      replyreport
   10. 67

       davenmidtownposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       The culture that created the crusades was created by one person... the religious leader... the fact that humans cared so little for human life because of differences in culture is only evidence that humans will kill for little reasons

       replyreport
   11. 0

       CJ Sledgehammerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Don't think, Junkseller, that our governments wouldn't hire thugs or use their own ilk, to stage these murderous events to invoke fear and public outrage, such that, gun banning and the police state becomes, not only possible, but inevitable.

       replyreport
   12. 67

       davenmidtownposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       CJ... they already have hired thugs... those are the fources that the armed forces use when they do not use soldiers... they are contract companies that supply highly trained units similar ot the Navy Seals... I want to say blackhawk is one such comp

       replyreport
   13. 69

       Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       These conspiracy theories about the government are to me not a great argument for arming the population. The government controls the infrastructure - and military weapons - and wouldn't need to fight people face to face to get things under control.

       replyreport
   14. 0

       CJ Sledgehammerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Mazzy: You say that governmental conspiracy theories are not a good reason to arm the population, but our Founding Fathers would disagree with you. In fact, they would say the best reason to arm the population is to keep a tyrannical government at ba

       replyreport
   15. 69

       Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       CJ Sledgehammer, I'm just not sure that this would work nowadays. The government can stop power, fuel, telephone, satellite communication, food transport. I am not sure that people wouldn't just end up using guns on one another in that situation.

       replyreport
   16. 84

       Efficient Adminposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Mazzy I don't know the answer in how to stop the crazy insane people from using guns, but I don't believe the answer is taking away gun ownership from the law abiding hard working decent people.

       replyreport
   17. 69

       Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       It's a very different mentally in the US than in the UK where I live, efficient admin. British people, decent and hard-working or not, on the whole don't want widespread gun ownership, whereas Americans do.

       replyreport
6. 0

   Larry Wallposted 11 years ago

   I knew what your answers were going to be before I read them. One was reasonable in that he agree we should not be selling AK47.
   
   You cannot ban guns. People use them to hunt. Proper hunting is necessary to keep the population of some animal species in check.
   
   People have a right to personal protection.
   
   Some people like target practice to improve eye-hand coordination.
   
   There should be regulations on guns. I do not eight year old children should be carrying rifles or shotguns to go hunting. I do not believe college students should be allowed to carry concealed weapons on campus, as one legislator in my state proposed twice. I believe guns should be registered to owners so that so many lost guns to not end up in the wrong hands. I believe gun locks should required. They just need to be simple locks that an adult could remove in a moment but a child could not. I believe we need to add some common sense to the second amendment. All you pro gun people, please do not leave me a lot of comments. I have been down this route before and I know the constitution says that Congress shall pass no law prohibiting the rights of an individuals to own and bear guns or something similar to that. Congress can pass a law prohibiting manufacturers and distributors from selling guns such as AK47 at the retail level.
   Action can be taken. All sides just need to be reasonable about it.

   replyreport
   1. 69

      Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I think regulations are vital. It looks as if any lunatic can walk in a store and buy a gun in some states.  It's just too easy.  You can get a gun in the UK but you have to apply for a licence and state the reason you need one.

      replyreport
   2. 66

      ptosisposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Reason: for sport & recreation

      replyreport
   3. 69

      Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      You also have to have a respected and trusted member of the community support your application.  You have to have some way of at least trying to prevent homicidal nuts getting hold of guns.

      replyreport
7. 79

   junksellerposted 11 years ago

   I think there should be more stringent regulation. Certain weapons, like tactical rifles, should be much more difficult to attain. Weapons should be registered and registration transferred trough all sales. Owners of rogue weapons, without justification, should be punished for crimes committed with those weapons.

   replyreport
   1. 66

      ptosisposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Why can't we punish the leaders of our country that did ( and still are doing) Fast & Furious type of operations? Why is it 'legal'[ when the gov't does bad things?

      replyreport
   2. 79

      junksellerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Punish them by all means. No standing politician in 2012 is getting my vote. That's small punishment, but it is at least something I can do.

      replyreport
   3. 0

      CJ Sledgehammerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      It is legal for our government to misbehave because they are the ones making the laws and defining what is legal and illegal, and in doing so, always leave themselves an escape clause against retribution. Besides, might makes right...and so it goes.

      replyreport
8. 66

   ptosisposted 11 years ago

   
   
   "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government"
   -- Thomas Jefferson, 1 Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334
   
   Perhaps this is akin to  Operation 'Fast and Furious/,which was a failed attempt to undermine the Second Amendment by the Obama administration. Just like Pearl Harbor or 911 after a horror - security takes more freedom until a complete police state emerges.
   
   If the CIA had no problems with dust-cropping a town of 500 people with LSD that ended up with 5 deaths, or have a killing zone of 8 bullets killing President JFK or manchurian candidate Timothy McVeigh believing he did it out of his own free will. then  I'm suspect that this unwitting mind-controlled patsy who happened to have a sophisticated booby-trap bomb and witness reports of a second shooter in the FRONT of the movie houseis another way to turn up the fear of politics and have everybody stop thinking and react in knee-jerk ways.
   
   "In the book by Bary Glassner, "The Culture of Fear: Why Americans Are Afraid of the Wrong Things: Crime, Drugs, Minorities, Teen Moms, Killer Kids, Mutant Microbes, Plane Crashes, Road Rage, & So Much More", the author describes how the political uses of generating fear to motivate people into a state of confusion and free floating anxiety. A culture of fear that catastrophizes with worst case slippery slope scenarios with powerfully emotional images coupled with fear mongering journalism creates a constant under siege mentality on the human body that can literally make a person sick with fear." - http://ptosis.hubpages.com/hub/Fear-Works

   replyreport
   1. 67

      davenmidtownposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Excellent!

      replyreport
   2. 69

      Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Wow, I never heard this theory before. If the FBI did it, defending yourself with guns wouldn't do you much good nowadays, that's old technology. It's not the Wild West now.  If you controlled the guns, these incidents couldn't happen so much.

      replyreport
   3. 0

      CJ Sledgehammerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Outstanding commentary, Ptosis, thank you!!!
      
      Indeed...taking guns away from the public is a tyrant's dream come true. The criminal element will always have their weapon of choice, so disarming the general public will only cause more harm than good.

      replyreport
   4. 69

      Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      There are many democratic countries in which the people do not go around armed. Why would they need to in a democracy?  Are you really in a tyranny in the US and are you going to wage war on your government?

      replyreport
   5. 0

      CJ Sledgehammerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I have no plans to wage war against my country, but my country is run by thugs who are at war with the world, and, in time, will turn against us, too. We are already a police state and the only reason it's not worse, is the public is still armed.

      replyreport
   6. 69

      Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      If that's true, that's a very frightening situation, CJ Sledgehammer.

      replyreport
   7. 0

      CJ Sledgehammerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Let it also be known that I do not put it past the American government, and its various agencies,  to target the American public. Yes, I am saying that in order to create fear and elevate the prospects of gun banning, they hire thugs to fire upon us.

      replyreport
   8. 69

      Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Is this a widespread belief in the US?  If so, it would explain why they are holding onto their guns.  I hadn't thought of the US seriously as a police state.

      replyreport
   9. 67

      davenmidtownposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      It was thought in the beginning that the 911 attacks were orchestrated by the CIA. The US Govt can track airplanes and it would be apparent in a few minutes if an airplane left its flight path without reason... the F14's could have prevented 911.

      replyreport
   10. 69

       Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       There's clearly a lot of mistrust of the US government. (It's not the only country where that applies!) but is this is a mainstream belief?  I lived in the States a long time back and it was very different. This has been an eye-opener for me.

       replyreport
   11. 0

       CJ Sledgehammerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       In 1962, America's Joint Chiefs of Staff, wanted war with Cuba. They knew they needed to create a pretext for war, so they devised a plan to plant false debris fields, hire snipers to fire upon American citizens, hoping to instill fear and outrage.

       replyreport
   12. 0

       Larry Wallposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       The Bay of Pigs fiasco has nothing to do with this subject. The president sent soldiers and soldiers use guns, it is an unfortunate fact of life. Ownership of guns by private individuals. I do not want people who cannot shoot well anywhere near me.

       replyreport
   13. 69

       Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       To sum up, it seems Americans are more afraid of tyranny in government than being shot by some lunatic, and believe that everyone having guns will protect them from this.

       replyreport
   14. 67

       davenmidtownposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Mazzy... we are a nation born from revolution. Without guns, we would not have been able to defeat the Brittish and become the United States of America. This is why guns are important to us, and not just guns but the same guns our military has....

       replyreport
   15. 69

       Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       All countries fight wars, Davenmidtown.  If we follow that argument logically, without atomic bombs we wouldn't have won WW2, so everyone should have one.

       replyreport
   16. 67

       davenmidtownposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       yes, but we do not have the right to bear Atomic bombs... nor are we fighting to keep that right. Guns are part of our heritage and are part of our constitutional rights.

       replyreport
   17. 69

       Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       I was just following your logic, Davenmidtown.  I prefer to live without guns but I can see most Americans would not.  I think you pay a terrible price for them, though.

       replyreport
   18. 67

       davenmidtownposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       and I keep telling you that you do not need a gun to be killed... there are many other means as I have continued to list in my comments. Death is death... not having guns is not going to end man killing man...

       replyreport
   19. 0

       CJ Sledgehammerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       In America, we have the increasing threat of gang violence. If all you have at your disposal to protect your family is your little Swiss Army knife, you are going to watch your family violated in the worst of ways. Having a gun is the great equalizer

       replyreport
   20. 69

       Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Is this true? Do most Americans feel as if they are under seige by gangs nowadays?  Are there instances of families being killed by gangs who could have been saved if they had a gun, or saved because they did have one?

       replyreport
9. 70

   onegoodwomanposted 11 years ago

   Have a total of 27 guns...........rifles, pistols, replicas, re-issues, historical.......etc, and etc...........
   
   
   Have not  either myself or my husband aimed a gun or pulled a trigger on a single  human being ( or domestic animal)..........
   
   
   
   
   NO, gun control will not   work.............
   
   you can NOT legislate morals, good will or a sense of fairness.............
   
   
   whether it is a gun, a plane, or a bomb or chemical............................those with ill intent, will devise a way.
   
   
   
   YES...................it is an original amendament to our Constituiton............
   
   rather than ban guns..........perhaps we should be looking at W HO should be protected  under such a protected and granted right of way.
   
   
   
   YOU simply WILL NOT make me be a better citizen by taking away what I have or restricting what have or what I do.
   
   the most best thing that you or the AUTHORITY should do........is to get past this " political correctness", " fear of offending" bull shit and draw a hard line against the offenders.
   
   STOP crying out " insanity".........." unhappy childhood"........" distress"...........
   
   
   GROW UP, Americans..............GROW UP...............either make it or get lost in the system.............BUT STOP taking me down as LOST, when I have caused NO HARM.

   replyreport
   1. 67

      davenmidtownposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      she speaks the truth...

      replyreport
   2. 69

      Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      No matter how much you punish the shooter, the victims are already dead.  Would they devise another method? Plant bombs? I doubt it - they like shooting.  It's at a distance, requires no brains, makes them feel powerful.  You could get a gun licence.

      replyreport
   3. 67

      davenmidtownposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      911 shows that mass murder does not require a gun... they used airplanes and fear. I refuse to fear dying which is why I make peace with god. You can kill me but you can not keep me from living through the use of fear. we fear death so we do not live

      replyreport
   4. 69

      Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      It's true there are other means to commit mass murder, but guns are a lot easier.  However, I do understand the way Americans think about this issue much better now, having asked this question.

      replyreport
10. 58

    Holisticityposted 11 years ago

    Stricter gun control is a controversial issue - I think it might be good for more control  but at the same time people need to defend themselves in America

    replyreport
    1. 69

       Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Isn't there a better way?  Why do citizens of many countries not need guns, yet Americans say they do?

       replyreport
    2. 67

       davenmidtownposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       People need to defend themselves around the world... not just in america. You can regulate which guns are sold but that does not stop sophisticated criminals, maffia, and gangs from getting any type of gun.

       replyreport
    3. 69

       Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Have you ever had to defend yourself from any of these groups of people? Just wondering.

       replyreport
    4. 0

       CJ Sledgehammerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Americans need to defend themselves because the government leaves our borders open to criminals from Mexico and Central America, who just wander across our open border. Once here, they form gangs, rape, steal, etc., while police do virtually nothing.

       replyreport
    5. 69

       Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       I always thought the US police were very efficient, but maybe I've been watching too many movies.  People should not have to defend themselves with guns - you need the rule of law,  not the law of the jungle.

       replyreport
    6. 0

       CJ Sledgehammerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Mazzy: Criminals do not concern themselves with laws...they do as they please. By the time the inept police force is called, the damage has already been done. Right now, we have a sheriff from Arizona that is charged with "profiling" illegal aliens.

       replyreport
    7. 67

       davenmidtownposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       The police in Sacramento do not even come when called now because they spend so mcuh time dealing with more severe criminal activities...caused by people who do not fear the laws. Increase the punishment and make it a harsher punishment it may change

       replyreport
    8. 79

       junksellerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Mazzy, please don't take the Sledgehammer as being representative of Americans. Everything she says, I probably would say the exact opposite. The typical American is somewhere in between.

       replyreport
    9. 69

       Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Thanks for that, junkseller. It's hard to assess what is mainstream opinion and what is a very individual opinion. However, I've realized the gun issue is tied to much wider issues and that may be why attitudes are so entrenched.

       replyreport
    10. 0

        JThomp42posted 11 years agoin reply to this

        Ditto on Sledgehammer junkseller!! Her views are VERY ANTI AMERICAN and ANTI POLICE. But, Who are you going to call if you need them? The POLICE.

        replyreport
    11. 0

        CJ Sledgehammerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

        Mazzy: Please don't take everything that junkseller says as being representative of educated Americans, because, it, too, is just her own opinion. I am sure I would disagree with most of her opinions as well. She is cute in that hat, however.  :0)

        replyreport
    12. 69

        Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

        Is junkseller female??

        replyreport
    13. 79

        junksellerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

        No, I think maybe I got CJ's gender wrong. I was actually thinking of someone else. I don't know what gender CJ is. My apologies if I got it wrong. It was inadvertent.

        replyreport
    14. 0

        CJ Sledgehammerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

        Mazzy: Gauging by the picture, I would think not. I was offended that he promoted his assumption that I was a female, without even thinking to check the facts. I also did not appreciate his attempt to downplay and disregard my educated viewpoint.

        replyreport
    15. 0

        Larry Wallposted 11 years agoin reply to this

        I hope everyone is ready to end this thread. Everything has been said at least twice and I do not see any new people jumping in. Some favor limited gun control. Others oppose any gun control. I do not think any tragedy will ever change that situation

        replyreport
    16. 79

        junksellerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

        Said nothing about education. Simply making the point, that in my opinion, we represent extremes, not the middle.

        replyreport
    17. 0

        CJ Sledgehammerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

        JThomp42: It offends me that you throw out wild accusations without the benefit of knowledge or good sense. How is anyone to respect your opinions when you are so reckless? You may know a thing or two about guns, but you know nothing about me.

        replyreport
    18. 69

        Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

        Speaking as a female, you both sounded like guys, without my even checking. Now, how did I know that   I'm glad to hear different points of view on this subject.

        replyreport
    19. 0

        CJ Sledgehammerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

        Junkseller: Peace brother. :0)

        replyreport
    20. 0

        JThomp42posted 11 years agoin reply to this

        CJ Sledgehammer AGREED!! I truly apologize. Just a touchy topic. PEACE!!

        replyreport
    21. 0

        CJ Sledgehammerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

        JThomp42:
        
        All's well that ends well. And, you are right, this can be an emotional topic, but we must remember that we are not the enemy. Peace be with you, too. :0)

        replyreport
    22. 0

        JThomp42posted 11 years agoin reply to this

        Cool!!

        replyreport
    23. 81

        phillippeengelposted 11 years agoin reply to this

        Indeed, there are countries that do not allow citizens to possess guns, and peace ensues for decades. Guns may be helpful weapons in defending oneself against brigands and marauders, but in a country where no one can possess guns, why worry?

        replyreport
    24. 69

        Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

        Thanks for commenting, philippeengel.  It seems most Americans don't agree with you. A lot of people in Colorado are now buying guns "to defend themselves".

        replyreport
    25. 58

        Holisticityposted 11 years agoin reply to this

        This is obviously a very contentious issue!  I think the biggest thing to fear is fear itself.

        replyreport
    26. 59

        taazakhabarposted 11 years agoin reply to this

        Possessing a gun alone does not mean you are safe. The person holding the gun should follow proper gun discipline and should be properly trained to fire in self defense. When both sides are carrying a gun only the one who fires has a kill

        replyreport
11. 0

    CJ Sledgehammerposted 11 years ago

    Banning guns isn't the answer, whereas training people to be civilized citizens and moral agents is the answer.
    
    Teaching children that they are animals and that there is no God, and that life has no meaning or purpose, is a sure-fire way to motivate people to act like animals and do whatever it takes for them to win the game of survival, where only the fittest survive and only losers play by the rules.
    
    The problem isn't guns...it's mass producing reprobates with no moral aptitude.

    replyreport
    1. 69

       Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       I think you are absolutely right about the moral decline and it's not just in the U.S.  However, why give the mass-produced reprobates deadly weapons?

       replyreport
    2. 0

       CJ Sledgehammerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Right now, I fear the emerging police state in America and America's rogue military machine, not to mention the puppet masters who pull their strings, more than I do common street scum.

       replyreport
12. 59

    Bethalegposted 11 years ago

    I believe there needs to be stricter punishment for crime in America. For instance, countries that use caning for stealing have a much lower incidence of theft than we do. As many have said, banning guns will not prevent people from killing. They must have fear of the consequences. Since our jails have turned into free housing and education, what is there to fear when a crime is committed?
    
    My husband and I love eating venison, as do most people I know. Especially with the rising cost of groceries, it is so awesome to have meat in the freezer. Banning guns would take this away from many Americans.

    replyreport
    1. 67

       davenmidtownposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       I grew up in a hunting family. We all have guns. We have never killed anyone. We hunt to eat. The laws and punishment need to become very strict for crimes. humanity has lost its common decency.

       replyreport
    2. 69

       Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Some states seem to be strict in that they have the death penalty. Obviously, it means that particular person won't re-offend, but does it reduce homicides in general?  I hear different opinions on that.

       replyreport
    3. 0

       CJ Sledgehammerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Our death penalty here in the states is a joke. So many of those on "death row" die of old age before they ever see the gallows.

       replyreport
    4. 67

       davenmidtownposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Cabel Television, basketball courts, linin services, quality food, education, libraries, legal, medical, cousiling services, etc are all benefits of going to prison. I  have quality food. Everything on this list I have to pay for plus be taxed on.

       replyreport
    5. 69

       Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       You have a point there, davenmidtown.  It's the same in other countries.  However, you do have some tough prisons over there as well.

       replyreport
    6. 67

       davenmidtownposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       not tough enough to prevent crime. There is a heirarchy of crime where little crimes lead to larger crime, which lead to extreme criminal activity. We do little to prevent the little crimes so the population of criminals grow.

       replyreport
    7. 69

       Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Yes, I saw a program about New York City, how zero tolerance of minor crimes helped reduce major crimes.  I think it's a good idea but probably expensive to implement.

       replyreport
    8. 0

       CJ Sledgehammerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       We already pay $50,000 per inmate in America each and every year. How expensive could this be in comparison to that?

       replyreport
    9. 69

       Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       I just read that Philip J Cook and Jens Ludwig calculated that gun crime costs the USA around $100 billion dollars every year.  This is from a book called "Gun Violence - the Real Costs"

       replyreport
13. 90

    Georgie Loweryposted 11 years ago

    I'm in agreement with the others here. All a gun ban will do in the US is create a thriving black market. If a criminal wants one, they'll get one.
    
    I think we need to not be so concerned with taking away the rights of the people who are doing what they're supposed to. Besides, it's hard to hunt deer with a spork.
    
    Yes, you can get a gun permit. Unfortunately, a crazy permit isn't legal yet (or I'd likely already have mine).
    
    If you ban guns, are knives, hatchets, bows and arrows and virtually any other item used to kill someone next? A lot of women would have been mad if pantyhose became illegal, since they've been used to strangle people. It sounds ridiculous, but I think it's perspective.

    replyreport
    1. 69

       Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       In the UK you cannot carry a knife. If you have a carving knife on your car seat, you can end up in court.  There has been a wave of knife crime, particularly among young black guys. As yet there has been no wave of pantyhose crime.

       replyreport
14. 0

    SirDentposted 11 years ago

    I wonder if anyone who has been posting here remembers Bernie Goetz.  He shot  4 alleged muggers on a subway back in the 80s.  He was charged with aggravated assault, attempted murder, reckless endangerment and several firearm offenses.  He was found not guilty on all charges except one which was illegal possession of a firearm. 
    
    How about those instances of self defense which are more clear than Bernie's case?
    
    A woman shot and killed a young man who had pistol whipped and shot her son through the leg in a robbery attempt.  http://www.webcitation.org/64J0sqd4C
    
    How about a man who shot an invader who came into his house with two others and held his son hostage.  http://gunssavelives.net/self-defense/v … n-hostage/
    
    This has never happened to me personally, but it doesn't mean it has never happened.  In my own opinion, it has all gone too far to fix.  Banning guns won't fix the problem.  Most people murder because they hate.  They allow hate to control them and it has gotten much worse in the US in the past 50 years.
    
    Until this hate is dealt with severely, atrocities like the shootings are going to happen.  I am afraid we must live with it as well as we can and deal with it as it arises.
    
    .

    replyreport
    1. 0

       CJ Sledgehammerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Indeed. People are taught in school that humans are animals, and then we are surprised when they behave like beasts preying on society.

       replyreport
15. 0

    AntonOfTheNorthposted 11 years ago

    I pose another question.
    
    Is life in America better or worse as a result of the free access to lethal weapons that require no skill or real intent to be lethal?
    
    During the first Iraq war, more Americans died of domestic gun shot incidents, over 200 of which were accidental, than any American servicemen died in the entire conflict, including friendly fire incidents. It could be argued a civilian in their home was more likely to die of a gun shot wound than an American soldier in a combat zone.  (of course soldiers are trained in the use of a firearm.  Civilians do not have to be and can still buy the thing.)
    
    No, guns don't kill people.  (bullets kill people).
    
    If you are keeping a gun as a collectable, you don't need the ammo.
    If you are keeping guns for hunting, you don't need an arsonal.  You need the right tool for the right job.  Combat weapons are not hunting weapons.
    
    If you just like shooting these things off on target ranges, you are arguing that this thing you do for fun is more important than keeping guns out of the hands of those who intend harm.  (I do accept however that perhaps gun control attempts have been misguided in the past, but so were the first attempts at flight, and we've been to the moon, now. . .)
    
    Archaic weapons and non projectile weapons (swords, maces, etc) these are all controlled.  You can't just walk down the street with a broadsword without facing some legal issues.  (although I admit owning one isn't normally a crime).
    
    If the rights given a free militia (and yes any civilian therefore) under the US constitution are more important than the 1500 (one stat) accidentally killed individuals per year in America, (not to mention the intentional shootings), then by all means, stand on the constitution.
    
    Surely there is another way.  "That's just the way it is" must always give way to "That's the way we wish it".
    
    If you'd rather have free access to killing machines for fun, someone is inevitably going to be killed.
    
    cheers

    replyreport
    1. 0

       CJ Sledgehammerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Yeah...target practice is not a strong argument in favor of the second amendment.

       replyreport
16. 81

    dghbrhposted 11 years ago

    If you ban on the gun and they find other equipment to kill then? Its not the gun that kills itself. Its the human who does the killing. So can you find a way to ban them from killing other people?
    Yes one can ban right of 'carrying the Gun' but its quite tough to ban the killer instinct in the human mind. The one who wants to kill can kill by using many other things as well.

    replyreport
    1. 69

       Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Others have also made this point. However, there is nothing so easy to kill with, and to kill many with, than a gun.  Should every person carry a gun and a knife at all times for "self-defence"? Would this make things better or worse?

       replyreport
    2. 81

       dghbrhposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Man is mortal. One day will come to die if one is born here. Self defense....does it work when death comes? Then why one needs to kill other human being is the concern. To be honest there were so many comments and replies I did not went through all.

       replyreport
    3. 69

       Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Well, all I know is that if I was in the vicinity of some mentally deranged and hate-filled person, I would rather neither of us had a gun rather than both of us.  However, I'm in a minority.

       replyreport
    4. 81

       dghbrhposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Don think like that.....I will be more then happy to join you league.

       replyreport
17. 78

    Kathleen Cochranposted 11 years ago

    From your mouth to God's ears.  But this is America.  Nothing will ever change.

    replyreport
18. 74

    Rosana Modugnoposted 11 years ago

    Guns have nothing to do with those that handle them.  If you take away guns, then you'll find more innocent people dying by those that found a way to get guns illegally and shooting people that had their gun rights taken away.  You'll see a jump in home invasions and robberies and car jacking.  Or you may even see a jump in knives and stabbings.  Really, it's not the guns.  It's the ignorance and moral ethic of a degenerating society.

    replyreport
    1. 69

       Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Other countries haven't seen that, though, Rosana. If a burglar has a gun and you also have a gun, you are both more likely to fire out of fear.  I agree with you about the moral decline, though.

       replyreport
19. 75

    daskittlez69posted 11 years ago

    With the # of automobiles and motorcycles that have killed people throughout history, don't you think it is time that we ban them.  I have always heard that walking isn't crowded.

    replyreport
    1. 69

       Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       As with pencils, scarves, panty-hose and other things that could kill people, the primary purpose of cars is not killing people. The primary/only  purpose of many types of guns is injuring/killing people.

       replyreport
    2. 59

       taazakhabarposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       I am sorry Mazzy but you seem to be going around with a preconceived notion. Nothing wrong with it but please understand. You cant blame a lifeless object. Guns dont go on their own. Guns are for defense as well as offense & you need someone 2 fi

       replyreport
    3. 69

       Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       I agree you need someone to fire it, but if they didn't have it they couldn't fire it.  We have far fewer gun deaths in the UK where guns are not banned but are controlled.  A bar fight ends up in a black eye instead of death.

       replyreport
20. 49

    Whittneyposted 11 years ago

    Absolutly not.  Why should'nt we as a society be allowed to defend ourselves?  It might just be me but I would rather be the person who has a gun when a murderer is on the loose rather than the person who sits in their own house in fear, wondering what they could use in the event of the hypothetical murderer entering their home.

    replyreport
    1. 69

       Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       But does allowing citizens to own guns - and in some cases guns of the type clearly used for combat - do more harm than good?  Hypothetical murderers are few and far between whereas gun accidents kill thousands every year.

       replyreport
    2. 92

       ercramer36posted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Cars kill even more in a year, should they be banned?????  Gun accidents do not kill thousands every year, that is a rediculous statistic that you are using.

       replyreport
    3. 69

       Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       The site gunsite.org, a pro-gun site, says 1,100. Other sites state 1,500.  Wikipedia says 17,352 of 31,224 firearm-related deaths in 2007 due to suicide, 12,632 homicide. What were the rest?  Also, 23,237 non-fatal gunshot accidents in 2000.

       replyreport
21. 59

    taazakhabarposted 11 years ago

    Guns kill but you need men to press the trigger. I think we need to ban men who kill other men... with or without the gun. Murder, personal enmity,  road accidents, infectious diseases, poverty, natural and man made disasters are some of the other main causes of death -- can we ban all of them?

    replyreport
    1. 69

       Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       I can see that you support gun ownership but your argument isn't logical. We shouldn't ban guns because there are other causes of death? Do we not try to reduce these other things, disease, road accidents, etc? So why not try to reduce gun deaths?

       replyreport
    2. 59

       taazakhabarposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Sorry I dont support gun owner ship. All I am saying that one things common between all causes of death from road accident to guns -- is a human being. An adversary. An enemy. What we need to do is to win over enemies and spread the bonds of Love.

       replyreport
    3. 69

       Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       I like the idea of spreading the love but that may be a bit hard to do.  I think both parties not having a deadly weapon on their person might be a pre-requisite.

       replyreport
    4. 65

       maddotposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       You need a certain mindset to own a gun and then it's just a short temper to pulling that trigger and then you have one of your good old fashioned USA massacres. Nothing like the "right to bear arms." (you also have the right NOT to bear arms)

       replyreport
22. 92

    ercramer36posted 11 years ago

    No, look at Chicago.  They have the strictest gun laws in the nation and one of highest rates of violence.  If you take all of the guns away, knives could be used to kill, forks, matches, alcohol, gasoline, pipes, rope, fertilizer, nails, hammers, rocks, cars, airplanes, boards, cleaning products, swords, ovens.  People can be killed in many different ways.  ARe you going to advocate taking all of these items away too?  I can construct a box and arrow without anyones help. 
    
    You are looking at this the wrong way.  How many lives have guns saved?  Many.  People having guns are a deterent to crime, aka Texas.  Pulling a gun out in Texas is not a good idea, because many people are armed.  We live in a FREE country where the CONSTITUTION gives us the right to keep and bear arms.  The founding fathers put that in there to guard against tyranny.  If someone breaks in to my house and tries to hurt my family, they will meet my gun and I will use it to protect them.
    
    The problem is not guns, the problem is sin.  We live in a fallen world that is plagued with sin.  Evil exists.  Taking away guns does not change the fact that evil exists.  Only by changing people's hearts and minds through a relationship with Jesus Christ is any improvement possible.  A spiritual and moral awakening.  What is funny is you advocate the government banning guns and we didn't have these problems when prayer and Bible reading were in the schools. . . . We kicked God out of America and I believe that the rise in these types of shootings are the direct punishment of God removing his protective hand from this country.  We need God in America again!  We NEED REVIVAL.

    replyreport
    1. 69

       Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Guns are much easier to kill with than cleaning products. I'd rather be free to go to a cinema/school/restaurant/post office without being shot by some lunatic. Gun statistics were even worse in the past. I never thought of Jesus as pro-gun.

       replyreport
23. 84

    Efficient Adminposted 11 years ago

    No, guns should not be banned.  If guns are banned then only the criminals will be walking around with guns.  Being able to arm yourself is part of the Constitution.  When the District of Columbia and the State of Maryland banned gun ownership, home break-ins increased dramatically, because the criminal element knew the residents didn't have guns and couldn't defend themselves.
    
    Now in the neighboring State of Virginia, there was no ban on gun ownership and most of the break-ins were in commercial properties in the middle of the night, not private residences.
    
    And here is the cliche of the day: Guns don't kill people -- people kill people.  I believe the majority of gun owners are responsible law abiding tax paying citizens. Unfortunately the criminal element and insane people get those guns and cause trouble.

    replyreport
    1. 69

       Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       I checked the Virginia State Police's figures for 2010 at
       http://vsp.cache.vi.virginia.gov/downlo … _2010.pdf. (2011 wouldn't download) It says 29,243 burglaries that year of which 26,551 were domestic.

       replyreport
24. 68

    PositronWildhawkposted 10 years ago

    Lines have been crossed. I think it is safe to say, society is gun-crazy. I do get that mental illness is a common factor in mass killings but the accessibility of these weapons is ridiculous. These weapons make citizens contenders against law enforcement. Also considering the fact that most assault rifles and automatic weapons can fire armor-piercing rounds putting them on the same level against law enforcement.
    
    The point of allowing people to have guns are so you can defend yourself and every assault weapon is intended for slaughter which is beyond self-defense. The fact that people go nuts around the topic of losing there guns is all the more reason to take all guns away. People need a gun to feel safe.

    replyreport