It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Gun Control, use both hands. From a Democrat!

page: 1
28
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+12 more 
posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 07:19 PM
link   
This is my first thread, go easy on me.

I've read here for a while and I've seen many different viewpoints, political bickering, stereotyping, arguing, debating and everything in between. I want to dispell the belief that all Democrats are against guns, that's not true.

The answer to gun control is easy. Use both hands.

Guns go beyond the Democrat and Republican divide. It's not just Republicans who support having them and it's not just Democats who call for gun control. To the contrary, in the area I live in, most Democrats do own guns and they hunt on a regular basis. This isn't so much a political thing as it is a way of life.

Think about most of the shootings you hear of. A gunman opens fire on unarmed people and many are killed. In today's tragedy, 20 children and 6 adults lost their lives. It was atrocious, it was devastating, it was heartbreaking. In the theater shooting, many lost their lives. In all the shootings that take place, many innocent people end up killed. It doesn't have to be this way.

Some will say "without gun control, every psycho will have a gun and can just go shooting anytime anywhere". Well, yes, they can. BUT, other people will also be armed instead of unarmed and defenseless. Instead of 20 deaths or 30 deaths or even more, there would be 3, maybe 4. Although every life is valuable and every life is important, if there is a choice of losing 4 valuable lives or 40 valuable lives, 4 is preferred to 40.

In today's world, when the shooting starts, everyone runs, everyone tries to get away. They aren't armed and that's their only choice. They are picked off one by one. If the law abiding citizens were armed along with the criminals, when the shooting starts, they would be able to defend themselves as well as protect others. The gunman would still be a gunman, lives would still be lost, but if was quickly brought under control, many lives would be saved.

Would the gunman be less likely to walk in and start shooting if he knew there were other people there with guns and those other people would quickly take him out? Would that deter the likelyhood of the mass shootings? I think it would. I don't think the gunmen would feel quite as brave, quite as powerful, quite as likely to walk in and open fire if he knew others would be there who could and would shoot him and stop him from harming others.

All life is valuable and I would prefer to not lose any. That isn't going to happen. As long as there are criminals, there will be illegal weapons and as long as there are illegal weapons, there will be killings. We cannot do away with all illegal weapons, only the legal ones. Why would we do away with legal ones when they are the only protection and deterrant we really have against the illegal ones? We can't get rid of any and all criminals, we just can't. As long as there are laws, there will be someone to break those laws.

The only logical answer is to encourage legal gun ownership and embrace it. Allow those citizens who do wish to uphold the laws to be able to protect others, allow them to protect themselves. With gun control, the only guns that are taken away are the legal ones. The only people who are left unarmed are the people who follow the laws. The criminals will always be there and they will always be armed. We need to be able to fight back. I'm not talking semi-automatic uzi's for anyone and everyone, but a simple handgun is a different story. The only way to stop the semi-automatic weapons is to stop producing them. People other than the military don't need them, so don't make them and don't sell them.

People DO need hunting rifles, they DO need handguns for protection. If they are carrying them legally and acting responsibly, they would be an asset, not a problem.




posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 07:30 PM
link   
Ha, yeah make sure everybody has a gun. Everybody will be so much safer. Ridiculous.



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 07:33 PM
link   
I agree with you absolutely.

Very well-written thread, by the way. You make the point nicely.



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 07:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by homeslice
Ha, yeah make sure everybody has a gun. Everybody will be so much safer. Ridiculous.


I agree...why do people think more guns is a good idea?? Homeslice, can I ask what country you're from?



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 07:39 PM
link   
I don't know if he's a D or an R but, I think the Shat says it best...




posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 07:41 PM
link   
Very good thread! People today want to be coddled and protected. The irony is they expect the police to protect them from domestic threats and the gov't to protect them from foreign ones. The very same people who will complain highly about said protectors. The police are not there to protect individuals or even a family but the public. Big difference there. To protect the public puts the individuals who make it up more likely to be left high and dry. We are the ones responsible to protect ourselves, the police just come in after to write up the report and secure the scene.



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 07:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by homeslice
Ha, yeah make sure everybody has a gun. Everybody will be so much safer. Ridiculous.


No, make sure it's legal for law abiding citizens to have guns. It would be much safer. Those who set out to commit these crimes will think twice if they know there could be someone there to stop them before they finished carrying out their plans.

If the shooter today knew that he could be shot himself the second he pulled out the gun and may not be able to shoot anyone at all, he wouldn't have been as likely to commit the crime he committed to start with.

I don't, in any way, support EVERYONE owning a gun. Everyone isn't capable nor are they responsible. However, those with no criminal record, a permit and a psychiatric evaluation with ongoing followups carrying weapons would prevent many of the crimes that take place. If the one and only life lost today was the guy that had the gun and did the shooting due to someone else being armed and preventing it, the tragedy would have been much, MUCH smaller.



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 07:44 PM
link   
reply to post by SerialVelocity
 


Not from the US, so I imagine I will be told me to butt out soon. I am from NZ, so its obviously a much different story here. It is just amazing to me why people think they should be entitled to carry a weapon on them at all times for "protection". I guarantee you are more likely to get shot yourself or shoot someone else accidentally rather than successfully defend yourself from a life threatening situation.

You need to change this mentality. You cant solve the problem over night. But arming everyone is not the answer.

edit on 14-12-2012 by homeslice because: (no reason given)


+2 more 
posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 07:46 PM
link   
The only people who are against gun rights are: TRAITORS, CRIMINALS, BRAINWASHED SHEEPLE, and IDIOTS who dont even live in America.

The latter should keep their DAMNED NOSES OUT OF AMERICAN TOPICS...
edit on 14-12-2012 by oper8zhin because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 07:49 PM
link   
With that being said, I wouldn't clear myself to carry one on a daily basis. I have no criminal record, I have never been violent, but I do have a temper. I can "go off" on someone and shout at them, scream at them, get very angry. When I lose my temper like that, I wouldn't want to have a gun on me. I don't think I would ever harm another person, but at the same time, I wouldn't want that temptation. I wouldn't want to have it at my fingertips 24/7. I do believe it would make me less likely to lose my temper, but that is a very big burden.

I do own guns, I do hunt, however, I don't carry one to work with me, I don't carry one in public. It's not because I don't think it should be legal, it's that I don't want that responsibility. I do want others who are much better at controlling there tempers to have them if they have no criminal record, if they are not violent, if they have passed the very, very stringent psyciatric exam and if they have regular follow ups. If they are deemed to be responsible enough to carry one, then yes, I want them to be able to carry it. I just don't think I'm responsible enough to do that yet.

I'm sure that at some point in my life, I will be ready for that responsibility, but I don't feel that I am at that point yet.



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 07:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by NinjaKitteh

Originally posted by homeslice
Ha, yeah make sure everybody has a gun. Everybody will be so much safer. Ridiculous.


No, make sure it's legal for law abiding citizens to have guns. It would be much safer


Until a person breaks the law.

The only people punished for breaking a law are those caught for breaking a law.

How do you ascertain that someone is mentally stable, and abiding by all laws? There are already methods in place to prevent criminals from owning guns, but it still happens. Why? Because guns are stolen from legal owners and sold on the black market.

However you look at this argument, America has been duped into believing they NEED all these guns by the pro-gun lobby and the wealthy gun manufacturers.

You're all sheep baaaa-ing along to the marketing of the NRA.



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 07:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by homeslice
reply to post by SerialVelocity
 


Not from the US, so I imagine I will be told me to butt out soon. I am from NZ, so its obviously a much different story here. It is just amazing to me why people think they should be entitled to carry a weapon on them at all times for "protection". I guarantee you are more likely to get shot yourself or shoot someone else accidentally than successfully defend yourself from a life threatening situation.

You need to change this mentality. You cant solve the problem over night. But arming everyone is not the answer.


I agree...I am from the UK where we are often accused of having out right taken away because we aren't allowed to carry guns around as we please. I am more than happy to have strict guidelines for carrying weapons. Anything to avoid the tragedy that happened today occurring again...I will probably also be told that it isn't my place to comment on American politics but I am pretty sure the right to bear arms was probably created purely for a time when the country was worried they would be invaded again.



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 07:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by oper8zhin
The only people who are against gun rights are: TRAITORS, CRIMINALS, BRAINWASHED SHEEPLE, and IDIOTS who dont even live in America.

The latter should keep their DAMNED NOSES OUT OF AMERICAN TOPICS...
edit on 14-12-2012 by oper8zhin because: (no reason given)


And yet America is allowed to intervene in the goings on of pretty much every other country in the world...



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 07:58 PM
link   
Nice thread! Lets take today as an example. I'm 100% possitive the cops showed up on scene as fast as they could get there. But this maniac still managed to kill 20 little kids and 8 adults before taking his own life. This particular school had new security protocals in place, meaning someone had to let him inside because the doors were locked preventing him from getting in on his own. And still he killed all these inocent people. Not one person inside this school had any means to defend themselves or to defend the defenseless children within their care. Now this may sound cold, but its the truth...no one in the school had a gun, now many lives did that save today? How many of those poor innocent children would be alive if one adult had the means to defend himself? Humans will always find a way to kill eachother, be it from a gun, a knife or a car. More people get killed every year from cars, but i don't hear the outrage on banning the car to save lifes. the events of today are horrible, but people need to start thinking with level heads here and quit reacting on emotions by wanting to get rid of guns. criminals dont follow the laws and law abiding americans with no means to defend themselves agianst someone with a weapon of ANY KIND who wishes to do them harm will continue to die long before the cops have a chance to respond. I love cops, many of my friends are cops, but when your lifes in danger and seconds count, the cops are only minutes away....now can we drop the politics and spend the weekend grieving for these poor children and their families this close to chrismass?....



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 08:01 PM
link   
EDIT: Sorry was going to take a jab, but decided not to.
edit on 14-12-2012 by homeslice because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 08:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by oper8zhin
The only people who are against gun rights are: TRAITORS, CRIMINALS, BRAINWASHED SHEEPLE, and IDIOTS who dont even live in America.

The latter should keep their DAMNED NOSES OUT OF AMERICAN TOPICS...
edit on 14-12-2012 by oper8zhin because: (no reason given)


Sorry, but I don't agree with that either. Just because someone doesn't want guns availble to everyone doesn't mean they are any of those things. They have a strong opinion against violence and are opposed to guns. That doesn't mean they are traitors, brainwashed or idiots. Most likely they aren't criminals either or they'd be all for carrying guns. They just wouldn't want them regulated in any way.

I do want some regulation, I want people to prove they are responsible and capable and I don't want people out buying tons of semi-automatic weapons because they think they're "cool". Many of the people who go on and on about guns and have stockloads of them wouldn't pass the psychiatric exam that would enable them to carry one.

Owning guns, collecting guns and stockpiling guns are very different things. Gun collectors don't go around buying tons and tons of ammunition and planning the end of the world scenarios. Gun owners don't try to find armor piercing bullets or stockpile tons of ammunition because of a zombie apocolypse. The people who go on and on and on about guns, have more than they could ever use and have boxes upon boxes upon boxes of ammunition are the people who cause such opposition to guns to begin with and those are the very people who wouldn't pass the exam needed to carry one to start with. They are the people who commit these shootings, they are the people who finally flip out and end up killing innocent people, they are the people who are the problem, not the solution.

It's people who abuse what is available that cause it to no longer be available. Whether it's guns, medication, foodstamps, welfare, disability or anything else in the world, there are people who abuse it and ruin it for everyone else. They rant and they rave and they hoard until it ruins it for everyone by destroying the original intention. Many of the people who think they are "protecting their second ammendment rights" are the very people who are destroying it.

Have only what you need or may reasonably need, not everything you want or can dream of. That's going overboard and it ruins it for everyone else.



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 08:05 PM
link   
I do believe some of these shootings would end differently in open-carry states.



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 08:07 PM
link   


Until a person breaks the law. The only people punished for breaking a law are those caught for breaking a law. How do you ascertain that someone is mentally stable, and abiding by all laws? There are already methods in place to prevent criminals from owning guns, but it still happens. Why? Because guns are stolen from legal owners and sold on the black market. However you look at this argument, America has been duped into believing they NEED all these guns by the pro-gun lobby and the wealthy gun manufacturers. You're all sheep baaaa-ing along to the marketing of the NRA.
reply to post by detachedindividual
 


Then you are suggesting the outlawing of guns to prevent them from being stolen by criminals??? That sir is retarded. Mayhaps actually punishing criminals with stolen guns as opposed to the ole plea deal. Revolving door "justice" does us no service. More laws are needed?? How about actually enforcing the ones on the books? We all saw how that worked w/the guy who shot Gifford. He was already being evaluated and that little fact was missed by the feds who ok'd him purchasing his guns. Mayhaps crimes like this are why we had capital punishment?



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 08:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by detachedindividual

Originally posted by NinjaKitteh

Originally posted by homeslice
Ha, yeah make sure everybody has a gun. Everybody will be so much safer. Ridiculous.


No, make sure it's legal for law abiding citizens to have guns. It would be much safer


Until a person breaks the law.

The only people punished for breaking a law are those caught for breaking a law.

How do you ascertain that someone is mentally stable, and abiding by all laws? There are already methods in place to prevent criminals from owning guns, but it still happens. Why? Because guns are stolen from legal owners and sold on the black market.

However you look at this argument, America has been duped into believing they NEED all these guns by the pro-gun lobby and the wealthy gun manufacturers.

You're all sheep baaaa-ing along to the marketing of the NRA.


The law they break doesn't have to be a law involving guns. Any criminal record of any kind would disqualify them. Mental stability is checked when they purchase their gun.

Yes, others who don't qualify will still have guns, we can't stop it completely, however, with more people being allowed to have them, when those who don't qualify pull them out to commit a crime, there will be someone there who isn't a criminal, who does have one legally, who is responsible enough to carry one. That person, or several people will also be able to take action against the one who is going to commit the crime. There still may be lives lost, but the number may be 2 or 3 instead of 20, 30 or 40.

It's not the answer to all our woes, but it is an answer that can cut our woes down greatly. It's enough to be a deterrant as well as a possible solution in some cases. That's more than we have right now and it may have made a difference in many lives. Not all the lives, but just one life being saved would have made a tremendous difference for the family that is now mourning their child.

It's not the end all solution to fix everything, but it is a start and a heck of a lot closer than we were before.



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 08:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by NinjaKitteh

Originally posted by homeslice
Ha, yeah make sure everybody has a gun. Everybody will be so much safer. Ridiculous.


No, make sure it's legal for law abiding citizens to have guns.


I'm not picking on you, I promise. I just have a problem with this phrase, even though I've caught myself using it.

I despise the term "law-abiding citizen". It is an overdefined term meant to infer something that I'm not entirely sure of.

There are citizens. Law-abiding by default. The moment you are not, you are a criminal.

Citizens. Criminals.



new topics

top topics



 
28
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join