Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

The Gun Control Debate on ATS

page: 2
10
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 21 2012 @ 04:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Underworlds
 


You are absolutely right. I worded that carelessly. I apologize. When I referred to murder weapons, I did so in the context of the discussion of weapons and non-weapon objects being used to harm or kill other people, including guns, where of course they become murder weapons.

I would like to reiterate that my point was that originally (and arguably to this day) weapons are a tool designed, ultimately, to take lives. It can be used to threaten and harm (sometimes thereby saving innocent lives and preventing crime), and it can be used for target practice. Arguably, it CAN and often IS used for "good", i.e., to protect. But a weapon is still a weapon, and it IS ultimately designed to take lives, even if it during the lifetime of its owner, never is used for that purpose.

That was the point I was trying to make. Did it make sense? I hope so.

I did not mean to suggest all guns are murder weapons, and I apologize again for wording it so carelessly that I gave that impression.
edit on 21-12-2012 by Gauss because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 21 2012 @ 04:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Shdak
 


I'm pretty much in agreement with your opinions, with clarification!

Semi-automatic "Assault type weapons":
What could we agree on or propose as features that sensibly defines the term?
I own a "tactical" ruger 10/22 with bipod, rails and a 25 round capacity factory magazine that "looks like an assault weapon" but it's still just a "black" .22 caliber target/plinking/varmint just-for-fun rifle.
Personally, I have a hard time allowing that weapon to be classified as an assault rifle, especially given there are pistol variants using the same magazines.
Perhaps proposed restrictions based on cartridge size/type/caliber might be in order?

State Militia
Other than the National Guard, I'm not so sure there are 50 "state militias" - what about local militias? "Private" militias? "County" (or parish) militias? Isn't the concept of a militia basically drawing on every able-bodied man with arms (firearms) - otherwise known as the general public? I don't have any suggestions on this one because I'm in the dark on what states have militias, although we have a local militia unit near here, it's not connected to the "government" in any way.

Please don't take this as a criticism or disagreement, I seek clarification and qualification in order to be able to intelligently agree or disagree. Thanks for your post!

ganjoa



posted on Dec, 21 2012 @ 05:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Underworlds
 


Great post, point well taken.

I've carried concealed for 38 years or so, every day except when travelling by air. When I moved to a tiny town, I let just about everybody know that I have a concealed license that is constantly and consistently used. There are folks in town who consider me a gun nut an that's fine - BUT - unlike my neighbors and much like yourself I've never suffered a break-in or robbery. Although I've had to show my weapon (walked in on a robbery many years ago), I've never had to fire it as a civilian. Deterrence is a powerful tool for self defence.

My take on the OP's post was as he stated in his reply - a Spear or Crossbow for example are other types of "murder weapons" since their purpose is primarily (and solely?) for killing, while a machete, axe, etc. have other primary purposes.

ganjoa



posted on Dec, 21 2012 @ 05:19 PM
link   
reply to post by ganjoa
 


I am graced by the added good fortune of living in a red state that acknowledges the individuals rights to carry a firearm in "open carry" format without the need for a permit. I actively encourage people to carry their firearms into my establishment, asking only that their Arms remain holstered or (in the case of long-barrel weapons such as rifles) that their barrels remain pointed downwards or upwards at all times. Anyone violating these simple rules have to answer to me... after twelve years, not a single one of my guests have ever broken the rules.

Open carry has its benefits. Unlike concealed carry, with open carry people know for fact that myself and my customers are armed. There is no guessing at the possible trouble one would face if they were to attack my establishment.

In very recent years, I'm happy to say that other business owners have followed my example. Some are now offering discounts to their customers, as well, for open carry. Many business owners are now carrying, themselves. Word has gotten out that we are armed and crime within our downtown business community has plummetted to all-time lows, consisting these days of mostly public intox and the occassional harassment charges against panhandlers. As for robberies... I can only think of one within the past few years, and it was done as a break-in after the business was closed for the night.

Where I live and work, we are a well-armed society. We are also a more polite society with much less crime and much more enjoyment of life.
edit on 21-12-2012 by Underworlds because: spelling error



posted on Dec, 21 2012 @ 05:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Underworlds
My business... it has never been robbed. Why? Because the bad guys know that I carry a firearm and that I will not hesitate to use it. Also, because I offer cash discounts to my customers if they open carry their firearms into my establishment


Brilliant, I like that idea… we have alot of Pawn Shops around here that do the same thing, never heard of one being robbed either.



posted on Dec, 21 2012 @ 05:35 PM
link   
I love the idea personally as well. Some people might be scared by open carry - but your store, your rules.
edit on 21-12-2012 by Gauss because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 21 2012 @ 05:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Shdak
 


You probably never will, either. You may hear of one being caught up in an attempted robbery on America's Dumbest Criminals, but I wouldn't think of any other place you'd hear of such a thing happening at such a pawn shop.



posted on Dec, 21 2012 @ 05:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Gauss
 


If people get scared by being in an open carry environment, it would probably be best if they just packed up a bag and made a quick move to some place like Australia where firearms are illegal to possess and crime rates soared after the disarming of the public. Though not all states recognize the right to open carry, the Second Amendment (through the "right... shall not be infringed" statement) guarantees that all of America is supposed to be open carry territory for all times.



posted on Dec, 21 2012 @ 06:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Underworlds
 


I'm not sure how I feel on it. Personally I'm for open carry. But I think we also have to respect that some people may be intimidated by it - though I think this is more due to a lack of understanding (i.e., a misconception along the lines of "legal gun owners carry concealed, public shooters strap on the leg holster") of the concept, than necessarily a fear of the gun itself.

Bah, I don't know.

But by and large I don't understand why people are so afraid of guns (unless of course it is pointed at you). I live in a country where you basically never see firearms unless in the hands of police, military, or at the range. Most people here would wet themselves if they saw someone carry a gun. This in spite of every male citizen doing their military service for fifty to sixty years during the Cold War, where the threat of a Soviet invasion forced everybody to learn to handle guns.



posted on Dec, 21 2012 @ 06:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Gauss
 


The following is not intended to appear condescending towards you or your countrymen, but I am serious when I say that I feel sorry for people such as yourself who never know the true pleasure of providing for your own security, providing for the security of your loved ones, and being empowered to defend freedom to its fullest potential. At the age of seven years, I fired my first gun. It was a 10 guage shotgun... it kicked me like a mule kicking a barn door, and I loved it. There were always guns of all size and calibre in my family's house. Myself and my siblings grew up with guns and we learned to use and respect them at an early age. We know their uses and purposes, and being in an environment without guns is alien to us. Heck, my baby sister is a highly skilled deer hunter with numerous mounts to prove it by. I'm not so bad either, nor is my baby brother. My nephews and nieces... they all are excellent marksmen. And I can guarantee you one thing above all else... nobody ever brings trouble to our doorsteps. Never.



posted on Dec, 21 2012 @ 06:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Underworlds
 


No offense taken, mate.
I often wish that I could have had the chance to use guns more often (I got to fire some really big guns, as well as pistols, in the Army...but only as long as I stayed in the Army.) and the chance to become a better marksman. But it is what it is. The gun control laws in my country are what most Swedes prefer, for some reason I do not understand. I guess the psyche as a whole is different in Sweden than America.

I, however, am not most Swedes. I do not fear guns, and I do not approve of the gun politics in my country. But it is what it is. However, I very much plan to move to the US, marry my girlfriend, and in time become an American citizen. And I will most definitely exercise my right to bear arms when I have sworn the Oath of Allegiance. In my opinion, that is one of the (many!) reasons why America is one of the greatest countries in the world.
edit on 21-12-2012 by Gauss because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 21 2012 @ 06:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Gauss
 


EXCELLENT! If your ambitions in life include swearing allegiance to America and our Constitution, I most definitely applaud you and welcome you. I can only hope for you that your plans come to full fruition.

I must admit, however, that you have stated twice that "it is what it is" and that, in my personal opinion, is the philosophy of the already defeated. Nothing ever really is what it is. Things are what you make them to be. Sometimes, not you alone, but you as a part of a larger move for greatness.



posted on Dec, 21 2012 @ 09:40 PM
link   
I'm one of those people that I guess you could call "anti-guns" (I use this term loosely).

First off I don't carry, nor does anyone in my immediate family. My reasoning is as simple as this - When my dad joined the military, he was told that you always try to find a way to do something without shooting. He was also taught that if you pull out your gun, you better be using it, not just waving it around saying "I'll shoot! I'll shoot!".

For reference, he used to work in all the "bad" parts of Michigan (Outskirts of Detroit, Pontiac, sometimes Flint), and used to live in some of the rougher areas of Ohio - at the time, he was the only one in his workplace that never carried a gun into these areas (Side note: the outskirts of Detroit aren't really a fan of white people - not trying to be or sound racist).

Now, even though I'm "anti-gun", I still feel that it's wrong to say that "all guns are evil; we must dispose of them", especially if the person has the proper training. If this were to be on a ballet, saying we are "getting rid of all guns", I wouldn't vote for it. I would however, vote for legislation that requires gun owners to undergo a yearly mental exam (at no cost to the owners - maybe have it covered by the state?) - if you fail the exam, or fail to take the exam, then they should temporarily take the guns away.

Also, even if a theoretical ban on guns were achieved - there's still one major problem: The Black Market. It wouldn't take much for a criminal to find a gun on there. Problem with this is that if it's "illegal" to use a gun, then how would anyone take care of the criminal with the gun?

I also feel it would be a mistake to let anyone except for the police, or another person of similar sort have guns in or on any school property - Think about it: Even the most trained person, when surprised, will have a surge of adrenaline coursing through their system. If a gunman suddenly pulled out a gun in front of you, and you happened to have a gun on hand, I doubt you'd be able to "shoot to kill" without hurting someone else in the process? There's a reason why if a gunman is in a public place, the police don't just start "opening fire"; They're trained to take the environment into consideration. I know there'll be a little backlash with this point, but bear in mind this is an observation (I mean, shooting a person can't be in the same category as shooting a deer, because last I checked, the deer aren't armed & shooting back at you).

Just some thoughts.
-Fossilera



posted on Dec, 21 2012 @ 11:42 PM
link   
reply to post by fossilera
 


From where I stand, there's only one thing that I find wrong with what you posted, fossilera... there shouldn't be any backlash from the point that you were making.

The choice not to arm one's self is the right choice to make, if that person thinks for even a moment that he or she will be unable to pull the trigger when needed, or if he or she feels uncertain about keeping the safety of non-target others primary in his or her concern. Not everyone is cut out to use firearms for the defense of others or themselves because when split seconds mean the difference between life or death, making the wrong decision can have consequences that will haunt a person forever.

Even still, the conscious decision to not arm one's self, regardless of the reasons behind that decision, is and should always be a personal choice - not mandated by the wills of others. Choosing not to arm one's self doesn't necessarily make that person (such as yourself) "anti-gun" by definition. I don't know you, but I doubt that you would mind too much if someone such as myself were to use a firearm, if needed, in your defense or in the defense of your wife, children, mother, father or some other person that you love and care for. And if I am correct - if you wouldn't mind that someone such as myself saved you or your loved ones from certain death by defending you or your loved one with my firearm - then you are not "anti-gun". You would then only be someone who prefers not to assume the highest level of responsibility measurable in life-threatening circumstances - that responsibility being the decision to kill or be killed.



posted on Dec, 22 2012 @ 02:54 AM
link   
Legislation is more readily passed than a solution to the problem.

Government solves no problems all it does is take liberty and collects revenue... not to mention labor for things it decides should be illegal or controlled.

Maybe just maybe we should look into the problem. The sad part is that we are too busy fighting against people trying to take our freedoms to be able to do that.

Too many people are already brainwashed into believing that relinquishing your rights is the best course of action.

sometimes I do not even blame them. We have reared a bunch dumb kids who are hopped up on drugs, have bad nutrition, and lack discipline. Instead of coping with emotional problems they are drugged, instead of getting into shape they are told they have a medical problem and they are drugged, instead of learning discipline they bend rules to allow kids to get away with anything and bind parents hands.

I won't even get into the violent entertainment they are exposed too since they are born.

all of this leads to a sick nation that is unfit to have all the rights we are now losing. It is just a no brainer. There are many that still are fit but the ones who are not are becoming more abundant.

I think we will lose everything because many in our nation have become unfit to have those rights. everytime we try to fight for our rights some more retards go on and do something to make us look bad.

I am mainly talking about guns. If I didn't know any better I would say these attacks are planned but if you have seen how bad our youth are today..... I don't think they have to plan anything.




posted on Dec, 22 2012 @ 10:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Underworlds
reply to post by Gauss
 


EXCELLENT! If your ambitions in life include swearing allegiance to America and our Constitution, I most definitely applaud you and welcome you. I can only hope for you that your plans come to full fruition.

I must admit, however, that you have stated twice that "it is what it is" and that, in my personal opinion, is the philosophy of the already defeated. Nothing ever really is what it is. Things are what you make them to be. Sometimes, not you alone, but you as a part of a larger move for greatness.


Thanks, man. I hope so too. And you're right, it is a bit of a defeatist attitude. Perhaps one day there will be gun reform in my country, but currently the consensus among the Swedish people is there is no need for it, so until something turns for the worse, it will not change I'm afraid.

It isn't entirely illegal to own firearms, though, but it IS illegal to carry them in public, even if concealed.

Personally I do not have the energy to take the debate in Sweden because people are not willing to listen to any suggestions that do not follow the current gun laws. They seem to believe that allowing carrying of firearms would lead to gunfights in the streets similar to the wildest of Wild West movies.

To me, it doesn't matter enough to waste the energy, since I plan to live in Sweden for less than one more year before moving to the US. And I can tell you, as far as gun politics go, it will be a fresh wind of common sense, to move to the US.



posted on Dec, 22 2012 @ 10:31 AM
link   
I am not sure about, but they can even change your state religion, after they dissarm you...
edit on 22-12-2012 by dragnik because: addition of photo

Gift from...
edit on 22-12-2012 by dragnik because: addition of photo



posted on Dec, 22 2012 @ 10:31 AM
link   
The problem with those calling for "common sense" gun control and compromise is that they talk a good game but have an agenda that is based neither in common sense nor compromise. Those leading the charge have been very clear that they don't want compromise. Only during the debate do they say that but when they are nice and comfortable among those who think alike, their agenda is stated clearly......... a total ban and confiscation. What do they mean when they say "we have to get these _________ off the street"? They really mean get them away from you and me, which means take them.

Those who are pro gun know that a if a compromise is made today, tomorrow we will be asked to compromise again. Then the next day another compromise. Each time we will be demonized for being unwilling to compromise until there is nothing left to compromise and your rights are essentially gone.

The anti gun agenda does not want compromise. They want disarmament. This will be accomplished in small increments under the heading of 'common sense'.

The problem, as others have stated, is not guns. The problem is glorifying gangs and 'thugs' in music, tv and movies. The music industry is the worst and coincidentally the most influential. Criminal and immoral behavior is not only promoted but glorified as something to aspire to. Then we have the medical industries tendency to answer any medical condition with swift medication. Many of the drugs prescribed, even if not for a mental disorder, are mind altering.

So you have wannabe gangsters pumped full of both prescribed and illegal drugs trying to emulate a glorified lifestyle that promotes crime and violence and what do you get? The anti gun folks won't point the blame at that influence because for the most part they are the ones making all the money off of it, so .. blame the guns.

However, try and point the conversation in that direction and you are accused of bigotry, racism and hatred.



posted on Dec, 22 2012 @ 12:27 PM
link   
Primordial, you make a fair point. I do not have any answers, but my instinctive feeling is that "we" need to compromize - to a certain point - and never, ever, let ourselves be dragged farther than that point. Draw a line in the sand, but don't draw it where we're currently standing. Be ready to give *a little* ground.

I hope that made sense. It did sound a bit flaky.


From one thing to another, I'm a friend of the (legendary?) journalist Robert Young Pelton, on Facebook, and he posted the following on his wall. To me it makes sense, and at the very least it adds to the discussion, so I will copy and paste it here:

My two cents (By Robert Young Pelton):

1) Rampage murderers chose soft targets. So security is just going to shift them to work, malls or playgrounds. The idea is to kill as many innocent helpless people as possible and then blow your brains out.

2) Similar events happen all over the world and involve a variety of weapons from aircraft to knives to rocks. Guns are not the problem. Just an easy to use tool.

3) Gun control is a completely separate "hot button" issue that cannot be solved without a major constitutional battle. Many other countries have a bizarre mix of laws ranging from outright bans to complex restrictions. Regulating the legal activities of law abiding citizens does not stop criminals. There is a problem with the use of weapons in crime and domestic violence in America. But Chicago is a perfect example of the failure of gun legislation to stop this.

4) Politically our government should focus on statistically relevant problems versus news worthy politicking. Gay marriage, gun legislation, tax the rich etc etc are irrelevant to basic but unsexy underlying problems like education, health care and safety. The TSA is what happens when a government is allowed to "solve" a problem.

5) If a community feels threatened by violence they should have to right to deal with it rather than wait for beltway bandaids that will never actually resolve the underlying problems. If armed guards are wanted they should be hired, if another solution is deemed better so be it. We are all responsible for our own safety, law enforcement can only responds to crime they cannot successfully guard everyone or monitor millions of potential criminals.

6) The effects of "more" security can be viewed by statistically comparing violent Britain, one of the most violent nations on earth versus peaceful Somalia. Societal structure, control and enforcement is the key to reigning in misfits not national bandaids. If every American had a camera planted in his/her head it still would not stop insane people from doing violence.

7) Some people hate guns, usually those that are inexperienced, uncomfortable or blissfully ignorant of how to store and use them properly. Those that know how to use them would be very hesitant to discharge them in crowded school or office. This skill of surgical killing is only mastered by the most elite counter terrorism forces like the SAS, Devgru and CAG and even they are very concerned about innocent casualties. Some police SWAT units are also expert but share the same concern.

8) Turning the government (who hire security to protect from their constituents) and the wealthy (who hire security to protect them from their fans) into a gun nation while removing guns from the masses is a very elitist concept and at odds with democracy.

9) Most experts that speak out on gun control are rarely providing advice on how to actually stop random members of society from unleashing violence but rather how to restrain all members of society for the potential actions of a few insane people.

10) Many people like myself sense that there are motivators and indicators to identify potential rampage shooters. Stress, drugs, social retardation, repressed emotions etc can be indicators. There are real time psychiatrists and law enforcement professionals that study this field with jumpers, hostage takers and suicide threateners. I see very little posted or discussed in this area.

11) there is no number eleven.
edit on 22-12-2012 by Gauss because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 22 2012 @ 01:32 PM
link   
A single armed security guard could have prevented the massacre!

In this world we will always have nut jobs and the best option is to be prepared by having guards at schools and other "soft targets"! We guard banks, but not our children! At least once a week a kid is taken and tortured to death by some nut job.

Even if Lanza had not been able to get guns he could have done just as much damage or more using other means. Thank God he didn't walk in with a homemade flame thrower or similar. Thank God he didn't take his time and level the place with explosives etc... What if "What if" he had just walked in and started kicking down doors and tossed homemade grenades/pipe bombs in?

There is only one way to stop a person bent on killing others and himself, and this by direct confrontation. The only answer is to guard the children!

Common sense seems to be missing in Americas politics. Instead of meaninful change we will instead be surrendering our guns to a goverment which has killed and continues to kill thousands of children in Iraq and beyond.. If you trust a system which is for sale to the person willing to spend the most and you expect it to always have your best interests at heart. Then you are a fool! I wonder how many Jews trusted that Germany would always have their best interests at heart?

To sit and pretend that a gun ban is to safe guard children is complete nonsense! It is to further a power grabbing tyranical agenda! In the last decade or so many power grabs have been made and some of our most basic rights have been stripped away. IT IS TIME TO STAND YOUR GROUND PEOPLE! If they had taken all these rights at the same time we would have fought to the last breath! Why is it ok piecemeal? If it quacks like a duck and swims like a duck it's an FN duck people!

Gun free zones are targeted because they are defenseless, just as an unarmed America would be defenseless!

If we abandon the law which our country was founded on then we invite another Hitler to power etc... Elections can be bought in America, but at the end of the day none can trespass to far because American citizens constitute the largest armed force on the planet! Would you really like to see a helpless American public? I know that I would not want to see that!

A well armed American public has kept tyranny at bay for 200+ years! It is not time to open the door to tyranical goverment!

blog.beliefnet.com...


“Then they took our guns

“Next came gun registration. People were getting injured by guns. Hitler said that the real way to catch criminals (we still had a few) was by matching serial numbers on guns. Most citizens were law abiding and dutifully marched to the police station to register their firearms. Not long afterwards, the police said that it was best for everyone to turn in their guns. The authorities already knew who had them, so it was futile not to comply voluntarily.


Kitty Werthmann

“No more freedom of speech. Anyone who said something against the government was taken away. We knew many people who were arrested, not only Jews, but also priests and ministers who spoke up.

“Totalitarianism didn’t come quickly, it took 5 years from 1938 until 1943, to realize full dictatorship in Austria. Had it happened overnight, my countrymen would have fought to the last breath. Instead, we had creeping gradualism. Now, our only weapons were broom handles. The whole idea sounds almost unbelievable that the state, little by little eroded our freedom.”

“This is my eye-witness account."

“It’s true. Those of us who sailed past the Statue of Liberty came to a country of unbelievable freedom and opportunity.

“America is truly is the greatest country in the world.

“Don’t let freedom slip away.

“After America, there is no place to go.”


Dont think it could happen here in America? Then you are deluded! Had the jews of Nazi Germany been armed like the America public we never would have seen 50 million killed in WWII! It is very likely that Hitler would have been taken out early in his career!

We absolutely do maintain a balance of power by purchasing and keeping all the arms we can get a hold of! It is a silent trust, and it most certainly keeps tyranny in check.

All this talk is just reason to buy more assault rifles! Anyone else here notice that hi cap magazines are getting scarce?

I think we need a million man armed march (Peaceful of cource) to hammer the issue home!

The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed!

YOU CAN HAVE EM WHEN YOU PRY EM FROM COLD DEAD HANDS!

I am honor bound by the constitution of this land to stand against tyranny in all its manifestations, as are YOU! Limiting Americans rights to keep and bear arms leaves the American populace weak and defenseless.

When we vote for a president it a choice between two persons who have been pre selected by corrupt systems. Our media ignores true merit and instead props up the plastic men with billions of dollars backing them. America is ripe for Fascism and in my mind the need for a well armed populace is greater than any other time in history.
edit on 22-12-2012 by Donkey_Dean because: (no reason given)






top topics



 
10
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join