Gun Control is ridiculous

[baron]

Do you think that people being stabbed to death is "no social harm"? Then ban all knives!

Yes, ban the carrying of knives in public places. Like in the UK. Good idea.

 

[Lonewulf]

Yes, ban the carrying of knives in public places. Like in the UK. Good idea.

Indeed.

Next, let's ban chairs. We can hit others upside the head with it.

Then, ban any types of martial arts experience. They can be used to harm.

Then, ban any kind of pen or pencil, they can stab too.

 

[CFLarsen]

Where did I say this?

Ranb

There is no social harm in my owning guns.

Are you saying that it is only the others who cause problems?

 

[Lonewulf]

Are you saying that it is only the others who cause problems?

The ones that intend to use their weapons for harm, yes. Notably gangsters, drug dealers, rapists, etc.

 

[Tmy]

You can only carry around knives of certain legnth.

 

[baron]

The guns are ALREADY IN CIRCULATION. They're in the homes of every single citizen here.

There are 37500 guns sold in the US every single day. I think preventing 14 million shiny new guns appearing per year on the streets is a reasonably logical first step to addressing the problem, no?

http://ojjdp.ncjrs.org/pubs/gun_violence/sect01.html

You just kept law-abiding citizens with no criminal record from getting guns. Way to go, genius! That REALLY shows those criminals!

That's right, all 14 million new guns in 2007 will go to stalwart, well-behaved citizens who will keep them secure and safe and nobody will ever be harmed by them. Ahhhh.

Next, let's ban chairs

Yes, let's. Chair crime is getting totally out of control. I've heard gangs are using chairs made from metal tubing now, and they can cause nasty bruising.

Seriously, if you don't know the difference between a chair and a gun then that's the best argument for a firearms ban I've yet heard on this thread.

 

[Ranb]

Your argument. Your main argument. The thing you are arguing about.

And you're right, you don't need to call people freaks simply because their view differs from yours. It's kind of childish, don't you think?

Some people in this thread are saying that handguns are not useful for hunting, have no sporting uses, and are primarily intended for killing people. I have disputed this. I have also claimed that I do not value property over human life and that crack heads are losers. Did I miss anything?

Which one of these arguments has fallen apart?

I guess I could say "greatly excited and upset" instead of freak, but I like the word freak better when I describe people I do not respect (ex liars).

Ranb

 

[Lonewulf]

You can only carry around knives of certain legnth.

Not outside of city limits, however. Some of those hunting knives are pretty darn long. But then, maybe that's just in Texas...

 

[Lonewulf]

There are 37500 guns sold in the US every single day. I think preventing 14 million shiny new guns appearing per year on the streets is a reasonably logical first step to addressing the problem, no?

http://ojjdp.ncjrs.org/pubs/gun_violence/sect01.html

So how do you get rid of the guns already in existance? They will not "go away". What, you think the magical Gun Fairies will appear and poof them all away?

My grandmother has a Colt 1911. It belonged to my grandfather, who used it in WWII. It's one of the few memories she has of him. The colt 1911 is -- get this -- a HANDGUN. It is in my family. When she dies, it may very well go on to pass to me, or another member of my family.

Okay, so how do you prevent this? Are you going to rip this handgun out of my family's hands? Or are you going to keep it in circulation?

That's right, all 14 million new guns in 2007 will go to stalwart, well-behaved citizens who will keep them secure and safe and nobody will ever be harmed by them. Ahhhh.

The majority of them do, yes. For every person that breaks the law are many many many that do not. I'm sorry, but I do not have the dim look on humanity that you do, that I think that they have to be completely controlled.

Oh, and by the way: Criminals can still buy guns from friends. How do you prevent this?

Yes, let's. Chair crime is getting totally out of control. I've heard gangs are using chairs made from metal tubing now, and they can cause nasty bruising.

I've heard of several gangs that use their fists, steel bars, and anything they can get their hands on.

What, you're saying that they don't? That once you get rid of all guns, they'll suddenly go away and become peaceful loving hippies?

Hell, there's a famous case here in the U.S. where a group of kids were connected to videogames (which was ludicrous), after killing a homeless man with their fists. Oh, but it's not a gun, so don't keep that in mind!

Seriously, if you don't know the difference between a chair and a gun then that's the best argument for a firearms ban I've yet heard on this thread.

Oh, I know the difference. I do not understand the difference between a violent individual that is prepared to kill to a violent individual that is prepared to kill with a gun, however.

You seem to think that guns will make people automatically insane, send them on shooting rampages, and transform people into psychopathic killers. I do not.

 

[Ranb]

Are you saying that it is only the others who cause problems?

Lets see, first I said, "There is no social harm in my owning guns." Then you said "How can you describe all those people shot to death as "no social harm"?"

I own guns, and since I have never shot or threatened anyone or let anyone use my firearms in an irresponsible manner, my gun collection is not causing any social harm. I was not speaking of American gun culture in general. I certainly was not talking about victims of violence. You are smart enough to know the difference but you want to equate me with those who kill.

If I separate all of humanity into two groups; me and others, then I can say that the "others" group is doing the killing, not me. What problems have I caused that you are aware of?

Ranb

 

[Skibum]

You seem to think that guns will make people automatically insane, send them on shooting rampages, and transform people into psychopathic killers. I do not.

Well we know at least one person posting in this thread has admitted that upon sight of a gun he will fly into a murderous rampage. Perhaps that is where he draws his idea that guns cause people to kill, because they would cause him to kill. Pehaps he thinks that most people who owns guns are willing to kill without provocation just as he is willing to.

 

[Lonewulf]

Well we know at least one person posting in this thread has admitted that upon sight of a gun he fly into a murderous rampage. Perhaps that is where he draws his idea that guns cause people to kill, because they would cause him to kill.

??????

Who said that? I totally missed that post.

 

[baron]

So how do you get rid of the guns already in existance? They will not "go away". What, you think the magical Gun Fairies will appear and poof them all away?

My suggestion was a possible first step. If you have a leak in your roof you plug the leak as best you can before you start mopping up. I don't know what this talk of gun fairies is, perhaps you can point me to any post in any thread by any forum member that says such a task would be simple and instant.

My grandmother has a Colt 1911. It belonged to my grandfather, who used it in WWII. It's one of the few memories she has of him. The colt 1911 is -- get this -- a HANDGUN. It is in my family. When she dies, it may very well go on to pass to me, or another member of my family.

Once the flood of tens of millions of guns has been stemmed we can worry about your grandmother's WWII Colt.

Okay, so how do you prevent this? Are you going to rip this handgun out of my family's hands? Or are you going to keep it in circulation?

OK, it's obviously important to you that we discuss your grandmother's Colt. In answer to your question, I would suggest that once a ban is in place the gun is permanently deactivated. Hopefully the loss of its potential to cause injury and death will not result in a lack of enjoyment for your grandmother or your family.

The majority of them do, yes. For every person that breaks the law are many many many that do not. I'm sorry, but I do not have the dim look on humanity that you do, that I think that they have to be completely controlled.

I've tended to be swayed mainly by facts in this argument, not my views on humanity.

Oh, and by the way: Criminals often buy their weapons from a friend, not from a legitimate store. Chew on that a while.

Hmm, you got me there...

Just kidding. I imagine the friend got them from the gun fairy then, no?

I've heard of several gangs that use their fists, steel bars, and anything they can get their hands on.

Have you now? So you know about street fighting? Maybe you can address my earlier question, the one in which I ask what the outcome would have been of the thousands of non-lethal fist fights I've witnessed if guns had been involved?

What, you're saying that they don't? That once you get rid of all guns, they'll suddenly go away and become peaceful loving hippies?

I would never suggest something so ridiculous. If you would like my opinion, ask properly and when I'm back on the forum I'll discuss it sensibly.

Oh, I know the difference. I do not understand the difference between a violent individual that is prepared to kill to a violent individual that is prepared to kill with a gun, however.

The latter is more likely to achieve his aim than the former. Do you understand now?

You seem to think that guns will make people automatically insane, send them on shooting rampages, and transform people into psychopathic killers. I do not.

There is a tiny element of truth to your assumption, but as usual you've massively overstated your point and turned it into a straw man.

 

[Skibum]

??????

Who said that? I totally missed that post.

The post wasn't in this thread, but its quite a stunner.

Think "Sky Marshalls"? Think that guns on a plane is a good idea?

Sorry, I don't have time for that. I don't have time to even contemplate the possibility of him being a "good guy". It takes less than 5 minutes to fly from any NY airport to WTC, and I do not have time to check with authorities to see if the guy with the gun is a "good guy" or not.

I'll kill the f***er. On the spot. No questions asked. He's dead.

What will you do?

 

[Lonewulf]

My suggestion was a possible first step. If you have a leak in your roof you plug the leak as best you can before you start mopping up. I don't know what this talk of gun fairies is, perhaps you can point me to any post in any thread by any forum member that says such a task would be simple and instant.

Oh, okay, then.

What do you think will happen when you recall guns from every single citizen that owns them? Or is that your second step?

Once the flood of tens of millions of guns has been stemmed we can worry about your grandmother's WWII Colt.

I'm plenty worried about it now, as you've more or less said that you want to make her a criminal for owning it.

OK, it's obviously important to you that we discuss your grandmother's Colt. In answer to your question, I would suggest that once a ban is in place the gun is permanently deactivated. Hopefully the loss of its potential to cause injury and death will not result in a lack of enjoyment for your grandmother or your family.

What if she doesn't want it deactivated? What if she wants it for self defense of her home and property?

Will you then want her arrested?

I've tended to be swayed mainly by facts in this argument, not my views on humanity.

"Facts"... sure, yeah. See your next piece here to see how much you understand "facts":

Hmm, you got me there...

Just kidding. I imagine the friend got them from the gun fairy then, no?

Wow. You just cannot add two and two together, can you?

GUNS = ALREADY OUT THERE.

PEOPLE = CAN BUY GUNS OUTSIDE OF STORES.

GUNS = HARD TO MOP UP.

There, you might be able to understand that.

Let's put it this way: how would a gun banning and recollection be any different than Prohibition?

Have you now? So you know about street fighting?

Certainly. I do research and I know what I read.

Maybe you can address my earlier question, the one in which I ask what the outcome would have been of the thousands of non-lethal fist fights I've witnessed if guns had been involved?

"Non-lethal"? Being beaten to death sure is non-lethal...

I would never suggest something so ridiculous. If you would like my opinion, ask properly and when I'm back on the forum I'll discuss it sensibly.

"Sensibly"? Like your comment on how people can't get guns illegally once you take them out of stores?

The latter is more likely to achieve his aim than the former. Do you understand now?

And what about when someone wants to defend himself? If he's unarmed, he cannot achieve his aim.

You don't seem to comprehend this little fact.

here is a tiny element of truth to your assumption, but as usual you've massively overstated your point and turned it into a straw man.

Then how come there are other gun-saturated societies where gun crimes are lower?

 

[Ranb]

??????

Who said that? I totally missed that post.

I think it might be this post. http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=16055&highlight=airplane

Ranb

 

[Lonewulf]

I think it might be this post. http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=16055&highlight=airplane

Ranb

Hm. That was certainly a calm and rational post.

I'll go with Crackmonkey's response there.

Kill authorities that are trying to be there to save your life -- Good.

Banning guns so individuals cannot protect themselves -- Absolute Good.

Mopping up all the guns and making criminals of those that refuse -- Good.

Think about the fact that criminals can still get guns illegally -- ERROR! RETRY/ABORT?

 

[shanek]

For protection. Black Talons (unfortunately no longer made)

Actually, they are, they just aren't called that anymore. Look for "Ranger SXT."

And, why in skeptics' name would I be blowing smoke off the barrel? That's movie/t.v. crap.

That's the only experience a lot of the gun control nuts have with guns, which is why it's laughable that one of them accused me of getting my info from Hollywood.

 

[shanek]

So, in the face of damning and extensive evidence,

What damning and extensive evidence? You have shown nothing other than some people are killed with guns. You must show, as Lonewulf (see? I spelled it right!) asked you, to show how those killings would not have taken place with more gun control in order to make this a valid point. Which you refuse to do.

And still... the massively elevated US firearms murder rate has not been addressed.

Yes, it has.

Asking a question equates to addressing the evidence?

Yes. It shows you have done no sort of regression analysis whatsoever showing that it's the mere presence of guns, and not a zillion other factors of which the War on Drugs is very probably the biggest, that is making the difference. Asking it in question form gives you the opportunity to respond to the criticism, which, again, you haven't done.

 

[shanek]

Hasn't the rate of violence (gun, youth, and not) been going down in the U.S., anyways?

Yes, for over 10 years now, even as the number of firearms increases and the number of gun control laws dwindles.

How do the gun control nuts explain that???