Should guns be banned?

[Ruhani777]

Guns shouldn't be banned. In some places in the United States, crime rates are high, and homicides are skyrocketing. Such places would be washington d.c. itself. although it may look pretty, the outskirts are dangerous. If you ban guns, then it would kill the sense of security in law abiding citizens, and just give the criminals an oppurtunity to strike. Guns shouldn't be banned, they should have heavy restrictions on them.

What do you think?

[:)]

They could "ban" guns...but people would still have them so it's sorta pointless.

[Ruhani777]

if it wernt for guns, people would have no way of protecting themselves from those who use them for dangerous purposes.

[Deliciously_Saucy]

Living in Australia (a place with very strict gun laws) I can say it's a double edged sword...

Increasing gun laws, or banning them is really not the wisest idea, all I can see it doing is taking the peoples ability to defend themselves from criminals who can acquire guns with ease.

In Australia, while you can get a firearm (you need a large safe bolted deeply to the ground, you must have passed a gun handling safety test and you must very actively participate in gun club sporting competitions) it is impossible to get one for self defense, as the penalties are just to high to be caught with a concealed weapon, let alone pointing it at someone about to mug you. It's also illegal to have any form of weapon, including many simple knives (even in your own home as decoration). I don't feel safe, criminals have the upper hand in all situations, and I would get a jail term if I was shot and stabbed the attacker in self-defense.

I don't think gun laws in America should be made any stricter, nor should they ban them. Simply put; all you are doing is taking away the peoples right to defend themselves. 

[biohazard]

How about the banning of guns for all pedestrians, so only authority figures can have them (ie cops), but not banning (maybe even to go as far as to issue) self defense weapons to people that do not have a criminal record?

[Roph]

No guns allowed in the UK, and as a result never hear about them really. Including in crime. Stabbing seems to be the current fad.

Per populace, there's much less genocide without guns, so why allow them?

[Ruhani777]

burney, in some places, crime rates are high, no way the cops have time to respond to all emergencies, so citizens need something to defend themselves. and in the mean time, they need to explain what happened to cops, and have a lawyer ready just in case. Although criminals make their deaths seem like homicides, when the other person shoots them or whatsoever. So yeah, really, they have the upper hand in almost anything, but why let your life a waste, just cuz you aint have nuthin to protect yourself.

[biohazard]

self defense weapons to people that do not have a criminal record?

[Ruhani777]

thats the kind of restrictions they need to have

[Deliciously_Saucy]

No guns allowed in the UK, and as a result never hear about them really. Including in crime. Stabbing seems to be the current fad.

Per populace, there's much less genocide without guns, so why allow them?

That was part of the double edged sword I was talking about, gun violence is quite low in Australia, but only so because the laws where introduced at such an early stage. America has a large gun influence, the criminals would know how to acquire them even if there was a full and complete ban and at this stage (in America) it would simply being doing more harm then anything else.

Gun control works in countries that introduce them at early stages, it is not something that would meet the US's current situation.

[biohazard]

Thats why my idea is a little less drastic, I think that guns could be banned, but self defence items (tasers, tear gas, riot gun, etc.) could be allowed to people without a criminal record.

[Ruhani777]

they should have access to those weapons, but id prefer anesthetic dart guns, then it wont be such a big deal, and if people were taught the right way to aim at a hostile and bring them down without killing them, then yeah, thatll work.

[biohazard]

Yeah, but you also have to bring into account the whiplash from this, if this ever happened in America, there would be large amounts of protesting, probably rioting, and I'm sure a lot of paranoid people like me would think it's just one step in global unification.

[Ruhani777]

banning guns is an offense to the second amendment, so yeah, wuts the point, ever heard of the waco massacre?

[Deliciously_Saucy]

Why put restrictions on gun ownership? I think a better answer would be to more harshly punish the abusers rather then trying to stop it before it happens. People deserve the right to own guns, it comes down to freedom.

[Ruhani777]

people have been doing that for the last 50 years, doesnt seem to work, and theres no way of stopping homicide, unless you take away the right to bear and keep arms, and close down all the gun stores in America, then yeah, a violent revolution is really worth it 



Any ways


The Waco, Texas Massacre

Many people believe that David Koresh (or the Branch Davidians) were responsible for the deaths of the 74 men, women and children who died in the inferno at Waco on April 19, 1993. This is the story that the FBI put out. It is a lie. The guns they had were legal. The local sheriff investigated and found no basis for complaints against them. These were law-abiding American citizens, even if they thought differently to most other folks. They trusted the U.S. Constitution to ensure their political rights, but they were murdered by agents acting under the authority of the U.S. government. Read this page if you believe otherwise. If you still have doubts, get the video Rules of Engagement for visual evidence. Or read the book Armageddon in Waco. Or see the film Waco: A New Revelation.

Waco occurred under the presidency of Bill Clinton, with Janet Reno and Wesley Clark in supporting roles. Already back in 1993 the US government demonstrated its contempt for the American people by carrying out a massacre in order to "demonstrate" (on prime time TV) its supposed "authority" (a tactic favored by fascist governments). Following the usurpation of the presidency in 2000 by the psychopath George W. Bush, and the subsequent installation of the insane John Ashcroft as Bush's Himmler, things became much worse. On 9/11 about forty times as many people were murdered as at Waco. In both cases the murderers have so far gone unpunished.

After the February raid by the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF) of David Koresh's dissident religious community at Waco, Texas, the FBI and the U.S. Army took over, mounting a 51-day siege. This included such psy-war tactics as sleep deprivation of the inhabitants of the community by means of all-night broadcasts of recordings of the screams of rabbits being slaughtered.

Finally, despite David Koresh's pledge to surrender upon completion of his written explanation of the meaning of the Seven Seals, the FBI and the Army attacked. At dawn on April 19, 1993, and throughout the morning, tanks rammed holes in the main building and pumped (in the FBI's words) "massive amounts" of CS gas into the building, despite knowing that inside were more than a dozen children. The tanks demolished parts of the compound and created tunnels for the wind to blow through. The buildings at this point were saturated with inflammable CS gas and spilled kerosene.

Around midday two U.S. military pyrotechnic devices were fired into the main building, igniting a fire which (because of the holes in the walls allowing the wind to gust through) spread rapidly through the complex of buildings and became an inferno. 74 men, women and children died — including twelve children younger than five years of age. Fire trucks were prevented by the FBI from approaching the inferno. After the compound had burned down the BATF flag was hoisted aloft to signify 'victory'. Subsequently the burned-out ruin was razed in an attempt to remove all evidence of this premeditated murder of innocent civilians by agents of the U.S. government. Thus occured an atrocity which many Americans believe could never happen in their country. A look at the evidence presented in the film Waco: Rules of Engagement (and in the BBC documentary broadcast in the U.K. on November 28, 1998) shows that it did happen.

The lawyer for one of the survivors said at one of the U.S. government 'investigations' (or rather, whitewashes): In this country when people are accused of a crime they are arrested and given a trial — that's 'due process'. If found guilty of murder then maybe they are killed. We don't just kill them first — which is what happened at Waco.



As a result, the 51st Militia has been organized, to protect the second amendment, and to prepare for wahtever comes.

[biohazard]

Who cares, it's really only a matter of time until the "free" citizens of the world are destroyed.  The few contain all the power, and we are just cattle.

[Lominisio]

[sarcasm]Yes. Guns should be banned. That we we'll all have to go back to using spears and arrows to hunt animals and have more difficulty getting meat.[/sarcasm]

[Snailer]

What's a guns

[Lominisio]

[gonorrhea]

And surprisingly I actually agree with Ruhani.
I'm sad now, DS already covered everything I had to say
But for what it's worth, I intend on purchasing a gun (when I have the appropriate finances and satisfy all legal requirements) for self-defence and also for the gun range.

[Arrow]

The same here. These days, one can't trust the law to defend them. (Solely anyway. The police are AMAZING, I've seen their work firsthand, and I am a big fan, but it's just not possible for them to do it all alone.)

[biohazard]

Yeah, but I wouldn't shoot a bullet at someone above the waist unless I really needed to, remember, just use it for self defence, don't be a hero.

[Ruhani777]

guns ARE for self defense, really, shooting some one above the waste just kills them, and you're charged for manslaughter (Killing somebody in self-defense), its not a heavy charge. I'd just shoot the limbs, and they're disabled,

Limb with weapon

Knee caps, so attacker falls instantly

i really try to use dart guns, if needed, lead filled bullet guns (Shotguns and Handguns, and pistols)

[biohazard]

You spelled waist wrong, and manslaughter is a pretty heavy charge.  Shooting when they are disabled is also going to far, beleive me, one shot to the kneecap and they will go down. it is the most painful place to get shot in the entire body, aside from the stomach.