Pro-gun vs. Anti-gun

[Watch Me Sink]

Can you give me any statistics to support that? In states such as Alaska, most people who carry guns in public are actually law abiding citizens. And are you telling me that people going to shooting ranges and gun shows are comitting crimes?

The logic you use is distorted at best.

 

[Lorcan]

First of all, a lot of gang members carry weapons and what do gang members do? they commit crime. And second off all I am not talking about going to shooting ranges and gun shows, I am talking about walking around in public with a gun at your side. And you can get a permit to do this in America but they have many rules such as,

You can not go to a Public or private elementary and secondary schools either inside or within 1,000 feet of these areas Some ban carry from all such establishments such as retail liquor stores and supermarkets.

Government buildings (State Capitol, courthouses, police stations, federal buildings, post offices).Public accommodations (theaters, concert halls, indoor shopping malls).Public events (polling places, state fairs, stadiums and other sporting venues).

So why would you even bother bringing a gun around in public.
You don't even know what your talking about, you have no idea how the system works you just think that you can carry a gun around with you with no problem, so you might what to check your logic.

 

[Cosmic]

So, let's say that guns were to be banned. Would the gang members bow low and say, "Yes, oh great master Barrack Hussein Obama. Here are our guns!"No, they wouldn't.

Hmm, first guns, then tasers, what next? Will we not be able to carry pocket knives along with us because we're obviously evil gang members? And many of those rules you list either are state rules or should be state rules, according to the constitution. Gun rights is not a federal issue.

Let's say that evil sneering gang memberz walk around carrying guns all day long. Let's say that everyone out there has a gun and is an evil member of the mafia as you suggest. Why not carry a gun if this is true? If everyone with a gun is a sneering gangsta, then knowing how many people have guns in their cars, you are probably in great danger. If you go to walmart, I promise you that 10 cars have guns in them, or more. Many of those cars are owned by old white guys with clean records.

 

[Watch Me Sink]

First of all, a lot of gang members carry weapons and what do gang members do? they commit crime. And second off all I am not talking about going to shooting ranges and gun shows, I am talking about walking around in public with a gun at your side. And you can get a permit to do this in America but they have many rules such as,

You can not go to a Public or private elementary and secondary schools either inside or within 1,000 feet of these areas Some ban carry from all such establishments such as retail liquor stores and supermarkets.

Government buildings (State Capitol, courthouses, police stations, federal buildings, post offices).Public accommodations (theaters, concert halls, indoor shopping malls).Public events (polling places, state fairs, stadiums and other sporting venues).

So why would you even bother bringing a gun around in public.
You don't even know what your talking about, you have no idea how the system works you just think that you can carry a gun around with you with no problem, so you might what to check your logic.

First, your judgement of gang members is false. I know of many gangs that spend their time at the local Boys and Girls Club or at local churches.
/s

You may be suprised, but my town and county are comprised of mostly suburban area. Thus, the majority of area isn't comprised of government buildings, malls and public parks.

Why would I bring a gun around in public? Because I can. The constitution allows it. Why do people hold protests? They can. Rarely does a politician see protesters and base voting on the protesters (unless they happen to be donators to a campaign fund).

That last sentence is completely ignorant. You have no idea my knowledge or lack of when it comes to gun laws. In fact I could bet that the gun laws in my area are completely different to those in your area. Also using the exact words I used in my arguement shows immaturity and weakness in your arguement. I can argue with myself any day, though it is rarely as entertaining as arguing with others.

 

[Nicholi]

Most people who carry a gun in public have caused a crime or are going to commit a crime. So that is why you should not be allowed to carry a gun in public for the safety of others and to stop crime.

Not to be mean here, but the points that you stated here are totally ignorant...for one most people who carry a guns on themselves are law-abiding citizens who are exercising their 2nd amendment rights. Most criminals or as you said "going to commit a crime" would not be carrying their gun within sight of most people. So I find this statement very offensive as I am always carrying my gun everywhere I go.

I carry my gun, because I know wherever I may go with my friends and family they will be protected. I know that by me having my service weapon with me at all times and keeping it both visible and sometime concealed has proven to have saved my life and many others!!

I have been working in the Security Industry for over 4 years and have seen so many reasons why people should be allowed to carry a gun, as long as the rules are followed and enforced as they are written.

This is just my current $0.02

 

[Ar180shooter]

I should fill in a few things here from GooseDenis' original post. Canada had a gun control law. You had to have a license to have a gun, and you can't use it or bring it to the mall or anything. He was right. (well over 50% by the way) The majority of Canadian gun-related crimes were done using smuggled American guns. That's basically what happens when they have the right to possess firearms and we don't.

I personally am anti-gun. I mean if you don't have the tools to be destructive, then, well, how are you gonna be destructive? That's my idealist side, at least. When I look at the United States and people who are anti-gun, unfortunately, they're fighting a lost war. Cuts unfortunately hurt (including if they are to rights). When I studied American History, the second amendment in the Bill of Rights is the one about guns, and the right to possess them, right? I was taught that the American people got the right in case the British wanted to invade them again. I guess that was then. To this day, I do think Amendment II is likely the most out-of-date right to any Bill or Charter of Rights, but maybe that's just me. Being a Canadian, it does scare me that people would be scared enough to have to bring guns to the mall, but what can I say? There are people out there who really misuse their rights and abuse them, but there are also others who only would ever have a gun just because they are scared someone will kill them and they have to defend themselves. Any right will have people properly and improperly using that particular right (I could go to marijuana, but it's late). Bottomline? As much as I hate having gun possession, there's nothing much I can, or want to do to ban it. I'm a big non-believer in an arms race, but banning guns wouldn't really do anything, as people will still carry firearms, I guarantee you. It's kind of like what CAN-SPAM did (or tried).

Firstly, removing legal access to a particular tool that may be used for destructive purposes does nothing to change the destructive nature of the person in question, nor does it prevent illegal access to the aforementioned tool. In both Canada and America, the production and distribution of marijuana is illegal, bu nobody would say that marijuana is unavailable because it is illegal. This is because prohibition of any kind is impossible to enforce in a free society. In order to effectively enforce a prohibition, civil rights need to give way.

But all of this is beside the point. If I'm a mentally stable law-abiding citizen who wants to own firearms for legitimate sporting and defensive purposes, why shouldn't I be able to? FYI I am Canadian, I have my firearms license, and my firearms are registered. So the real question is, why shouldn't I be able to legally carry a side arm on my person? By virtue of passing the rigorous background and mental health checks required to obtain a firearms license, the demographic group of licensed firearms owners are statistically less likely to commit a crime than the general population.

Secondly, your interpretation of the Second Amendment is incomplete. Although the British invading was a concern at the time, it was not the only reason why the founding fathers included the right to keep and bear arms in the Bill of Rights. The main purpose of the Second Amendment is to ensure that the population of the United States has the means to overthrow and establish a new government should the previous one become tyrannical. This is not at all surprising after you realize that the United States was founded in precisely this way. I would argue that this is the ultimate check on governmental power.

Thirdly, you're right that banning firearms won't do anything to prevent criminal organization from obtaining them. I do agree that we should aggressively prosecute those who illegally smuggle and traffic firearms, but how does preventing me from owning a handgun or "assault rifle" (I hate that phrase, especially considering the rifle is just a semi-auto carbine) change that?

Finally, for those who are using the percentage of a population in prison in a given country as a statistic that shows societies with less gun control are more violent... You obviously don't understand what you are talking about. Most of the offenders in U.S. prisons are there for drug crimes, most of them non-violent and totally unrelated to gun crime. Also, even if they all were for gun crimes, without analyzing arrest and prosecution rates in all of the nations cited, a higher jail population does not mean a more violent population. It could just mean that the U.S. has harsher sentencing or more effective prosecution. I don't necessarily believe that the previous statement is true, but irregardless of that, the previously quoted jail statistics are worse than useless.

Oh, and in case you couldn't tell, I'm pro-gun. 😉

 

[Watch Me Sink]

Welcome to Forum Promotion!

 

[Canadian Marksman]

I am very pro gun and agree with "Successful Promoter"
I have been shooting since I was 6
I have been around firearms all my life
I have been shooting competitively since I was 12
I am an 18 year veteran of the Canadian Military I have carried and used my firearms in the line of duty
and also a firearms instructor teaching advanced firearm tactics and skills to people who have never touched one
I spend on average about 3to4 months a year going through about 500 to 1000 rounds a week through that and spend another 2 to 3000 on my own
I shoot on a higher level than most police in competitions
I have also never been arrested or got anything higher than speeding ticket
But I cannot carry in Canada because our rights are being slowly taken away here

I think most people people who are anti gun get their firearms education from school, tv sitcoms (or other vehicles of social engineering something they "hear" or from somebody else that is anti gun.........kinda hard to make an educated opinion there eh?



I have read all the posts and all you anti firearms people are either flawed in your logic or outright wrong.

Anti-gun
Becouse most of legal guns also used in crimes.

WRONG on every level 'legal' guns are used 2.5 million times a year to properly and lawfully protect citizens.
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm

It is also statistically proven that U.S. states with concealed carry have less gun crime not more

Military grade weapons aren't used for self defense and should be almost banned from civilian ownership. I can hardly see any reason why one would need assault rifles and machine guns.

What is the definition of a "military grade" weapon?
are you talking about the lee enfield bolt action that uncle used to hunt with ? it was a military firearm or are you talking about the AR15 they use in Service rifle and NRA matches they "look" military but are not select fire so in that sense the lee enfield would be banned using the term "military grade" as its "as issued" I suggest you find out what your actually talking about before you talk about it.

second there are plenty of legal uses for ar15s etc I think you were just told there wasn't any and believing it.

3rd what you mean you can't "defend yourself" with a "military grade weapon"

I DID!!!! WHAT DO YOU THINK THEY ARE MADE FOR !!!!!!!!!

Frankly i don't care if your pro or anti but if your going to be anti esp rapid anti know your stuff

GooseDennis ...........let me guess you want to move to toronto ...........I hear its illegal to fly kites there

 

[Watch Me Sink]

Military grade weapons include but are not limited to: Bazookas, Cannons, Tanks, Atomic Bombs, Bombs, various poisonous gasses (such as Mustard Gas, Nerve Gas, Agent Orange).

If you can prove why one would need a tank and/or a bazooka to defend one's self, enlighten me. It could change my view.

 

[Canadian Marksman]

Military grade weapons include but are not limited to: Bazookas, Cannons, Tanks, Atomic Bombs, Bombs, various poisonous gasses (such as Mustard Gas, Nerve Gas, Agent Orange).

If you can prove why one would need a tank and/or a bazooka to defend one's self, enlighten me. It could change my view.

Funny I thought we were talking guns aka small arms and not what you mentioned above ............nice attempt to divert the subject

you would save more face by acknowledging you were wrong or......


maybe your proving my point that anti gun people will twist skew and out right lie to prove them selves right

many people own tanks armored vehicles and such without running amok

an interesting side note cannons tanks and bazookas(aka rocket launchers and recoiless rifles) are legal in Canada but their ammunition is controlled

as for chemical agents ...........look under your kitchen sink there's all you need to make them

I also find it interesting that you want me to justify what others may need!!!!!! sorry i am not that arrogant or full of myself to attempt that

do you really want to live in a place where only what you need is permitted and dictated by others? i guarantee you would not have a happy life look at prison!

I would like to add something as well
the second amendment was based on british law ..........YES British law
and that is rooted back over more than a 1000 years

you see a free man can defend himself a slave cannot just as in roman times slaves had weapons under threat of death freemen could carry a sword
(you don't hear that in college)

 

[Gimgak]

Kirisute is pro-gun though...

 

[Canadian Marksman]

not if you want to ban "military grade" weapons what ever that term means
a gun is a gun is a gun
the anti firearms camp will not be bargained with will not be swayed until they are all gone and that is it. and here in Canada they get alot of taxpayer money ( though most don't know it ) to plead their case.

you see its all about incremental ism.......today we ban full autos.......then we ban short barreled pistols(what ever that means) then we move on to military weapons(sorry but grandpas lee enfield has to go to the smelter now for the public good) then shot guns ..........that's how it works

actually one of the best strategy's for the anti gun camp is to put the hunters against competition shooters .......it has worked quite well here in Canada but we are now wiser to their ways

@GooseDennis
why would you start such a thread and run away from it ?
..I don't hate liberals just people who call themselves liberals and think being a liberal is dictating to others how to live thier lives

 

[Watch Me Sink]

Kirisute is pro-gun though...

Which somebody fails to see. Also note I put "but not limited to." I don't think it should be legal for civilians to own assault rifles or machine guns either.

As for chemical agents, it's quite possible to make a form of mustard gas, but I don't think any of us have the capabilities to make Agent Orange in our house.

Note, I didn't read your entire post mainly for the lack of grammar and the consistant bolding. I probably left the door open for something that I didn't notice to be used against me, that I haven't defended my position on. I don't care the least bit.

 

[Canadian Marksman]

Which somebody fails to see. Also note I put "but not limited to." I don't think it should be legal for civilians to own assault rifles or machine guns either.

so tell me then what do you consider an assault rifle?

tell me your definition of a machine gun?

and please tell me how you cannot defend yourself with one.

Yes i am calling you out, because here in canada they said they would ban full autos and other firearms and leave us alone .......guess what! They want hand guns and All Semi Autos now.


BTW

I have noticed many errors in spelling and grammar but I have not called anyone out on it. As I realize i am not perfect :lol:

 

[Watch Me Sink]

I don't know model numbers and such because I am not in the military (yet). But use your best judgement of what an assault rifle and a machine gun is.

And I was referring to the complete lack of grammar and such. I make spelling and grammatical errors as well, but lack of punctuation and capitalization makes reading hard.

 

[Ar180shooter]

I don't think it should be legal for civilians to own assault rifles or machine guns either.

Why not? And how are you defining an "assault rifle". Is it ok for civilians to own semi auto rifles?

 

[Canadian Marksman]

AR180
don't bother they're not "getting it" and your question will be dodged.

If answered I expect it to go the same route as Handguns here in Canada.
"you can't hunt with them...so why have them"
......any because some Jack@$$ made it illegal to do so

eg

the difference between an assault rifle and lets say a semi remington R15 is minimal but i would wager the r15 would be evil because the looks of such a device would obviously inspire one to kill babies and such

trying to explain the difference between the two is futile.

once they get rid of those then it will be hunting rifles .........but they will be "high powered sniper rifles" then

once it starts with guns it will next be cars (nobody needsa ferrari.

then it will other things then everything else where somebody other than your self will dictate your life

the difference between you , me and anti gunners is that we don't tell others how to live but they do and get off on it. they're control freaks

your typical anti firearms person is scared and knows nothing about guns except what they are told by cultural engineers........listen to what Oprah and Dr Phil says but don't think for yourself :roll:

the more fanatical ones will attack with insults twist, and skew facts and manipulate logic to suit themselves. What I love the most about two people arguing about gun control is when the anti-gun advocate dismisses certain hard to debate arguments and moves the topic to something else....

 

[katy perry is hot]

To the both of you (although you probably are the same person), no way, in no how, should ANY citizen be permitted to keep and bare a military grade weapon. That means assault rifles, sniper rifles, and anything else that uses a 5.56. Oh, and sub machine guns also.

To be quite frank, I appreciate your service in the military, but that doesn't give you the right to bare heavy weaponry in your home. No one has that right. I don't care if you are David Petreaus or recently recruited army private. By possessing this type of weaponry, you take "protecting your home and family" to an entirely different level.

 

[Canadian Marksman]

To the both of you (although you probably are the same person), no way, in no how, should ANY citizen be permitted to keep and bare a military grade weapon. That means assault rifles, sniper rifles, and anything else that uses a 5.56. Oh, and sub machine guns also.

:rofl:

Myself and AR180 are not the same person and I don't even know what country he is in.

I guess that was an attempt to discredit two people who might hold similar views contrary to yours.

regarding firearms you obviously do not know what your talking about.

Some would just call it ignorance i call it bigotry

The point already made is just about any gun can be considered military grade!

you said "no 5.56"....so i guess that means no .223 rem as well / no 7.62....or 308....that means no 303, 4570, hey lets ban muzzle loaders as well !!!!!!!

and you probably don't realize that there are well established sports, and hunters use those calibers and horrible evil rifles of which you speak, but i guess you know whats better for others.

I bet you don't even know why you don't like them ...........by using your same logic one could ban minivans........they are in alot of accidents and crappy drivers use them :rofl:

please impress me more with your firearms knowledge ....some more...or do you have to catch up on tv to get your knowledge up?

BUT HEY YOU KNOW WHATS GOOD FOR EVERYBODY! :rofl: ....just like the government of Rwanda in 1994.

To be quite frank, I appreciate your service in the military,

Why? I didn't fight in your army.
The only reason i brought up my job is its a reflection of my experience, judging by some of the posts here many of you who love to lord over others , your firearms experience likely is limited to watching tv.

By possessing this type of weaponry, you take "protecting your home and family" to an entirely different level.

BTW I don't own firearms to "protect my home and family" some are heirlooms some are for competition I have one or two just for fun.
I am in Canada remember? .....Our right to bear was taken away some time ago and the same people instituted a hug a thug policy so you basically get about 7 years for murder now...My firearms are stored in accordance with the law....I live in a very safe community and know most of the police who patrol personally but at the same time that does not mean my situation won't change. Just because I don't need to protect myself I don't make the judgment for others. like some who consider themselves so enlightened do so

By the way I have been all over over north America (Canada and the U.S.) I have yet to see one fist fight at a competition or among the spectators........hockey and soccer games is another story....maybe we should ban them

Tell ya what Irviding, you live the way you want ...........but don't tell others whats best for them particularly when you don't know what your talking about.

but hey you gotta hate somebody i guess

 

[Watch Me Sink]

Irviding, funny how we were both called out for having such a pro-gun view early in the topic, and now our views (very similar) don't seem to be radical enough.

And what's the chance that two radical pro-gun users sign up here within days of each other, and this topic is their only contribution...