Author Topic: Gun control  (Read 7724 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Harrison

  • Tier 2
  • *
  • Posts: 15
  • Gender: Male
  • Let's all love Lain!
  • Current Mood: happy happy
Gun control
« on: January 04, 2013, 01:12:53 AM »
Gun control. An important topic worldwide that, since the massacre of school children in Newtown, Massachusetts several weeks ago, has been causing quite a stir in American politics. On one side, you have those showing that this is proof that "assault weapons" need to be kept out of the hands of citizens. On the other, you have those who say that massacres like this are an outlier, not the norm, and as such should not be used to infringe on the rights guaranteed to Americans through the second amendment. (Do note that these are simplifications, I mostly want to hear what you have to say instead of taking talking points from this introduction. Add whatever you'd like, in other words.)

So, the question is: Where do you stand on the issue?

I'm in a weird position: I do not support an "assault weapons" ban at all. Why? Because all that "assault weapon" means is "a gun that looks scary". That's it. All the things that make up an assault weapon are purely cosmetic and make no change to how deadly a gun could be. The gun doesn't determine a bullet's killing power, the bullet itself does.

But I do support more restrictions on acquiring guns. By this I mean I would be completely open to the idea of mandatory classes that would have to be gone through before purchasing a gun, classes that go over safety, proper usage, cleaning (many accidental shootings come from cleaning improperly), etc. A psychological exam should be a necessity as well, as it is for police officers. And of course, a waiting period while one gets all of this in order.

I like guns, but safety should be the number one thing we focus on. I'd be more than willing to have to do a few more things to acquire a gun (though in all honesty, I couldn't see myself buying one for a very long time) to help ensure the safety of others.

Stardale

  • Freebird Linguist-Actor
  • *
  • Tier 7
  • **
  • Posts: 3760
  • Gender: Male
    • Blog
  • Current Mood: happy happy
  • Discord ID: senseigab#6268
  • Twitter: senseigab
Re: Gun control
« Reply #1 on: January 04, 2013, 04:59:23 AM »
In class, we had a serious discussion about Emile Durkheim and his views on crime. To him, crime is normal, and it will happen not because of the person, but because of the society. The crime in the society is product of the community. It can never be stopped; hence, there must be law and punishment.

Why am I saying these things?

I think the idea of a total gun ban is a wrong move, as it defeats the purpose of having a gun - for protection. At this point, the only thing I can suggest is to implement gun usage programs (something like Drivers' Education including Ethics), stricter rules and harsher punishments to those who would abuse their "privilege" of having a gun. Unfortunately, I think these are too general; it requires something specific.

And speaking of massacres, here is another event that is equally bad as the Newtown Massacre:

The Maguindanao Massacre Part 1 of 2




[I may elaborate more on another post; just wanted to release what ideas I have at the moment.]

Unimaginative Username

  • Guest
Re: Gun control
« Reply #2 on: January 04, 2013, 06:32:07 AM »
These are the things that constitute an assault weapon in the Assault Weapons Ban:
Quote
In general, the AWB defined any firearm with a detachable magazine and at least two of certain other characteristics as an assault weapon.

For rifles, those characteristics included:

Telescoping stock
Pistol grip
Bayonet mount
Grenade launcher
Flash suppressor

For shotguns:

Telescoping stock
Pistol grip
A capacity to hold more than five rounds

For handguns:

Threaded barrels made to attach a barrel extender, handgrip or flash suppressor
A barrel shroud that can be used as a handhold
Weight of at least 50 oz. when unloaded

[I will come back an say what I think later when I have thought about it some more]

Tumbles

  • 海が私の心です。
  • *
  • Tier 7
  • **
  • Posts: 3956
  • Gender: Male
  • I am who I am, but not yet.
    • Big Palooka
  • Current Mood: cheerful cheerful
Re: Gun control
« Reply #3 on: January 04, 2013, 06:48:43 AM »
Australia banned gun ownership in 1997 I believe. There has only been one school massacre since then, and it was from an international student. We've been massacre-free for over a decade now. I don't have any strong views on the subject, but I do feel that no one with a gun is a lot safer than everyone with a gun. If they were legal, I still wouldn't get one.

Spoiler: show


                                         

~

Thunderbird

  • 雷の鳥
  • *
  • Tier 7
  • **
  • Posts: 1573
  • Gender: Male
  • Flame Haze
  • Current Mood: happy happy
Re: Gun control
« Reply #4 on: January 04, 2013, 09:20:51 AM »
There will be less massacres victims, if guns aren't as easy to obtain anymore.
Don't believe this "we need more guns to fight this" bullshit.
The ones who do massacres aren't professional criminals that would obtain the weapons anyway.
Even if you are nothing more than a drop in a bucket...
Every drop leaves ripples.

Just Lance

  • 狼と冒険家
  • *
  • Tier 7
  • **
  • Posts: 18635
  • Gender: Male
  • Commodore of Freebirdia Orbital Defense Fleet
  • Current Mood: perverse perverse
Re: Gun control
« Reply #5 on: January 04, 2013, 09:33:49 AM »
As a holder of Firearms licence I must stand by some points that are omitted in Gun laws in America. From my point of view there should be firearms licence and they should enforce securing of obtained guns. I'll shortly point out how are gun laws here in Czech. The gun laws here are in my opinion very well build and there is not really that much gun related crimes.
Firstly we have several categories of gun licence and each of them is age restricted:
A- Gun collecting (age requirement 21 years)
B- Sport (Age of 18 in special case may be issued at age of 15 if the person is a member of a sport shooting club)
C- Hunting (Age of 18 and there is a need of valid hunting license to obtain it. If the person is studying school that have hunting in it's curriculum this licence category can be issued at age of 16)
D- For employment purpose (Age of 21 holders of this licence such as myself are bound to have medical check every 30 months that's twice as often as other licence holders)
E- Personal Defense (Age restriction of 21 also holders of this licence can request permission for CCW. Open carrying of firearm is restricted by law only to members of Police force on duty, military personnel and members of Czech National Bank on duty that are allowed to carry a gun)

Every person that applies for firearms licence must deliver an application to the respective department of Czech Police and must have clean crime register (there are detailed rules about that).
After that the applicant must pass a written exam which difficulty and pass requirements depends on which categories he or she applied for (I am a holder of every licence except of C category).
If the applicant passes the written exam he may proceed to practical part of exam. If he fails he can repeat the written exam 3 months after last unsuccessful attempt.
 The practical part of exams varies on which categories you applied for, but it generally includes a field strip of a handgun, Bolt action rimfire rifle and/or a double-barreled shotgun. It might include a theoretical questions, but practical part is based on the Exam commissar, that is testing you. He/she must test you on filed strip, practical shooting and safety manipulation with weapons. They are sometimes tricks that they employ like they call on you from behind while you hold a gun (you always must aim the gun into a safe zone) or in my case I was asked to show him how would I prepare a gun as a security personnel.
When you have a licence you can they request a permission from police for buying a weapon.  Some require permission from police to purchase some just need to be announced to police.
You are bound by law to secure you handgun to prevent lost, theft or misuse. You also must secure your weapons in home if you hold more than two weapons that require a firearms licence or if you have more than 500 pieces of ammunition usually by having a safe or gun safe/closet of specific requirements.

Now if they'd tighten laws in America in style of licence categories, licence trials and law that would force owners to secure their guns I think there would be a reduction in cases like this.
Here we have tight laws for ownership of military styled rifles. Civilians must meet some hard requirements if they want obtain a weapon that is full-auto fire-able. Also if you have gun like this the police is permitted to visit your house to inspect a security you have on this type of gun.
Quote
"God, it's so hard to be a smartass nowadays." Dr. Neil Watts (To the Moon)

Merlandese

  • 静態の遊子
  • *
  • Tier 7
  • **
  • Posts: 5095
  • Gender: Male
  • ---
  • Current Mood: happy happy
Re: Gun control
« Reply #6 on: January 04, 2013, 02:48:29 PM »
The problem is that guns are inedible. They should be made of hard candy, and impossible to resist eating, barrel first.

Once people are afraid of their own guns, afraid of placing the barrels in their own mouths, ideas about proper gun control will change dramatically.

I've considered contacting Werther's. This will shift political opinions for the tastier.

Dr. Zooks McCoy

  • Tier 7
  • *
  • Posts: 1372
  • Gender: Female
  • Dr. Rodney McKay's female sidekick
    • Soundcloud
  • Current Mood: creative creative
Re: Gun control
« Reply #7 on: January 04, 2013, 03:46:42 PM »
The problem is that guns are inedible. They should be made of hard candy, and impossible to resist eating, barrel first.

Once people are afraid of their own guns, afraid of placing the barrels in their own mouths, ideas about proper gun control will change dramatically.

I've considered contacting Werther's. This will shift political opinions for the tastier.

You would talk about putting barrels in people's mouths. ;)

Just Lance

  • 狼と冒険家
  • *
  • Tier 7
  • **
  • Posts: 18635
  • Gender: Male
  • Commodore of Freebirdia Orbital Defense Fleet
  • Current Mood: perverse perverse
Re: Gun control
« Reply #8 on: January 04, 2013, 04:47:11 PM »
The problem is that guns are inedible. They should be made of hard candy, and impossible to resist eating, barrel first.

Once people are afraid of their own guns, afraid of placing the barrels in their own mouths, ideas about proper gun control will change dramatically.

I've considered contacting Werther's. This will shift political opinions for the tastier.


You would talk about putting barrels in people's mouths. ;)


I hear about bowling balls, but whole barrels...

Also guys this should be a serious debat
Quote
"God, it's so hard to be a smartass nowadays." Dr. Neil Watts (To the Moon)

Raxus

  • とてもかっこいいですよ!
  • Mod-Suspect
  • Tier 7
  • *
  • Posts: 10102
  • Gender: Male
  • Ignore the Hats! I don't have a problem!
    • Cupcakes So Sweet and Tasty~
  • Current Mood: playful playful
Re: Gun control
« Reply #9 on: January 04, 2013, 05:40:35 PM »
There will be less massacres victims, if guns aren't as easy to obtain anymore.
Don't believe this "we need more guns to fight this" bullshit.
The ones who do massacres aren't professional criminals that would obtain the weapons anyway.

How about reforming psychological help. I can go and buy a gun in a store within the next hour, but I can't get mental help without going through an entire process! We don't need gun control, we already have enough of that. We need more psychological help for those who it.

People will kill people regardless of what guns we ban. You can look up ways to modify Nerf guns and turn them into weapons. You can YouTube "how to make a bomb" and make a bomb in no time. Guns may be weapons, but they are not the only means to kill.
We have to remember that lest we take away the right to defend oneself.

Speaking of rights, I believe that guns are a basic right. They are something we need not only for sport or defense, but as a repellant against a dictatorial establishment were it to be created. People should have a check on their military in case the military goes against the people. So many dictators have come to power and the people been able to do nothing about it.

Too long? Didn't read?
Guns control laws are good as they are. Focus instead on helping the mentally unstable.

Dr. Zooks McCoy

  • Tier 7
  • *
  • Posts: 1372
  • Gender: Female
  • Dr. Rodney McKay's female sidekick
    • Soundcloud
  • Current Mood: creative creative
Re: Gun control
« Reply #10 on: January 04, 2013, 06:58:42 PM »
Also guys this should be a serious debat



Let me get my rifle and I'll debat it.

Just Lance

  • 狼と冒険家
  • *
  • Tier 7
  • **
  • Posts: 18635
  • Gender: Male
  • Commodore of Freebirdia Orbital Defense Fleet
  • Current Mood: perverse perverse
Re: Gun control
« Reply #11 on: January 04, 2013, 07:01:48 PM »
Well sorry for a forgotten e.
Quote
"God, it's so hard to be a smartass nowadays." Dr. Neil Watts (To the Moon)

Thunderbird

  • 雷の鳥
  • *
  • Tier 7
  • **
  • Posts: 1573
  • Gender: Male
  • Flame Haze
  • Current Mood: happy happy
Re: Gun control
« Reply #12 on: January 04, 2013, 07:15:23 PM »
There will be less massacres victims, if guns aren't as easy to obtain anymore.
Don't believe this "we need more guns to fight this" bullshit.
The ones who do massacres aren't professional criminals that would obtain the weapons anyway.

How about reforming psychological help. I can go and buy a gun in a store within the next hour, but I can't get mental help without going through an entire process! We don't need gun control, we already have enough of that. We need more psychological help for those who it.

I agree that there are more things like bullying that create such problems. It's not like it's just guns or no guns and everything is solved.


Quote
People will kill people regardless of what guns we ban. You can look up ways to modify Nerf guns and turn them into weapons. You can YouTube "how to make a bomb" and make a bomb in no time. Guns may be weapons, but they are not the only means to kill.

But it's more difficult to do so. And because it's more difficult less people will do it. Easy as that.
It may not be the only option to decrease massacres, but it's one.

Quote
We have to remember that lest we take away the right to defend oneself.

Speaking of rights, I believe that guns are a basic right. They are something we need not only for sport or defense, but as a repellant against a dictatorial establishment were it to be created. People should have a check on their military in case the military goes against the people. So many dictators have come to power and the people been able to do nothing about it.

Too long? Didn't read?
Guns control laws are good as they are. Focus instead on helping the mentally unstable.

I am not able to evaluate the chances that another dictator appears and you are able to repel him, because you have weapons, but I don't think they are very high. Also it's easier for this dictator to gather an army outside the military.

With your arguments you could also claim the right to hold personal nuclear missiles.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the right to defend yourself with weapons is bad itself. It has good sides like criminals may be less likely to break into your house, if they know you can shoot them. It also has bad sides like the massacres. And there are way more options than gun control. There are a lot of countries that do just fine with a stricter gun control though.

By the way, my real opinion about this discussion is that it's "too important". Yes massacres are bad.
But take a look at how many people die from other things, what other big problems are to be solved, but the massacre gains all the news coverage for weeks.
« Last Edit: January 04, 2013, 09:02:16 PM by Thunderbird »
Even if you are nothing more than a drop in a bucket...
Every drop leaves ripples.

Dr. Zooks McCoy

  • Tier 7
  • *
  • Posts: 1372
  • Gender: Female
  • Dr. Rodney McKay's female sidekick
    • Soundcloud
  • Current Mood: creative creative
Re: Gun control
« Reply #13 on: January 04, 2013, 07:30:21 PM »

Harrison

  • Tier 2
  • *
  • Posts: 15
  • Gender: Male
  • Let's all love Lain!
  • Current Mood: happy happy
Re: Gun control
« Reply #14 on: January 04, 2013, 08:49:41 PM »
Australia banned gun ownership in 1997 I believe. There has only been one school massacre since then, and it was from an international student. We've been massacre-free for over a decade now. I don't have any strong views on the subject, but I do feel that no one with a gun is a lot safer than everyone with a gun. If they were legal, I still wouldn't get one.

Australia didn't ban all gunownership, but did ban semi-automatic gun possession by civilains. It put in requirements that one must be licensed before getting a gun, there is a month waiting period before you can get your license, must have storage, and interestingly enough, must have a legitimate reason for wanting a gun, and "self-defense" doesn't count. I'll have to do more reading on their system.

As a holder of Firearms licence I must stand by some points that are omitted in Gun laws in America. From my point of view there should be firearms licence and they should enforce securing of obtained guns. I'll shortly point out how are gun laws here in Czech. The gun laws here are in my opinion very well build and there is not really that much gun related crimes.

trimmed license information for space reasons ~Harrison

Now if they'd tighten laws in America in style of licence categories, licence trials and law that would force owners to secure their guns I think there would be a reduction in cases like this.
Here we have tight laws for ownership of military styled rifles. Civilians must meet some hard requirements if they want obtain a weapon that is full-auto fire-able. Also if you have gun like this the police is permitted to visit your house to inspect a security you have on this type of gun.

That sounds a lot like what I just read about Australia's system, and I wouldn't mind a system along those lines at all.  I'm wary on the banning of semiautomatics for civilians in that one though, mostly because they're fun. I wouldn't miss much though if that did happen, however.

How about reforming psychological help. I can go and buy a gun in a store within the next hour, but I can't get mental help without going through an entire process! We don't need gun control, we already have enough of that. We need more psychological help for those who it.

Isn't that a sign that there's not enough control then, if anyone can just go and buy one on such short notice? I do agree that mental health services need drastic reform in this country, and the stigma against those with mental illnesses needs to be done away with. But, even if one does have near instantaneous access to getting help, what incentive do they have to take that route for help over just getting a gun and doing what's on their mind at the moment?


People will kill people regardless of what guns we ban. You can look up ways to modify Nerf guns and turn them into weapons. You can YouTube "how to make a bomb" and make a bomb in no time. Guns may be weapons, but they are not the only means to kill.
We have to remember that lest we take away the right to defend oneself.
Could you link to some of these? For a Nerf gun to become mainly lethal, it would need serious reworking to be able to handle the pressures that come about from launching projectiles at high speeds. I'm having a hard time imagining how this would be possible for anyone less than a gunsmith, who in that case may as well just make one up from scratch instead of coming up with a way to change a Nerf gun.

And bombs are easy to make, but have extreme repercussions for those who are found to have made them. The same can't be said for guns (unless we talk about modifying a gun to be fully automatic, which is a huge felony).

Speaking of rights, I believe that guns are a basic right. They are something we need not only for sport or defense, but as a repellant against a dictatorial establishment were it to be created. People should have a check on their military in case the military goes against the people. So many dictators have come to power and the people been able to do nothing about it.

The only way I can even imagine a dictator gaining hold of America would be through forceful takeover via military (in which case our military would already be defeated and our land thoroughly plundered), or by the complete failure of the US economy (and I mean complete, not just a depression) and thus more than likely the government resulting in worldwide unrest (because if America goes down, stuff is happening everywhere) in which case the odds of guns being used to protect ourselves from said dictator would again only result in the group with the most guns and adherents taking control, resulting in simply a different dictator. There's no possible way that the people with their guns (untrained, at that) would be able to unite on one front to fight back against a dictator, because the question of "who gets to be in charge now?" would never be answered peacefully after that sort of catastrophe.

In short, I feel the whole "we need guns to protect against dictators!" rhetoric is simply a silly idea that lives on thanks to everyone wanting to feel like a hero and thinking that they know exactly how things would happen in every circumstance, when in reality the chances are it won't happen at all in that way because in the case of a dictatorial establishment, there won't be any America to defend.


I seriously just zoned out and wrote those past two paragraphs. Apologies if anything's unclear.