Obama's Inauguration /Good Riddance "W"

[abyssofdreams]

from an european standpoint i hear you on this. but we (europeans) have to keep in mind that it´s totally rooted in their history.
the arguments James Murphy once brought, made me think twice about the situation. usa citizens without guns is utopia imo.

yes I remember his points and they were perfectly valid, however I'm talking about the future and I don't think it is Utopia there. It is now, for sure and a long and difficult road to go, just the same they'd have to do to undermine religion which is rooted in their history too.

As I said, you can't make laws without pissing somebody off, it is nearly impossible.

 

[RockGuitarX]

Yeah, I don't think guns will be gone anytime soon in this country. It's people who have fucked up problems/issues who use guns to murder others. Why not take away steak knives, scissors, bow and arrows, tridents (lol), etc. ? The imagination can come up with infinite ways to kill someone but a good citizen should be able to own a weapon without wrongful use of it. AND since we're on a music based forum that same related argument is/was made against several metal bands. It's the MUSIC'S fault, not the fucked up person who committed suicide or murdered someone. You wouldn't want certain forms music banned because some people are stupid. I don't want guns banned because some people are stupid.

 

[J.DavisNJ]

Wow, yeah I really cannot understand this mindset of "all citizens should be stripped of their firearms..." As if this would magically solve all of our problems with gun violence, or gun related deaths. The criminals already have their firearms. Criminals want to maim and cause pain, not because they can or do own a gun, but because of their upbrining, socio-economic status, depression, whateverthefuck reason.

Do you really think they would be ready and willing to give them up?? Not a chance in hell...therefore this brilliant idea would never, ever work.

Yes, it is rooted in our history. Some own them for self defense, some enjoy them as a pasttime. There are plenty of responsible gun owners in this country. To strip them of this right is ridiculous and a SERIOUS infringement on one's freedom.

I really cannot understand your mindset. I can try, and all I can come up with is:

Gun = bad, used to kill, no one should use one, no one should own one, those who use them recreationally should give them up IMMEDIATELY. It's an extremely childish (maybe unrealistic is a better work...) view in my opinion. It will not reduce crime in this country and will cause a SERIOUS upset among gun owners who have been responsible with their firearms since this country's inception. It will never happen, so don't get too excited. As of now, we can only truly predict that BO will want to reinstate the 1984 assault weapons ban.

Quite ridiculous guys. Like a previous poster said, let's ban steak knives, bows & arrows, hell...let's ban fast sports cars and sport bikes while we are at it. Yes, a gun can be easily concealable and can cause significant damage in close quarters. Why don't we ban gasoline as well? Or steel pipes? It's quite easy for someone to construct a pipe bomb and kill lots of people.

It's the person, not the tool.

-Joe

 

[abyssofdreams]

Wow, yeah I really cannot understand this mindset of "all citizens should be stripped of their firearms..." As if this would magically solve all of our problems with gun violence, or gun related deaths. The criminals already have their firearms.

Do you really think they would be ready and willing to give them up?? Not a chance in hell...therefore this brilliant idea would never, ever work.

Yes, it is rooted in our history. Some own them for self defense, some enjoy them as a pasttime. There are plenty of responsible gun owners in this country. To strip them of this right is ridiculous and a SERIOUS infringement on one's freedom.

I really cannot understand your mindset. I can try, and all I can come up with is:

Gun = bad, used to kill, no one should use one, no one should own one, those who use them recreationally should give them up IMMEDIATELY. It's an extremely childish view in my opinion. It will not reduce crime in this country and will cause a SERIOUS upset among gun owners who have been responsible with their firearms since this country's inception. It will never happen, so don't get too excited. As of now, we can only truly predict that BO will want to reinstate the 1984 assault weapons ban.

Quite ridiculous guys. Like a previous poster said, let's ban steak knives, bows & arrows, hell...let's ban fast sports cars and sport bikes while we are at it. Yes, a gun can be easily concealable and can cause significant damage in close quarters. Why don't we ban gasoline as well? Or steel pipes? It's quite easy for someone to construct a pipe bomb and kill lots of people.

It's the person, not the tool.

-Joe

Yes but it works for other countries and America has to understand that it is not leading the world as they think they are, they are BEHIND with quite a lot of moral views. When you say that it will never happen that makes me really sad. As I said, yes, it is a very difficult move, especially in America but liberal gun ownership makes things worse by all means.
It has to be a process in the long run that takes its time with tiny steps. Maybe the methods aren't always right as to how to treat this topic and you have crime everywhere but obviously less crime where the laws aren't as liberal and respect the rights of the invidual as good as possible. I'm not talking about Russia or anything the likes but west/central Europe

 

[J.DavisNJ]

Also, I think it's a bit unfair to say "we Europeans..." as if all Euros have the same views when it comes to civilian firearms ownership. Just as the U.S.A. is a gigantic country with far ranging political, social, religious, and civil rights views, Europe is gigantic continent with vastly different countries that may not agree with you.

What about Finns and their guns? The Swiss?

Or the fact that Germany, Switzerland, and Italy all make superb firearms.

Not all Americans are gun toting maniacs. Some think the same as yourself, yet some strongly oppose it. I'm a responsible firearm owner and would never even think of violating a law that would allow me to use it as a reckless tool.

-Joe

 

[RockGuitarX]

It might work in other countries.. but not here. Like JDavisNJ stated it's not going to magically solve all our problems and there are more responsible gun owners than stupid ones. Media is very selective on what it covers.

 

[J.DavisNJ]

Yes but it works for other countries and America has to understand that it is not leading the world as they think they are, they are BEHIND with quite a lot of moral views. When you say that it will never happen that makes me really sad. As I said, yes, it is a very difficult move, especially in America but liberal gun ownership makes things worse by all means.
It has to be a process in the long run that takes its time with tiny steps. Maybe the methods aren't always right as to how to treat this topic and you have crime everywhere but obviously less crime where the laws aren't as liberal and respect the rights of the invidual as good as possible. I'm not talking about Russia or anything the likes but west/central Europe

Well, what constitutes "moral views" is debatable. Do I think we should have a CLEAR separation of church and state? Yes! Absolutely!

But, I also think Americans in general have other good values. The same can go for Europeans. Family values in general are SO damn important to myself, my close friends, I can't stress this enough.

A STRONG, but not overbearing family uprbinging is so important. The fact that many do not have this is the bigger problem in my eyes. Many parents do not have an active enough role in the lives of their children, so they will naturally turn to the streets, drugs, violence, and unlawful gun use.

Kids need to learn the difference between right and wrong, loyalty, respect, integrity early on...or they are doomed. Simple as that. It seems that most parents are either unqualified to raise children, or have some strange fear of being overbearing and scared that their kid won't develop socially or something.

Oh by the way, I PM'd you dude.

-Joe

 

[wishtheend]

I'm not against responsible people owning guns, but I for one do think the attitude towards guns in the US is far too relaxed. It provides a country where manufactures can spread their weapons widely, because somehow it's every American's right to have it. There are far too many guns being manufactured and sold then there are "responsible" owners.

Instead of changing the laws to alter the citizens' right - I would like to see more control on the companies making and distributing them. We need more documentation on how many guns are being sold and who they are being sold to beyond registering a serial number after purchase.

 

[abyssofdreams]

Yes of course, I didn't say "we" have perfect laws or a perfect moral understanding according to guns either. You have to understand, I am against ALL guns. Be it sports or whatever. Now you could say but if we have a sport where we throw big heavy rocks we could potentially use these to kill someone else too. Yes, indeed. But that's not my point. My point is guns where initially invented to kill. You always have to keep that in mind. Hunters have their excuses for using them, so have sportsmen and any other group who may not kill others in the first or second place. If you really need that sport where you shoot at stuff why not take tools that replace guns and are simply less dangerous? There's plenty of alternatives. Did you see the movie Crash? I'd suggest you watch it, pay attention to the gun controversy scene.

Of course I'm not saying that anyone who owns a gun is willing to kill someone but I'm against gun ownership simply because guns are superfluos. Yes, criminal people won't ditch their guns but do you really want to fight fire with fire? That won't work.

Now, here comes the really difficult part, freedom of choice. But a sane, rational, intelligent person with high moral standards doesn't need any laws to understand why certain things are bad for a society. It is common sense. The majority of germans think this way for a good reason, life is significantly better this way. Finns have made other choices but then again they are an exception because Helsinki is one of the safest cities of the world. That's not because of their gun laws but because of their general attitude towards humanity.

To a certain extend this issue is even rooted with men. Wars, hunting, most crimes etc. have been caused by men. We have to advance, guys. What a loss is it to loose your love for a certain type of sport if we could all live in a far more peaceful world? Don't be so egoistic. Noone steals your right to live the way you want but there should be certain limits in what the general person does or elsewise, without strict laws, everyone goes doing whatever he wants.

On a global scale it should be irrelevant if you can't follow your beloved sports the way you want.

 

[J.DavisNJ]

Yes of course, I didn't say "we" have perfect laws or a perfect moral understanding according to guns either. You have to understand, I am against ALL guns. Be it sports or whatever. Now you could say but if we have a sport where we throw big heavy rocks we could potentially use these to kill someone else too. Yes, indeed. But that's not my point. My point is guns where initially invented to kill. You always have to keep that in mind. Hunters have their excuses for using them, so have sportsmen and any other group who may not kill others in the first or second place. If you really need that sport where you shoot at stuff why not take tools that replace guns and are simply less dangerous? There's plenty of alternatives. Did you see the movie Crash? I'd suggest you watch it, pay attention to the gun controversy scene.

Of course I'm not saying that anyone who owns a gun is willing to kill someone but I'm against gun ownership simply because guns are superfluos. Yes, criminal people won't ditch their guns but do you really want to fight fire with fire? That won't work.

Now, here comes the really difficult part, freedom of choice. But a sane, rational, intelligent person with high moral standards doesn't need any laws to understand why certain things are bad for a society. It is common sense. The majority of germans think this way for a good reason, life is significantly better this way. Finns have made other choices but then again they are an exception because Helsinki is one of the safest cities of the world. That's not because of their gun laws but because of their general attitude towards humanity.

To a certain extend this issue is even rooted with men. Wars, hunting, most crimes etc. have been caused by men. We have to advance, guys. What a loss is it to loose your love for a certain type of sport if we could all live in a far more peaceful world? Don't be so egoistic. Noone steals your right to live the way you want but there should be certain limits in what the general person does or elsewise, without strict laws, everyone goes doing whatever he wants.

On a global scale it should be irrelevant if you can't follow your beloved sports the way you want.

Well, I can understand your point of view and can agree with certain points - but I do think we have a fundamental difference between us that no amount of debate will solve.

You are against all civilian gun ownership, that's perfectly fine...I'm not. And that is perfectly fine.

Yes, guns were designed to kill. But, their place in society in regards to ownership has obviously shifted over the years. Some gun owners simply like going to the range and probably wouldn't even consider using a gun against an intruder in their home.

I for one would not hunt. I'm not an animal rights activist, but don't see the point in targetting a defenseless animal for sake of marksmanship or sport...just not my thing.

Lastly, I do think you are right, to an extent, about the macho attitude of certain men in regards to guns. I'm talking about the guys who go to the range decked out in army gear as if they are about to fight a war with their target. Yep, a bit ridiculous. I feel that firing my gun is a great stress reliever and yes, it can feel empowering, but I would NEVER even think of using it in an unlawful manner.

At the same time, I also do not trust the average civilian and live near some very seedy neighborhoods. If an intruder VISIBLY has a firearm and is threatening me, I would not hesitate to use force.

While it's easy to say that an unarmed population is inifinitely safer than an unarmed one, that doesn't mean that the decision is right. It IS engrained in our culture and would be a serious loss to many people if our firearms all vanished suddenly. I know you cannot identify with this and that's ok. We live in the free world and it's cool to disagree...haha.

While I understand and respect your views, and can agree with some of your points, it's obvious that we think pretty differently. That is ok though.

Like I said, I'm always up for a friendly argument.

Cheers dude.

-Joe

 

[Chryst Krispies]

Murphy had a great post in some earlier thread about gun laws, someone find it...

Basically something about ...

THEY'RE CRIMINALS, they are going to have guns either way, and taking away guns from the law abiding citizens just puts those abiding citizens at a disadvantage cause then they can't protect themselves from the fuckin creeps/murkers/boogeymen lurking around.


DON'T TAKE AWAY MY HEATER CAUSE SOME MOTHERFUCKERS ARE EVIL!
That's fucking retarded.

We all need to watch Deathwish and re-evaluate the situation.

I want the right to arm bears.
Furthermore, not EVERYONE that hunts just does it cause they need to kill something and have a small pecker. I know a lot of hunters that hunt and then actually field dress the kill and go Apache on it's ass and utilize all the parts for sustenance/bricka-bracka and shwag.

 

[Torniojaws]

What about Finns and their guns?

The difference is that guns are not used for personal protection in here, and 85 % of the male population (and hundreds of volunteer women) receive professional gun safety, gun handling and shooting training in the mandatory military service. All the guns in use are for hunting or sport shooting (those are also the only lawful reasons for getting a permit from the police). You are not allowed to carry a gun in public, and during transportation to the hunting grounds/shooting range, it must be hidden from any view. In storage, you must have it in an officially approved heavy & locked gun locker.

 

[J.DavisNJ]

The difference is that guns are not used for personal protection in here. They are all for either hunting or sport shooting. You are not allowed to carry a gun in public, and during transportation to the hunting grounds/shooting range, it must be hidden from any view.

Well, concealed carry is not something I do either. It is pretty tough to do here in New Jersey where we have very strict gun laws.

But, I find it hard to believe that a Finn who owns guns would not even consider using it if someone were breaking into his home and threatening his family. Again, you probably have much lower home invasion cases than here, but it's still something worth considering.

I also need to conceal my firearm from view in NJ. Not all Americans have their shotguns mounted to their pickup truck cab, haha.

My ammo box must be locked, my gun case must be locked. If the gun/ammo cannot be separated (as in the case of an open cab car like an SUV, or a car with folding back seats that lead to the trunk), then both mustbe locked!

NJ has very tough gun laws. Some are quite ridiculous and some are very sensible.

-Joe

 

[abyssofdreams]

Hmm, I have to admit, in sports guns could have a right to exist but it should stay within sports use and sports use only.

As for the "engrained in our culture", true that. So were slaves and so thought the indians they had a right to live, eh?

 

[Torniojaws]

Again, you probably have much lower home invasion cases than here, but it's still something worth considering.

Practically zero. I can't even think of a case like that, except for foreigners robbing very old women with the excuse of getting in by "selling something" or "needing a glass of water". Old folks won't use guns anyway (they got more than their share during the second world war).

Oh and in Finland it is very common for everyone to lock the doors even when they're home (and of course, a lot of people live in apartment buildings, which have a lock in the lobby and all apartment doors cannot be left unlocked unless they're open) and Finnish locks are nigh-on impossible to lockpick due to their mechanism (Abloy locks, if you want to read up on them). And our doors open outwards, so you will only break yourself if you try to ram a door down.

 

[musickey]

Cant stress it enough, Gun ownership is probable the only thing that has truly kept this country demacratic. A citizenry with meens to pretect itself is a great tyranny deterrent. I dont even own a gun...yet

 

[J.DavisNJ]

Practically zero. I can't even think of a case like that, except for foreigners robbing very old women with the excuse of getting in by "selling something" or "needing a glass of water". Old folks won't use guns anyway (they got more than their share during the second world war).

Oh and in Finland it is very common for everyone to lock the doors even when they're home (and of course, a lot of people live in apartment buildings, which have a lock in the lobby and all apartment doors cannot be left unlocked unless they're open) and Finnish locks are nigh-on impossible to lockpick due to their mechanism (Abloy locks, if you want to read up on them). And our doors open outwards, so you will only break yourself if you try to ram a door down.

See, that I can understand. Those door locks sound quite beneficial too. I'm sure we can get them here as well - maybe they aren't quite as popular.

Oh well, we live in pretty different societies. While I can identify with your point of view, I still wouldn't hesitate to use my firearm for protection given the circumstances. Yeah, the probability of having a home invasion might be slim, and most would probably shit their pants before using their firearm, but I still like to have it.

Besides, mine is used for sport anyway, but can still be a theft deterrent even if it isn't fired. The same can be said for a long ass kitchen knife.

Now, to look into outward swinging doors and abloy locks.



-Joe

 

[J.DavisNJ]

Oh, and I think anyone in my remote area that DOES NOT lock their doors at night are out of their minds. Some people in rural areas of NJ will leave them unlocked which I find pretty unbelievable! There are nuts everywhere - common sense is key here.

-Joe

 

[J.DavisNJ]

Also, as a final statement. We seem to live in very different societies. I do believe you Euros have much better solutions to certain aspects of gun ownership and home protection. My main point is that I am fully against the complete disarming of a population.

Reforming of laws that allow certain people to own firearms? Sure...but an outright band, no way!

-Joe

 

[Torniojaws]

Reforming of laws that allow certain people to own firearms? Sure...but an outright band, no way!

I think having mandatory (and quite long, not just a 5 minute "because They force us" job) gun ownership courses (maybe state-arranged?) would be a good path to follow. And psychological tests of course, which are also done here in Finland (though even that isn't fool-proof, as witnessed within the past 14 months).