Obama's Inauguration /Good Riddance "W"

[J.DavisNJ]

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.

Absolutely, I agree! Safe ownership and training should be required.

As far as the psychological testing or background checks, this varies from state to state. I've heard that in Texas, Utah, Arizona, and other gun-friendly states, an individual can qualify and buy a firearm within five minutes. I think this is way too lax.

Here in NJ, I had to pay a $55 (??) fee, submit contacts for two non-family acquaintences to attest to my character, have a complete criminal background check done, and submit my rights to a mental health background check. I waited around 1 1/2 months and received my firearms purchaser's card.

To obtain a pistol, you need a separate permit per pistol.

-Joe

 

[JBroll]

I know you're gonna hate me for this statement:

Fuck individual rights when it comes to gun laws.
No should own a gun in the first place, it should be completely superfluous to own one. If there would be a clean way to remove all guns/weapons I would be the first person to sign this.

You can say what you want, you'll always piss off somebody with this gun crap. We europeans can only shake our heads. America needs to find a way to move towards a gun-free country.

I'm talking about civilians here btw.

I'm not saying it is an easy or even quick move but you NEED to get there as fast as possible.

(1) Keep in mind that the US is not in Europe. Your solutions will not likely work here - in fact, we see this specific 'solution' failing constantly.

(2) Keep in mind that our social climate is completely fucked, and that if guns were to blame for our crime problems we'd see proportional crime rate changes in other countries with large numbers of firearms.

(3) Gun control has *never* worked in the States. Even if it did, the guns aren't the problem. Europe doesn't have high crime rates, blah de fucking blah... America's crime rates have been significantly higher for as long as these things have been noted - a century ago, before either place had gun control, New York's crime rate was five times that of London's. Blaming guns for our problems is fucking stupid and completely irresponsible - we have MUCH bigger problems than whatever you think is causing murders and we NEED to fix those rather than pretending that disarming the people will calm them. Moves like this, where people try to make up for the inadequacies of their fellow men by taking away their rights, are cowardly, irresponsible, and doomed to fail miserably.

(4) Our police aren't obligated to protect us in our own homes.

(5) Our founding fathers, most of whom knew a fuckload more than you do, knew far better than to put this sort of issue at risk by endangering our rights under the care of 'enlightened' statists. Guns are necessary for self-protection (see (4)), impossible to blame for our crime rates, and our last line of defense against presidents like Bush.

Jeff

 

[JBroll]

One problem with mandating safety and training is that the government WILL inevitably fuck it all up. Like the NRA or not, they sponsor great safety programs, and here in Texas (where we have more individual firepower than Europe has socialism) all but the stupidest take safety courses (and bring their kids along years before they can shoot) and secure their guns. If the government gets involved, though, everything will be ruined forever and inadequate training, coupled with a false sense of security, will lead to disasters.

Jeff

 

[Ermz]

Once again, all I can say is that any country which requires its citizens to bear arms in order to feel truly safe and empowered has got to do a double take and re-evaluate its stance on tackling criminality. It's not the guns that are causing the issues in the US - it's the citizens. IMO the fact that there are so many safer cities in the world where citizens aren't allowed to bear arms at all is a testament to the US state of governance & culture being flawed in some fundamental ways.

Guns don't prevent crime, at the end of the day. They are simply a potential solution to a problem that shouldn't exist at all. It's a patchwork 'feel good' solution for massively inadequate tackling of criminality. Surely, you guys must see that in a more 'perfect' world, the concept of citizens owning weapons designed with the sole purpose of killing human beings to be absolutely ludicrous?

No need to give me the 'different culture' lecture either. I was born in former Yugoslavia (few years before the war tore it asunder) and I was playing with handguns when I was 4 years old. I know what happened there when an armed citizenry attempted to take on a military force. To feel that simple personal arms in this day and age will save you in a civil uprising is naive to say the least. When your gov't starts shelling your cities from above, there is no sense of security to be had with that 9mm (or heck, the Steyr, for the more enthusiastic of you) locked in the back.

 

[abyssofdreams]

(1) Keep in mind that the US is not in Europe. Your solutions will not likely work here - in fact, we see this specific 'solution' failing constantly.

(2) Keep in mind that our social climate is completely fucked, and that if guns were to blame for our crime problems we'd see proportional crime rate changes in other countries with large numbers of firearms.

(3) Gun control has *never* worked in the States. Even if it did, the guns aren't the problem. Europe doesn't have high crime rates, blah de fucking blah... America's crime rates have been significantly higher for as long as these things have been noted - a century ago, before either place had gun control, New York's crime rate was five times that of London's. Blaming guns for our problems is fucking stupid and completely irresponsible - we have MUCH bigger problems than whatever you think is causing murders and we NEED to fix those rather than pretending that disarming the people will calm them. Moves like this, where people try to make up for the inadequacies of their fellow men by taking away their rights, are cowardly, irresponsible, and doomed to fail miserably.

(4) Our police aren't obligated to protect us in our own homes.

(5) Our founding fathers, most of whom knew a fuckload more than you do, knew far better than to put this sort of issue at risk by endangering our rights under the care of 'enlightened' statists. Guns are necessary for self-protection (see (4)), impossible to blame for our crime rates, and our last line of defense against presidents like Bush.

Jeff

Believe me, I am completely aware of these points, or at least I think I am, since I don't live in the US myself.

The thing is, what I am preaching is that it should be a longterm ideal to get rid of guns, basically that shouldn't effect only the citizens so they cannot "defend" themselves anymore, it should effect everyone. With less weapons/guns significantly less harm is done on a wider scale.

That is all I am saying. People need to think different in order for this to work. Plus criminals and such are not born, they are made, maybe there are a few exceptions where some DNA got screwed (e.g. people who have no emotions in their doing and are therefore inable to be socially compatible) right from the start but basically I'd say we have to work on the roots in order for fruits to grow. Not the other way round. Picking up rotten/decayed food won't stop the foul food to fall from the tree.... haha, sorry for that weird analogy but I'm sure you understand me.

 

[J.DavisNJ]

Once again, all I can say is that any country which requires its citizens to bear arms in order to feel truly safe and empowered has got to do a double take and re-evaluate its stance on tackling criminality. It's not the guns that are causing the issues in the US - it's the citizens. IMO the fact that there are so many safer cities in the world where citizens aren't allowed to bear arms at all is a testament to the US state of governance & culture being flawed in some fundamental ways.

Guns don't prevent crime, at the end of the day. They are simply a potential solution to a problem that shouldn't exist at all. It's a patchwork 'feel good' solution for massively inadequate tackling of criminality. Surely, you guys must see that in a more 'perfect' world, the concept of citizens owning weapons designed with the sole purpose of killing human beings to be absolutely ludicrous?

No need to give me the 'different culture' lecture either. I was born in former Yugoslavia (few years before the war tore it asunder) and I was playing with handguns when I was 4 years old. I know what happened there when an armed citizenry attempted to take on a military force. To feel that simple personal arms in this day and age will save you in a civil uprising is naive to say the least. When your gov't starts shelling your cities from above, there is no sense of security to be had with that 9mm (or heck, the Steyr, for the more enthusiastic of you) locked in the back.

For me, I don't own a gun for the #1 purpose of self defense. I don't feel that I NEED it on a daily basis to survive. Hell I'm 24 and bought my first firearm a few months ago. I own it for sport primarily. I enjoy maintaining it, working on it, taking a day trip to the range with a friend, and practicing marksmanship. I see no problem with this, even if the original purpose of the firearm was to maim and kill.

At the same time, having it for self defense is simply a bonus. There is a very good chance I will never have to use it in that fashion, but I still have it just in case.

Do I expect there to be a civil uprising any time soon, as there was in your country, where I feel the need to use my firearm against the government? No, to be perfectly honest. Do I see this as a long term possibility? You never know. Do I think my 7.62x39 caliber carbine will be a match for a fighter jet? Of course not. But, if the opportunity ever arose to defend myself or my family against a purely tyrannous (is that a word??) enemy, I would't hesitate.

As a side note Ermin, respect for living through and dealing the conflict in Bosnia, I can't imagine what that could have been like, especially being a child then. I don't mean any offense, but do you think that could have a particular bias on your opinion of the matter? I'm not saying it's a wrong opinion, but it could have facilitated the way you view the subject today.

Also, I agree with you that criminality needs to be tackled in a different way. It's obviously not working out too well here in NJ or NY. I work in Newark, probably the worst city in NJ next to Camden or Paterson. I work in a homicide squad and see the gang killings, shootings, etc. all the time. It's an endless cycle in this city and SOMETHING needs to be done to seriously weaken the grip that criminals have on this city. There is no doubt about that.

Of course we can argue that if we never had the opportunity to own guns in the first place, then criminals would never have them either...but who can say with certainty that this is true?

The fact of the matter is, there is real evil in the world and in this country. I long for the time when we can be truly free of any type of violent crime, but that is a long way off in my opinion. I have my firearm for sport, but if it ever comes in handy for protecting my own well being, or that of my family, then so be it.

Cheers.

-Joe

 

[Metaltastic]

For the record, I really don't know personally anybody that has guns beyond rifles/shotguns for sport; we're not some lawless fucking frontier-country; well, not in the civilized Northeast, anyway (though of course there are always small backwoods towns that are the exceptions, but whenever you're going through 'em, just keep driving and in the words of Chevy Chase, "roll 'em up!" )

 

[J.DavisNJ]

For the record, I really don't know personally anybody that has guns beyond rifles/shotguns for sport; we're not some lawless fucking frontier-country; well, not in the civilized Northeast, anyway (though of course there are always small backwoods towns that are the exceptions, but whenever you're going through 'em, just keep driving and in the words of Chevy Chase, "roll 'em up!" )

Hear, hear dude! Travel to south Jersey or way up north in NY and I'm sure you will see some of those!

But for the average citizen in the metro northeast, we aren't so bad.

-Joe

 

[Metaltastic]

Furthermore, while I totally acknowledge that plenty of people are capable of responsibly owning guns strictly for sport shooting and recreation (I want to myself eventually, that's what happens when you play too many video games ), simply for the sake of argument against people who think we're nothing but a bunch of gun-toting nutcases, I'd be interested to see statistics on how many people in this country own guns, and whether it'd even be over 50% (I know if the sample set was all the people I've personally known decently well, it'd definitely be way under).

 

[RockGuitarX]

(1) Keep in mind that the US is not in Europe. Your solutions will not likely work here - in fact, we see this specific 'solution' failing constantly.

(2) Keep in mind that our social climate is completely fucked, and that if guns were to blame for our crime problems we'd see proportional crime rate changes in other countries with large numbers of firearms.

(3) Gun control has *never* worked in the States. Even if it did, the guns aren't the problem. Europe doesn't have high crime rates, blah de fucking blah... America's crime rates have been significantly higher for as long as these things have been noted - a century ago, before either place had gun control, New York's crime rate was five times that of London's. Blaming guns for our problems is fucking stupid and completely irresponsible - we have MUCH bigger problems than whatever you think is causing murders and we NEED to fix those rather than pretending that disarming the people will calm them. Moves like this, where people try to make up for the inadequacies of their fellow men by taking away their rights, are cowardly, irresponsible, and doomed to fail miserably.

(4) Our police aren't obligated to protect us in our own homes.

(5) Our founding fathers, most of whom knew a fuckload more than you do, knew far better than to put this sort of issue at risk by endangering our rights under the care of 'enlightened' statists. Guns are necessary for self-protection (see (4)), impossible to blame for our crime rates, and our last line of defense against presidents like Bush.

Jeff

One problem with mandating safety and training is that the government WILL inevitably fuck it all up. Like the NRA or not, they sponsor great safety programs, and here in Texas (where we have more individual firepower than Europe has socialism) all but the stupidest take safety courses (and bring their kids along years before they can shoot) and secure their guns. If the government gets involved, though, everything will be ruined forever and inadequate training, coupled with a false sense of security, will lead to disasters.

Jeff

 

[Joematthews]

http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp

That has all the stats you would want.

In general I am agreeing with Tornio and as usual with Ermin.

I'd like to bring another anti-gun point although not neccesarily a particularly aplicable point, that being the use of a gun as a suicide weapon. 1 in 25 suicide attempts results in death in America. 50 percent of those deaths is by the use of firearm.

Facts...
# Although most gun owners reportedly keep a firearm in their home for "protection" or "self defense," 83 percent of gun-related deaths in these homes are the result of a suicide, often by someone other than the gun owner.
# Firearms are used in more suicides than homicides.
# Death by firearms is the fastest growing method of suicide.

Of course you could argue that if people want to commit suicide they will, but I refer you back to the 1:25 succesfull : attempt ratio, and ask you to consider how many of those unsuccesfull attempts use firearms.

I am not in favour of completely removing guns. That will never happen, although in an ideal world it would be like that. However, while it may be OK for the owner to have the gun, be mentally stable and all, people who may have access to it may not be fit for it. Yes you can lock it away. But with it being there the risk still is there.

Joe

 

[RockGuitarX]

Yeah, same with pills, knives, a car even. You can kill yourself with all that shit too. Drugs are illegal in this country.. but yeah they're still around. EVERYWHERE. You ever read on prohibition? Guess who made lots of money and had lots of power because they dealt illegally? NOT your good citizen. Yeah it was a fun little group known as the Mafia.

You can stick up for the rights of criminals and sympathize for their behalf but just so you know, they usually don't give two shits about you. But I guess it boils to who's rights are more important?

http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=news/local&id=5766455

Take this man's story for instance. Two men are robbing the entire neighborhood, have a bad criminal background including drugs and violence and are illegal immigrants. Neighbor shoots them and people have the balls to stick up for illegal criminals that are thefts? IMO that's why this country gets fucked up because people sue, commit crimes and can get away with this shit. These people need to know the fear of fucking with people = trouble. It was neat that I read in another article that the Hell's Angels showed up to crank their bikes up to tune out protesters in front of the man's home where he is trying to peacefully live.

 

[RockGuitarX]

In case anyone is interested in this story the man's name was Joe Horn. Here's another article (http://www.khou.com/news/local/stories/khou080616_tnt_joehorn.c262cd7.html). There are plenty more articles on this if you search around. It's cool if you disagree, not trying to be all one sided. I can see how some other points people make are somewhat relevant but in the long run I personally think it's just a simple concept that people try to make a big issue out of.

 

[J.DavisNJ]

http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp

That has all the stats you would want.

In general I am agreeing with Tornio and as usual with Ermin.

I'd like to bring another anti-gun point although not neccesarily a particularly aplicable point, that being the use of a gun as a suicide weapon. 1 in 25 suicide attempts results in death in America. 50 percent of those deaths is by the use of firearm.

Facts...
# Although most gun owners reportedly keep a firearm in their home for "protection" or "self defense," 83 percent of gun-related deaths in these homes are the result of a suicide, often by someone other than the gun owner.
# Firearms are used in more suicides than homicides.
# Death by firearms is the fastest growing method of suicide.

Of course you could argue that if people want to commit suicide they will, but I refer you back to the 1:25 succesfull : attempt ratio, and ask you to consider how many of those unsuccesfull attempts use firearms.

I am not in favour of completely removing guns. That will never happen, although in an ideal world it would be like that. However, while it may be OK for the owner to have the gun, be mentally stable and all, people who may have access to it may not be fit for it. Yes you can lock it away. But with it being there the risk still is there.

Joe

Well, I don't really think the suicide argument is viable here. If someone wants to die bad enough, they will find any means to do it.

Yes, a gun is a pretty sure fire way to end it (as opposed to something like pills, turning your car on in a closed garage, etc.) but in my opinion that's hardly an argument for stricter gun control.

It may be an unfortunate fact or statistic, but has little to do with how viable it is to restrict civilian gun ownership in my opinion.

-Joe

 

[Metaltastic]

Hmm, I dunno, I think the incredible ease a gun makes suicide can't be understated, cuz if someone is really drunk, for example, and miserable, I can easily imagine they'd pick up their piece and do it, and plunge their family members/loved ones into incredible sadness and despair, not to mention having to take care of tying up that person's affairs for them. I'm not one for the government wiping our asses for us, so to speak, so I don't feel the suicide argument is grounds for outright banning, but I do think there should be really strict background checks for people who want to own guns to check for any suicide-prone tendencies.

 

[James Murphy]

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

i own my gun almost equally for sport and home/personal protection, and i'm not shy to say it. someone else said something about only needing rifles for sport shooting... sorry, handgun sport shooting is a rich tradition here in the US, and my handgun has a Match Class barrel for exactly that purpose. and as others on this side of the fence have pointed out, gun laws do NOT affect criminals... because they do not obey them, only law-abiding citizens obey laws. strict gun laws in the US criminalize law abiding citizens, leaving true criminals to run amok with no fear of being met with equal or supior force.... and to that point, what if all guns did suddenly vanish from the planet, except for yours (pretend you own one and carry it), and a murderous criminal approaches you with a long, sharp knife and informs you that he is about to kill you and then approaches you to do just that... and you are backed into a dead end, nowhere to run.... well... do you use that gun to save yourself, or do you rather pull out a knife yourself, so that it'll be a "fair" fight?... or do you just lay down and die?? i'll wager you'd use the gun... and i want that option, to be able to use a gun to defend myself, even if the criminal does not have one, and most certainly i want it if they do. i should not be forced, in such a situation, to have to fight someone in close quarters with knives.

so the next step is to make all knives illegal. guns are merely a tool... and most any tool can be employed as an instrument of mayhem and/or murder.

knife crime is on a sharp rise in the UK. i'd rather not live there for that reason, as much as i love visiting. i do NOT want to get in a knife fight. hell i don't want to get in any violent altercation, and given the option will walk away... or run if necessary... but if you corner me, i will most likely shoot you. it's the right to self-preservation, plain and simple.

i neither look for nor expect problems like that to arise in my life, but it happens.... in every country, in every city of the this planet. i'm thankful i live in a country and state that allows me to defend myself, and with superior force if need be. percentages mean nothing to those that are under attack. what, should they just roll over and say, "oh well, i guess i'm just in the unlucky small percentile"?

even in our "crime ridden, mean ol' usa" the odds are well in my favor to never be faced with such a terrible choice. if i ever am though, god/allah/zeuss/odin/buddah/satan help the sad wretch that makes the attempt on my life, for he'll be sporting several new .40 caliber air vents in his torso.

i refuse to be a helpless victim, be it from gun/knife/wooden-club or any other type of physical attack. yes, contemplating such things is horrible, but "pie in the sky" dreams of Utopian society and a weapon and malice free world is not going to make violent crime go away.. i mean, what comes out of victim's wounds when they get stabbed in germany? rainbows?

having said all that, self-defense is only about 50% or less of why i own a gun.... i just really enjoy target shooting.

 

[Joematthews]

Well, I don't really think the suicide argument is viable here. If someone wants to die bad enough, they will find any means to do it.

Yes, a gun is a pretty sure fire way to end it (as opposed to something like pills, turning your car on in a closed garage, etc.) but in my opinion that's hardly an argument for stricter gun control.

It may be an unfortunate fact or statistic, but has little to do with how viable it is to restrict civilian gun ownership in my opinion.

-Joe

Yeah, I sort of agree with you. However the statistics don't back that argument up. Most suicides are from depression (around 80 % if I remember correctly) which is curable. The problem I present is that guns end the life without a second chance, unlike for example pills. I know someone that attempted 3 times with pills and survived, he has been put on the correct drugs and he is a reformed person. If he had access to a gun he would not be here.

However, I agree that it is hardly important on the subject of gun control viability.

Joe

 

[RockGuitarX]

Yeah man, that suicide shit is really tragic. Good to hear your friend is alright and doing better. But as you can see it's the person and not the tool. Nonetheless, he got help and is cool. I just get bitter when the rights of law abiding citizens are taken away because of people with mental/criminal problems. We can't rely on the government to solve all our problems.

 

[Joematthews]

JamesI dont like that you argue gun laws don't affect criminals, they do. In america it is comparitivly easier to get a gun than in the UK. Petty criminals have guns therefore even petty crime is more dangerous. In the UK petty criminals have knives. Knives are arguably less dangerous then guns. Therefore petty crime is less dangerous in the UK. It's logical, yet an admitably not 100% sound argument.

Joe

 

[Joematthews]

Yeah man, that suicide shit is really tragic. Good to hear your friend is alright and doing better. But as you can see it's the person and not the tool. Nonetheless, he got help and is cool. I just get bitter when the rights of law abiding citizens are taken away because of people with mental/criminal problems. We can't rely on the government to solve all our problems.

No, it IS the tool. If he had a gun he would be dead. He isn't because he doesn't have a gun or have access to one. He had a second chance because he tried to use something else (pills).

Joe