The thread about guns and stuff like that!

[waif]

Why?

Because there's no reason anyone would need to own a silencer, machine gun, or sawed off. Isn't a hand gun enough for defense? I mean, unless the muggers are driving around in tanks, this is totally unnecessary.
Silencers in particular are only useful for crime or government stuff. If you're defending yourself, you want the loud noise of a gun in order to get people to call the cops or come and help or whatever.

 

[PanzerKunt]

Silencers in particular are only useful for crime or government stuff. If you're defending yourself, you want the loud noise of a gun in order to get people to call the cops or come and help or whatever.

but WHAT IF 20 burglars are in your house trying to take your stuff! you can camp under the stairs and head shoot them as they run unknowingly by! TEABAG FOO

 

[waif]

Camper

 

[Einherjar86]

why the hell do you need a silencer other than sneak attacking someone? and a machine gun, is kansas at war or something with the neighboring states? im glad i don't live there, that bill is a severe back step to the stone age.

They didn't have guns in the stone age, genius.

Because there's no reason anyone would need to own a silencer, machine gun, or sawed off. Isn't a hand gun enough for defense? I mean, unless the muggers are driving around in tanks, this is totally unnecessary.
Silencers in particular are only useful for crime or government stuff. If you're defending yourself, you want the loud noise of a gun in order to get people to call the cops or come and help or whatever.

I can agree with the silencer bit; but criminals import automatic weapons and obtain them illegally in other ways. I see no reason to disallow automatic weapons while allowing semi-autos. Anyhow, most people probably only own them for the sport. I know lots of people who just enjoy going out back and shooting sometimes; it's a fun pastime. I don't understand why people are so against this; it can honestly be a fun hobby.

And sawed-offs are nothing special. Any bloke with a shotgun can saw off the barrel.

 

[PanzerKunt]

They didn't have guns in the stone age, genius.

Did you go to special school for special people?

 

[Einherjar86]

Did you go to your history classes?

Anyways, it was a joke,

 

[waif]

I can agree with the silencer bit; but criminals import automatic weapons and obtain them illegally in other ways. I see no reason to disallow automatic weapons while allowing semi-autos. Anyhow, most people probably only own them for the sport. I know lots of people who just enjoy going out back and shooting sometimes; it's a fun pastime. I don't understand why people are so against this; it can honestly be a fun hobby.

Basically, it seems like you're saying that the main good point of this bill would be to allow people to have fun cranking off a couple magazines at a shooting range? Because that seems like a bad call. I have nothing against shooting ranges or whatever, but this will make it easier for criminals to obtain weapons.

And sawed-offs are nothing special. Any bloke with a shotgun can saw off the barrel.

And why would someone do that? Maybe because they wanted a concealable weapon? And why would someone want to carry a shotgun around? I'm thinking the answer might be something illegal.

 

[PanzerKunt]

Did you go to your history classes?

Anyways, it was a joke,

Your mom was joking too, you aren't special OOOOH it BURNS

And I say more guns to everyone, we need at least ONE school shootout a year. Go for pro!

 

[mutantllama]

 

[PanzerKunt]

and with one I meant _eight_

in Kansas.

 

[Einherjar86]

Basically, it seems like you're saying that the main good point of this bill would be to allow people to have fun cranking off a couple magazines at a shooting range? Because that seems like a bad call. I have nothing against shooting ranges or whatever, but this will make it easier for criminals to obtain weapons.


And why would someone do that? Maybe because they wanted a concealable weapon? And why would someone want to carry a shotgun around? I'm thinking the answer might be something illegal.

The stuff in bold outlines the problem with the argument. Criminals will obtain guns anyway. That's where I think that anti/stricter gun laws fall short. They don't stop crime. Studies have shown that in areas where people are allowed to carry concealed weapons, crime rates have actually decreased because criminals don't know whether or not someone is carrying a gun. Law-abiding people will obey the law, and if you arm them, criminals will be more hesitant to commit crime.

Furthermore, why are criminals in crime? Usually it's because of poverty. Chances are, they won't be able to afford machine guns. I'm willing to bet that robbery and break-in rates will decrease if criminals suspect that there's a fuckin automatic on the premises. Making machines guns legal won't increase crime; the background checks and cost will pretty much ensure that criminals won't be able to obtain them (unless they break the law, which is what they're doing now anyway).

 

[waif]

The stuff in bold outlines the problem with the argument. Criminals will obtain guns anyway. That's where I think that anti/stricter gun laws fall short. They don't stop crime. Studies have shown that in areas where people are allowed to carry concealed weapons, crime rates have actually decreased because criminals don't know whether or not someone is carrying a gun. Law-abiding people will obey the law, and if you arm them, criminals will be more hesitant to commit crime.

Give me a link to these studies. Because if it was the NRA, I'm not buying it. If this is from a legit organization, I'd be interested in seeing it.
Also, as far as criminals obtaining guns, we could make it a lot harder for them. We have the means to trace a bullet to a gun, and the gun to the owner, but the laws that have been won by gun lobbyists don't allow us to do this. A longer waiting period for buying a gun, better background checks, and better records keeping would help a lot. It wouldn't eliminate the problem, obviously, but it would help.

Furthermore, why are criminals in crime? Usually it's because of poverty. Chances are, they won't be able to afford machine guns. I'm willing to bet that robbery and break-in rates will decrease if criminals suspect that there's a fuckin automatic on the premises. Making machines guns legal won't increase crime; the background checks and cost will pretty much ensure that criminals won't be able to obtain them (unless they break the law, which is what they're doing now anyway).

Stolen guns, anyone?

 

[Einherjar86]

Stolen guns, anyone?

Exactly; that's crime. That's what criminals do. But if guns are legalized and put in homes, crime will decrease because criminals don't want to get shot, and criminals will be less likely to obtain guns.

 

[waif]

Or, if it becomes legal for a criminal to buy a silencer, violent crime will increase, perhaps. Let's find out!

 

[Valerie]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/644224.stm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_South_Africa
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Switzerland

Spare me the "zomg lulz u usd wikpedia lopl ideot" and skip to the references at the bottom of the page if you wish.

South Africa: very strict gun control --> high shooting rate
Switzerland: lenient gun control --> low shooting rate

This is of course affected by the two different cultures of these countries, so take that into account.

 

[skeptik]

I hope there are better, more neutral examples than a highly volatile region rife with sectarian violence juxtaposed with the perennial "most harmless country ever".

 

[Valerie]

Probably. South Africa still serves as a good example of how very tight gun control laws still won't prevent criminals from getting them.

 

[Krigloch the Furious]

criminals dont follow laws... hense the whole criminal part...
Chicago has some of the worst gun laws in the entire country. hand guns are banned. but look at what happened over the weekend. So much for no guns.
a sawed off shotgun would be nice if you're patrolling your house after a break-in. easier to turn corners.

my buddy in Phoenix shot a .22 pistol with a silencer over the weekend. He said it was awesome.

 

[zabu of nΩd]

I'm starting to wonder if banning the manufacture of certain guns and ammo would be a more effective way of reducing the crime rate through gun control than simply banning the possession of guns. It's pretty hard to argue that possession laws will hinder criminal activity. But if the industry behind handguns and machineguns were halted (outside of the military, anyway), and it became nearly impossible to find a working firearm, or safe-to-use ammunition for one, then the playing field would be a lot more level between criminals and non-criminals.

Thoughts, anyone?

 

[Zephyrus]

They tried that with alcohol, and that didn't do shit.