For or against?
 

OK since I am tired of catering to the weak arguments of some anti-gun idiots that are too fucking stupid to stay on topic in my firearms thread about what firearms the population of GFF would like to own we shall come here and listen to their argument in the proper place.

So are you for or against firearms and why? Maybe because someone told you to think that way or maybe because you just don't like others having the right to protect their family and home? Sooooo babble away with all the overdone arguments you want.

SEE DEVO IS A SANE PERSON!!! WHY CAN'T ALL THE ANTI-GUN NUTS UNDERSTAND THAT?!?

And those illegally obtained weapons wouldn't have been so readily available if they weren't bought and sold by people as a hobby.

I have no problem with firearms, but I don't see any sense in having one for 'protection' either. If you want to hunt, then fine. If you want to feel badass and know that you can shoot a burglar and have delusions about being a hero-in-waiting, then that's something I don't relate to.

The strangest thing about the subject in my view is how adamant people are that they just need to have guns, lots of guns. And big f'n guns too. I mean, the logic gets lost along the way pretty quickly from where I'm sitting. But I guess it's always hard to explain the draw of penis enhancing purchases.

But I love your opening post. If I'm not pro-gun, then it's really just that I want to endanger your family and infringe on your rights. I mean, yeah, that's why people do things, just to piss off another group.

I personally can not think of many situations where having a gun is necessary or safe. Can someone enlighten me?

Pistol? Sure.
Shotgun? I can see it.
Hunting Rifle? Why not.

Assault Rifle? RPG? You can all go to hell unless I'm allowed to build myself a nuclear power plant and/or bomb.

It all comes down to differences in opinion, really.

If you don't want a gun, don't have one. If you want a gun, then you have the legal right to own one.

We have that freedom here in the United States. That some people think it's unnecessary for people to own firearms is fucking irrelevant. Rights don't exist until you decide that they aren't necessary anymore.

I don't think "freedom" counts as a valid argument. If I had true freedom I could smoke a burner at the bus stop while fucking a girl in the face in front of a cop, but I can't do that! Well, I can, if I want to go to jail.

That said, any given right can begin or end where a law does. Because of that, there at least should be more reasoning to behind why one does have the right to own a lethal weapon besides, "because of freedom".

Your argument falls because of this:

Me owning a firearm does not in any way, shape, or form infringe upon your rights or freedoms. Unless I use that firearm against you, it likely never will.

There is a fundamental difference between owning a firearm and what the hell you're talking about.

Do any of you actually live in dangerous neighbourhoods?

Don't piss out with 'irrelevant'.

Dude, sit down, relax and drink some shampoo. One fine day, even you will figure out the obvious: Why's there so much crime in the States? Because every fucking person is allowed to own a gun. You know, not everyone who pretends to use it "for self-defense" only uses it only for that.

My thoughts exactly.

In fact, they wouldn't even need to steal them or smuggle them in, they could just make their own if they really wanted to. It's not that difficult to make a firearm, some in fact are VERY simple (single-shot weapons for example).

See above. If somebody wants a gun badly enough, they can get one, illegal or not...

It has nothing to do with being a "hero". Simple fact is, when you call the cops, it takes them time to get to you. It maybe be 5 or 10 min before the police arrive. Alot of shit can go down in that time. I for one don't want to be left helpless while I await the arrival of law enforcement...

Isn't that the case though?

Guns are no more dangerous than anything else in these modern times. Cars are a great example. They're big and dangerous, yet everyone has them and 99% of the people who drive them manage not to kill anyone. It's the same with firearms, yes bad things can happen if you're stupid with them, but 99% of gun owners are very safe, responsible people.

As far as necessity, well the odds of someone ever having to use their gun are pretty small (maybe 1 in 500?). However, you don't know if you'll be that one guy that needs it untill the shit hits the fan. Therefore I argue it's better to have one, just to be prepared. It's like having airbags in your car... you'll probably never need them, but if you ever do you'll be glad they are there...

True, and thats why I think drugs should be legalized (maybe not the really hardcore drugs). It's not fair to punish everyone because a few people do stupid things. I think it's very hypocritcal (spelling?) that we as a society say it's okay to get drunk but it's not ok to get high. This is, however, a totally different subject...

There are plenty of reasons why a responsible citizen would want a firearm. Self defense and hunting being the main ones, but there are others, such as collecting historic firearms or target shooting...

Very good point. How does my owning a gun harm you? It doesn't...

EDIT:

About the question "why is there so much crime in the US"... Before you open that can of worms, you might want to do some research... the US crime rate has been going steadily DOWN for many years now... while it remains high in countrys where firearms are illegal (such as the UK)...

Again, what the fuck? How often does the average American expect to have to deal with law enforcement authorities in their lifetime?

Say the right wasn't enshrined in a bill and a buyback scheme (SHOCK) was doing the rounds in congress? Is this argument really as piss-weak as I think it is, or is defence of person and property actually an everyday problem in your country?

That's cool, that's cool... I mean you know if you're starting like that, I don't really know what to say; it's not like because the crime rate has been going steadily DOWN, it makes the States a safer place to live. There's still almost as much crime as in all European countries together.

I don't think it's so much the guns, it's the paranoia the masses are deliberatly kept under by mass media and politicians. Scared people will easier do your bidding, i.e. consume or approve of certain things. So of course you feed them an endless line of ominpresent terrorism, crime, video game inspired amok kids, satanic metal, cholesterol... naturally they will all want a gun (or other weird things).

Some interesting facts I found in about 30 seconds by doing a google search of "US crime rate":

From the Department of Justice:

From the FBI:

Yet, when I do another search of "UK crime rate", I see things like this:

From the BBC:

I actually had a hard time finding any offical data on the UKs crime rate... the best I could come up with were newspaper articals like the one I quoted above.

So what is my point in all this? My point is that banning guns isn't going to prevent crime. The reverse is also true, legal gun ownership isn't going to increase crime. Therefore, if you're arugment is "baning guns will stop crime", I'd say it's a weak argument...

The following two paragraphs came first and second in the "worst analogy of all time" contest I've been running.
Cars are built with a primary purpose: moveing you around. They have been adapted for other uses like ram raiding bottlestores and running over your ex girlfriend.
Gun are also built for a primary purpose: killing humans! Other uses since discrovered include: oh wait none, guns are only good at destroying life.

Owning a gun is not at all like airbags in you car.
Airbags are there so that in the case of an accident they will cushion you and save you life.
People carry guns just incase they have to KILL SOMEONE.

But the classic stupidity came from Night Pheonix
Wait wait wait let's have a look here. Eleos argument fails because GUNS don't infringe on other people freedoms except when they're shooting bullets at you.

Eleo complained that you couldn't get high and fuck in public. Who's freedoms do those impose on?

I'm sick of this protecting my house and family line too. News: unarmed people don't get shot at. So people come invade your home, big deal. they take your stuff, you call the cops, the cops catch them and insurance replaces all your valubles. Drama over. Would you prefer to have a leathal gun battle in your own home? Fuck your pride.

I love how partisan politics can turn a complex issue like firearm control into such inane "FOR" or "AGAINST" options. Really helps to reinforce that whole "YOU'RE WITH US, OR YOU'RE WITH THE TERRORISTS" mentality.

That being said, I'm all for the ownership of pistols/rifles/shotguns. However I don't think you should be allowed to buy assault rifles such as an AK-47 publicly without at the very least a through background check. If at all. Do you really need a AK for duck hunting? Isn't that over doing the whole "protection" issue just a tad? Just who are you "protecting" yourself from that requires that much firepower?

Why is everyone so damn paranoid about being maimed/shot/killed anyway? Comparing the murder/suicide rates can only lead to one plausible conclusion. The biggest threat to your life is yourself. Or dying in a car accident. Not terrorists, not communists, not even criminals. But you! Be afraid!

That was probably the sanest and most non-belligerent thing that got said in this thread. Congrats! :) *edit* oops guess not had to read some posts beyond yours. */edit!*

I recommend you try a legal challenge for your 2nd amendment rights to nuclear arms! I mean all you need is a little plutonium right?

*edit*
I call bullshit on that. Cars can be used for multiple purposes. Most cars have 15 gallon tanks. Five gallons of gasoline is equal to about a stick of TNT. You can legally buy as much of that substance as you want for your bomb building pleasure! Don't think it's possible? Learn a little chemistry. Yet most accidents involving cars are accidents no? You're sitting on such destructive firepower... and it's usually a accident when fatalities occur.

Quit being so paranoid.

So at the very least - neither of those things infringe on people's freedoms. Still doesn't make me any less right.

This lets me know you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

You know what? If you feel fine with just letting someone run through your house, more power to you. But there are those of us who feel the need to, have the ability to, and will defend their home with lethal force and the law allows us to do so. Don't like it? Doesn't matter. If it isn't you who is getting hit in the chest with that .45 I keep by my bed because you decided you wanted to play thief in the night, why do you even give a fuck?

So basically your ethics are defined more or less by what is and isn't legally sanctioned and you value your HDTV more than human life.

OK

Ethics would indicate NOT to come into my home when I am there to rob it or do harm to me. So don't use ethics when it comes to criminals CAL, it doesn't work. They will never abide by our laws or any set of reasoning other than they want what you have and will take it from you by force. Ever wonder why police are armed at all times? For their protection, the same reason why I have firearms in my home. I hope I never have to use them but in the off chance I do, I know that my family and I will be save. CAL if you think I give one bit of damn for that piece of shit would tried to hurt my family you are a fool.

Ok, first of all, knowing that one crime rate is going down, and the other going up doesn't say anything about how big they are in relationship to each other. Also, try to do some more research on what kind of crimes you are talking about, not all involve guns.

From http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/810522.stm, they are talking about a report saying that Britain is more violent than the USA (it's from 2000, but I didn't have the time to search for more recent figures):

I believe these figures do show quite clearly that making gun-ownership legal is a bad idea.

Some people are not interested in harming or killing anyone. Poverty leads to desparation, but not necessarily to homicidal tendancies. There's a good chance that the guy who is stealing your stuff has a hard time getting by in life and just needs to make a quick buck for whatever reason.

I'm not saying it's right for him to do that, but he doesn't deserve to die.

And I actually agree with you on that point, Minion, but ONLY if he chooses to wait until there's nobody home before coming in to steal my stuff. I'm not going to kill anyone over material things. However, if he comes into my house while I'm obviously there, the crime changes from a "burglary" to a "home invasion."

Wiki "home invasion" if you want. Do a little research on some other websites, as well. The general consensus (backed up by statistics) is that when someone breaks into your home and does it despite of or because of the fact that you're in it, they've come to harm you - not to steal your crap.

I don't know about the rest of you, but I hear about home invasions at least once a month in my area, and they often involve a rape or battery. Also, as I stated in the other thread, I have children at home who I will protect whether the bleedinghearts like it or not.

Yes, but Alice, since you mention statistics, one has to wonder if, statistically speaking, your children are safer with the gun (which they could accidentally kill themselves with) or without the gun (how likely are you to be the victim of a home invasion)?