Gun Free Zones

[Lootifer]

I personally think removing guns from the US would be amazing and would reduce the amount of homocides, suicides and other gun related deaths significantly. I am very much in the ban the whole friggin lot camp, but realise that thats only my opinion.

However its only possible in some kind of utopic fairy land as

- half the population will refuse to let the government take their guns (rightly or wrongly, its beside the point)
- even if you made guns illegal it would take years, if not forever, to remove guns to the point that it would impact homocide (and other death) numbers

So you need a compromise. Hence my opther thread

[comic boy]

I dont advocate a gun ban , its probably unworkable in any case , but in the long term I would like to see a mentality shift . The idea that one has to carry a firearm to feel safe , the notion that owning a gun enhances ones freedom, the fear mongering propoganda spewed out by the NRA , these are all highly negative mindsets.

[Lootifer]

Oh dont get me started on the NRA; arent they like the poster boy for crony politiko-capitalism?

[gordon1975]

in Scotland we had the Dunblane school massacre,we really don't have very much guns in this part of the world,from the 60,s through to the late 80,s ,the media gave serial killers fancy names,and gave them mass coverage,Made them famous and gave them recognition for there deeds,sames happening now with these pricks that are shooting up schools,don't give the offenders media attention ,just make the headlines worldwide say (some twat murdered) only go on about the victims, and id think that should curb the sad idiots that want there notoriety

[Metsfanmax]

Thank you Morgan Freeman*.

[gordon1975]

Thank you Morgan Freeman*.

how do you know my real name?

[gordon1975]

its true though ,there just this decades want to be (Ted Bundy, John Wayne Gacy, jack the ripper,boston strangler etc,whoever wrote that,and said it was morgan freeman has a very valid point.if they dont get the fame,theve nothing to strive for

[thegreekdog]

I dont advocate a gun ban , its probably unworkable in any case , but in the long term I would like to see a mentality shift . The idea that one has to carry a firearm to feel safe , the notion that owning a gun enhances ones freedom, the fear mongering propoganda spewed out by the NRA , these are all highly negative mindsets.

These ideas (carrying a firearm to feel safe, enhancing freedom, fear mongering propaganda) are not ideas perpetuated by anyone other than gun owners who do not use their firearms for any illegal purpose. People committing crimes with guns are not carrying firearms to feel safe, do not feel that firearms enhance their freedom, and are not fear mongering. As someone smarter than me wrote above:

To ban guns because criminals use them is to tell the innocent and law-abiding that their rights and liberties depend not on their own conduct, but on the conduct of the guilty and the lawless, and that the law will permit them to have only such rights and liberties as the lawless will allow... For society does not control crime, ever, by forcing the law-abiding to accommodate themselves to the expected behavior of criminals. Society controls crime by forcing the criminals to accommodate themselves to the expected behavior of the law-abiding.

[comic boy]

I dont advocate a gun ban , its probably unworkable in any case , but in the long term I would like to see a mentality shift . The idea that one has to carry a firearm to feel safe , the notion that owning a gun enhances ones freedom, the fear mongering propoganda spewed out by the NRA , these are all highly negative mindsets.

These ideas (carrying a firearm to feel safe, enhancing freedom, fear mongering propaganda) are not ideas perpetuated by anyone other than gun owners who do not use their firearms for any illegal purpose. People committing crimes with guns are not carrying firearms to feel safe, do not feel that firearms enhance their freedom, and are not fear mongering. As someone smarter than me wrote above:

To ban guns because criminals use them is to tell the innocent and law-abiding that their rights and liberties depend not on their own conduct, but on the conduct of the guilty and the lawless, and that the law will permit them to have only such rights and liberties as the lawless will allow... For society does not control crime, ever, by forcing the law-abiding to accommodate themselves to the expected behavior of criminals. Society controls crime by forcing the criminals to accommodate themselves to the expected behavior of the law-abiding.

The ideas translate into gun sales, guns , legal or not , lead to deaths , law abiding citizens still manage to accidently kill others. Bottom line is that the more guns in circulation , the more deaths there will be , reduce the guns and the end result will be fewer fatalities.
Answer me a simple question ; Do you think the number of firearms in circulation corelates to the number of gun deaths and would the USA be a safer society today if stricter gun controls had been in place for say the last 30 years.

[AAFitz]

I dont advocate a gun ban , its probably unworkable in any case , but in the long term I would like to see a mentality shift . The idea that one has to carry a firearm to feel safe , the notion that owning a gun enhances ones freedom, the fear mongering propoganda spewed out by the NRA , these are all highly negative mindsets.

These ideas (carrying a firearm to feel safe, enhancing freedom, fear mongering propaganda) are not ideas perpetuated by anyone other than gun owners who do not use their firearms for any illegal purpose. People committing crimes with guns are not carrying firearms to feel safe, do not feel that firearms enhance their freedom, and are not fear mongering. As someone smarter than me wrote above:

To ban guns because criminals use them is to tell the innocent and law-abiding that their rights and liberties depend not on their own conduct, but on the conduct of the guilty and the lawless, and that the law will permit them to have only such rights and liberties as the lawless will allow... For society does not control crime, ever, by forcing the law-abiding to accommodate themselves to the expected behavior of criminals. Society controls crime by forcing the criminals to accommodate themselves to the expected behavior of the law-abiding.

That's completely untrue. Many things are illegal because they are dangerous and can be used by criminals to cause great harm.

Further, there is absolutely no doubt that people who have committed crimes with their guns, also argued for their right to carry those arms as well.

And it is absolutely true, that by you fighting for a freedom to carry a gun, you steal my freedom of feeling safe without one.

[Phatscotty]

that is utter and complete bullshit. The overwhelming vast majority of legal gun owners are responsible. they absolutely make you more safe, whether you admit it or not. Nothing you said prevents a bad guy from getting a gun illegaly, it only ensures that the legal gun owners can do nothing to stop bad guys who go on shooting rampages

Under your logic, every mass shooter will be able to kill at will until they run out of bullets. Nobody will be able to stop them.

[AAFitz]

that is utter and complete bullshit. The overwhelming vast majority of legal gun owners are responsible. they absolutely make you more safe, whether you admit it or not. Nothing you said prevents a bad guy from getting a gun illegaly, it only ensures that the legal gun owners can do nothing to stop bad guys who go on shooting rampages

Under your logic, every mass shooter will be able to kill at will until they run out of bullets. Nobody will be able to stop them.

What you said is bullshit, and has no bearing on what I said, because you have no idea what you are talking about.

And yes, making and selling more guns absolutely makes it easier for someone to get a gun illegally. If that woman was not legally able to attain that gun, her son almost definitively would not have had it in the first place. Maybe, maybe, maybe he could have gone into the black market and found a similar gun, but I think its safe if not fully logical to assume he'd have had the handgun, and many of those children are dead because of your supposed right to hold your shiny new assault rifle, and no practical other reason under the sun.

I dont blame you for denying it, because youve always been biased and never given a shit about anything except what you want, but it doesnt change the facts, and any non-biased rational person understands that is the case in point.

You, buy suggesting more guns, are absolutely, if unwittingly, promoting more such deaths, and should be absolutely ashamed of yourself.

I suppose I should be more careful here though, since you have a gun, and if you just lose your temper, you have the ability to kill me very easily.

[Phatscotty]

and if there was no water, there would be no drownings...

I understand your point, just saying is completely unrealistic, not to mention the complete opposite approach that a free country should take.

like I said before

[stahrgazer]

And it is absolutely true, that by you fighting for a freedom to carry a gun, you steal my freedom of feeling safe without one.

People get stabbed by kitchen knives, knives need to be outlawed! People get hit by cars, cars ought to be outlawed! Occasionally a dog bites someone, dogs ought to be outlawed! Hey, that baseball bat can and has been a lethal weapon, outlaw baseball bats!

Because if you don't outlaw all these things, I cannot feel safe without my gun.

[Phatscotty]

In a Progressive future, it will be illegal to be out in the sun too long, no excessive tanning, because of the cost of skin cancer to the national healthcare system.

We are going the wrong way. Freedom is disappearing in front of our eyes

[Phatscotty]

[Phatscotty]

it was an accident. truth be told, I asked about it here yesterday and the day before. didn't get a response

Thanks for pointing it out, Symm

I had heard they found the assault rifle in the trunk...

In your defense I too had heard the murders were done with two handguns. It seems there was a bit of misinformation at the beginning.

thanks Loot. You are an alright guy...

Wondering if you heard or not that they are also saying now the mother that was shot was not a teacher at that school. If you remember at first they were saying the mother was a teacher at the school.

[Swimmerdude99]

And it is absolutely true, that by you fighting for a freedom to carry a gun, you steal my freedom of feeling safe without one.

People get stabbed by kitchen knives, knives need to be outlawed! People get hit by cars, cars ought to be outlawed! Occasionally a dog bites someone, dogs ought to be outlawed! Hey, that baseball bat can and has been a lethal weapon, outlaw baseball bats!

Because if you don't outlaw all these things, I cannot feel safe without my gun.

Yeah, kitchen knives scare me too. OH and baseball bats, and those are more deadly than guns. So every person owning a baseball bat scares me and makes me feel insecure. Please Ban baseball bats, kitchen knives, guns, oh and people too... becasue any given person could kill me. Therefore lets get rid of them.

[comic boy]

An interesting debate until they let the children in on it.....

[Symmetry]

in Scotland we had the Dunblane school massacre,we really don't have very much guns in this part of the world,from the 60,s through to the late 80,s ,the media gave serial killers fancy names,and gave them mass coverage,Made them famous and gave them recognition for there deeds,sames happening now with these pricks that are shooting up schools,don't give the offenders media attention ,just make the headlines worldwide say (some twat murdered) only go on about the victims, and id think that should curb the sad idiots that want there notoriety

Aye, while I don't think the media is solely responsible, clearly they share the blame for the culture, I'll just repost this:

[thegreekdog]

I dont advocate a gun ban , its probably unworkable in any case , but in the long term I would like to see a mentality shift . The idea that one has to carry a firearm to feel safe , the notion that owning a gun enhances ones freedom, the fear mongering propoganda spewed out by the NRA , these are all highly negative mindsets.

These ideas (carrying a firearm to feel safe, enhancing freedom, fear mongering propaganda) are not ideas perpetuated by anyone other than gun owners who do not use their firearms for any illegal purpose. People committing crimes with guns are not carrying firearms to feel safe, do not feel that firearms enhance their freedom, and are not fear mongering. As someone smarter than me wrote above:

To ban guns because criminals use them is to tell the innocent and law-abiding that their rights and liberties depend not on their own conduct, but on the conduct of the guilty and the lawless, and that the law will permit them to have only such rights and liberties as the lawless will allow... For society does not control crime, ever, by forcing the law-abiding to accommodate themselves to the expected behavior of criminals. Society controls crime by forcing the criminals to accommodate themselves to the expected behavior of the law-abiding.

The ideas translate into gun sales, guns , legal or not , lead to deaths , law abiding citizens still manage to accidently kill others. Bottom line is that the more guns in circulation , the more deaths there will be , reduce the guns and the end result will be fewer fatalities.
Answer me a simple question ; Do you think the number of firearms in circulation corelates to the number of gun deaths and would the USA be a safer society today if stricter gun controls had been in place for say the last 30 years.

It depends on what stricter gun controls you are talking about. I would say tentatively yes.

Let me ask you a return question: why is there more increased gun violence now than in the 18th, 19th, or early-to-mid 20th centuries?

My point with that question is to wonder, aloud, whether it is the availability of guns or something else that causes the number of gun-related deaths to increase.

[thegreekdog]

I dont advocate a gun ban , its probably unworkable in any case , but in the long term I would like to see a mentality shift . The idea that one has to carry a firearm to feel safe , the notion that owning a gun enhances ones freedom, the fear mongering propoganda spewed out by the NRA , these are all highly negative mindsets.

These ideas (carrying a firearm to feel safe, enhancing freedom, fear mongering propaganda) are not ideas perpetuated by anyone other than gun owners who do not use their firearms for any illegal purpose. People committing crimes with guns are not carrying firearms to feel safe, do not feel that firearms enhance their freedom, and are not fear mongering. As someone smarter than me wrote above:

To ban guns because criminals use them is to tell the innocent and law-abiding that their rights and liberties depend not on their own conduct, but on the conduct of the guilty and the lawless, and that the law will permit them to have only such rights and liberties as the lawless will allow... For society does not control crime, ever, by forcing the law-abiding to accommodate themselves to the expected behavior of criminals. Society controls crime by forcing the criminals to accommodate themselves to the expected behavior of the law-abiding.

That's completely untrue. Many things are illegal because they are dangerous and can be used by criminals to cause great harm.

Further, there is absolutely no doubt that people who have committed crimes with their guns, also argued for their right to carry those arms as well.

And it is absolutely true, that by you fighting for a freedom to carry a gun, you steal my freedom of feeling safe without one.

Can you provide me some more examples of items that are illegal because they can be used by criminals to cuase great harm? I doubt there are many things.

To the extent you can find many things that are illegal because they can be used by criminals to cause great harm, my response to that is that we should make those things legal. Just because there are other laws that denigrate the rights of the law-abiding in favor of protecting society from criminals does not make any of them right.

I don't see a lot of murderers, attempted murderers, or accused in Philadelphia arguing about their right to carry firearms.

Then you should purchase a gun, which is legal.

[comic boy]

TGD
I wouldn't have the least idea how present levels of gun violence in the USA compare with previous centuries , you got any stats ?
Gun related deaths are related to the quantity and availability of guns, period. Would homocides stop without the availability of guns , of course not , but accidental deaths and spree killings would almost certainly decrease.

[thegreekdog]

TGD
I wouldn't have the least idea how present levels of gun violence in the USA compare with previous centuries , you got any stats ?
Gun related deaths are related to the quantity and availability of guns, period. Would homocides stop without the availability of guns , of course not , but accidental deaths and spree killings would almost certainly decrease.

Yeah, I think that would be the case as well, I'm just not sure. Unfortunately, my firm has an automatic block on any searches involving the word "gun" on google (this is also related to reason I cannot see many Hot and Sexy pictures in that thread) and wikipedia only has statistics from 1976 to 2004.

Here is a link to the graph in Wiki...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ushom ... weapon.svg

It details homicides (which include suicides and accidental killings) by weapon type. Handguns account for by far the most deaths and reached a peak in 1993 of about 14,000. "Other guns" (not sure what is in that category) accounted for far less (less than knives, for example) and had a peak in 1980 of about 4,000.

I suspect that the legality and availability of guns do have a relation to homicides in the United States. That seems like common sense. But, ultimately, the question is whether there is some other factor at work. That could be anything from cultural issues generally and criminality generally to poor schools to violent video games and movies.

[Symmetry]

TGD
I wouldn't have the least idea how present levels of gun violence in the USA compare with previous centuries , you got any stats ?
Gun related deaths are related to the quantity and availability of guns, period. Would homocides stop without the availability of guns , of course not , but accidental deaths and spree killings would almost certainly decrease.

Yeah, I think that would be the case as well, I'm just not sure. Unfortunately, my firm has an automatic block on any searches involving the word "gun" on google (this is also related to reason I cannot see many Hot and Sexy pictures in that thread) and wikipedia only has statistics from 1976 to 2004.

Here is a link to the graph in Wiki...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ushom ... weapon.svg

It details homicides (which include suicides and accidental killings) by weapon type. Handguns account for by far the most deaths and reached a peak in 1993 of about 14,000. "Other guns" (not sure what is in that category) accounted for far less (less than knives, for example) and had a peak in 1980 of about 4,000.

I suspect that the legality and availability of guns do have a relation to homicides in the United States. That seems like common sense. But, ultimately, the question is whether there is some other factor at work. That could be anything from cultural issues generally and criminality generally to poor schools to violent video games and movies.

On the suicide issue, easy access to a method is certainly a big part, It's common sense that someone who wants to die will find a way, but it's one of those areas where common sense is wrong.