I'm Australian, so the gun ownership debate is one I sort of need clarified.

I understand the Second Amendment protects a citizen's rights to bear arms...

Why is there such great objection to ending or overruling the right to gun ownership?

It seems a ridiculously unnecessary and superficial right in the face of freedom of speech, and social violence.

you doof. guns can be owned by citizens in austrailia. in fact their ownership laws are very similar to our own.

let's see what the US ranks on this violent crime thing of your's.

doo doo doo....

damn that's annoying

doo doo doo

well according to this site (http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita) the US is number 24 in how many murders occur per capita... Austraila is number 43.

while japan (where only officers may posses firearms) is number 60 and great britain (where citizens cannot own guns) isn't even on the list.

so what now. you got served.

quote:

Originally posted by VivaLaSoph:
I'm Australian, so the gun ownership debate is one I sort of need clarified.

I understand the Second Amendment protects a citizen's rights to bear arms...

Why is there such great objection to ending or overruling the right to gun ownership?

It seems a ridiculously unnecessary and superficial right in the face of freedom of speech, and social violence.

Actually, if anything needs to be controlled, it's the abuse of the so-called "freedom of speech,", which is what trains people in and perpetuates violence in the first place.

We have rap music teaching people - and most of this is marketed specifically to youth - that violence is good, da thug life iz cool, that drug abuse is to be respected and embraced, etc. Then we have videogames that are fully-functional combat simulators. They have been implicated in a number of school massacres including Paducah, the Columbine killings, and the Virginia Tech killings. Not only do they teach that killing is fun, but they teach basic skills such as sight picture and weapons management.

Even the Big Media peddlers who product this garbage realize, at least, that they desensitize people to violence (duh!) which is why they have consentually agreed to TV, movie and videogame ratings systems. Of course, any number of studies could have told you that as well.

THAT is what needs to be controlled or ended.

BTW, seeing as Australia has one of the highest violent crime rates of any industrialized country, according to the International Crime Victimization Survey, don't you think your country is a prime example of why gun ownership should be encouraged rather than restricted?

quote:

Originally posted by Brehon:

quote:

But people use them for protection.

Protection seems to be a little bit dodgy to me; it looks, to an outsider, like an outdated element of the constitution that was only included because of the conquering of the Western frontier, or whatever. Cowboy films, but older, basically. In one of the most technologically advanced nations on earth, presumably the natural wilderness is mostly tamed by now?

When I say protection, I was referring more to human threats than animal ones. You know, those criminals that I mentioned would still have their guns? In that point which you promptly shot down. Damned logic! lol

quote:

People who do not follow laws have their guns illegally. If guns are illegal, those people WILL STILL HAVE their guns.

This is true. But, and I think this is the real point, as the overall availability of guns drops, so does the availability of black market guns. If a large number of guns become illegal to purchase, the demand falls, so less are made. Simple, basic economics. If this is the case, provided the existing surplus of guns is removed from circulation, then the non-law abiding criminals will be less able to procure a gun.

quote:

But people use them for protection and hunting.

Protection seems to be a little bit dodgy to me; it looks, to an outsider, like an outdated element of the constitution that was only included because of the conquering of the Western frontier, or whatever. Cowboy films, but older, basically. In one of the most technologically advanced nations on earth, presumably the natural wilderness is mostly tamed by now?

I was captain of target shooting at my preparatory school, so I have much more experience of guns than the vast majority of people in the UK, so I'm not completely biased. Just mostly.

quote:

As long as people are still allowed to drive those deadly weapons stories like kids getting run over will keep happening dozens of times a day.

But, more importantly, they'll destroy the environment. This is partially a joke, but I like to think it contains some kind of dark truth.

Maybe that last bit was too much.

transportation is much more necessary than hunting in these times.

actually the idea that gun deaths will increase has been disproven by the countless countries that have banned firearms. statistically the deaths have gone down.

how is a gun going to protect you from someone else with a gun? you'll just be standing there waiting for someone to move.

also, the illegal gun trade would probably stay the same due to the fact that most people are law abiding citizens.

Taking guns from the general public will only increase gun death.

That may sound weird so I'll explain, people who follow laws have their guns legally. If guns are illegal those people will not have guns.

People who do not follow laws have their guns illegally. If guns are illegal, those people WILL STILL HAVE their guns.

As for your point wolfie, the same could be said about cars (almost). As long as people are still allowed to drive those deadly weapons stories like kids getting run over will keep happening dozens of times a day.

I know you'll say, "but cars have a purpose, guns don't"
But people use them for protection and hunting. both are perfectly good reasons to keep them around. It's kind of a necessary evil.

i think only police should be allowed to have guns. it worked for england and most other european countries.

in my class there was a kid who, when he was in 4th grade, found a loaded shot gun under his grandfather's bed. his little brother and he decided to play with it (being kids and such). this kid in my class at point blank range blew his little brothers head off.

well there goes another family that was fucked up by a gun.

don't give me the whole "well i control my gun, it's the other people like that grandpa who should be blamed, not guns."

guess what. this world is full of plenty of idiots who will do stupid things with guns.

as long as everyday people are still allowed to have that deadly of a weapon stories like that kid will keep happening dozens of times a day.

I do not support outlawing ALL guns, I think we have a right to own guns which are reasonable for certain uses. Hunting and protection are the only reasons one should own a gun.

Ordinary citizens should not be able to get their hands on AK-47s, Uzis, TEC-9s, Kalashnikovs, Street Sweeper shotguns, grenade launchers, machine guns, or Panzer tanks.

However, I am not opposed to semi-automatic hunting rifles because they do help alot and can reduce recoil which affects aim.

I also support the use of semi-automatics for protection. I don't think an all-nation gun ban will help crime rates at all, if anything it will disarm the innocent.

I do not own a gun, I do not know how to use one, and I have fired a gun twice in my whole life: when I was 7yrs old at a row of cans. I don't even remember this, my older sister told me it happened.

btw- semi-automatic does not mean evil-killing-machine as its connotation suggests. it just means that after firing the old shell moves and a fresh bullet moves into position without human interference. The trigger needs to be pulled to fire the next bullet.
An automatic weapon is a gun where by simply holding the trigger down the gun will dispose of the shell, reload, and refire.

this is supposed to be a free country people. why shouldn't we have guns? what if someone breaks into your house? would you want to be totally unprepared? if you do then fine you dont HAVE to buy a gun but shouldnt you have the right to protect yourself? guns are not what kill people people kill people and without guns they would find another way.

Most of the heated opposition to gun control are from a relatively small group of people (I hope). It's mostly the people who realize their collections of guns are way beyond reasonable and they don;t want their investment to be taxed/seized/controlled by the 'Big Brother' government.

guns are so stupid.

lol on colbert the other night they had congressman shock on. sooo funny. he's pro-life and pro-gun.

wow, wonder how that works seeing as how guns end life.

and of course he probably eats animals and is for the death penalty.

i hate it when people do that.

lol bummer...

lol google.

you homewrecker.

not really, i'm being silly right now.

i'm pissed. i lost my car keys and i don't know how they got out of my purse because well i never take them out unless i'm driving. today i took everything out of my room in order to find it. i didn't.

my mom gave me one day to look for the stupid keys but now (even though we have a spare that works) i have to pay 80 dollars to get a new one. bs. utter bs.

the shitty part is that i know that my keys will turn up and then i'll be out 80 bucks.

To your other point, viva, I've never bought a gun, I'm not sure about the procedures. I plan on buying one after I move out of my mom's house.

I could look it up, and yes Wolfie, that means I'll probably google it.

quote:

Originally posted by VivaLaSoph:

quote:

Originally posted by Hoopdawg08:
I don't want to hear that you were too busy oppressing the aboriginal peoples or "recivilizing" their "half-breed" kids!

Whoa, you went there. But anyway.

I was only over-exaggerating the fact that pheonix1 said

quote:

its because they have very little intelligence and shooting people is the only way they know how to do things (eg. invading Iraq)

referring to all americans indiscriminantly. Granted it is true about most of the midwest.

I dislike guns, everything about them, etc.

due to the fact that America is full of gun nuts it would be very difficult to ban them. Also the illegal gun trade has grown so much in this country that we would never be able to get rid of them.

Guns should only be carried by officiers of the law.

quote:

I don't want to hear that you were too busy oppressing the aboriginal peoples or "recivilizing" their "half-breed" kids!

Whoa, you went there. But anyway.


What kind of processes are there for buying guns? Any sort of screening tests? How hard is it for street gangs to get their hands on guns?

Having a Constitution that maintains it's an individual's right to own a gun just contributes to its acceptability. If these guys, who do drive-bys have access to guns, and its so bad that as a consequence citizens need to defend themselves with guns, surely that's proof that this aspect of the justice system needs to be better regulated?

So I'm talking in circles- but explainnn!

My point being that gun laws/restrictions will not affect criminals at all and will just leave law-abiding citizens defenseless agains the criminals.

That must be a terrible place to live, but people need to understand that the criminals who are doing the drive-bys most likely aren't using a legally registered gun, and that restricting legal gun ownership will not help get the illegal ones off the street at all.

Gun laws restrict law-abiding citizens.

Criminals, by definition, do not abide by the laws.

Therefore, criminals will ignore gun laws along with all the other laws they ignore.