What would you do about Virginia Tech?

[ShakeZula06]

[ QUOTE ]
Americans will tell you the Constitution blah blah but I think it really comes down to this bizarre Wild West mentality we seem to have. When you question an American's right to bear an arm, you are literally attacking his manhood. It sounds silly but it's true, just look through this thread for examples.

[/ QUOTE ]
And we're to believe this why? Because you said so?

[renodoc]

[ QUOTE ]
Brits,

From a historical perspective, I find the fact that citizens of the UK are telling us we should have gun control laws very LOL.

Part of the reason that the US has historically been very anti-gun control is because of the actions of your government during colonial times. I'm not laying blame, I just thought it was kind of funny.

[/ QUOTE ]

232 years almost to the day. Brits tried to take Americans guns. Didn't work then. Doubt it will work now.

How many Brits are behind bars for defending themselves with a gun (shotgun) in the face of an armed intruder into their house? Nice law. Punish the good guys.

[Huh?]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Giving students the ability to carry firearms on and around school campus is just about the dumbest idea ever proposed.

[/ QUOTE ]

"Let's make tons of ineffectual laws that restrain the rights of law abiding citizens to own guns while doing nothing to affect criminals owning guns." is dumber, and if not, it's a close second.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes...americans are severly oppressed when it comes to their ability to own and carry guns lol.

[MasterLJ]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Giving students the ability to carry firearms on and around school campus is just about the dumbest idea ever proposed.

[/ QUOTE ]

"Let's make tons of ineffectual laws that restrain the rights of law abiding citizens to own guns while doing nothing to affect criminals owning guns." is dumber, and if not, it's a close second.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes...americans are severly oppressed when it comes to their ability to own and carry guns lol.

[/ QUOTE ]

We are. At least here in CA. I own a handgun. Here's how I may use my handgun:

1. I can carry around my loaded pistol in my house.
2. I cannot discharge my weapon on my small property
3. If I go to the range it must be stored in a locked container with ammo stored separately
4. I cannot carry a concealed weapon under any circumstance

Which part isn't limiting? To be honest, my handgun is more for sport than defense since I can't take it anywhere.

[tehox]

[ QUOTE ]
Brits,

Better work on banning knives.

[/ QUOTE ]

Has anyone every argued (not just this thread, anyone ever in the entire world), that banning guns gets rid of all crime?

[whiskeytown]

[ QUOTE ]
Brits,

Better work on banning knives.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know a guy who was held up in Scotland by someone using a syringe full of "allegedly" HIV Positive blood.

Do we ban HIV or syringes?

rb

[Misfire]

Most of the obvious points have been made here. One thing I might add is that comparisons between European and American gun laws/crime-statistics is difficult because you can't fully account for cultural differences. Americans and Europeans have different termperments. I think a more accurate assessment of the effectiveness of gun laws is to compare crime statistics among US cities of similar sizes and demographics. I'm sure you'll find a direct correlation between the levels of gun restrictions and gun crime.

Another thing I want to bring up are all the comparisons to the old west--that if we had an armed society we'd end up with duels and shootings. The old west was not like that. People were heavily armed and thus careful about their confrontations. FWIW, the shooter at VT killed more people today than Billy the Kid did in his whole life.

[NCAces]

[ QUOTE ]
So, you really want to live in the "wild west" where everyone is packing a gun? Jeez, people aren't careful with their cars, much less everyone with a freakin handgun!

[/ QUOTE ]

Your extreme example isn't my point, but that said, yeah, I support the right to defend myself.

The point I was making that you missed is that when someone says that a law is good so long as it keeps 1 person from being killed, the statement is statistical incomplete.

You have to look to see what other things happened because of the law. If one person, who otherwise could have defended themselves, is robbed, raped, killed, etc., are you still certain that gun control is so good? What if more people are saved each year because of gun ownership than are killed because of lack of gun control. What if we could say with statistical certainty that under the current gun control laws in the US, 10,000 people are killed each year by gun (accidental or otherwise), but 20,000 people successfully defend their lives and property by gun? Now are you so certain that gun control is a good thing?

NCAces

[BCPVP]

Enough of the Wild West references, people. Hollywood movies != accurate history.

[MasterLJ]

[ QUOTE ]
If it could be demonstratively proven that you could eliminate all automotive deaths by lowering the speed limit to 15 mph would you support such?

[/ QUOTE ]

That's not quite the same. If getting rid of guns guaranteed with 100% certainty that violent crime would not exist, I'd no longer have use for a handgun beyond sport. Limiting the speed limit to 15mph would cripple the utility of a car.