Gun Control

[MrGuts740]

For one of my classes i have to find out what the public option on gun control and then write a report on it so If you would be kind and leave your view on it so that i may get a more spread view point of this matter

[Shade_of_Gray]

You're probably not going to get a very good random sampling here. A lot of hackers tend to be clustered along the same general political lines.

That said, personally I am in favor of less strict gun control laws. It has a tendency to decrease violent crimes overall.

[hellow533]

You're probably not going to get a very good random sampling here. A lot of hackers tend to be clustered along the same general political lines.

That said, personally I am in favor of less strict gun control laws. It has a tendency to decrease violent crimes overall.

That's quit a generalizing statement, I know there are strong differences between liberal and conservative hackers (note the claimed problems between the jester and wiki-leaks/anonymous or whoever the fuck he goes after). While some hackers want to expose our government, others want to take down government that are claimed to be enemies of the United States. It all depends.

That being said, I think that instead of focusing on gun control laws we should focus on stopping black market gun sales. Stopping/crippling the sale of guns to law abiding citizens isn't going to stop the black market sales of guns to criminals.

[Goatboy]

Let's look at two extremes:

In the first, gun sales and ownership are illegal. The Second Amendment has been abolished and only police officials and the military are allowed to own or carry guns. Even then they are strictly regulated by caliber, clip size, rate of fire, ammo type, etc. Now of course this isn't "extreme" enough considering you could make *all* guns illegal in all cases, but this is more realistic.

In the second scenario, everyone is allowed a gun. Hell, you can have an arsenal if you'd like. idgaf. Grenades are still illegal in most cases, and you'd be hard-pressed to own a .50 cal, but for the most part you can do what you want. Little old ladies would be packing glocks. Teachers in schools would carry standard-issue sidearms.

Now ask yourself, in both cases, the following questions:

In which situation are criminals and killers going to find a way to get guns?
In which situation are civilians going to be able to defend themselves against such guns?
" " " would criminals be more hesitant to rob at gunpoint or kill someone?

My obvious bias aside, I don't think any reasonable person can say that heavy gun regulation will lead to less robberies and killings.

tl;dr - Guns save lives. Kinda.

[-Ninjex-]

It's simple really:
Guns have no morals. Guns can protect and guns can harm, it's the user behind the weapon that determines the outcome. It's almost as silly as saying spoons make people fat or cars make people drive at unsafe speeds.

Now ponder on this:
Let's say guns are outlawed. Just like moonshiners back in the day, guns will still be created and sold underground.
Now, let's say that you are in an auditorium with 1,000 people. One criminal pulls out an AK and starts shooting everyone he sees. Now, you must rely on some official with the rights to carry firearms to protect the community. Well, what if there isn't one on site? What if there was two or three, but the criminal watched them and made them the first targets, leaving the rest of the people defenseless? What a bad day that would be.

Now take this same story, assume guns are not illegal and that 1/10 of the population (100 people) had firearms with them. Given the same scenario, which story would you expect to have more causalities? Hopefully you came up with the conclusion that more firearms to the public would create a safer living standard for all.

Also keep in mind that if guns became outlawed, it gives incentive for guns to be distributed more rapidly by criminals underground. The reason is that they can make a great deal of profit for selling something not easily accessible to the public, just like marijuana in some states is today. When marijuana became legalized in California (with a license) it ran most marijuana drug dealers out. It just doesn't sound reasonable to ban guns, when they have no morals, they are used to protect (90% of the time), and the cons can be detrimental to society.

[MrGuts740]

Thank you guys so far just keep it coming it will help me out and i do agree about the black market .When something is not easy to get people will spend countless hours of time searching for what they want and once they find it they will use it as they please .

[sordidarchetype]

Man has always found a way to kill man. It has been happening since long before guns were created, and if they were to be abolished it would still happen. I think the real question is, what are you trying to achieve with gun control? What is the problem you are attempting to solve?

I feel that implementing gun control is akin to treating the symptoms of a disease rather than it's cause. You won't cure it. Maybe you will make it more tolerable. Then again, maybe you give the disease time to spread and become malignant. The bottom line is: the disease persists.

~Ninjex~ hit upon the key. Morality. That is the only thing that will make any true difference. If a man wills to kill, then he probably will succeed. With firm moral conviction and discipline, he can will just the opposite if he so chooses.

Here is an interesting resource I think everyone should read. It does not advocate or impede gun control. It is simply a collection of facts. Process it as you will.
http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp

[QueenC]

I agree with goatboy, but i think we should go with the second option. Everyone HAS to own some sort of firearm and have it in there home. Everyone learns how to shoot like they were learning to drive a car. They should teach it in schools. Children who know more about guns are less likely to play with them. Criminals who know that it is likely that everyone is packing a pistol will probably be less likely to try to break into a house or mug someone. Mentally ill people who pack a gun into a school would get picked off by the first teacher that saw them. In Egypt (or was it Afghanistan?) there have been 8 shooting deaths in the last five years. There have been more then three hundred in the U.S or A. The difference? Their teachers are packing.

-- Tue Apr 08, 2014 2:53 pm --

I agree with goatboy, but i think we should go with the second option. Everyone HAS to own some sort of firearm and have it in there home. Everyone learns how to shoot like they were learning to drive a car. They should teach it in schools. Children who know more about guns are less likely to play with them. Criminals who know that it is likely that everyone is packing a pistol will probably be less likely to try to break into a house or mug someone. Mentally ill people who pack a gun into a school would get picked off by the first teacher that saw them. In Egypt (or was it Afghanistan?) there have been 8 shooting deaths in the last five years. There have been more then three hundred in the U.S or A. The difference? Their teachers are packing.