Once again, prove that the only reason anyone has ever owned such a gun is for killing, or RETRACT your statement
I would suggest instead of retracting the statement perhaps a small edit? Could it not be conceivable that along with owning an assualt rifle for the purpose of killing varmits, it could also be illegal to own an assualt rifle for the purpose of having a collection of assault rifles? Make them illegal for any purpose! Simple, elegant, and now folks don't feel compeled to own a killing machine to paddle their canoes. :)
ABE:I just do not see the need for anyone, for any reason, to have such weaponry in their homes. If I decide I have a burning desire to begin collecting pipe bombs and grenades - its illegal regardless of the fact I just want to look at them. They are meant to kill people.
not to mention our own government which is getting more fascist by the day
A few posts late but I wonder if perhaps someone, brennakimi maybe, could tell me what the American public intends to do once they decide their goverment has become too fascist?
This is often stated when people are defending the right to have guns. I wonder what would they do with these guns? This is the same population that is very proud to have the most powerful, modern, and best trained militay force in the world.
I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but your going to need bigger guns.
Will you deal with the real issues: minority oppression, institutionalized inequality, racism, negative stereotypes; or will you try to fix it on a superficial gun control/ownership level simply to remain ignorant of the real problems you refuse to address?
If this has already been adressed by others, I am sorry. Still reading page 9 of 13!
I completely agree with you that these issues are very important. Reality, however, takes a bite out of humanities attempts to live up to high ideals. These problems are not going away. I would like to see these problems get fixed as much as any other, but the reality is that racism, inequality etc will not be cleared up within the next few hundred years.
Guns are not resposible for all the US mahem, you are correct. What you need to address is that guns, in the hands of a person affected by racism, inequality, or just some run of the mill mental disorder enable these people to kill fast, and possibly in large numbers. Most importantly it enables them to kill without any training whatsoever.
Why get rid of the weapon when it's the personâ€”and ultimately society as a wholeâ€”that is the problem?
I ask you this - how do you propose to get rid of all the problems in society when all attempts thus far have failed? What is the simplest solution to the problem? Would you give a baby a land mine, and then teach him to speak, reason with him/her, explain the dangers, and hope that during this process nothing bad will happen?
Is it normal to suggest the most difficult road to a better society while the simplest solution looks you right in the face? Nobody, for any reason, needs an assualt rifle. Society is full of crazy people and your best suggestion is to arm them to the teeth and supply councelling for their issues in society.
Edited by Vacate, : Found one of many spelling errors
Regarding your list of suggestions brennakimi - excellent list.
Outside of hunting rifles I see no reason to have more than one gun in a household. I will admit my city is quite safe compared to big American cities, so perhaps handguns would be justified in many cases. The more one needs the more restricted the procedure should be to obtain them.
where do you propose we draw it?
Hunting rifles - not restricted as handguns should be, but most if not all of your suggestions should apply
Handguns - Difficult to obtain; phsychological evaluation, fingerprinting, etc
quote:Any amunition not nessesary to kill a deer or a rat becomes illegal
bears? i know people who have to deal with those on a daily basis. and they live in big cities.
Point noted. The bear hunters I know have told me it does take more to drop a bear. I have not been told that they require and uzi and armor piercing rounds though.
Regarding others posts: ( in general, not directed at brennakimi)
On message 223 nator posted the following: (edited)
quote: Murders committed with handguns annually:
United States 8,915 Canada 8
Murder rate (per 100,000 people):
United States 8.40 Canada 5.45
I have been around guns my whole life. Most of my family on both sides are hunters. Rifles and shotguns are the norm as far as I am concerned. For the purpose of self defence - a shotgun works just as well as an uzi for repelling a crack addict.
Most of the robberies that I read about in my city are done with knives, on occation a handgun - but that is rare. Canadians do not (as a whole) own handguns, its just not seen as important. I dont have a bunch of statistics to back up my claims, but I do feel guns designed for the purpose of killing humans will promote killing humans. I read somewhere, and am willing to retract, that Canadians have more guns per person than Americans - yet gun related deaths are far far lower.
The problem, as I see it, is availability. While you fight to keep your stockpiles of weapons you cannot realisticly claim that the problem is with councelling or government funding to predict future madmen. The problem is future madmen can buy whatever they want to begin their killing spree. Handguns and assualt rifles make murder simple - killing 32 people with a knife is impossible for a killing spree.
Arming for a future revolution is simply absurd and claiming that resrictions will not stop the criminals does not seem to be reflected by the data - if that where the case then Canada should be a candy land of crime.