is having a gun a right?

I suppose it is if you're going by the constitution. But a human right? Hell no.chrisrooR

I agree with this.

[QUOTE="TopTierHustler"]

I do think it's interesting that you're more likely to kill a family member than an intruder if you own a gun.

thegerg

[QUOTE="TopTierHustler"]

I do think it's interesting that you're more likely to kill a family member than an intruder if you own a gun.

thegerg

[QUOTE="DJ-PRIME90"][QUOTE="Ace6301"][QUOTE="DJ-PRIME90"]It isn't here in Canada, but neither is self defense.
Even if we all had guns, we're not legally allowed to use it to defend ourselves.... but that counts for any weapon even your hands. Which is kinda ridiculous if you think about it, someone breaks into your home with a gun and tries to rob you... if you own a gun and you shoot at them, you're just as guilty as they are. You're expected to somehow call the cops and wait for them to handle the situation.Ace6301

[QUOTE="AussieePet"][QUOTE="Chaos_HL21"]

That is the problem, they will still have firearms. So they can still rob banks with firearms.

thegerg

Cause they cause harm , and the officers and military and army men will keep em, easy send the army to there house and take it or the policemen

[QUOTE="Ace6301"][QUOTE="DJ-PRIME90"]
Shooting an unarmed man would be considered excessive force to begin with.

And that poor farmer, I'm on his side 100%. Even the kid he shot said he would have shot too. The farmer was involved with 4-H and all kinds of other sports and stuff for kids. But now that he's got a criminal record he can't do that stuff anymore. All because he tried to stop someone from stealing his quad.DJ-PRIME90

[QUOTE="thegerg"][QUOTE="AussieePet"] the law will be to get rid of all owners who have access to guns AussieePet

Cause they cause harm , and the officers and military and army men will keep em, easy send the army to there house and take it or the policemen

[QUOTE="AussieePet"]

[QUOTE="thegerg"] Why would you get rid of those people, what would you do with them,and how would that take guns away from criminals? IustitiaMaximus

Cause they cause harm , and the officers and military and army men will keep em, easy send the army to there house and take it or the policemen

[QUOTE="IustitiaMaximus"]

[QUOTE="AussieePet"]

Cause they cause harm , and the officers and military and army men will keep em, easy send the army to there house and take it or the policemen

AussieePet

[QUOTE="AussieePet"][QUOTE="IustitiaMaximus"] This is what NAZI Germany did. World peace through globalcivilian armament.

IustitiaMaximus

[QUOTE="AussieePet"]

[QUOTE="thegerg"] Why would you get rid of those people, what would you do with them,and how would that take guns away from criminals? IustitiaMaximus

Cause they cause harm , and the officers and military and army men will keep em, easy send the army to there house and take it or the policemen

I'm just thinking it loudly.

[QUOTE="IustitiaMaximus"]

[QUOTE="AussieePet"]

Cause they cause harm , and the officers and military and army men will keep em, easy send the army to there house and take it or the policemen

TopTierHustler

I'm just thinking it loudly.

I am gonna lay some facts on some people in this thread. You are more likely to get killed in a vehicular wreck than be killed by a firearm. Also, the simple fact that most firearm deaths are suicide means that getting shot by someone is even less likely compared to being killed in a wreck.

NHTSA

Source-NHTSA

In the U.S. for 2006, there were 30,896 deaths from firearms, distributed as follows by mode of death: Suicide 16,883; Homicide 12,791; Accident 642; Legal Intervention 360; Undetermined 220. This makes firearms injuries one of the top ten causes of death in the U.S. The number of firearms-related injuries in the U.S., both fatal and non-fatal, increased through 1993, declined to 1999, and has remained relatively constant since. However, firearms injuries remain a leading cause of death in the U.S., particularly among youth (CDC, 2001) (CDC, 2006).Statistics Gun Control Issues and Safety

Statistics, Gun Control Issues, and Safety

As seen, in 2006, there were almost 43,000 deaths related to motor vehicles of any sort compared to the almost 31,000 of firearm related deaths. Take away suicides (anyone willing taking their life is selfish as it is and realistically, their deaths should not count as they are purposely killing themselves) and that means around 14,000 deaths related to fire arms actually happened. Also note that I am just talking about the US and not any other country where there have been deaths by firearms. Same goes for motor vehicles.

[QUOTE="IustitiaMaximus"]

[QUOTE="AussieePet"]

Cause they cause harm , and the officers and military and army men will keep em, easy send the army to there house and take it or the policemen

AussieePet

Sorry Aussie, he isn't agreeing with you.

[QUOTE="TopTierHustler"]

[QUOTE="IustitiaMaximus"] This is what NAZI Germany did. World peace through global civilian armament.

IustitiaMaximus

I'm just thinking it loudly.

You're logic makes sense.

If you're retarded.

[QUOTE="IustitiaMaximus"]

[QUOTE="TopTierHustler"]Not saying arming people who have committed felonies is the most stupid thing I've read.

I'm just thinking it loudly.

You're logic makes sense.

If you're retarded.

[QUOTE="IustitiaMaximus"]

I wasn't advocating the arming of felons specifically. But if we cant trust them around guns then we shouldn't trust them in society period. Never the less, laws aren't obeyed by criminals. That's a hard to grasp concept, I know.

TopTierHustler

You're logic makes sense.

If you're retarded.

Criminals do not care about laws. They will not walk into any place that sells guns due to the already required background checks. They will get them via other means. They will not stop obtaining them.

[QUOTE="TopTierHustler"]

[QUOTE="IustitiaMaximus"]

I wasn't advocating the arming of felons specifically. But if we cant trust them around guns then we shouldn't trust them in society period. Never the less, laws aren't obeyed by criminals. That's a hard to grasp concept, I know.

WhiteKnight77

You're logic makes sense.

If you're retarded.

Criminals do not care about laws. They will not walk into any place that sells guns due to the already required background checks. They will get them via other means. They will not stop obtaining them.

[QUOTE="WhiteKnight77"]

[QUOTE="TopTierHustler"]So instead of making it harder to get guns for people who have proved themselves to be violent we should just say "fuc k it" and give dangerous people weapons who we know can't be trusted. Criminals get guns yes, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't make it as hard as we can for them to get them to limit the number of weapons they do have.

You're logic makes sense.

If you're retarded.

Criminals do not care about laws. They will not walk into any place that sells guns due to the already required background checks. They will get them via other means. They will not stop obtaining them.

[QUOTE="TopTierHustler"]

[QUOTE="IustitiaMaximus"] I wasn't advocating the arming of felons specifically. But if we cant trust them around guns then we shouldn't trust them in society period. Never the less, laws aren't obeyed by criminals. That's a hard to grasp concept, I know.

IustitiaMaximus

You're logic makes sense.

If you're retarded.

That's common sense.

Again the idea is do what we can to stop criminals from getting guns the best we can, and not to just hand them to them.....why is that hard to grasp?

[QUOTE="TopTierHustler"]

[QUOTE="WhiteKnight77"]

Criminals do not care about laws. They will not walk into any place that sells guns due to the already required background checks. They will get them via other means. They will not stop obtaining them.

IustitiaMaximus

[QUOTE="IustitiaMaximus"][QUOTE="TopTierHustler"]So instead of making it harder to get guns for people who have proved themselves to be violent we should just say "fuc k it" and give dangerous people weapons who we know can't be trusted. Criminals get guns yes, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't make it as hard as we can for them to get them to limit the number of weapons they do have.

You're logic makes sense.

If you're retarded.

That's common sense.

Again the idea is do what we can to stop criminals from getting guns the best we can, and not to just hand them to them.....why is that hard to grasp?

[QUOTE="TopTierHustler"]

[QUOTE="IustitiaMaximus"] By make it harder for them you mean make it harder for me. You may not realize it but that's what that would mean. Felons don't just walk into gun shops and purchase firearms. They won't pass the background check. Freedom uber alles is all the logic I need.IustitiaMaximus

That's common sense.

Again the idea is do what we can to stop criminals from getting guns the best we can, and not to just hand them to them.....why is that hard to grasp?

[QUOTE="IustitiaMaximus"][QUOTE="TopTierHustler"]Like I said, the idea is to limit the availability to people we know are violent, not to just hand them guns.

In the US due to an outdated constitutional loophole ofc.

It shouldn't be though. Owning a firearm should be a privilege, not a right.

[QUOTE="TopTierHustler"]

[QUOTE="IustitiaMaximus"] When did I ever say we should just hand guns to felons?IustitiaMaximus

[QUOTE="TopTierHustler"]

[QUOTE="thegerg"] You're also more likely to kill a family member if you use a car than an intruder.thegerg

But a car is not, it's a requirement in life, owning a gun is not.

[QUOTE="TopTierHustler"]

[QUOTE="thegerg"] I'm just saying. If the greater likelihood of killing a family member rather than a criminal is a reason to outlaw guns, then that same logic should probably be applied to other things.thegerg

But a car is not, it's a requirement in life, owning a gun is not.

I used to live 45 minutes away from my job by car, is it really reasonable for me not to own a car?

[QUOTE="TopTierHustler"]

[QUOTE="thegerg"] You seem to be confused. A car is not a requirement for life.thegerg

I used to live 45 minutes away from my job by car, is it really reasonable for me not to own a car?

Your example is stupid, it's a basic necessity if you don't have alternative options, a gun isn't.

If you really believe you don't need a car, then you do live in your own little world.

No, but that doesn't mean that is required for life.thegerg

[QUOTE="thegerg"]No, but that doesn't mean that is required for life.MissLibrarian

If you really believe you don't need a car, then you do live in your own little world.TopTierHustler

But also this is wrong too. A car makes things easier but you could always take a bus.
Life does not cease to exist if one does not own a car.

why do you assume a gun is only used to end a life? it can be used to defend multiple livesZumaJones07