Should guns be banned in the United States?

then we would have no need for anything, firemen, cause fire kills people, sugeons, cant we kill ourselves if we wanted to, and if get a cold u couldnt take pills cause pills cause death if u overdose, but cold doesnt

I think we should ban everything that kills people.

I mean like, just put a ban on cancer and heart attacks, then we don't have to worry about it. :roll:

ElArab

It's insane how so many people in this thread believe that having objects designed to kill a human being can be justified by the outdated second amendment... The argument that it would takee guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens does not work because law abiding citizens still can shoot someone after a few beers. I have seen people in situations after alcohol or drugs where if they had a gun they would have shot someone without a doubt. It doesn't matter that they would not do it usually, there are sets of circumstances where we all would shoot someone unjustly. I'm pretty sure at the columbine school shooting they didn't buy the guns of a criminal. Human beings are too emotional and violent to have the responsibility to own an object that serves no other purpose but to kill.

It's insane how so many people in this thread believe that having objects designed to kill a human being can be justified by the outdated second amendment... The argument that it would takee guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens does not work because law abiding citizens still can shoot someone after a few bears. I have seen people in situations after alcohol or drugs where if they had a gun they would have shot someone without a doubt. It doesn't matter that they would not do it usually, there are sets of circumstances where we all would shoot someone unjustly. I'm pretty sure at the columbine school shooting they didn't buy the guns of a criminal. Human beings are too emotional and violent to have the responsibility to own an object that serves no other purpose but to kill.

swizz-the-gamer

more people die from car crashes than gun shots, should we ban cars?

[QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"]

It's insane how so many people in this thread believe that having objects designed to kill a human being can be justified by the outdated second amendment... The argument that it would takee guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens does not work because law abiding citizens still can shoot someone after a few bears. I have seen people in situations after alcohol or drugs where if they had a gun they would have shot someone without a doubt. It doesn't matter that they would not do it usually, there are sets of circumstances where we all would shoot someone unjustly. I'm pretty sure at the columbine school shooting they didn't buy the guns of a criminal. Human beings are too emotional and violent to have the responsibility to own an object that serves no other purpose but to kill.

shoeman12

more people die from car crashes than gun shots, should we ban cars?

Guns have a use. Ever gone hunting?

And banning guns wouldn't stop criminals from getting them. I can back that up too.

Guns have a use. Ever gone hunting?

And banning guns wouldn't stop criminals from getting them. I can back that up too.

dgwutka

Guns have a use. Ever gone hunting?

And banning guns wouldn't stop criminals from getting them. I can back that up too.

dgwutka

I'm just saying guns have legal uses. I'm not saying a gun is the only way to hunt.

I'm just saying guns have legal uses. I'm not saying you need a gun to hunt or anything.

dgwutka

Guns have a use. Ever gone hunting?

And banning guns wouldn't stop criminals from getting them. I can back that up too.

dgwutka

Guns have no uses that would justify them being legal. swizz-the-gamer

Let's assume that's correct. So the government bans guns. And you think that, since they're illegal, gun crime will drop siginificantly?

[QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"]Guns have no uses that would justify them being legal. dgwutka

Let's assume that's correct. So the government bans guns. And you think that, since they're illegal, gun crime will drop siginificantly?

I wouldn't say so. England banned most private ownership of guns in 1997, and look what happened. "Since 1998, the number of people injured by firearms in England and Wales has more than doubled" If you want the source, you can have it.

[QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"]Guns have no uses that would justify them being legal. dgwutka

Let's assume that's correct. So the government bans guns. And you think that, since they're illegal, gun crime will drop siginificantly?

yes

[QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"]Guns have no uses that would justify them being legal. dgwutka

Let's assume that's correct. So the government bans guns. And you think that, since they're illegal, gun crime will drop siginificantly?

it's the same as drugs. they're illegal, but does that stop people?

yes mrp1

Why? Okay, assume your a burglar. "They just banned guns. I don't obey the law saying I can't steal, why should I obey the law saying I can't own a gun?" Why should you respect one gun law over another. And just because you asked, get ready for a massive wall of text.

---

New Jersey adopted what sponsors described as "the most stringent gun law" in the nation in 1966; two years later, the murder rate was up 46% and the reported robbery rate had nearly doubled.

In 1968, Hawaii imposed a series of increasingly harsh measures, and its murder rate tripled from a low of 2.4 per 100,000 in 1968 to 7.2 by 1977.

In 1976, Washington, D.C., enacted one of the most restrictive gun control laws in the nation. Since then, the city's murder rate has risen 134% while the national murder rate has dropped 2%.

Over 50% of American households own guns, despite government statistics showing the number is approximately 35%, because guns not listed on any government roll were not counted during the gathering of data.

Evanston, Illinois, a Chicago suburb of 75,000 residents, became the largest town to ban handgun ownership in September 1982 but experienced no decline in violent crime.

Among the 15 states with the highest homicide rates, 10 have restrictive or very restrictive gun laws.

Twenty percent of U.S. homicides occur in four cities with just 6% of the population-New York, Chicago, Detroit and Washington, D.C.-and each has (or, in the case of Detroit, had until 2001) a virtual prohibition on private handguns.

UK banned private ownership of most handguns in 1997, previously held by an estimated 57,000 people-0.1% of the population. Since 1998, the number of people injured by firearms in England and Wales has more than doubled. In 2005-06, of 5,001 such injuries, 3,474 (69%) were defined as "slight," and a further 965 (19%) involved the "firearm" being used as a blunt instrument. Twenty-four percent of injuries were caused with air weapons, and 32% with "imitation firearms" (including BB guns and soft air weapons).Since 1998, the number of fatal shootings has varied between 49 and 97, and was 50 in 2005.

Australia forced the surrender of nearly 650,000 personal firearms in 1997. A study published in 2001 shows a 47% decrease of firearms related deaths, but also reveals an overall rise in non-firearm related violent crime.

Violent crime accelerated in Jamaica after handguns were banned.

it's the same as drugs. they're illegal, but does that stop people?shoeman12

Agreed. People who say guns should be banned think for some reason that it will work.

[QUOTE="dgwutka"]

[QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"]Guns have no uses that would justify them being legal. shoeman12

Let's assume that's correct. So the government bans guns. And you think that, since they're illegal, gun crime will drop siginificantly?

it's the same as drugs. they're illegal, but does that stop people?

the difference is that guns cost more money than drugs but if weed was legal like cigarettes there would be alot more people buying them than now

I wouldn't say so.

"Since 1998, the number of people injured by firearms in England and Wales has more than doubled" If you want the source, you can have it.

dgwutka

I think you need to look outside your outdated concepts of freedom and use some logic.

I can also 'happily say that I know no one who lives in fear of gun crime.' Anyway, what are you trying to say by 'As gang culture and drug related crime increases so does gun crime'?

Please rebut entire wall of text above before you go further.

[QUOTE="dgwutka"]

[QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"]Guns have no uses that would justify them being legal. shoeman12

Let's assume that's correct. So the government bans guns. And you think that, since they're illegal, gun crime will drop siginificantly?

it's the same as drugs. they're illegal, but does that stop people?

I can also 'happily say that I know no one who lives in fear of gun crime.' Anyway, what are you trying to say by 'As gang culture and drug related crime increases so does gun crime'?

Please rebut entire wall of text above before you go further.

dgwutka

[QUOTE="shoeman12"][QUOTE="dgwutka"]

[QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"]Guns have no uses that would justify them being legal. swizz-the-gamer

Let's assume that's correct. So the government bans guns. And you think that, since they're illegal, gun crime will drop siginificantly?

it's the same as drugs. they're illegal, but does that stop people?

drugs don't have pratical uses. guns can be used for target/competition shooting, hunting, self defense, etc. i'm saying making them illegal won't stop criminals from getting ahold of them. do you think it will?

So because guns cost more, nobody will smuggle them in? That works backwards. The more value it has, the more you would want to smuggle it in, because you can get more profit off of it. And I'm pretty sure you can get certain kinds of guns cheaper than drugs, but I'm not positive.dgwutka

yeah but who would buy not every joe blow crim would have the money to buy ilegal fire arms (think of prices of firearms now but triple it is multiply it by 4)

but yeah you have a point that more people would want to smuggle weapons in opening a whole new market for gun smugglers

[QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"][QUOTE="shoeman12"][QUOTE="dgwutka"]

[QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"]Guns have no uses that would justify them being legal. shoeman12

Let's assume that's correct. So the government bans guns. And you think that, since they're illegal, gun crime will drop siginificantly?

it's the same as drugs. they're illegal, but does that stop people?

drugs don't have pratical uses. guns can be used for target/competition shooting, hunting, self defense, etc. i'm saying making them illegal won't stop criminals from getting ahold of them. do you think it will?

Guns have legal use. Drugs do not have legal use, aside from using them as medicine, which is negligable.

I see. Ignore my point and change the subject to something else.

yeah but who would buy not every joe blow crim would have the money to buy ilegal fire arms (think of prices of firearms now but triple it is multiply it by 4) mrp1

You can get a Saturday Night Special for about 30$, and those are illegal in some places.

Guns have legal use. Drugs do not have legal use, aside from using them as medicine, which is negligable.

I see. Ignore my point and change the subject to something else.

dgwutka

Wait... Guns have the practical use of fun. Why do you think people take drugs? swizz-the-gamer

So you're saying people only carry guns for self defense becuase they think it's fun?

I have to go, I have better things to do that argue about something that the arguement itself will never solve.

[QUOTE="dgwutka"]

Guns have legal use. Drugs do not have legal use, aside from using them as medicine, which is negligable.

I see. Ignore my point and change the subject to something else.

swizz-the-gamer

Just curious.

Also, fully automatic weapons are illegal. Unless you get a permit and a gun manufactured before 198-, which gets really expensive, fast. I don't think i've heard of someone kill another person with a legal automatic.

[QUOTE="mrp1"] yeah but who would buy not every joe blow crim would have the money to buy ilegal fire arms (think of prices of firearms now but triple it is multiply it by 4) dgwutka

You can get a Saturday Night Special for about 30$, and those are illegal in some places.

a special on one night isn't a really good comparison but i just find it funny how people will like protect there guns like its there babies and stuff when normally there just siting around the house colecting dust.

[QUOTE="dgwutka"]

[QUOTE="mrp1"] yeah but who would buy not every joe blow crim would have the money to buy ilegal fire arms (think of prices of firearms now but triple it is multiply it by 4) mrp1

You can get a Saturday Night Special for about 30$, and those are illegal in some places.

a special on one night isn't a really good comparison but i just find it funny how people will like protect there guns like its there babies and stuff when normally there just siting around the house colecting dust.

[QUOTE="mrp1"][QUOTE="dgwutka"]

[QUOTE="mrp1"] yeah but who would buy not every joe blow crim would have the money to buy ilegal fire arms (think of prices of firearms now but triple it is multiply it by 4) wemhim

You can get a Saturday Night Special for about 30$, and those are illegal in some places.

a special on one night isn't a really good comparison but i just find it funny how people will like protect there guns like its there babies and stuff when normally there just siting around the house colecting dust.

lol really well i don't live in America so i wouldn't know

only for felons and gang members. If we outright banned guns then the only civilians with guns would be the criminals, in essence we would leave law abiding citizens vulnerable to criminals. And also if the gov't is the only one with guns, then essentially it could oppress us.whipassmt

It's insane how so many people in this thread believe that having objects designed to kill a human being can be justified by the outdated second amendment... The argument that it would takee guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens does not work because law abiding citizens still can shoot someone after a few beers. I have seen people in situations after alcohol or drugs where if they had a gun they would have shot someone without a doubt. It doesn't matter that they would not do it usually, there are sets of circumstances where we all would shoot someone unjustly. I'm pretty sure at the columbine school shooting they didn't buy the guns of a criminal. Human beings are too emotional and violent to have the responsibility to own an object that serves no other purpose but to kill.

swizz-the-gamer