Should guns be banned in the United States?

Er, no.LukeAF24

You say it like it's obvious.

[QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"] Criminals have guns in the UK... I don't have a gun. I'm not afraid.
reagan80_basic

But, aren't you just a little concerned about what the Canterbury Archbishop said about "adopting some Islamic Sharia laws" to quell :Muzzy" angst in the U.K.?

I believe Churchill would have called this notion "appeasement".

What power does the Archbishop have in enacting those laws....

[QUOTE="reagan80_basic"][QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"] Criminals have guns in the UK... I don't have a gun. I'm not afraid.
KG86

But, aren't you just a little concerned about what the Canterbury Archbishop said about "adopting some Islamic Sharia laws" to quell :Muzzy" angst in the U.K.?

I believe Churchill would have called this notion "appeasement".

What power does the Archbishop have in enacting those laws....

[QUOTE="GettingTired"]No. Get rid of one Bill of Right, and then the others will go in time aswell.bman784

Yes, in today's times the second amendment does seem somewhat useless. But maybe another 50 years down the line the government will start deeming other rights as "useless". Then maybe one day the first amendment will be repealed, because the government has decided that in the current age, certain religions must be prohibited for the safety of the people. It sets a precedent that the Bill of Rights holds little value.

[QUOTE="Bloodbath_87"] Just think about that...guns do nothing except TAKE LIFE AWAY.mastershake575

[QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"][QUOTE="mastershake575"]

[QUOTE="Bloodbath_87"] Just think about that...guns do nothing except TAKE LIFE AWAY.-TheSecondSign-

Drugs can't defend people. They can fry your brain, but that's it.

Legally owned firearms are rarely a danger, because they are rarely used for crime. THey can be tracked.

Illegally gained firearms are the universal preference. We should use resources to constrict the trade of illegal firearms over banning all of them, in my opinion.

[QUOTE="GettingTired"]No. Get rid of one Bill of Right, and then the others will go in time aswell.bman784

Hey.... if we start bending the rules and breaking apart the bill of rights, that would techincally be dividing america.

United we stand, divided we fall.....does that sound familiar?

[QUOTE="reagan80_basic"][QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"] Criminals have guns in the UK... I don't have a gun. I'm not afraid.
wemhim

But, aren't you just a little concerned about what the Canterbury Archbishop said about "adopting some Islamic Sharia laws" to quell :Muzzy" angst in the U.K.?

I believe Churchill would have called this notion "appeasement".

You might be right.

Hell, I could be wrong about the "violent Mexican separatist movement" thing.

[QUOTE="bman784"][QUOTE="GettingTired"]No. Get rid of one Bill of Right, and then the others will go in time aswell.GettingTired

Yes, in today's times the second amendment does seem somewhat useless. But maybe another 50 years down the line the government will start deeming other rights as "useless". Then maybe one day the first amendment will be repealed, because the government has decided that in the current age, certain religions must be prohibited for the safety of the people. It sets a precedent that the Bill of Rights holds little value.

[QUOTE="wemhim"][QUOTE="reagan80_basic"][QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"] Criminals have guns in the UK... I don't have a gun. I'm not afraid.
reagan80_basic

But, aren't you just a little concerned about what the Canterbury Archbishop said about "adopting some Islamic Sharia laws" to quell :Muzzy" angst in the U.K.?

I believe Churchill would have called this notion "appeasement".

You might be right.

Hell, I could be wrong about the "violent Mexican separatist movement" thing.

[QUOTE="GettingTired"]No. Get rid of one Bill of Right, and then the others will go in time aswell.reagan80_basic

I couldn't have said it better myself. Thank you.

[QUOTE="reagan80_basic"][QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"] Criminals have guns in the UK... I don't have a gun. I'm not afraid.
KG86

But, aren't you just a little concerned about what the Canterbury Archbishop said about "adopting some Islamic Sharia laws" to quell :Muzzy" angst in the U.K.?

I believe Churchill would have called this notion "appeasement".

What power does the Archbishop have in enacting those laws....

The guy I quoted said he had nothing to fear about being unarmed in the UK.

The Archbishop might not be a lawmaker, but he is presumptively a member of Britain's "elites". If he's willing to say that in public, then the situation must be deteriorating there more than I would have expected.

[QUOTE="KG86"][QUOTE="reagan80_basic"][QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"] Criminals have guns in the UK... I don't have a gun. I'm not afraid.
reagan80_basic

But, aren't you just a little concerned about what the Canterbury Archbishop said about "adopting some Islamic Sharia laws" to quell :Muzzy" angst in the U.K.?

I believe Churchill would have called this notion "appeasement".

What power does the Archbishop have in enacting those laws....

The guy I quoted said he had nothing to fear about being unarmed in the UK.

The Archbishop might not be a lawmaker, but he is presumptively a member of Britain's "elites". If he's willing to say that in public, then the situation must be deteriorating there more than I would have expected.

[QUOTE="reagan80_basic"][QUOTE="wemhim"][QUOTE="reagan80_basic"][QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"] Criminals have guns in the UK... I don't have a gun. I'm not afraid.
swizz-the-gamer

But, aren't you just a little concerned about what the Canterbury Archbishop said about "adopting some Islamic Sharia laws" to quell :Muzzy" angst in the U.K.?

I believe Churchill would have called this notion "appeasement".

You might be right.

Hell, I could be wrong about the "violent Mexican separatist movement" thing.

What's ridiculous?

Is it that 49.42% of French-Canadians voted to secede from Canada and form a new country in 1995?

[QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"][QUOTE="reagan80_basic"][QUOTE="wemhim"][QUOTE="reagan80_basic"][QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"] Criminals have guns in the UK... I don't have a gun. I'm not afraid.
reagan80_basic

But, aren't you just a little concerned about what the Canterbury Archbishop said about "adopting some Islamic Sharia laws" to quell :Muzzy" angst in the U.K.?

I believe Churchill would have called this notion "appeasement".

You might be right.

Hell, I could be wrong about the "violent Mexican separatist movement" thing.

What's ridiculous?

Is it that 49.42% of French-Canadians voted to secede from Canada and form a new country in 1995?

So I need a gun because?
swizz-the-gamer

Because the government's multi-culturalist policies are setting up conditions so that the UK will be a giant soccer (or football) stadium brawl, but with more fires.

[QUOTE="reagan80_basic"][QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"][QUOTE="reagan80_basic"][QUOTE="wemhim"][QUOTE="reagan80_basic"][QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"] Criminals have guns in the UK... I don't have a gun. I'm not afraid.
swizz-the-gamer

But, aren't you just a little concerned about what the Canterbury Archbishop said about "adopting some Islamic Sharia laws" to quell :Muzzy" angst in the U.K.?

I believe Churchill would have called this notion "appeasement".

You might be right.

Hell, I could be wrong about the "violent Mexican separatist movement" thing.

What's ridiculous?

Is it that 49.42% of French-Canadians voted to secede from Canada and form a new country in 1995?

I guess not, if they leave me alone.

[QUOTE="mmogoon"]LOLOL guns don't kill people, people kill people right guys??? wemhim

...Everyone, pulling a trigger a couple of times at range is just as simple as engaging in CQB and choking someone for 3 minutes until death! :|

Guns should not be banned. Regulated perhaps, but not banned.

The_Ish

exactly....the laws should be made more strict!!

[QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"] So I need a gun because?
reagan80_basic

Because the government's multi-culturalist policies are setting up conditions so that the UK will be a giant soccer (or football) stadium brawl, but with more fires.

[QUOTE="wemhim"][QUOTE="mmogoon"]LOLOL guns don't kill people, people kill people right guys??? Aznsilvrboy

...Everyone, pulling a trigger a couple of times at range is just as simple as engaging in CQB and choking someone for 3 minutes until death! :|

THere would be a ridiculous amount of deer and turkeys and stuff. I say we should ban any gun clips that hold more than four bullets/shells, that aughta keep crime a little lower.Half-Life_man

[QUOTE="Aznsilvrboy"]

[QUOTE="wemhim"][QUOTE="mmogoon"]LOLOL guns don't kill people, people kill people right guys??? wemhim

...Everyone, pulling a trigger a couple of times at range is just as simple as engaging in CQB and choking someone for 3 minutes until death! :|

That sarcasm sure is hard to catch on the internet :P

[QUOTE="wemhim"][QUOTE="Aznsilvrboy"]

[QUOTE="wemhim"][QUOTE="mmogoon"]LOLOL guns don't kill people, people kill people right guys??? Aznsilvrboy

...Everyone, pulling a trigger a couple of times at range is just as simple as engaging in CQB and choking someone for 3 minutes until death! :|

That sarcasm sure is hard to catch on the internet :P

[QUOTE="reagan80_basic"]

[QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"] So I need a gun because?
bman784

Because the government's multi-culturalist policies are setting up conditions so that the UK will be a giant soccer (or football) stadium brawl, but with more fires.

No, I just vehemently oppose unrestricted immigration that is not conducive to assimilating the "new arrivals" and their progeny into our existing culture. At the current rate, they will change us more than we'll ever change them.

Other historical examples of countries with asymmetric ethno-cultural demographics resulting in instability include Iraq and Yugoslavia. Forgive me for not taking comfort with mere liberal platitudes about how "political correctness" will save us all.

no

as said before, criminals could still get guns via the black market...but innocents would abide by the law and be defenseless

not to mention the whole point of the second amendment is so that civilians would own the firearms necessary to overthrow the government in case it became tyrannical. it makes the government afraid of its people, as opposed to the other way around

limit guns

besides in 1776 we didnt have automatic weapons and people killing people but what will I kill my deer with

knife

No.

-TheSecondSign-

Guns should not be banned. Regulated perhaps, but not banned.

The_Ish

Agreed, they should not be banned, it is a right to have guns, but they should make take more control on how it's distributed. They should tighten up the process in being cleared in receiving a gun.

Works in Japan, so sure.madmidnight

Not quite.

Japan's culture is very, very different. "Saving face", "honor", and "avoiding shame" are still important to them.

Their culture is extremely non-confrontational. They only have 1 law school and there are only about 25,000 lawyers in Japan. (America graduates 35,000 more lawyers every year)

They have a more patriarchal society where women tend to be more submissive to men.

Nah, they should continue to promote the gun crime they enjoy daily.SolidSnake35

guns dont kill people, people kill people. don't believe me??? put a gun on the table and see who it kills first. people are stupid and that is the only problem. banning guns wouldnt reduce gun crime, they would still be in circulation, especially in the black market, readily avaviable to criminals and other shady exchanges.

[QUOTE="The_Ish"]

Guns should not be banned. Regulated perhaps, but not banned.

groovdafied

Agreed, they should not be banned, it is a right to have guns, but they should make take more control on how it's distributed. They should tighten up the process in being cleared in receiving a gun.

what exactly do you want them to do??? it's not like you can stop them anyways, lets say person A who is friends with person B buys a gun (who has a clean background) then gives the gun person B (who wouldn't be able to otherwise purchase a firearm). See, not exactly hard to get one.

limit guns

besides in 1776 we didnt have automatic weapons and people killing people but what will I kill my deer with

knife

coltscardfan

in 1776 we also didnt have as advanced medecine or medical knowledge or even technology for that matter. times change, but the people never will.

[QUOTE="bman784"][QUOTE="reagan80_basic"]

[QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"] So I need a gun because?
reagan80_basic

Because the government's multi-culturalist policies are setting up conditions so that the UK will be a giant soccer (or football) stadium brawl, but with more fires.

No, I just vehemently oppose unrestricted immigration that is not conducive to assimilating the "new arrivals" and their progeny into our existing culture. At the current rate, they will change us more than we'll ever change them.

Other historical examples of countries with asymmetric ethno-cultural demographics resulting in instability include Iraq and Yugoslavia. Forgive me for not taking comfort with mere liberal platitudes about how "political correctness" will save us all.

tell that to bush.

[QUOTE="Aznsilvrboy"][QUOTE="wemhim"][QUOTE="Aznsilvrboy"]

[QUOTE="wemhim"][QUOTE="mmogoon"]LOLOL guns don't kill people, people kill people right guys??? wemhim

...Everyone, pulling a trigger a couple of times at range is just as simple as engaging in CQB and choking someone for 3 minutes until death! :|

That sarcasm sure is hard to catch on the internet :P

i dont think a lot of people (especially those who haven't used guns in real life) realize it's not as easy as on the games..........plus you alos have to have the knowledge on how to perform said moves. I'ts not like after playing splinter cell i could just go up behind my mom and knock her out with a slight move of my hand.

[QUOTE="wemhim"][QUOTE="Aznsilvrboy"][QUOTE="wemhim"][QUOTE="Aznsilvrboy"]

[QUOTE="wemhim"][QUOTE="mmogoon"]LOLOL guns don't kill people, people kill people right guys??? firebreathing

...Everyone, pulling a trigger a couple of times at range is just as simple as engaging in CQB and choking someone for 3 minutes until death! :|

That sarcasm sure is hard to catch on the internet :P

i dont think a lot of people (especially those who haven't used guns in real life) realize it's not as easy as on the games..........plus you alos have to have the knowledge on how to perform said moves. I'ts not like after playing splinter cell i could just go up behind my mom and knock her out with a slight move of my hand.

Hell no. They are taking away the second amendment. The right to bear arms, anyway if they did, they would never touch any of my guns, or my bows for any matter. They shouldnt ban any kind of guns. kool-aids

I wonder if the second amendment was never included in the bill of rights, would you be fighting for it to be included, because all I've seen in this thread is "no way, it is my right".

[QUOTE="kool-aids"]Hell no. They are taking away the second amendment. The right to bear arms, anyway if they did, they would never touch any of my guns, or my bows for any matter. They shouldnt ban any kind of guns. KG86

I wonder if the second amendment was never included in the bill of rights, would you be fighting for it to be included, because all I've seen in this thread is "no way, it is my right".

Why ban something that doesnt hurt anyone. Should we take your right away to live?

[QUOTE="KG86"]

[QUOTE="kool-aids"]Hell no. They are taking away the second amendment. The right to bear arms, anyway if they did, they would never touch any of my guns, or my bows for any matter. They shouldnt ban any kind of guns. kool-aids

I wonder if the second amendment was never included in the bill of rights, would you be fighting for it to be included, because all I've seen in this thread is "no way, it is my right".

Why ban something that doesnt hurt anyone. Should we take your right away to live?

Read my post again, I said if the 2nd didn't exist, would you be fighting for it to be included, or are you just defending it because it's in the bill of rights.

[QUOTE="kool-aids"][QUOTE="KG86"]

[QUOTE="kool-aids"]Hell no. They are taking away the second amendment. The right to bear arms, anyway if they did, they would never touch any of my guns, or my bows for any matter. They shouldnt ban any kind of guns. KG86

I wonder if the second amendment was never included in the bill of rights, would you be fighting for it to be included, because all I've seen in this thread is "no way, it is my right".

Why ban something that doesnt hurt anyone. Should we take your right away to live?

Read my post again, I said if the 2nd didn't exist, would you be fighting for it to be included, or are you just defending it because it's in the bill of rights.

Oh, im sorry then.

Umm, yes, I would still fight for it, because I love to hunt, and shoot guns and bows.