Opinion about gun control?

[TheChaosCarrier]

Gun control is not and never will be the answer.
I don't care what you come up with to prove otherwise, because you're immediately wrong no matter what scenario.

[img ]http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc7/399218_458122850912018_1024251775_n.jpg[/img]

This image is a prime example as to why all gun-control nuts are handicapped.
Please explain an event where a mass shooting took place at a gun range.
Exactly, you can't.

I'm not saying "give teachers guns! lol!"
I'm saying that if every citizen owned a gun, there would be close to zero gun crimes in the United States. It is simple logic that any moron can understand: You wouldn't rob a bank with a firearm if EVERYONE ELSE in the bank had firearms with them. You would be shot by a civilian immediately.

What happens if none of the patrons had guns? Well, you'd rob the bank and take hostages. Probably kill some poor, unarmed bastard. Meanwhile, the cops take 20 minutes to even show up. Up to 1 hour to even set up a SWAT team effectively. During those 20 minutes, you could kill off everybody in the bank with your fancy gun with nobody to stop you.

"But what if everyone did own guns and children were accidentally shooting themselves at home?"
That has nothing to do with gun control. Absolutely nothing.
That is the fault of the parents for a) not watching their children effectively and b) not securely locking up their firearms in locations not even a half-wit teenager could access.

Gun control solves nothing and you're handicapped for thinking it does.

[Ad Bot]

[-Blok-]

Those who have and or like guns will say that everyone should have a gun and that it should be easier to get firearms.

Those who don't have and or don't like guns will say that only certain people should have guns and that firearms should be harder to get.

In my opinion, it should be difficult to get a gun. Those who are qualified or that have a license should be the only ones to have a gun. Which would you rather have:  anyone can get a gun  OR  only people who pass tests and have a license can get a gun?

This:

Related:

This 'nut' wouldn't have a gun if there were more strict gun laws.

-snip-

What if the bank robber couldn't get a gun in the first place because he wasn't qualified? If the laws were very strict to get a gun, this bank robber wouldn't be able to get a gun in the first place. No bank robbery, no death, no idiots with guns.

Explain.

[Katadeus]

Oh my gosh he looks like someone I know.

used to*

[Tango²]

I support this. They shouldn't increase gun control but make it so you have to pass a certain amount of tests to get a gun in the first place.

[Tango²]

used to*

The shooter is still alive, lol.
getting shot =/= getting killed

[Momentum]

well, obviously assault weapons should be banned. there really is no reason to argue with that, but normal pistols are fine if you have taken a personality test and such

[TheChaosCarrier]

What if the bank robber couldn't get a gun in the first place because he wasn't qualified? If the laws were very strict to get a gun, this bank robber wouldn't be able to get a gun in the first place. No bank robbery, no death, no idiots with guns.

Explain.

You have no idea what you're even considering here.
It's like you know nothing of criminals.

It is so much easier than it looks to obtain a weapon ILLEGALLY.
Hence the name "criminal".
There are criminals that go out of the country just to get a weapon and shoot up "Gun Free Zones."
I bet you the shooter at the Connecticut elementary school obtained his weapon by very illegal methods.

[Mr.jacksaunt]

This 'nut' wouldn't have a gun if there were more strict gun laws.

No, he wouldn't have a gun if his parent responsibly locked the gun away. Students shooting up a school touches up on parental responsibility, not how currently legal guns are bad.

The shooter is still alive, lol.
getting shot =/= getting killed

Shooter wasn't even shot.

[Tango²]

well, obviously assault weapons should be banned. there really is no reason to argue with that, but normal pistols are fine if you have taken a personality test and such

Why should they be banned? It's like banning Lamborghini's because Honda's are "more than enough".

I bet you the shooter at the Connecticut elementary school obtained his weapon by very illegal methods.

i think he stole it from him mom or something lol

[Sat]

Solve for this problem, GUNS are illegal, but bows(NOT CROSSBOWS)make killing a man 100% legal.

Lol, with current medical technology it would be difficult to kill people.

Exactly.
People would have to stop being lazy starfishs with their guns and actually have some determination when killing a person.  Also they'd need some actual training, relatively speaking.

[Momentum]

Why should they be banned? It's like banning Lamborghini's because Honda's are "more than enough".

you dont need an SMG to defend against robbers

[-Blok-]

You have no idea what you're even considering here.
It's like you know nothing of criminals.

It is so much easier than it looks to obtain a weapon ILLEGALLY.
Hence the name "criminal".
There are criminals that go out of the country just to get a weapon and shoot up "Gun Free Zones."
I bet you the shooter at the Connecticut elementary school obtained his weapon by very illegal methods.

Then why doesn't this happen in other countries?

Why should they be banned? It's like banning Lamborghini's because Honda's are "more than enough".

No, it's nothing like that.

[Tango²]

you dont need an SMG to defend against robbers

Taking away guns from law-abiding citizens just because some criminals shot someone with it doesn't make any sense. You really think criminals are going to follow gun laws?

[TheKhoz]

Banning guns is taking away our 2nd amendment right, and if the government takes that away. Then the people are going to get pretty loving mad.

No, it is not. Read the 2nd amendment. Then think about when that was written.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

That was written in 1790, when the most powerful handheld weapon took 1 minute to reload. The reason for people to keep and bear arms was for the Militia.

The Second Amendment should have been abolished when America first had a real military.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm not arguing for gun control, but I'm just saying that the 2nd amendment as it is now is loving stupid.

According to Dictionary.com Arms are: Implements of war, munition, weaponry, weapon system, blazon.

This means that I could have a 20 foot tall nuclear missile in my backyard, which is the "right to keep arms" that is guaranteed to me by the 2nd amendment.

[Harm94]

I'll be glad to get rid of assault rifles if the military and police get rid of theirs first and tanks, killer drones, warheads, warships, airdropped bombs, ect.