k00ns 9 Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 cray Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solitaire 902 Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 Something like this is so predictable. Celebrities endorsing this movement to help make a cultural impact and use this tragedy to remove the American's right to bear arms... Their opinions are really on the same level as anyone else. They may be able to reach more minds, but they aren't that important, just people with money and fame... Those are as common as happy meals in this day and age and people who think for themselves will not be so easily swayed. We're giving these wackjobs too much power to make sweeping changes like this. Although I do agree with an assault weapons ban to reduce the potential of these situations, I am against the removal of all weapons. I'm sorry if you think that is irrational but if we know anything from history from China and other tyrannical governments, taking away a person's right to defend themselves will open to door to more controlling and invasive policies. Freedom is a priceless commodity and if this sort of thing is considered, it should be through all three branches of government along with open communication with the public. I think people forget how governments so easily abuse their power from the past. Remember how the British had little to no respect for the early colonials? Stationing troops at people's homes and the corruption at those levels of authority? Guns in the people's hands is sort of the same situation as the nuclear standoff between nuclear armed nations. The fear of reprisal keeps the opposing powers in check. If a crook knows you have a shotgun ready to take his face off, he might think twice before invading your home. Cops are great when they are reliable, but that is not always the case. People think we live in a world that is all unicorns and rainbows? No, this is about survival and protection of one's own being in this cruel and ****ed up world and that should be anyone's right. No one has the authority or the right to take that away. I feel terrible about those lost to tragedies like this. However, people die like this all the time all over the world. Don't let anyone take advantage of your emotions to make you give up your precious rights is all I'm trying to say. I don't even own a gun, but I respect a person's right to have one. :clap: :sweep: I'm so happy that someone with a realistic stance on this subject is on GGD. There are too many guns in America for us to ban them and for us to expect them to disappear. It's just not going to happen guys. Guns would simply be bought and traded on the black market and the people who wanted to commit crimes like what happened at the elementary school would still be able to find weapons. And also, if an intruder breaks into your home with a gun, and all you have to defend yourself with is say, a knife, who do you think is going to be harmed first? The American constitution says gun ownership is an unalienable right because without gun ownership, the colonies would have never been able to overthrow the British, and the constitution states that it is the citizens DUTY to overthrown tryanical government whenever it arises. Without guns, we would most likely never be able to do that. I understand that those of you who have grown up without being exposed to guns might feel uncomfortable by their presence, (I grew up in East Texas where if you don't go hunting every other day you're basically a freak, and I'm still a little gun shy so I know how you feel) but as soon as I legally can, I want to get my concealed handgun license and a pistol for self defence. I HATE hunting as I feel that ALL life is valuable and is a miracle, and should be treated as such, but I am extremely greatful that I live in a country where I can own a gun for my own protection against people who would want to harm me, for whatever reason. Also, the majority of these mass murder incidents are caused by mentally disturbed individuals. If a law was instated that schools and work places have screenings for mental illnesses, say twice a year, these kinds of events could be stopped MONTHS in advance. And b4 you all say I'm a backwards redneck overly conservative Republican, I support gay rights, I myself am gay, I don't like abortion, but I belive that it is legal as a woman's right to privacy acording to the constitution, America DESPERATLY needs to reduce it's defict and spending, and that the Obamacare, after revision could be one of America's greatest assets. So please don't pigeonhole people whenever they express their policical views (Even if they word them in a really.... really strange way). Everyone has unique views on all subjects, even if they identify with a certain party. And sorry about all my misspelled words, I'm on my way to Colorado and after 9 hours in the car you get kinda tired.... :laughga: - Previously Sycothisis Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fresh 1 Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 kinda glad she signed it too Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaperIz 7,261 Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 Yes, it would be like in Europe, where I hardly step out of my flat anymore tbh. It's so f*cking dangerous, I honestly don't know how we all do live just ONE day longer. I have to run from armed criminals on a daily basis, not just me, my parents and grandma too. Should I start carrying a baseball bat? Any suggestions? I feel so unprotected and scared... It's hell really. see point proven! This is not an argument. Look at Europe. Guns a illegal for decades in Europe and Europe has still a lower death rate than America it is an argument for me. i'll be damned if I can't protect myself. --- Banning guns completely won't stop evil people, and I don't like how people are saying the 2nd amendment isn't a necessary part of the constitution. If we can take this out because it "isn't necessary" then what will stop them from taking out free speech? or anything else? Something like this is so predictable. Celebrities endorsing this movement to help make a cultural impact and use this tragedy to remove the American's right to bear arms... Their opinions are really on the same level as anyone else. They may be able to reach more minds, but they aren't that important, just people with money and fame... Those are as common as happy meals in this day and age and people who think for themselves will not be so easily swayed. We're giving these wackjobs too much power to make sweeping changes like this. Although I do agree with an assault weapons ban to reduce the potential of these situations, I am against the removal of all weapons. I'm sorry if you think that is irrational but if we know anything from history from China and other tyrannical governments, taking away a person's right to defend themselves will open to door to more controlling and invasive policies. Freedom is a priceless commodity and if this sort of thing is considered, it should be through all three branches of government along with open communication with the public. I think people forget how governments so easily abuse their power from the past. Remember how the British had little to no respect for the early colonials? Stationing troops at people's homes and the corruption at those levels of authority? Guns in the people's hands is sort of the same situation as the nuclear standoff between nuclear armed nations. The fear of reprisal keeps the opposing powers in check. If a crook knows you have a shotgun ready to take his face off, he might think twice before invading your home. Cops are great when they are reliable, but that is not always the case. People think we live in a world that is all unicorns and rainbows? No, this is about survival and protection of one's own being in this cruel and ****ed up world and that should be anyone's right. No one has the authority or the right to take that away. I feel terrible about those lost to tragedies like this. However, people die like this all the time all over the world. Don't let anyone take advantage of your emotions to make you give up your precious rights is all I'm trying to say. I don't even own a gun, but I respect a person's right to have one. perfect. thank you :worship: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marrytheknight2012 0 Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 But isn't taking away some rights for the good of everyone kind of the entire point of a government? The government has taken away your right to ignore traffic lights for a reason (a very good reason). At one point, women were the property of men, but thanks to the women's rights movements, they no longer are. Was it immoral to take away the "rights" of men to treat women and children like property? I (and hopefully most other people) would think not. Is it not a good idea to examine whether some rights need to be given or taken away, especially with our changing social values? For example, the right to bear arms was given to Americans during very dangerous times. The police was almost nonexistent then, and there was barely any justice system to keep crime in check. Today we have an incredibly vast and technologically advanced justice system, which is why I think that the need to use guns for self-defense is much reduced from what it was several centuries ago. Do we still need to make sure that African-Americans only have 3/5ths of a vote? Should we have never changed the law so that women could vote? Do we still need to make sure that we're safe from the apparently evil government we elected through legalizing firearms to the general public with no sensible restrictions? No, taking a right away for the 'greater good' isn't acceptable. Greater good would be if it was a huge issue not a rare occurance imo. Furthermore, taking away freedom of speech would stop arguments and conflict of that nature. Not being able to wear what we want would solve some issues...but rights cannot be taken away, no matter what the reason or a reason will be invented for yet another right to be taken away. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
uo111 5,201 Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 Actually that's where you're wrong. 23 kids were attacked and wounded with a knife, BUT THERE WERE NO CASUALTIES. If he had used a gun this would have had a very diffrent outcome. That's because the guy wasn't trying to kill them. If he had a gun and shot their foot, none of them would have died. And if he wanted to kill them, he could have killed them all with a knife. Instead he cut off their ears and fingers Point is that that example proves violence is possible without guns. Homemade explosives are reason enough to see that. And quite a bit more horrific and damaging than guns to boot. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
germagaga 22 Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 No, taking a right away for the 'greater good' isn't acceptable. Greater good would be if it was a huge issue not a rare occurance imo. Furthermore, taking away freedom of speech would stop arguments and conflict of that nature. Not being able to wear what we want would solve some issues...but rights cannot be taken away, no matter what the reason or a reason will be invented for yet another right to be taken away. By that logic we should've never taken the right of men to treat women and children as property, and we never should've taken away the capacity to drive drunk. :shrug: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Ryan 1,468 Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 It's not like it's going to do anything. If people want to get a gun, they will get it or not. Plus, not every person who kills someone is mentally ill. Was Hilter? Hussein? Bush? even Zimmerman? and the list goes on..... No one needs a gun in general this too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
EarnYourLeather 231 Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 No one needs a gun in general Some people don't live in Candy Land. :nails: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melech 9,869 Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 Some people don't live in Candy Land. Then is the Europe Candy Land?hm,didn't know. :nails: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Ryan 1,468 Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 Some people don't live in Candy Land. that's true also and I don't know what you talking about? candy land was ****ed up that green dude didn't play. xD Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marrytheknight2012 0 Posted December 24, 2012 Share Posted December 24, 2012 By that logic we should've never taken the right of men to treat women and children as property, and we never should've taken away the capacity to drive drunk. No thats twisting logic. those were never rights enshrined in the constitution Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DIVA 666 Posted December 24, 2012 Share Posted December 24, 2012 I'm a democrat, I voted for Obama in the latest election, but I still believe that citizens have the right to own their own gun. I believe gaining possession of a gun needs to have stricter rules and guidelines, and tests need to be more thorough and extensive. We're all Stronger Together! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveb 0 Posted December 24, 2012 Share Posted December 24, 2012 People who do not actively take part in a gun-related sporting activity have NO need for guns. This mentality of 'fight fire with fire' does not work; it encourages a culture of fear, the same as having always-armed police force walking in your local town. Tighter gun control - not a ban per se - is what is needed. It is about reducing the risk and accessibility; someone with relatively easy access to a parent's gun can go around and commit a mass murder. Gun crime in the UK has fallen over the last 10 years, since tighter gun control laws and legislation were enforced and the culture began to change - it's now lower, in 2012, than it has been since the mid-90s. Someone armed with a knife is not powerful unless they hunt you and stab you at arm's reach; if they throw the knife, they are no longer armed. A gun has the ability to shoot from distance, and shoot multiple times. There is a massive, massive difference. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marrytheknight2012 0 Posted December 24, 2012 Share Posted December 24, 2012 People who do not actively take part in a gun-related sporting activity have NO need for guns. This mentality of 'fight fire with fire' does not work; it encourages a culture of fear, the same as having always-armed police force walking in your local town. Tighter gun control - not a ban per se - is what is needed. It is about reducing the risk and accessibility; someone with relatively easy access to a parent's gun can go around and commit a mass murder. Gun crime in the UK has fallen over the last 10 years, since tighter gun control laws and legislation were enforced and the culture began to change - it's now lower, in 2012, than it has been since the mid-90s. Someone armed with a knife is not powerful unless they hunt you and stab you at arm's reach; if they throw the knife, they are no longer armed. A gun has the ability to shoot from distance, and shoot multiple times. There is a massive, massive difference. The constitution says there is a right to bear arms not a priviledge to bear them only if you shoot for sport Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trending Now
New Threads
Trending Now
New Threads
Featured Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.