SGT.Graison

First the idea that every single person just because they have a gun will try to be a hero is silly. I carry my glock 23 with me every day and if someone came up to me and had me already at gun point there is, exactly, no point in trying to be a hero for 2 reasons: 1 you yourself could be killed before you even draw your weapon. 2 most robbers have no intent of harming anyone but the goal is to scare them into giving them what they want. In that aspect i agree with you however you have missed the point. Criminals will still have weapons even though now us citizens do not, so hypothetically speaking lets say  2-3 guys start walking down my street shooting everyone, going into their houses and shooting at the police; what you are saying is i should just hide and wait for my police to hopefully save me? When in fact it could be the police that now need help?

I strongly trust in my police and i intend to become an LEO, but even the police admit they may not get to you in time. Many police agencies have been pro-gun in saying that the citizens very well should be armed in case of an intruder. Another hypothetical question lets say a young mother of 2 is alone by herself in the middle of nowhere and the police are 15 minutes away AT BEST, in the united states currently she is allowed to own a firearm and defend her children from harm. You however believe that she should hide herself and her kids in a closet or something and pray to god the police get there in time?

You also overlooked that there are states that require carry permits or that wont issue them. Not ever inch of the US has gun violence. Also needless to say firearms are a huge part of our culture and history in the US. So to entirely remove that would be detrimental to everything our forefathers have bled and died for so we could be here today to enjoy the freedoms we do.

And i answer you with this - The 1940s when Adolf Hitler was conquering Europe, murdering millions of people and imprisoning almost an entire culture. The idea that violence is never the answer in most cases is true until it becomes a matter of life and death..especially when its multiple lives involved.

We would all love to live in a world where no one raised a gun or even a fist but the sad reality is we live  far from a world anything like that and until that day comes i will not lay down and die a victim who could of stood a chance. I don't know about you but i intend to live until i die of old age or what have you and until then any person who wishes to do me harm is an obstacle of that goal and they will be overcome or i will die trying.

I just want to add to this, teenage girls are getting pregnant everyday, I don't see anyone promoting birth control.

First i am not debating the origin of the assault rifle and what its intent was for. To be more specific by the market i mean the civilian market and the common semi-automatic rifles that are usually demonized as "assault rifles". The rifles you posted are the rifles i am exactly talking about none of those have the full capability that the original military version has (selector switches, different internals ect..); These rifles may be nearly identical in every way to the original but they are not being sold with the intention of being used to harm another human being or fight a war.

Secondly the AR in AR-15 does not stand for assault rifle it stands for ArmaLite the company that first manufactured the rifle before selling it to Colt.
Here is an excerpt: "AR does NOT stand for Assault Rifle, as is commonly believed. AR stands for the original company that manufactured it, ArmaLite. ArmaLite sold their rights to the AR-10 and AR-15 designs in 1959 to Colt." sources - http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=AR-15 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AR-15

My stance remains unchanged as these weapons are not sold to civilians with the intention of being used for combat as the original was. I refuse to let emotion and fear dictate my stance on personal freedoms; furthermore In school it was a great annoyance when the entire class is penalized for the actions of a lone individual, and i believe that idea remains true for nearly anything within moral reason.

Lets agree to disagree but i respect the fact you took the time to post links to explain your stance.

I agree with you to an extent. I commonly fear i will be shot by another citizen thinking that i am the criminal if a shootout ever happened. So in that respect i agree some people have no business near guns.
Some citizens do have training like that but you are right that the common citizen has 0 training.

 
1 I know exactly why the police need that equipment i was just making the argument that if the citizens didn't need them, then neither would the police. I stated at the bottom that i am pro police, i intend to become a police officer myself and have taken a citizen police academy here in Vermont. Sorry for the confusion on that one.

2 I apologize if it seemed like i was accusing you of only suggesting new gun laws or not allowing law abiding citizens to have them. I was attacking the main idea of gun control in general again sorry if it felt like i threw you under the bus but it wasn't my intent.

3 i just read what you wrote and took it literally so i apologize if i took that  out of context.

I also agree that the cultural difference is huge, which is why the US has more violence then France as Hystery mentioned but i also feel that, that is a unfair comparison because France and the US have much different cultures. I don't think that because Switzerland is like that, that it would work in the US but my point was that guns are not the problem.

As far as actual assault rifles, machine guns and anti material rifles go me personally i agree its a bit overkill but i feel it should still be there to own if you have the money and in case our country ever is invaded which is unlikely but who knows. I personally would like to own some just to collect them for historical value or to go have fun shooting at an old washing machine.

First the idea that every single person just because they have a gun will try to be a hero is silly. I carry my glock 23 with me every day and if someone came up to me and had me already at gun point there is, exactly, no point in trying to be a hero for 2 reasons: 1 you yourself could be killed before you even draw your weapon. 2 most robbers have no intent of harming anyone but the goal is to scare them into giving them what they want. In that aspect i agree with you however you have missed the point. Criminals will still have weapons even though now us citizens do not, so hypothetically speaking lets say  2-3 guys start walking down my street shooting everyone, going into their houses and shooting at the police; what you are saying is i should just hide and wait for my police to hopefully save me? When in fact it could be the police that now need help?

I strongly trust in my police and i intend to become an LEO, but even the police admit they may not get to you in time. Many police agencies have been pro-gun in saying that the citizens very well should be armed in case of an intruder. Another hypothetical question lets say a young mother of 2 is alone by herself in the middle of nowhere and the police are 15 minutes away AT BEST, in the united states currently she is allowed to own a firearm and defend her children from harm. You however believe that she should hide herself and her kids in a closet or something and pray to god the police get there in time?

You also overlooked that there are states that require carry permits or that wont issue them. Not ever inch of the US has gun violence. Also needless to say firearms are a huge part of our culture and history in the US. So to entirely remove that would be detrimental to everything our forefathers have bled and died for so we could be here today to enjoy the freedoms we do.

And i answer you with this - The 1940s when Adolf Hitler was conquering Europe, murdering millions of people and imprisoning almost an entire culture. The idea that violence is never the answer in most cases is true until it becomes a matter of life and death..especially when its multiple lives involved.

We would all love to live in a world where no one raised a gun or even a fist but the sad reality is we live  far from a world anything like that and until that day comes i will not lay down and die a victim who could of stood a chance. I don't know about you but i intend to live until i die of old age or what have you and until then any person who wishes to do me harm is an obstacle of that goal and they will be overcome or i will die trying.

It may "deter" them in the same way police presence should deter a threat but time and time again have shown that when these criminals step foot out their door with a weapon, with the intent to kill they will stop at nothing to harm someone; why the ***k would they even care about a death penalty when 9/10 the shooter ends up dead in these shootouts. It may stop a few people from wanting to commence heinous acts but it will never be an endgame solution and all you have accomplished is hurt your law abiding citizens in the process and make them more vulnerable.

To say that "they all" (Mexican criminals, gang members, cartel members ect..) get all their weapons from the US is naive. Sure one cannot debate that weapons from the US do leak into Mexico but the major cartels can get their hands on literally anything they want in fairly large shipments as we have seen they have everything from hand grenades to anti-take weapons... But to blame Mexico's gun violence entirely on the US is also naive.

I agree something should be done but turning our culture upside down is not the way to do it.

Just because they have no training doesn't mean they have no right.
 

If I was a robber, and I knew that one person had a gun and the other didn't....I would rob the guy without a gun.
 
Guns DON'T kill people, People kill people.
 
Every man/women deserves the right to own and carry a firearm for their protection, and the protection of others. Taking guns away won't keep criminals from getting guns...we live right next to Mexico and Canada...and Guns, drugs, and many other things cross the border unaware of the government and police. I believe people should be allowed to have Assault Rifles, shotguns, rifles, and handguns...
 
For people who say the government and criminals are far from different...you keep on thinking that, and continue being ignorant to the fact that our government is EXTERMLY power hungry and corrupt. If Government takes the peoples right to have guns, then they have the power to control us however they want...a person with a gun is a LOT more powerful than a person without one...if you don't believe me...then you got problems.
 
Now with all this said I think a better system needs to be created, that way we limit the amount of guns being sold to people who could possible use guns to harm others....do I know what this system is...no.....but I know that guns shouldn't be taken away just because they are "bad".

No offense taken. I have no issue with what you have stated, you are entitled to your opinion. I was just stating my view on it based on my experience and knowledge on the subject.

I agree with you to an extent. I commonly fear i will be shot by another citizen thinking that i am the criminal if a shootout ever happened. So in that respect i agree some people have no business near guns.
Some citizens do have training like that but you are right that the common citizen has 0 training.

 
1 I know exactly why the police need that equipment i was just making the argument that if the citizens didn't need them, then neither would the police. I stated at the bottom that i am pro police, i intend to become a police officer myself and have taken a citizen police academy here in Vermont. Sorry for the confusion on that one.

2 I apologize if it seemed like i was accusing you of only suggesting new gun laws or not allowing law abiding citizens to have them. I was attacking the main idea of gun control in general again sorry if it felt like i threw you under the bus but it wasn't my intent.

3 i just read what you wrote and took it literally so i apologize if i took that  out of context.

I also agree that the cultural difference is huge, which is why the US has more violence then France as Hystery mentioned but i also feel that, that is a unfair comparison because France and the US have much different cultures. I don't think that because Switzerland is like that, that it would work in the US but my point was that guns are not the problem.

As far as actual assault rifles, machine guns and anti material rifles go me personally i agree its a bit overkill but i feel it should still be there to own if you have the money and in case our country ever is invaded which is unlikely but who knows. I personally would like to own some just to collect them for historical value or to go have fun shooting at an old washing machine.

I will reformulate my opinion. I consider that only law enforcements should have the right to carry a gun, for the simple reason that they have the training, knowledge, psychological preparation and they know how, when, and why use a weapon. Citizens carrying guns don't have that. And no, I don't consider shooting regularly on paper targets as training and knowledge about guns. If it was, everyone could be a police officer.

First the idea that every single person just because they have a gun will try to be a hero is silly. I carry my glock 23 with me every day and if someone came up to me and had me already at gun point there is, exactly, no point in trying to be a hero for 2 reasons: 1 you yourself could be killed before you even draw your weapon. 2 most robbers have no intent of harming anyone but the goal is to scare them into giving them what they want. In that aspect i agree with you however you have missed the point. Criminals will still have weapons even though now us citizens do not, so hypothetically speaking lets say  2-3 guys start walking down my street shooting everyone, going into their houses and shooting at the police; what you are saying is i should just hide and wait for my police to hopefully save me? When in fact it could be the police that now need help?

I strongly trust in my police and i intend to become an LEO, but even the police admit they may not get to you in time. Many police agencies have been pro-gun in saying that the citizens very well should be armed in case of an intruder. Another hypothetical question lets say a young mother of 2 is alone by herself in the middle of nowhere and the police are 15 minutes away AT BEST, in the united states currently she is allowed to own a firearm and defend her children from harm. You however believe that she should hide herself and her kids in a closet or something and pray to god the police get there in time?

You also overlooked that there are states that require carry permits or that wont issue them. Not ever inch of the US has gun violence. Also needless to say firearms are a huge part of our culture and history in the US. So to entirely remove that would be detrimental to everything our forefathers have bled and died for so we could be here today to enjoy the freedoms we do.

And i answer you with this - The 1940s when Adolf Hitler was conquering Europe, murdering millions of people and imprisoning almost an entire culture. The idea that violence is never the answer in most cases is true until it becomes a matter of life and death..especially when its multiple lives involved.

We would all love to live in a world where no one raised a gun or even a fist but the sad reality is we live  far from a world anything like that and until that day comes i will not lay down and die a victim who could of stood a chance. I don't know about you but i intend to live until i die of old age or what have you and until then any person who wishes to do me harm is an obstacle of that goal and they will be overcome or i will die trying.

If you analyze both positions on this debate, if you're smart you'll begin to realize that there is no common factors that will solve it. Both sides disagree with each other; one says keep them, it's the American people's right and is written in the constitution; the other side says hell no they're killing school kids, citizens or criminals don't need them. When someone uses a weapon to harm another person do they charge the weapon with the crime or the person? Also, no matter what laws or bills are passed, you cannot get rid of guns. If you banned guns here it will cost us a lot of money in the long run. Even law abiding citizens will be thrown in jail and that's more American tax dollars being used to support their life in jail or prison. The American people nor criminals will not give up guns; especially criminals. Hell it might even cause a civil war, definitely more riots and protesting for sure. Who the hell would wanna do that?? Just quit it already. It makes no sense.

Well for starters, if you're going to shout and support the 2nd amendment, then I hope you know that it was meant for states to maintain a milita (our Nat'l guard now). 
 
However, I support and also encourage every citizen to own a firearm. Gun control doesn't mean shit; if a criminal wants a gun, he's going to get a gun. But we don't need to own m240's .50 BMG, mini-guns, or the various explosives (FPSRussia is a prime example of what our country SHOULD NOT BE). 
 
Personally, I own 5 guns (3 hand guns,  .30-06 rifle, and a shotgun). Guns are a part of our tradition, heritage, and culture. We've depended on guns for survival since our inception, and no they're a favorite pastime and hobby.
And yes, blame the US for the recent trend of gun crimes and how they're finding their way into the hands of criminals. Operation Fast & Furious was giant fuck up of a job by our gov't. We still are experiencing the affects of that cluster-fuck.