Guns..get rid of

[morefngdbs]

Hi Guy's
We have had several dozen gun threads from get rid of them keep them etc.
But I have been noticing lately in reading the Canadian News Papers as well as the BBC paper & the Austrailian Sun, that while we have much stricter Gun control compared to the U.S. our Knife crime with murders & stabbings are HUGE !
While we also have gun crime & while no where near what is reported in the U.S. I have not gone 1 day this summer without murders by knife in Canada & Briton .
So I believe it doesn't matter what happens with guns...the murders are going to happen anyway... anyone elses thoughts. agree...disagree

[CommanderX1125]

The acts that are commited are illegal in and of themselves, so I fail to see how making another aspect of the act illegal is really going to deter anything, though that is just me.

[Jon-86]

Nothing new really :-/

http://www.newgrounds.com/bbs/topic/9310 13

[Creek]

The right to bear arms is something that made sense 300 years ago (when the amendment was written). but in today's world it isn't. We need to change that, but it's just another old rule on the book that doesn't want to be taken off because of old conservative bastards.

[CommanderX1125]

At 8/24/08 02:19 PM, Creek wrote: The right to bear arms is something that made sense 300 years ago (when the amendment was written). but in today's world it isn't. We need to change that, but it's just another old rule on the book that doesn't want to be taken off because of old conservative bastards.

Please tell me you forget the /s at the end.

[stafffighter]

What you really have to consider is ease of use. First of all, it's at a distance so you're not physically connected to the act. Also it's as simple as pressing a button.
Compair that to a knife. Witha knife you have to get in close into the other persons range, you have make a very definitive motion and feel that you're there doing it. It's much more viseral.
My point in that is that yes, there are times when someone is killed with a gun when the person would not have killed them otherwise.
Another thing is the additude of gun use. I'm not generalizing gun owners as trigger happy by any means but the simple fact is that when guns are introduced into a situation they bring things to a different place.if someone has a gun and they are presented with a situation they may use it. Humans being human not every time someone makes the choice to pull the trigger is going to be nessesary. I don't care how many saftey classes you've taken or how good you are at the range pointing a gun at a human being is something you can either do or not.

[morefngdbs]

At 8/24/08 02:19 PM, Creek wrote: We need to change that,

;;
That's my point, it doesn't seem to make any difference.
People are killing people instead of just getting into a fight & settling their differences.... they just kill each other.
So you get rid of the guns...knives work best.
Get rid of the guns & knives it will just be something else.

[morefngdbs]

At 8/24/08 02:42 PM, stafffighter wrote: What you really have to consider is ease of use. First of all, it's at a distance so you're not physically connected to the act. Also it's as simple as pressing a button.

If your going to fight someone...your going to be willing to get in close.

Compair that to a knife. Witha knife you have to get in close into the other persons range, you have make a very definitive motion and feel that you're there doing it. It's much more viseral.

No fighting is more about overpowering your oponent... when you pull a knife or gun you want to kill them, in that act...you've gone from beating someone for the win to murder.

My point in that is that yes, there are times when someone is killed with a gun when the person would not have killed them otherwise.

True enough..same thing with knives though... you make the conscious decission to kill someone.

When i was in school we fought, once in awhile you heard about the occaisional stabbing...but today people are cutting others throats...that's not just an attmept to hurt you that's wanting to kill. Gun crime 10 12 years ago in schools wasn't something that was happening ...now its all the bloody time.

People don't seem to get in fights anymore...they just go out with the intent to murder.

I am starting to believe if the only weapon available are pillows , the amount of people smothered is going to go WaYYYYYYYYYYYYYY up .

Another thing is the additude of gun use.

[Zeistro]

At 8/24/08 02:19 PM, Creek wrote: The right to bear arms is something that made sense 300 years ago (when the amendment was written). but in today's world it isn't.

Actually, it makes equally amount of sense to have it today, you fuckwit. It was written so that ordinary citizenry can be armed incase of a government. This acts as a deterred for a despotic government, or as one Founding Father said "The second amendent is there incase the government starts ignoring the others."

Afterall, you gotta be one naive dumbfuck to believe the government should handle all the weaponry while the common man is unarmed.

We need to change that,

It's hilarious how liberals would love to get rid of one our most sacred rights, whilst arguing in favor of pedophilia and retroactive abortion.

but it's just another old rule on the book that doesn't want to be taken off because of old conservative bastards.

Maybe because not only does getting rid of the second amendment not only undermine the very fabric of what America stands for, but gun control doesn't work.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/watson/watson 12.html

http://www.123helpme.com/view.asp?id=174 13

[morefngdbs]

At 8/24/08 04:17 PM, Zeistro wrote: Afterall, you gotta be one naive dumbfuck to believe the government should handle all the weaponry while the common man is unarmed.

;;;
to start with, This topic has nothing to do with right 's to own and or bear guns.

It's hilarious how liberals would love to get rid of one our most sacred rights,

First off your right to bear arms isn't sacred...it's a mandated right...it can be taken away.
God didn't drop by Early America & put that right in your constitution.
Your right's are what your Gov. Say they are... If you think your rights are so well protected...Explain why so many have been taken away by the 'Homland Security" act ?
If they decided tomorrow all guns must go ...they would be gone.
It would take a lot of doing, & a lot of extremely pissed off people would probably die...but it would still get done.

Maybe because not only does getting rid of the second amendment not only undermine the very fabric of what America stands for, but gun control doesn't work.

Now your getting to what I meant.
It doesn't matter if there are no guns anywhere...people will use knives, sticks, stones, anything they can get their hands on... years ago it wasn't as violent as it was now...all through High school there wasn't one stabbing at my high school.
Hell there wasn't any in any school in the Halifax Area.
Now it is a regular occurance. plus gun's have been fired, found & confiscated....it's an escalation of people's violent behavior & seems to be getting worse.

That's the real worry, people would perfer to kill you as opposed to just robbing & or beating you up.

[xscoot]

We should keep guns, but rewrite the constitution. The original one was created 300 years ago, and for that time period. We should make a new one for this time period.

[Bramly-apple]

I'd rather there by knife crime than gun crime. Both are terrible things, but its much easier to go on a killing spree with a gun than it is with a knife.

[Saruman200]

If everyone owns guns, such as in Switzerland, gun ownership works really well, because while there are guns that can be used to commit crimes, all the law-abiding citizens have them too, so it levels the playing field, which really discourages criminals. Having no legal gun ownership works well too, because it makes a lot harder to get a hold of guns to kill people with.

However, Switzerland is small. Legal gun ownership doesn't work so well in highly populated countries, because some people in those highly populated countries won't want to own guns (and that's understandable). So, you end up with criminals and some law-abiding citizens owning guns, while other innocents don't own guns. Thus, the criminals can easily prey on those without guns. So, gun ownership only works at the extremes: either no one owns guns, or everyone owns guns. If only some people own guns, it doesn't work out so well.

[morefngdbs]

At 8/24/08 06:57 PM, Saruman200 wrote: If everyone owns guns, such as in Switzerland, gun ownership works really well, because while there are guns that can be used to commit crimes, all the law-abiding citizens have them too, so it levels the playing field, which really discourages criminals.

;;;
This isn't what the topics about..& maybe it discourages B&E's but the people of Switzerland are not wandering around everywhere with a gun in their hands.
;;;
If you look at Canada ,Great Britian... the crimes involving knives are over the top...once a criminal or two would mug you & steal your money or belongings...today they knife you multiple times then rob you...people are getting in arguments and instead of a fight , there are multiple stabbings.

So while having a gun may make it easier to shoot more people quicker, It doesn't matter these days what is banned or outlawed ,people it seems are becoming more violent.
The larger centres especially you don't just have any real fighting any more its all done with weapons...that's really stupid .
we recently had some people who were going around Halifax & just randomly attacking people. no reason...just something to do !
Also take sometime & read the papers from several different countries & the larger the population 7 the more poverty the bigger the violence seems to be.

[Saruman200]

At 8/24/08 07:24 PM, morefngdbs wrote:

At 8/24/08 06:57 PM, Saruman200 wrote: If everyone owns guns, such as in Switzerland, gun ownership works really well, because while there are guns that can be used to commit crimes, all the law-abiding citizens have them too, so it levels the playing field, which really discourages criminals.

;;;
This isn't what the topics about..& maybe it discourages B&E's but the people of Switzerland are not wandering around everywhere with a gun in their hands.

But most of them carry guns on them. I've been there, believe me. Then what is this topic about, do tell?

;;;
If you look at Canada ,Great Britian... the crimes involving knives are over the top...once a criminal or two would mug you & steal your money or belongings...today they knife you multiple times then rob you...people are getting in arguments and instead of a fight , there are multiple stabbings.

Yes, but Canada and Britian both have much lower crime rates than the US (but higher than countries like Switzerland or Israel).

So while having a gun may make it easier to shoot more people quicker, It doesn't matter these days what is banned or outlawed ,people it seems are becoming more violent.
The larger centres especially you don't just have any real fighting any more its all done with weapons...that's really stupid .
we recently had some people who were going around Halifax & just randomly attacking people. no reason...just something to do !

I know, I read about it in the papers.

Also take sometime & read the papers from several different countries & the larger the population 7 the more poverty the bigger the violence seems to be.

I do... I'm a dual US-Canadian citizen, so I read papers and watch news from both those countries. I also use the internet to get information from all over the world. Yah, more poverty more crime, isn't that obvious?

[TheMason]

1) Neither the Constitution nor the Second Amendment was written 300 years ago.

2) People who cannot understand basic facts about history and government probably have erroneous assumptions about the complexities of this (or any) issue. Therefore, while it is your right to write/speak your opinion...just remember that does not make it valid.

Lurks waiting for a challenge.

[therealsylvos]

At 8/24/08 09:01 PM, TheMason wrote: 1) Neither the Constitution nor the Second Amendment was written 300 years ago.

Lurks waiting for a challenge.

Well it was penned in the 18th century and we're now in the 21st century and 21-18=3
Q.E.D. its from 300 years ago.

[thedo12]

prove to me with actual satistical facts tht people are becomeing more violent,

[jackkniphe]

At 8/24/08 09:26 PM, therealsylvos wrote:

At 8/24/08 09:01 PM, TheMason wrote: 1) Neither the Constitution nor the Second Amendment was written 300 years ago.

Lurks waiting for a challenge.

Well it was penned in the 18th century and we're now in the 21st century and 21-18=3
Q.E.D. its from 300 years ago.

it was written in 1787 that makes it 221 years. its more like 200 years ago not 300.

[Phobotech]

If people are going to kill people they'll find a way to do it regardless of the law; They know what they're getting into when they commit the crime.

The way I see it, the more good people out there that are certified to carry a concealed weapon for protection, the more it discourages crime.

[kipper456]

At 8/24/08 05:04 PM, xscoot wrote: We should keep guns, but rewrite the constitution. The original one was created 300 years ago, and for that time period. We should make a new one for this time period.

change the constitution? your kidding, Australia has been kissing britains ass for 100 years to avoid that. Contitutions shouldnt be changed if you dont have to

[D2Kvirus]

At 8/24/08 09:01 PM, TheMason wrote: 1) Neither the Constitution nor the Second Amendment was written 300 years ago.

It was merely written three centuries ago. Either way, how is it relevant to life in 2008?

Come on, in the 18th Century, it was illegal to swear in England under the Profane Swearing Act of 1694, followed by the Profane Oaths Act of 1745, punishible with a fine. Are these still clung to with the paranoid vigour we see from the pro-gun lobby? Of course not. Why? Because that mentality belongs in the 18th century, along with many other outdated notions.

[therealsylvos]

At 8/25/08 01:14 AM, jackkniphe wrote:

Well it was penned in the 18th century and we're now in the 21st century and 21-18=3
Q.E.D. its from 300 years ago.

it was written in 1787 that makes it 221 years. its more like 200 years ago not 300.

Not so good at recognizing sarcasm are you?

[FUNKbrs]

I think we should illegalize rocks, because the wave of rock-borne violence in the middle east.

How many more whores need to die needlessly in the streets at the hands of militant islamists? We need to crack down on possession of small rocks and large gravel before one more person dies!

Did you know that a single golf ball sized rock when used with a sling, can result in INSTANT death? IT CAN!!!. However, by grinding all stones into a fine, sand like powder, we can ENSURE no more people die of violence skull smashing concussions.

I know what you're thinking: "Illegalize rocks!? Why the hell would we do that?"

Well, apparently one of your children has never been hit in the head with a rock and bled all over the ground in agony while hematoma sets in and causes brain death from the swelling. And to make sure that NEVER happens...

WE. MUST. ILLEGALIZE. ROCKS.

disagree and you're a bloodthirsty goblin who hates babies and loves rocks because you're a chavinist and like the fact that rocks are symbolic of testicles.

[morefngdbs]

At 8/24/08 09:50 PM, thedo12 wrote: prove to me with actual satistical facts tht people are becomeing more violent,

;;;
Read a news paper.
try reading several big city papers like the BBC, Toronto Sun etc. Toronto could just as easily be any city in the U.S. the amount of Gun crime ,even with our tougher laws, is nuts.

Are you still in school ?
I remember what High School was like & I have been in a fight or two over the years & knife/gun crime was unheard of around here. That has changed completely. You want proof do your own homework I have & it is getting worse.

Also I believe the courts are partly to blame... you get a convidtion for a weapons offense 5 years Str8 time no early parole should be the minimum, & it should go up from there. That will immediately curb the more intelligent from carrying a knife. The stupider ones will get caught in due time 7 that problem will also be rectified.
You can get more jail time for sellong pot that you can for a weapons offense...that to me is truely offensive.

[Saruman200]

At 8/25/08 03:47 PM, morefngdbs wrote:

At 8/24/08 09:50 PM, thedo12 wrote: prove to me with actual satistical facts tht people are becomeing more violent,

;;;
Read a news paper.
try reading several big city papers like the BBC, Toronto Sun etc. Toronto could just as easily be any city in the U.S. the amount of Gun crime ,even with our tougher laws, is nuts.

Canadian gun laws arn't that tough at all...If you want a really tough gun law go to Europe. Toronto could not easily be any US city in gun crime. Toronto's highest gun crime rate is 1.25, compared to around 3 in Boston, around 5 in New York, and around 19 in Atlanta.

Are you still in school ?
I remember what High School was like & I have been in a fight or two over the years & knife/gun crime was unheard of around here. That has changed completely. You want proof do your own homework I have & it is getting worse.

Um, reading the newspaper isn't doing your homework. Newspapers only report on fights were people are killed or weapons are used. Why would they report on every single fight?

Also I believe the courts are partly to blame... you get a convidtion for a weapons offense 5 years Str8 time no early parole should be the minimum, & it should go up from there. That will immediately curb the more intelligent from carrying a knife. The stupider ones will get caught in due time 7 that problem will also be rectified.
You can get more jail time for sellong pot that you can for a weapons offense...that to me is truely offensive.

I agree with this, the weapons offense laws are way too weak.

[Proteas]

At 8/25/08 08:17 AM, D2Kvirus wrote: It was merely written three centuries ago. Either way, how is it relevant to life in 2008?

And just WHAT may I ask do you intend to replace it with?

[morefngdbs]

At 8/25/08 06:37 PM, Proteas wrote:

At 8/25/08 08:17 AM, D2Kvirus wrote: It was merely written three centuries ago. Either way, how is it relevant to life in 2008?

And just WHAT may I ask do you intend to replace it with?

;;;;;;
That's a very good point Proteas, I don't think re-writing your constitution is even possible at this time.

But if ,just if anyone found guilty of a weapons offense, whether it be a gun, knife , baseball bat (anything used as a weapon), if no one is badly hurt...5 years minimum no possibility of early release. Hurt someone bad enough to need hospital care 10 years no early release period...anything worse you throw them in jail & lose the key.
I believe that will work to curb weapon violence in a couple of ways. First anyone with half a brain will realise that carrying a weapon will get them a minimum of 5 years inside. Criminals know that they can get early release for good behavior,you take that away & it will give any with half a clue that hard time waits. Secondly the people who are acting tough, who haven't actually done anything ,may just decide walking around ready to shoot or stab anyone can still get you in big time trouble...it may give them pause so they don't have & or walk the streets with a weapon in the first place.

Funks Idea about outlawing rocks...while impossible, just like the elimination of knives, goes to the part that even totally outlawing guns can't work, cause then there's , knives get rid of them , there's rocks 7 bottles , etc. etc.

If the reason (& some say it is) people are carrying knives or guns is to protect themselves from others who carry knives & or guns. Then a partial answer might be to make it a severe penalty just to posses such a thing in public. You don't even have to commit a crime & you still do 5 years, each & every day of the 5 years its because you had something in your pocket, you shouldn't have.

That might not wake some of you up enough to leave it home...it would make me take a long hard look at why I think l might need to carry, when l go outside.

[Elfer]

At 8/25/08 06:37 PM, Proteas wrote:

At 8/25/08 08:17 AM, D2Kvirus wrote: It was merely written three centuries ago. Either way, how is it relevant to life in 2008?

And just WHAT may I ask do you intend to replace it with?

Precisely. Due to the conservation of laws law, laws and amendments can never be drafted or repealed, they can only change form.

wait what

[Proteas]

At 8/26/08 09:47 AM, morefngdbs wrote: But if ,just if anyone found guilty of a weapons offense, whether it be a gun, knife , baseball bat (anything used as a weapon), if no one is badly hurt...5 years minimum no possibility of early release. Hurt someone bad enough to need hospital care 10 years no early release period...anything worse you throw them in jail & lose the key.

My problem with this argument (and other's like it) is that it implies that we don't already have such laws on the books. In law, use of a deadly weapon can act as a penalty enhancer when the sentencing phase of the trial is occuring, and depending on the severity of the crime determines how harsh the sentencing will be. If I conk someone over the head with a chair in a bar fight and knock them out, that will be treated far differently than it would if I was to take a broken beer bottle and cut them up with it.

Sentencing someone with less than a joint's worth of pot on them like they were a dealer with a pound the stuff on them is why our prison system is so overcrowded, and now you wish to do the same to people over weapon's offenses? Sheesh...