American gun use is out of control. Shouldn't the world intervene?

[duraaraa 203]

Would you be able to defend yourself if someone came at you with baton?

Would you be able to defend yourself if someone came at you with Knife?

Forget the contact weapon, do you think you can defend yourself if you were attacked by taser or pepper spray?

The problem is you are not against the ownership of the guns but Dem taking advantage of ppl like you who in general have phobia of gun to push their agenda of removing the weapons from civilian hands.

If we actually could remove all the guns, I'd be happy with that. I don't think we should try because we would fail. It's like trying to ban alcohol after so many people got used to drinking regularly -- people will just find ways to get a gun anyway.

What I have isn't a phobia of guns. What I have is a phobia of things that are dangerous and I can't defend myself against.

I stand a much better chance defending myself and making it out alive against batons, knives, pepper spray, and tasers than I do guns.

[Harsh_77 718]

If we actually could remove all the guns, I'd be happy with that. I don't think we should try because we would fail. It's like trying to ban alcohol after so many people got used to drinking regularly -- people will just find ways to get a gun anyway.

What I have isn't a phobia of guns. What I have is a phobia of things that are dangerous and I can't defend myself against.

I stand a much better chance defending myself and making it out alive against batons, knives, pepper spray, and tasers than I do guns.

That you have better chance is just your perception, baton, knife or taser can be as lethal.

[Teddy B 17,252]

did you forget your own question already? did you forget about the dc ban on owning pistols that was recently overturned?

that one has to pay to exercise a constitutionally stated right.

Are you talking about the DC gun ban of the 1970's or the more recent ban of guns from public places?

You want to own a gun, you pay for it and everything that goes a long with it, including certification and training.

[Harsh_77 718]

Are you talking about the DC gun ban of the 1970's or the more recent ban of guns from public places?

You want to own a gun, you pay for it and everything that goes a long with it, including certification and training.

Can we also say if one wants to vote than they need to pay for the Id and whatever goes along with it.

[Teddy B 17,252]

Can we also say if one wants to vote than they need to pay for the Id and whatever goes along with it.

Works for me.

[Ban Hammer 13,590]

Really Charles, that's what you want to go with? People with criminal records and veterans who have been deemed mentally unfit? And one guy who couldn't get a gun in his new state because he hadn't lived there a year yet? That's your go to here? How does any of that equate to law a biding citizens being prevented from owning a gun?

I never took you for a "fringe" guy, but I may have to rethink that.

it would help if you actually read the links before climbing out on that limb....

Veterans are being denied the right to own firearms. VA field officers are allowed to determine if veterans can properly handle their own finances. If a field officer finds a veteran is not competent to handle their own finances, a third party fiduciary is appointed to take control of that veteran’s finances.

The problem arises in that when this happens, the veteran’s name is forwarded to the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System database where he or she is categorized as mentally defective. This action subsequently denies veterans the ability to purchase firearms.

the question you should be asking at this point is what makes that VA field officer qualified to make that determination. i'm not sure what part of the constitution states one needs to demonstrate financial responsibility before being able to exercise their right to own firearms.

and like i said, there's probably more links and stories, but i'm too lazy to post them. and after reading how cavalierly you dismiss anything i posted, it's apparent i'm wasting my time anyways.

Are you talking about the DC gun ban of the 1970's or the more recent ban of guns from public places?

You want to own a gun, you pay for it and everything that goes a long with it, including certification and training.

i don't believe in having to pay for my rights. that's just another hurdle people have to jump through. thinking it's ok to make people pay for the certificate before being able to purchase a firearm sounds quite a bit like the old poll tax....

[duraaraa 203]

That you have better chance is just your perception, baton, knife or taser can be as lethal.

On the same day as Sandy Hook, a man in China attacked children at a school with a knife. Kids were injured, but nobody died.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/12/15/not-just-sandy-hook-china-s-terrifying-knife-attacks.html

If he had a gun, do you think that none of the injured kids would have maybe died?

[Harsh_77 718]

On the same day as Sandy Hook, a man in China attacked children at a school with a knife. Kids were injured, but nobody died.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/12/15/not-just-sandy-hook-china-s-terrifying-knife-attacks.html

If he had a gun, do you think that none of the injured kids would have maybe died?

Why don’t you look at numbers in UK where guns are banned yet murder rate is so high.

Forget UK, look at Chicago where the CCW was banned until few weeks and yet it’s a murder capital of US.

Edited September 23, 2013 by Harsh_77

[Teddy B 17,252]

it would help if you actually read the links before climbing out on that limb....

the question you should be asking at this point is what makes that VA field officer qualified to make that determination. i'm not sure what part of the constitution states one needs to demonstrate financial responsibility before being able to exercise their right to own firearms.

and like i said, there's probably more links and stories, but i'm too lazy to post them. and after reading how cavalierly you dismiss anything i posted, it's apparent i'm wasting my time anyways.

i don't believe in having to pay for my rights. that's just another hurdle people have to jump through. thinking it's ok to make people pay for the certificate before being able to purchase a firearm sounds quite a bit like the old poll tax....

I read your links, none of them back your premise that law abiding citizens are being denied gun ownership. You can pretend that veterans who are deemed unfit to do handle their own finances are fit to own firearms, but I certainly do not agree. If you can't balance a checkbook, then sorry I don't want you possessing a firearm either. There has to be a met criteria for one to own a firearm, mental stability needs to be one of those criteria..

[Sousuke 1,214]

LOL whats next certification and training to vote?

[duraaraa 203]

Why don’t you look at numbers in UK where guns are banned yet murder rate is so high.

Forget UK, look at Chicago where the CCW was banned until few weeks and yet it’s a murder capital of US.

In the UK, perhaps the murder rate would be even higher if guns were more readily available.

In Chicago, people have guns anyway, which is why I said it's stupid to ban guns, since people will get them anyway. I don't think guns should be banned at this point, because they've become so regular that it's actually the only way to defend yourself against guns.

It just would be better if we didn't have them in the first place.

[Penny Lane 8,159]

That you have better chance is just your perception, baton, knife or taser can be as lethal.

Just as lethal and yet guess what people generally choose as their weapon of choice.

Hint: it's not a baton, knife, or taser.

People are always talking about things that are just as deadly (or more deadly!) than guns. Why don't people choose them more often then? If there are multiple things that people own that could easily be used as a murder weapon, why do they reach for the gun so damn much?

Edited September 23, 2013 by Penny Lane

[Harsh_77 718]

In the UK, perhaps the murder rate would be even higher if guns were more readily available.

In Chicago, people have guns anyway, which is why I said it's stupid to ban guns, since people will get them anyway. I don't think guns should be banned at this point, because they've become so regular that it's actually the only way to defend yourself against guns.

It just would be better if we didn't have them in the first place.

That’s what I have been trying to explain to you that it’s a myth.

Ppl are made to believe that they guns are so bad and they should be banned and on and on.

For Example – did any of the major media cover that marines in Navy Yard had guns but no ammo? I don’t think so but most of the major media did cover what type of gun shooter took and where he purchased from and on and on.

[Penny Lane 8,159]

Can we also say if one wants to vote than they need to pay for the Id and whatever goes along with it.

Yep.

[Harsh_77 718]

Just as lethal and yet guess what people generally choose as their weapon of choice.

Hint: it's not a baton, knife, or taser.

People are always talking about things that are just as deadly (or more deadly!) than guns. Why don't people choose them more often then? If there are multiple things that people own that could easily be used as a murder weapon, why do they reach for the gun so damn much?

There are pressure cooker, airplanes and personally themselves that have been used to inflict injury.

It is physiological for certain ppl to think guns are more dangerous, they would see gun on someone’s hip and would assume they are killers.