| We hope you enjoy your visit to this forum. If you are reading this then it means you are currently browsing the forum as a guest, we don’t limit any of the content posted from guests however if you join, you will have the ability to join the discussions! We are always happy to see new faces at this forum and we would like to hear your opinion, so why not register now? It doesn’t take long and you can get posting right away. Click here to Register! If you are having difficulties validating your account please email us at admin@dbzf.co.uk If you're already a member please log in to your account: |
| Opinions on gun control the U.S? | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Aug 18 2016, 03:29 PM (3,715 Views) | |
|
|
Aug 20 2016, 01:27 PM Post #46 |
![]()
What will you do when you get old?
![]()
|
Just to clarify, that's actually justifiable homicide, where someone had the justification to kill another with their firearm, on average about 240-250 deaths a year. They are used in self defense much more than that. |
![]() |
|
| Sam | Aug 20 2016, 05:41 PM Post #47 |
|
It takes a mere second for treasure to turn to trash.
![]()
|
Yeah, I didn't word that properly. I agree with what you mean. I should have restructured that sentence. |
|
WoW Legion Ending - Thank you Darker for making this into one, big incredible gif! <3 | |
![]() |
|
| Political Piper | Aug 23 2016, 09:10 PM Post #48 |
![]()
|
There is a fundamental flaw when supporting the necessity of stricter gun laws. First, stricter gun laws are based for a specific purpose, to whit, make it harder for dangerous civilians to acquire guns to harm innocent people. However, the vast majority of gun crimes are committed by gang-on-gang violence where the vast majority of those involved have acquired their guns in some clandestine behavior. You won't see a gang member walk into a gun store and purchase a gun legally, then use that gun to commit a violent crime against a rival gang. That individual would be arrested the next day. These gang members acquire their guns illegally. Based on this notion alone, banning guns would be detrimental to law abiding citizens since the strict law would only apply to law abiding citizens. Now I know the poll is about increasing restrictions and not necessarily banning them. However, that is how it all starts. The President would never ban all guns. First off, if he or she did, congress would probably file articles of impeachment and/or the supreme court would have to weigh in. This is why it is imperative that Hillary lose (more on that later). But if stricter gun control is implemented then that opens the door to future restrictions and overall banishment. Immediate banishment could lead to a social uprising and possibly even a civil war, but if the restrictions are implemented slowly, it obscures the overall goal of firearm removal. To conquer a nation you must disarm its citizens - Hitler He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither - Ben Franklin The majority of gun deaths are from gang violence, suicides, and police involvement. If a person is suicidal they will find a way. A gun is only as dangerous as the individual involved. It is also imperative to point out that gun free zones have a higher crime rate than gun zones. This is why you will never hear of a gun store being robbed or shot up, or a gun show, etc... Now, there is also a push for stricter gun laws by not selling guns to those on a terrorist watch list, and although I do somewhat agree with this, the real question becomes who has the say on who is to be labeled? Like Obama's Cyber Security Act and Bush's Patriot Act, the rights of the American people are ignored for reasons of National Security. If the Government can spy on our phone calls in the interest of National Security, why couldn't they put whomever they wanted on a watch list for national security? The answer is they can. Lastly, Universal background checks means there is a universe database of every gun owner in America; a dangerous thing. Gun control only hurts law abiding citizens |
|
My Youtube Channel With More Political and Breaking News Videos FOOD FOR THOUGHT: | |
![]() |
|
| Wagwan | Aug 23 2016, 10:04 PM Post #49 |
![]() ![]()
|
My views on gun laws are as followed: you shouldn't be able to obtain a gun if you're poor, live in a low income area (with some leeway given to people in rural areas), live in an area with a high crime rate, a wag, if you're a convicted criminal, live with a convicted criminal/wag, first and maybe second generation migrants (there will be a 10 year "cooling down" period for people who once lived in a low income area, were poor etc but now live in a higher income area and aren't poor anymore etc) edit: the cooling down period is 25 years for first generation migrants must complete a course which teaches you how to clean, maintain and fire said gun correctly and accurately can't buy automatic/semiautomatic and high power guns until you have owned a crappier smaller gun responsively for 18months Edited by Wagwan, Aug 23 2016, 10:05 PM.
|
| |
![]() |
|
| + Steve | Aug 23 2016, 11:56 PM Post #50 |
![]()
Greetings. I will be your waifu this season.
![]()
|
All that I'd say sounds great but I'm not sure about "live in an area with a high crime rate" Like I get the idea there but if you live in a high crime area you kinda need the protection. High crime areas should either be monitored or have some sort of sweep done to weed out undesirables and their weapons. I still don't get why people view guns being restricted or taken away as the end of America or something. You'll be fine. The world is hardly just going to sit back while the government murders everyone, the US is not that powerful. Tons of disarmed countries disprove Hitler's quote there. Barely anyone in the UK has a gun and you don't see our politicians murdering folk, in fact most of them get called knobheads by the general public. Guns aren't what secure your safety common decency is. The US Government/military is hardly some rabid dog just waiting to pounce on a defenceless public... |
![]() Definitely not a succubus, fear not | |
![]() |
|
| * Ketchup Revenge | Aug 24 2016, 12:02 AM Post #51 |
![]()
"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the war room!"
![]()
|
I don't necessarily disagree with more regulation, but if you are to regulate, the regulations have to be made by people who are gun-savvy and not simply people who are opposed to guns. For example, an AR-15 is no more dangerous than a nine mil; it simply looks more terrifying. The round it takes isn't that big. The round in most hunting rifles are larger and more freaky looking. In my home state of Massachusetts, there's some weird loop-holey gun laws that don't make much sense because they were written by people who oppose guns, but aren't gun-savvy. Many people believe the NRA sells guns (they don't). They also believe in a fabricated "gun show loophole" where you can go into a gun show and buy a gun right from there. You can't. You express interest in a gun, and then it's sent to a local firearms dealer who does a background check on you, and if you pass, you can buy it. However, when you have a culture like ours that values itself on the freedom to own firearms, people will get their hands on them, legally or illegally. It's simply part of the game. Even though most mass shootings are caused by people who are licensed gun owners, most gun violence is caused by people who aren't trained or licensed, and own the firearms illegally. |
![]() The vengeance is her's for as long as she stands by Him. | |
![]() |
|
| Wagwan | Aug 24 2016, 12:04 AM Post #52 |
![]() ![]()
|
because you're more likely to commit a crime and yeah i agree people kill people not guns |
| |
![]() |
|
| * Ketchup Revenge | Aug 24 2016, 12:13 AM Post #53 |
![]()
"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the war room!"
![]()
|
Most guns in high-crime areas are illegally owned. So regulation of any kind in those areas means absolutely nothing. No one's following the rules in the first place. If you own a gun legally in that area, and have been trained, ups to you because you've actually gone through the process to become legal and use it safely. Edited by Ketchup Revenge, Aug 24 2016, 12:16 AM.
|
![]() The vengeance is her's for as long as she stands by Him. | |
![]() |
|
| Wagwan | Aug 24 2016, 12:48 AM Post #54 |
![]() ![]()
|
which is why it should be harder/impossible to obtain them legally in that area |
| |
![]() |
|
| + Steve | Aug 24 2016, 01:05 AM Post #55 |
![]()
Greetings. I will be your waifu this season.
![]()
|
On the subject of AR-15's I'm not sure why they're allowed really. I don't see much reason for civilians having anything semi-auto besides pistols. Many rifles are more powerful per shot than an AR-15 for sure but it doesn't make much difference when an AR can be far more devastating in a crowd of people in the same situation someone with a bolt action rifle would be lucky to get more than two shots off before someone tackled them. Pretty sure there's not many mass shootings where people snipe from a distance with bolt action rifles these days. They're not a great tool for crazies. |
![]() Definitely not a succubus, fear not | |
![]() |
|
| Wagwan | Aug 24 2016, 01:12 AM Post #56 |
![]() ![]()
|
a poor musician blames his instruments |
| |
![]() |
|
|
|
Aug 25 2016, 01:06 AM Post #57 |
![]()
What will you do when you get old?
![]()
|
Because handguns are the worst thing you could ever use for self defense, unless you're using magnum cartridges and not everyone can handle a revolver, especially revolvers in .454 Casull or .480 Ruger. AR-15s are perfect for home defense because they have almost no kick, don't overpenetrate using the proper home/self defense loads, and can be adapted for people with all ranges of disabilities. Also since I'm pretty sure you don't understand what a "sniper rifle" is, I'll explain it. It's a rifle that is used by a sniper. AR-15s can be considered a sniper rifle, if they're used by a sniper. A Mosin Nagant can be a sniper rifle if used by a sniper. Also here's someone rapid firing a sporterized MK IV Enfield. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u8b5ondZv5o |
![]() |
|
|
|
Aug 25 2016, 01:10 AM Post #58 |
![]()
What will you do when you get old?
![]()
|
Also meant to address this, the BATFE just got caught by the GOA for not disposing of records of gun owners, I think it was like 2 million different gun owners had their records on file, which the BATFE are supposed to dispose of after the NICS background check. Only the firearm dealer is supposed to maintain those records for up to 20 years. It doesn't actually matter though because both the NSA and CIA give law abiding citizens who own guns the highest priority in surveillance because they deem 125 million people with guns rising up in anger a significant threat. |
![]() |
|
|
|
Aug 25 2016, 01:16 AM Post #59 |
![]()
|
I think guns should be completely restricted in the US because no one uses them for anything good. Hunting = immoral, killing = immoral, defense = immoral because most people are not trained in the use of guns and/or have no real grasp on the situation because fear and instinct override rational decision making. |
![]() |
|
|
|
Aug 25 2016, 01:18 AM Post #60 |
![]()
What will you do when you get old?
![]()
|
What about shooting competitions? IDPA/USPSA matches are fun. |
![]() |
|
| 0 users reading this topic | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · General Discussion · Next Topic » |
| Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
4:58 PM Jul 13
|
Theme Designed by McKee91
Powered by ZetaBoards Premium · Privacy Policy





















4:58 PM Jul 13