Thread: USA Gun Laws Poll

Originally Posted by EMC45

Never thought I would agree with Ice T the "OG", but...........

The guy who wrote the song "COP KILLER".....no thanks and I'll keep the rest of my thoughts about him to myself.

Originally Posted by thebigspendur

Here we go again. That argument has always been a bunch of nonsense. Gun laws are worthless when you can walk a few blocks out of a jurisdiction and buy all the guns you want and just bring them back.

This is why they need to be the same....everywhere....whatever they may be. yea...I know....States Rights.

Originally Posted by JimmyHAD

In North Jersey an acquaintance of mine stabbed a guy 15 times in an argument over a parking space. Very tough gun laws in NJ. People looked at me funny when I would comment that if they lived in No Jersey they would know that it should have been adjudicated justifiable homicide.

They only charge with a homicide here when you stab 16 times. he was 1 short.

Originally Posted by JimmyHAD

The French resistance in WWII certainly gave the nazis some problems with their guns. It is not feasible that the citizenry in the USA could overthrow a tyrannical government. It is feasible that individuals can protect themselves and their neighbors from predatory individuals. Happens every day. I always like the parachute/gun analogy .... you may never need it, but if you ever need it and you don't have it ..... chances are you'll never need it again.

The French or Warsaw resistance also produced more innocent (French/Polish) victims than German. Men/women/children who had nothing to do with the resistance. The resistance couldn't overcome German army either. It was Russian and allied forces that did the job.

Having a gun in case you need to overthrow a tyrannical government. That is a fairy tale, imho. You folks are democracy and your leaders are elected by vote. "Overthrowing a tyrannical government" means civil war, people against people.

Now you had yours and so do we. Ours was that much later (1918) that i was lucky (?) to listen to the stories from the old family members who had fought on both sides and in the German army at Tanneberg and Masurian lakes. Listen to the stories about family sisters and brothers, mothers and fathers who got kia/mia or had been executed or starved to death in a prison camps. It was Russian and red forces against white guards/jaegers and German army/Swedish volunteers. The battle of Tampere was and is the biggest and bloodiest battle in Scandinavia ever. In that war the relative body count exceeds easily the one in Yugoslavia.

As far as i remember, no person ever were proud or happy for "fighting against tyrannical government" or against rebels. Not even those who were "winners" who returned the peace and stability. They had blood in their hands and they knew it. We Finns are good in killing when we finally decide to take the last step. Those times were so painful that even today people cannot agree on what name to give to that war. Some call it civil war, some call it liberation war, some call it brother against brother and some call it time of slaughter. I'm not interested to be ready or prepared for the times like that.

Of course this has nothing to do with US gun laws. Just like old dude yelling at clouds

Originally Posted by Sailor

Having a gun in case you need to overthrow a tyrannical government. That is a fairy tale, imho. You folks are democracy and your leaders are elected by vote. "Overthrowing a tyrannical government" means civil war, people against people.

I agree with you Sailor. It probably is a fairy tale. In our civil war there were more casualties than in all of the wars in US history up to two thirds of our participation in the Viet Nam war. Certainly brother against brother in many cases. God willing that no country should have to go through something like that again. Still want to hang on to my firearms though. Dangerous place we live in here. Personal protection is better than none. IMHO.

I've been thinking a while about the Colorado movie theater incident a lot. I am hearing so much more about "gun control", this notion absolutely foolish. All gun control does is limit law abiding citizens, do you think the law breakers will follow the laws? Hell no, this is fact and point...look at history and around the world.

My wife and I went to the theater this weekend and watched a movie in Paris, TX & I think, HOW COULD THIS HAVE HAPPENED? If that same sicko (no, I don't think he was mentally ill...that's just a cop out to try and avoid lethal injection) would have tried the same thing here, sure he would have shot a few...but is "threat" would have been eliminated by law abiding concealed carriers.

This should be an eye opener to all, go out and obtain your Concealed Carry license and carry at all times (where legal of course) as this could happen to you or your family. Sure the police were there in minutes, but seconds count when you have to defend yourself or family.

I pray to God that none of my friends or family are never placed in this situation, but if you are I hope you are prepared.

Originally Posted by earcutter

I was talking to my uncle from Holland not that long ago. He asked how I was enjoying living in "The Land of The Gun?" Being I am a gun nut, and think that guns in America are about as identifiable to the nation as apple pie and baseball, I got into how the country was founded and how people here really believe that they have the right to own guns in order to ensure their defense from a tyrannical government bla, bla, bla.

He listened politely and when I was done (and feeling rather good about myself if I can say so myself), he simply stated, "yeah we felt the same way here in Holland, but when the Nazi's came in tanks, we put our guns down." I was dumbfounded! He then went on and recited that after hurricane Katrina, they just took everyone's guns anyway...

Well he's right! One tank will take an entire state of guys only armed with guns. One jet or chopper - two.

That's all to say restriction isn't going to help unless we understand what exactly we are restricting! Restricting for the sake of restriction or as knee jerk reactions after a shooting doesn't solve a thing if you ask me. But I am with the Fin Pithor thinking that there should be some kind of restrictions on gun ownership... in KS anyway.

Seriously, a paranoid stereophonic who's on enough drugs to put down a horse can walk into gun store here and get whatever he/she wishes within ten minutes just so long as that person doesn't have any criminal record. If that person walked into a Walmart here to get said weapon - they could get their drugs, a six-pack, and some snacks on the way out too LOL.

I am actually Dutch, living in Finland . I could go on about the WWII thing, but I wont.

I'm now actually leaning more towards "It's your problem and I'm glad it's not mine" vote. Also I don't think adding laws will help. You need to have good laws that are consistently enforced, the difficult bit is: what are those good laws? I don't know. I have some ideas but there's no telling how those will work out in the end either.

I think I'm with Sailor here. Not for the sake of Irony, but because he makes good points. Guns, killing and wars are sensitive issues in Finland, and not easy black-and-white issues, for good reasons.

Turns out loosening up the gun laws isn't a bad idea for combating crime and murder either.
The curious case of Kennesaw, Georgia
Kennesaw, where everyone is armed by law - FT.com

I mentioned Kennesaw as well. True story. Also the U.S. is a REPUBLIC!!!!! Not a democracy.

Originally Posted by EMC45

I mentioned Kennesaw as well. True story. Also the U.S. is a REPUBLIC!!!!! Not a democracy.

A democratic republic technically.

Originally Posted by JimmyHAD

Add to that, maybe people will think I'm all wet but ...... our "entertainment" which impressionable young people many times build role models from. Glorifying violence and casting criminals in a 'glamorous' or sympathetic light. To some of these young gang kids life ain't nothin' but a movie.

I don't think there is anything "wet" about this at all. In combination with the rest of our social disorders, the glorification of violence and the individual desensitization and disassociation that goes with it, IMO definitely compounds the problem - although I must note that kids in Canada and Europe and Japan are exposed to the same material, and we're not seeing the same levels of predatory violence in those countries. An excellent book on the subject, written not long after the Columbine shooting, is Lt. Col. Dave Grossman's "Stop Teaching Our Kids How To Kill". Grossmann is a former Army Ranger and psychologist whose studies on the physiological and psychological effects of inter-personal violence are considered seminal.

Originally Posted by Pithor

I am actually Dutch, living in Finland . I could go on about the WWII thing, but I wont.

I'm now actually leaning more towards "It's your problem and I'm glad it's not mine" vote. Also I don't think adding laws will help. You need to have good laws that are consistently enforced, the difficult bit is: what are those good laws? I don't know. I have some ideas but there's no telling how those will work out in the end either.

I think I'm with Sailor here. Not for the sake of Irony, but because he makes good points. Guns, killing and wars are sensitive issues in Finland, and not easy black-and-white issues, for good reasons.

I sincerely appreciate the point of view put forward by you and Sailor, both living in Finland, and I understand the usual European perspective that civilian gun ownership is questionable and should be highly regulated (which in most EUR countries, it already is). As I've said before, if I lived there, I might not even own a firearm. In view of this perspective, it's even more shocking to me that some of the worst rampage killings of the past five years have all occurred in Europe, in countries that do allow civilian gun ownership, but under much more severe restrictions than in the US: Jokela and Kauhajoki in Finland, 2007/2008, 19 casualties - Winnenden, Germany, 2009, 16 casualties - Oslo/Utoya, Norway, 2011, the worst rampage killing in history, leaving 77 dead and more than 300 injured.

My point is that a society's attitude towards gun ownership is not necessarily a determining factor in whether a psychopath will go on a killing spree or not. These killers all carefully planned their actions, some long in advance, and in spite of restrictive laws managed to legally access sufficient armament to carry out their plans. I can't prove it of course, but I believe that if guns had not been available to them at all, they would have explored and found alternative methods of mass killing.