Look, if you don't want a gun, don't own one. It doesn't meant you're certain to be victimized.

 

 

This is EXACTLY my point.

 

If Batman doesn't need a gun, I don't need a gun. :lol

 

So you're satisfied with the status quo on gun laws? I haven't actually heard what you think about them because you and Accord have been too busy being on opposite ends of the political spectrum.

Show you one statistic that backs up what I say happens all the time? Easy. Just turn on your damn 11 o'clock news. Do you ever open a newspaper or watch the news? Every single day there are a countless amount of robberies, rapes, murders, assaults, break in's, muggings, etc. the list goes on. If you disagree, then you're one of the most naive SOB's i've ever come across.

 

That's your problem accord. Your logic is warped. You let single events being reported drive you into thinking there is a crisis. Four or five kids in Florida got killed this year. Do you lock your kids up in the basement? You live in this world engulfed with fear. Tell me how many of these news events happend in the exact neighborhood you live in? How many happend recently? You know full well the chances of you yourself getting attacked are next to nill. And even if it could happen, Im sure your family has some super elite security system to protect them.

 

Take away crimes that happen in low income to lower middle class neighborhoods and I bet the chances of you getting attacked based on crime rates becomes nearly non-existent. Want an example? Post Katrina New Orleans. Sad as it is to say, all of a sudden, because the poor people in New Orleans havent returned, the city safer than it has been in a long time.

Guess what, F_M? I live in a low income neighborhood and there's a serial rapist on the loose in my town. I have no need to protect myself and those in my townhouse, right?

Guess what, F_M? I live in a low income neighborhood and there's a serial rapist on the loose in my town. I have no need to protect myself and those in my townhouse, right?

 

Why would you not want to protect yourself? The threat of crime is much more serious for you, so I definitely think you have a need to protect yourself.

 

Do I think a gun is the solution? Debateable. Id say the presence of a male deters a rapist a good degree. Maybe locked doors arent foolproof, but they can frustrate an attacker enough. But not even a gun can ensure the safety of your friends at all times right. I think guns as safety fit a particular scenario of crimes but most of the time don't do anything except to make us feel like Rambo. But hey, if you want it to protect your house with any means necessary, that's your choice.

 

My problem with the NRA is that they dont want extensive and detailed background checks. What's wrong with background checks at gun shows? A lot of them also feel that if everyone has a gun, the world is at it's best. Thats insane to me. I also think more people use assault rifles for bad purposes then do for practice range shooting.

I personally support extensive background checks on people buying weapons. Not that it always works, but it's a good way to determine who should have a gun or not.

 

I have yet to see a reasonable argument why people in the U.S. need to own an assault rifle. We don't live in the Middle East, where it seems like 9 out of every 10 people owns an AK-47 and an RPG. Typical gun-related crimes are carried out with small handguns, not M4's. Therefore, I don't see why we need to allow people to own assault weapons legally.

I personally support extensive background checks on people buying weapons. Not that it always works, but it's a good way to determine who should have a gun or not.

 

I have yet to see a reasonable argument why people in the U.S. need to own an assault rifle. We don't live in the Middle East, where it seems like 9 out of every 10 people owns an AK-47 and an RPG. Typical gun-related crimes are carried out with small handguns, not M4's. Therefore, I don't see why we need to allow people to own assault weapons legally.

 

So people can get their jollies at the gun range. Personally, Id like a shoulder rocket launcher because I like blowing up large trucks. I really dont care if terrorists can use them too.

So you're satisfied with the status quo on gun laws? I haven't actually heard what you think about them because you and Accord have been too busy being on opposite ends of the political spectrum.

 

 

My honest opinion on guns is that I don't care at all about hunting rifles. Other than that, I don't want anyone having hand guns or anything that can fire multiple rounds at a high rate. That's how I feel morally. I only want cops legally having hand cannons, at least, from a moral standpoint (so if criminals have them illegally then the cops know who to shoot).

 

That being said, I have no problem with people owning guns, legally, for the most part. I haven't argued very well for my point, because for the most part I've been kidding around and just plain lazy. However, I'll disagree with Accord on the fact that guns are analogous to an insurance policy or that "a right not exercised is a right lost" (which is textbook b.s. NRA garbage, in my opinion).

 

For a few reasons, the main reason being that if someone breaks into your house a gun is only potentially an insurance policy for saving your life. There are instances I can think of where people have a) shot their family members accidently, where b) the gun owner in question confronts the criminal and either the criminal gets the drop on them or they miss and end up paying for it. I can think of instance c) where a kid sneaks the gun out of a safe-locked place (kids aren't dumb, especially teens, so I'm not sure I feel a responsibly locked, "safe" gun isn't capable of not being taken by a kid who really wants it).

 

The problem type A) has to be one of the worst because you can, accidently shoot and kill someone you love. But I'll treat it as something that doesn't happen that often. It's a tragedy nonetheless and I wonder how those who have accidently killed/shot their loved ones feel about guns after this incident, but let's make it a non-factor early.

 

Type B) seems to me to be the biggest problem on a case to case basis. If your gun is responsibly locked up who's to say you'll get to it before a criminal who's planned ahead can get to you? This, I think, sufficiently counters any kind of "gun as insurance policy" analogy you can think of. An insurance policy, let's say in the case of a fire, is to count 100% of the time that there is a fire (barring extenuating circumstances, ie there's evidence you burned your own house down to cash in on the insurance). A gun is not nor ever will be 100% effective. I want to say, in my opinion, AT THE MOST a gun is only 50% effective (you either get to it and possibly shoot the guy, or you don't). In situation type B) there are instances where you can miss, instances where the criminal gets a drop on you, instances where you turn a non-violent robber into a more violent one. A gun is only effective in that you can only fire it in the dark with some certain percentage of accuracy. Even if you somehow get the drop on a criminal and shoot him, it's not 100% certain he dies or is incapacitated. You might hit some non-vitals and he might be big enough, strong enough that he turns on you and you've got a real problem on your hands. My point is, if someone wants to break into your house to kill you I'd rather it be the case that if I hear them coming that I run and live to get killed another day, than to try and kill them myself and possibly still end up dead. Now, I'm not saying escape is going to be 100% effective either, but in my line of thinking it's just as effective if not moreso than a gun for the above mentioned problems.

 

Problem type c) is also VERY problematic. You can be a responsible gun owner and have a gun under lock and key, and yet there are instances where your kid is at the age where he has a certain level of curiosity about guns and, let's face it, kids ain't dumb (I use kid in the general sense, let's assume kid=teenager in this instance). If a kid is willing enough to sneak a gun out of their parents safe place, they can do so. I wouldn't want to be responsible for my kid shooting themselves in the foot (literally), committing suicide or, in my opinion the worst possible of this scenario, killing someone else.

 

However, guns are legal and from that perspective I don't begrudge anyone for owning a gun. What a I have a problem is someone the likes of Accord morally condemning me for NOT having a gun. I justify it in the sense that I live in a safe neighborhood and in my house I have 3 ground floor entrances and exits and 3 second floor window exits. In the case that I become aware of a robber in my house I have 6 escape routes with which to escape, go to my neighbor's house and call the police. I do not have my own family living under that roof so I don't feel the need to protect anyone. In the case that I do become a family man, I plan on living in similar circumstances and making my children aware of escape routes (and having a baseball bat, the only security I feel is necessary).

 

Morally, I don't believe in owning a gun. Legally, fine. And on a personal note I don't want, nor do I need, a gun. And to counter the old NRA slogan "a right not exercised is a right lost," is simple: We have all kinds of rights we don't use and it's not that by not using that right we're somehow getting rid of it's use. Far from it, Accord. That's analogous to Admin not believing in free speech because this board doesn't allow me to use the words c**t - sh*t - f*** and n****r . That's a slippery slope argument. People who don't buy alchohol after the age of 21 don't give up that right to do it by the time they're 65.

 

Owning a gun, in my opinion, is fine if you're other people or the police. I don't personally need one for the above reasons stated. And I think it's hard to counter the fact that guns only make you some percentage safer. I seek to go the other route and be a pacifist on the matter.

 

I refuse to be so scared of the world in which we live that I need a gun. We have already made killing to easy by making it so that when one pushes a button, a bullet flies out of a barrell and can kill someone. I don't seek to support that kind of institution regardless of what our forefathers put it in the constitution for. I find it offensive that we live in a society where news scares people to the degree that they feel they have to protect themselves in this manner. I give local news a quick cursory glance because I don't buy most of what they're selling: fear. I like being informed, but I refuse to believe that the world is as bad as the news paints it.

 

"WAR! FAMINE! DEATH! AIDS! WAR! FAMINE! DEATH! AIDS!" This is the mantra of most news agencies. And yet, I look outside of my window and hear crickets chirping. Obviously this stuff happens, but we live in America where for the most part we're protected by local agencies.

 

And, as stated before, Batman don't need a gun.

Damn. Preach it, brother (especially at like 5 in the morning).

Knowing East St. Louis, she probably had an apartment on top of a crackhouse, and some young thug was robbing her to get money for a fix.

 

And I am not kidding, E. St. Louis is hell on earth. Makes DC look like Mayberry.

The voice of reason has spoken.

I also think more people use assault rifles for bad purposes then do for practice range shooting.

 

That's an absolute load of crap and so far detached from reality. There are more members of the Sawgrass High Power Rifle club actively participating in shooting sports than there are criminals who used assault rifles in America over the past few years.

 

You act like assault rifles are bad and scary, yet you can buy hunting rifles which are far more destructive in every single category. Newsflash: Most gun crimes are committed with cheap small caliber .22lr and .380 pistols, do you realize how impractical it is for the common criminal to haul around a 4 foot long assault rifle?

Show you one statistic that backs up what I say happens all the time? Easy. Just turn on your damn 11 o'clock news. Do you ever open a newspaper or watch the news? Every single day there are a countless amount of robberies, rapes, murders, assaults, break in's, muggings, etc. the list goes on. If you disagree, then you're one of the most naive SOB's i've ever come across.

 

That's your problem accord. Your logic is warped. You let single events being reported drive you into thinking there is a crisis. Four or five kids in Florida got killed this year. Do you lock your kids up in the basement? You live in this world engulfed with fear. Tell me how many of these news events happend in the exact neighborhood you live in? How many happend recently? You know full well the chances of you yourself getting attacked are next to nill. And even if it could happen, Im sure your family has some super elite security system to protect them.

 

Take away crimes that happen in low income to lower middle class neighborhoods and I bet the chances of you getting attacked based on crime rates becomes nearly non-existent. Want an example? Post Katrina New Orleans. Sad as it is to say, all of a sudden, because the poor people in New Orleans havent returned, the city safer than it has been in a long time.

 

I live in this world engulfed in fear? That's such a joke. I own firearms and I have the necessary training to use them should a situation extreme enough present itself before me. Period. You're acting like i'm Dale Gribble or something.

 

It doesn't matter where these news events happened, you cannot pick and choose when and where a criminal may do something. The chances of a criminal breaking into my home are very small, however regardless of what the exact chances are, it sure as hell isn't ZERO and that is a risk I am not willing to take, it's better to be safe than sorry.

 

Those I love do not live in a perfect world and therefore as a man it is my responsibility to do everything in my power to keep my family safe and that is a responsibility that I that I don't play around with and that I take seriously - the fact that some of you have a problem with this is flat out disgusting.

 

It doesn't matter where I live, what type of security system we have (if any), what the crime rates in my specific neighborhood are. The chances of something actually happening may be very small, but the chances will NEVER be zero.

I also think more people use assault rifles for bad purposes then do for practice range shooting.

 

That's an absolute load of crap and so far detached from reality. There are more members of the Sawgrass High Power Rifle club actively participating in shooting sports than there are criminals who used assault rifles in America over the past few years.

 

You act like assault rifles are bad and scary, yet you can buy hunting rifles which are far more destructive in every single category. Newsflash: Most gun crimes are committed with cheap small caliber .22lr and .380 pistols, do you realize how impractical it is for the common criminal to haul around a 4 foot long assault rifle?

Here, Ill use some of the accord branded logic on you. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Hollywood_shootout

 

You really dont think drug dealers have these things sitting around?

 

Explain to me how the spray action of an AK-47 or Uzi is something people like to practice with? What target are you hitting?

 

Even assuming youre correct, why cant we just only allow gun ranges to own these weapons and not allow the average citizen to go buy one and use it for whatever purposes he wants to?

 

 

I live in this world engulfed in fear? That's such a joke. I own firearms and I have the necessary training to use them should a situation extreme enough present itself before me. Period. You're acting like i'm Dale Gribble or something.

 

It doesn't matter where these news events happened, you cannot pick and choose when and where a criminal may do something. The chances of a criminal breaking into my home are very small, however regardless of what the exact chances are, it sure as hell isn't ZERO and that is a risk I am not willing to take, it's better to be safe than sorry.

 

Those I love do not live in a perfect world and therefore as a man it is my responsibility to do everything in my power to keep my family safe and that is a responsibility that I that I don't play around with and that I take seriously - the fact that some of you have a problem with this is flat out disgusting.

 

It doesn't matter where I live, what type of security system we have (if any), what the crime rates in my specific neighborhood are. The chances of something actually happening may be very small, but the chances will NEVER be zero.

 

:lol Yeah, youre acting exactly like Dale Gribble. The chances of aliens reading your mind are pretty small but not zero. Better put on a tin foil hat. The chances of criminals invading your home with rocket launchers is also not zero. Better set up invisible but deadly laser beams that scroll accross your lawn. But the chances that the criminals will have laser proof suits is not zero. So better go get a security mech assault robot to patrol the yard. See how that all fits into your thinking?

If automatic weapons were used a lot more for crime then for recreation ---- I don't think we'd be having this discussion.

Guess what, F_M? I live in a low income neighborhood and there's a serial rapist on the loose in my town. I have no need to protect myself and those in my townhouse, right?

 

Why would you not want to protect yourself? The threat of crime is much more serious for you, so I definitely think you have a need to protect yourself.

 

Do I think a gun is the solution? Debateable. Id say the presence of a male deters a rapist a good degree. Maybe locked doors arent foolproof, but they can frustrate an attacker enough. But not even a gun can ensure the safety of your friends at all times right. I think guns as safety fit a particular scenario of crimes but most of the time don't do anything except to make us feel like Rambo. But hey, if you want it to protect your house with any means necessary, that's your choice.

 

My problem with the NRA is that they dont want extensive and detailed background checks. What's wrong with background checks at gun shows? A lot of them also feel that if everyone has a gun, the world is at it's best. Thats insane to me. I also think more people use assault rifles for bad purposes then do for practice range shooting.

 

 

There are background checks at every gun show in Florida which happens to be one of the most lenient states in the entire country as far as lax gun laws are concerned, infact i'm going to one in Ft. Lauderdale this weekend. If I buy a gun, any type of gun, at the gun show (we call the FUN shows :thumbup ), every dealer there is required to have the customer fill out an ATF 4473 form and submit the customer to an FBI NICS background check, and assuming they pass all this, they must then wait 5 days before they're allowed to bring their firearm home.

 

If every law abiding citizen owned a gun and was properly trained in the use of their firearm and the applicable laws they need to know, then yes our society would be a safer place. The #1 thing that criminals fear more than anything is encountering a victim who is armed. Chicago, Washington DC, NYC, Australia, England, several other european countries, the list goes on. Violent crime rates in virtually every city and country that have banned guns outright has dramatically increased ten fold because the criminals still have their guns and they've now been guaranteed that every single one of their victims will be unarmed, they no longer have to fear breaking into a house and staring down the barrel of a Remington 870 shotgun that is locked and cocked, they no longer have to fear raping a woman who may potentially be carrying a pocket pistol in her purse, the list goes on.

Oddly, my little internal voice of reason (common sense perhaps?) tells me that if automatic weapons are used more often for crime purposes than recreation, as Flying_Mollusk suggests.... that we wouldn't be having this debate.

I have yet to see a reasonable argument why people in the U.S. need to own an assault rifle. We don't live in the Middle East, where it seems like 9 out of every 10 people owns an AK-47 and an RPG. Typical gun-related crimes are carried out with small handguns, not M4's. Therefore, I don't see why we need to allow people to own assault weapons legally.

 

 

I have yet to see a reasonable argument why people in the U.S. need to own 800 horsepower Ferrari's. We don't live in Europe with the Autobahn where it seems like 9 out of every 10 people own a fast exotic car.

I have yet to see a reasonable argument why people in the U.S. need to own an assault rifle. We don't live in the Middle East, where it seems like 9 out of every 10 people owns an AK-47 and an RPG. Typical gun-related crimes are carried out with small handguns, not M4's. Therefore, I don't see why we need to allow people to own assault weapons legally.

 

 

I have yet to see a reasonable argument why people in the U.S. need to own 800 horsepower Ferrari's. We don't live in Europe with the Autobahn where it seems like 9 out of every 10 people own a fast exotic car.

 

 

Before F_M says it - red herring.

 

 

The difference between assault rifles and Ferraris is that assault rifles fire volatile projectiles that fatally wound people.

 

 

 

Can't you insane partisans just use your heads?

Violent crime rates in virtually every city and country that have banned guns outright has dramatically increased ten fold

 

Please show the evidence or statistics to back that up.

 

my little internal voice of reason (common sense perhaps?) tells me that if automatic weapons are used more often for crime purposes than recreation, as Flying_Mollusk suggests.... that we wouldn't be having this debate.

 

Yeah but you could say that about a lot of things. If the word "god" in the pledge of allegience really didnt force Christianity on people, then it wouldnt be a debate. It's the stubborn position of the extreme groups that ends up making it a debate.

 

 

 

 

I have yet to see a reasonable argument why people in the U.S. need to own an assault rifle. We don't live in the Middle East, where it seems like 9 out of every 10 people owns an AK-47 and an RPG. Typical gun-related crimes are carried out with small handguns, not M4's. Therefore, I don't see why we need to allow people to own assault weapons legally.

 

 

I have yet to see a reasonable argument why people in the U.S. need to own 800 horsepower Ferrari's. We don't live in Europe with the Autobahn where it seems like 9 out of every 10 people own a fast exotic car.

 

 

Before F_M says it - red herring.

 

The difference between assault rifles and Ferraris is that assault rifles fire volatile projectiles that fatally wound people.

 

 

Can't you insane partisans just use your heads?

I was gonna say apples and oranges. :lol

This thread is HOF material.

 

Buckeye's post was awesome.

I also think more people use assault rifles for bad purposes then do for practice range shooting.

 

That's an absolute load of crap and so far detached from reality. There are more members of the Sawgrass High Power Rifle club actively participating in shooting sports than there are criminals who used assault rifles in America over the past few years.

 

You act like assault rifles are bad and scary, yet you can buy hunting rifles which are far more destructive in every single category. Newsflash: Most gun crimes are committed with cheap small caliber .22lr and .380 pistols, do you realize how impractical it is for the common criminal to haul around a 4 foot long assault rifle?

Here, Ill use some of the accord branded logic on you. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Hollywood_shootout

 

You really dont think drug dealers have these things sitting around?

 

Explain to me how the spray action of an AK-47 or Uzi is something people like to practice with? What target are you hitting?

 

Even assuming youre correct, why cant we just only allow gun ranges to own these weapons and not allow the average citizen to go buy one and use it for whatever purposes he wants to?

 

 

I live in this world engulfed in fear? That's such a joke. I own firearms and I have the necessary training to use them should a situation extreme enough present itself before me. Period. You're acting like i'm Dale Gribble or something.

 

It doesn't matter where these news events happened, you cannot pick and choose when and where a criminal may do something. The chances of a criminal breaking into my home are very small, however regardless of what the exact chances are, it sure as hell isn't ZERO and that is a risk I am not willing to take, it's better to be safe than sorry.

 

Those I love do not live in a perfect world and therefore as a man it is my responsibility to do everything in my power to keep my family safe and that is a responsibility that I that I don't play around with and that I take seriously - the fact that some of you have a problem with this is flat out disgusting.

 

It doesn't matter where I live, what type of security system we have (if any), what the crime rates in my specific neighborhood are. The chances of something actually happening may be very small, but the chances will NEVER be zero.

 

:lol Yeah, youre acting exactly like Dale Gribble. The chances of aliens reading your mind are pretty small but not zero. Better put on a tin foil hat. The chances of criminals invading your home with rocket launchers is also not zero. Better set up invisible but deadly laser beams that scroll accross your lawn. But the chances that the criminals will have laser proof suits is not zero. So better go get a security mech assault robot to patrol the yard. See how that all fits into your thinking?

 

Your lack of firearm knowledge precedes you. The weapons used by the criminals in the infamous North Hollywood Shootout are ILLEGAL! Again, I want to emphasize this to you... they're already illegal and the average citizen cannot go out and buy one, anyone who owns one got it on the black market or through some other sort of criminal channel, you cannot buy them at gun shows or anywhere else, they're 100% flat out illegal. Let me say this again, the weapons used by those criminals are ILLEGAL.

 

The gun range at Markham Park which is one of only two ranges in South Florida where you can use your AR-15 does not allow rapid fire, it doesn't matter if you have a .22lr pea shooting rifle or an AR-15. you're allowed to fire no quicker than 1 shot every 5 seconds, anything more than that and they come over the loud speaker and say "SLOW DOWN THERE RAMBO" and you get a warning, anything after that and you're kicked out. The same goes for the Trail Glades range which is the other range in South Florida where you can fire them.

 

And yeah, you're damn right I like to get my jollies. When the Palm Beach County Sherriff's Department opens up their private range to the public once a month and I go out there and shooting every round in the black at 300 yards, it's a huge adrenaline rush.

 

None of what you stated fits into my line of thinking, unlike those whacked out things you just proposed, a criminal breaking into your home at 3am is not an unrealistic scenario, rather it is something that is very common and happens on a daily basis all around the country. Like I stated above, I don't even use my AR-15 as my primary home defense weapon because the small .223 caliber round is simply not practical for such applications. I use a standard Remington 870 shotgun, the most popular long gun in America and for more than 50 years it's been the #1 choice of millions of American's to protect their families.

You folks out there are sure making it sound like it such a bad thing for a regular law abiding citizen to own a gun. You should see what its like in Switzerland... almost every store keeper owns an uzi and there is virtually no crime. I could see why.

You folks out there are sure making it sound like it such a bad thing for a regular law abiding citizen to own a gun. You should see what its like in Switzerland... almost every store keeper owns an uzi and there is virtually no crime. I could see why.

 

 

That sounds like a police state and goes against the very tenants of freedom this country was founded on.

 

No thanks. I'll take freedom over fear.

I know some convenience store owners that have a gun. Does that make it a police state that they own one. Their practicing the freedoms of this country. Im not fearful of them.

I know some convenience store owners that have a gun. Does that make it a police state that they own one. Their practicing the freedoms of this country. Im not fearful of them.

 

 

I don't want just anyone to get uzi's, sorry. It's too much. Call it overkill.

 

Maybe I'M the crazy one here, but no one needs that much firepower.