Should Guns be Banned in the US?

good, was starting to worry about you

 

go up to New Hampshire, Vermont, New York and you'll still see people who have guns with mounted on there rear window in regular cab pickups, my uncle has one on his f250. There are folks who do this, it isn't a passing culture, he was a heavy equipment repo man. he has alot of people on his back.

 

Glad to hear it.

To Balbus, the simple version of my point is that IMHO guns have nothing to do with crime. Crimes are committed by people, not guns. Guns are a tool and if they were not available, other tools would be used. (I think I'd rather be shot than hacked with a machete, not that I really care to experience either).

Address society's root causes of crime such as poverty, lack of education, drug abuse, and other things that lead to violence. The gun didn't commit the crime, the criminal did.

In response to your point about whether I have traveled to Europe, no, I have not. I look forward to doing so someday. I'm a bit of a history buff (which is funny because I did not enjoy it in school at all), and completely understand how a country as new as the US cannot hold a candle to the deep, historical significance of the UK and others. That said, I have had the opportunity to travel extensively in my profession throughout the lower 48, Canada, Mexico, and the Caribbean so hopefully I'm not as culturally unwashed as my lack of travel to Europe would lead one to believe.

And when I do cross the pond, I'll feel perfectly safe leaving my toys at home.

 

One good thing about gun culture is you get a lot of jokes out of it. For example the other year when there was shortage of eggo waffles due to a factory problem, and also a rice shortage that made places like BJ put a limit of 80lbs(oh god only 80lbs) on purchases, you can say things like:
"It's happening, food rations. Death of America. Grab your gun and follow me"

 

I read this quote by an american writer today:

"Americans love guns, not because they like to hunt but because they feel, if they're faced with tyrannical authority, if they're armed they've got a way of resisting"

It's interesting that Americans feel like that, because even with guns they're infinitely less powerful than their armed forces and police. Maybe they should be allowed tanks and bombs?

 

a very helpful phrase to use here would be "some but not all"

thanks

 

If anyone should be disarmed it's our government ! Who's now hell bent on global bullying and domination of the world . Who commits mass murder of innocent civilians for their natural resources like oil ! Why can't we see the madness for what it is ? WAR CRIMES !
If we could trust our government , there would be no need for guns . However since we can't , we must always have a right to keep and bear arms ! As an armed person is a citizen , an unarmed person is a subject .

i think it was Ben Franklyn who said , liberty is two wolves , and a well armed lamb to ensure the vote goes right .

 

this sentence, which one original thinking individualist or another posts every couple of days or so, has never made one bit of sense to me

 

I'm confused about this situation in the US. I feel that we should have the right to bear arms, but I also feel like no matter what, guns will fall in the hands of the wrong people.

I know the old saying goes "guns don't kill people, people kill people." But I feel that the wrong people feel empowered by having a weapon and it becomes a psychological thing as opposed to a security thing. Guns can change people psychologically. This is going to be a debate for many years to come...and I can honestly see both sides of the argument.

 

Afghanistan and Iraq if anything have shown how easily a bunch of guys with guns and homemade bombs can take on the world's most powerful military. One must remember anyways if in some way the US started falling apart, it wouldn't be the military vs everyone else.

 

you left out "and favorable terrain" and every other intangible that has unaccountably allowed the afghans to hold off the british, soviet and american militaries

 

My son was just asking about where to by a gun that the government wouldn't know about

 

montana

 

Thats along way to drive. I was think across town

 

don't know where you live

i was kind of making a joke about neighborhoods where gun nuts live, which would be the whole state for me

ad in today's paper:

FOR SALE: REMINGTON mod 1900 dbl barrel shotgun, 12 gauge; Remington mod. 11, 16 gauge semi auto shotgun; M1 carbine, brand new in box with 3 mags; Taurus Judge stainless revolver. Please call 987-xxxx.

guessing this would be a painless operation, then a little filing of numbers . . .

maybe there is a neighborhood near you where drugs are dealt? a little more bravery might be required . . .

 

Certainly the military has a technological advantage but when the military is constrained by rules of engagement that forbid wide scale effect weapons, the advantage goes to a motivated, numerically superior force.

Back in 1788 Madison argued that a national "standing army" would be "opposed" by a militia of armed citizens outnumbering the army by factor of 17-20 to 1.

Today, with the military drawdowns in the past few years, the modern global "standing army" (active and reserve forces) is outnumbered by armed citizens by at least 30 to 1.

Domestically it is probably on the order of 60-75 citizens to 1 military (maybe even more ).

 

The army of 1788 compared to the army of 2010 is basically irrelevant in conversation. The army of 1788 was essentially the militia with more training than normal along with a few cannons, the army of 2010 is ridiculously high tech, more high tech than any normal person will encounter in their daily activity with rifles.

 

that's why the real citizen has atom bombs

 

A nuclear armed society is a polite society.

 

If we could outlaw all guns then people wouldn't be so quick to pull the trigger. I know banning all guns would be a hard thing to do but if it did happen people could fight with their fists and live to fight another day rather than die.