Should Guns be Banned in the US?

I think people should buy more and more guns in the usa, I think they should get really absurd about it and have so many guns they have to move the furniture out of their houses and tunnel their way to other rooms in their house through all the guns. I think the usa should be completely covered in guns every square inch of it 5 foot deep in guns
then everyone should shoot at anyonelse they see until they all kill each other and then the last one alive should become the emperor of the usa and the moon

 

... while standing on top of a humongous pyramid of guns and ammo, stacked up hundreds of feet into the air

 

Personally I believe that it is high time you realize you have no dog in this American debate being a Brit. To top that off, it was you Brits whom engendered the undying love of the right to bear arms. were it not for an armed citicenry we would still live under the heel of the British monarchy. In fact we have had more wars with ya'll Brits (3 if you include the Hog War of the Northwest) in order to preserve our freedom. Please just sit back and watch you may learn a little something.
Personally I've done unarmed crisis intervention for35+ years including going in and disarming angry armed people bare handed, so I know it can be done, but not many have my skills and/or years of practice. I believe that even so that have a right to protect themselves and their friends and families by any means possible. Oh, please don't tell me they should leave that to the police. In most cities the responce time is pitiful and we are talking of situations where seconds can mean the difference between life and death.
Now that I think of it I should be thanking you Brits for teaching us to love and cherish the gun. Thank You!

 

Good point. Disarming the armed is a dangerous trick. I'd rather die trying than to die by not trying.

Nope.

The lack of fear of retribution. Why do you think parents spank their children? Ok, some don't. And some kids don't need it. But, those that do, do it for a reason. The same reason why should have no gun control- the fear of retribution.

My theory is, you are correct. Kinda. We accept threat of violence, intimidation and suppression as legitimate means of societal control. No, it's not like we use it to force people to bow to our demands, instead to make sure that the criminal element backs off. To keep our country safe from foreign invasion. To keep America safe, peaceful and quiet without having to inflict stupid laws (like we have today).

If we had fewer restrictions on our Right to Keep and Bear Arms, I'm willing to bet that a lot of the societal and political problems would disappear. Politicians should fear the citizens. You tell me, Balbus. If you were a Klansman, how willing would you and your fellow Klansmen be to chase down a black guy so you can beat him up for being black, if you know there was a good chance he was armed? What if you knew he wasn't? What if it was a coin toss?

Reflecting on what Ranger said, I have to agree with him. But I won't tell you it's none of your business. Instead I want to know how does this issue in the US affect you? What is it you feel you can do to help the matter? What kind of benefit would the people in the US get from your involvement?

I won't tell you to get out or to shut up, instead I want to invite you to help us find alternatives instead.

 

love and cherish?

i thought the goddamn things were tools

shaking head, walking away . . .

 

Ranger

Actually I think if it wasn’t for the French…..

http://people.csail.mit.edu/sfelshin/saintonge/frhist.html

And later the US militia were used to stop rebellion by the same armed US citizenry such as in the Whisky insurrection.

And thank the French for fighting your battles for you.

And now that bit of silly chest beating is over – maybe you can actually address what has been raised?

But again why do you think it could happen? What do you think are the root causes of crime?

 

logan

Please clarify

Please clarify

My theory is that there is a general attitude among many Americans that accepts threat of violence, intimidation and suppression as legitimate means of societal control and this mindset gets in the way of them actually working toward solutions to their social and political problems.
I don’t spank my child, whose child would you have spanked, do you like the idea of children being spanked?

Why is there a criminal element that you are so frightened of that you feel you need to be armed with a gun?

But you do want people to bow to your demands, criminal activity especially violent criminal activity is a symptom of something being wrong in a society, you are using guns to try and suppress the symptoms because you don’t seem to want to deal with the underlying problems.

Please clarify

Why have a society based on fear?

But why did lynching’s by the KKK go on so successfully for so long?

To repeat -
Here is a short version –

The false sense of power that guns can give people also seems to appear in the idea that they are a protection against government persecution.

For example over the years several pro-gun people have implied that the Jews would have been safe and the holocaust may never have happened if the Jews had just been armed.

The problem is that the German people had been taught the Jews were dangerous. So what if some of them had fired on the police that had come to take them away, do you think the German people would have seen this as a justified reaction and come to their defence or just seen it as proof the Jews were indeed dangerous and needed taking care of?

Think about US history, did the Native Americans that fought back against the treaty breaking US government get the support of the American citizenry? What if the US citizens of Japanese decent had resisted the unconstitutional internment imposed on them after Pearl Harbour and had shot at the police, do you think they would have got general and popular support? What about those hauled in front of McCarthy or the un-American committees, would Americans have rallied to them if they had refused to go before such witch hunts and opened fire on those that came to take them?

Here is the long version –

Can guns save you from suppression?
http://www.hipforums.com/newforums/s...&postcount=217

 

scratcho

I’ve got nothing against the law abiding and responsible owning guns, if they have to legitimately defend themselves, so be it.

What I’m asking is that the best way to tackle crime?

But you don’t think that will never happen. – “Do you see this manifested? Who will get this done? Who is interested in getting this done?...” That it is “not likely to happen”.

So in the meantime you seem to have come to see the world as threatening, you feel intimidated and fear that you are or could be the victim of criminal or political suppression. Several times you have used scaremongering (home invasion, murder, rape etc) to promote the idea that guns are a good means of tackling crime

If you believed in what you claim to preach you wouldn’t be viral selling guns through scaremongering you’d be asking why does US society seem so frightening to so many Americans. If they think it full of ‘crazies’ then isn’t the question why are there so many people with mental illness, not just jump to the answer ‘I need a gun’. If they feel, as you do, that their fellow citizens are greedy, self aggrandizing and dangerous animals that have no concern for life then isn’t the question –what is it about this society that is going so fundamentally wrong, not jump once more to the answer ‘I need a gun’?

I mean I’ve lived in many parts of Europe and I’ve never experience the kind of fear of the societies I lived in that many Americans show daily toward their own in such threads as these.

Also as I’ve tried to explain there seems to be a feed back loop between intimidation and feeling intimidated - as there seems to be a general attitude among many Americans that accepts threat of violence, intimidation and suppression as legitimate means of societal control. As you have expressed yourself when you said you thought the best way of dealing with this social problem was to lock up all the ‘scumbags’.

But to me the question should be why are there so many ‘scumbags’ why is US society producing so many ‘scumbags’ and what is the best solution to the ‘scumbag’ problem, stopping what is causing people turning into ‘scumbags’ or living in fear and hoping the threat of violence, intimidation and suppression will keep the ‘scumbags’ in check?

 

Scratcho

You have listed a number of things you think stand in the way of a better society.

Evolution is too slow – evolution is not about becoming ethically better, it is the kind of society that is more likely to teach that, and if you have a society that is based in fear, and on the idea that threat, intimidation and suppression are legitimate means of societal control, then you are likely to produce people that are threatening and scared.

Greed – Again this comes down to the type of society you have and what it teaches those in it. For example in the UK we have the BBC no adverts, my child watches cbbc, no adverts, she knows what they are and in a capitalist system its hard to get away from them but she isn’t constantly bombarded with them. It is only something small but…

Dangerous Animals - If a society treats people as if they are dangerous animals that need to be ‘tamed’ and ‘broken’ through threat and intimidation then you are likely to get dangerous animals.

No concern for life – Again this comes down to the type of society you have and what it teaches those in it. if you have a society that is based in fear, and on the idea that threat, intimidation and suppression are legitimate means of societal control, then you are likely to produce people that are threatening and scared.

Inequality – The Spirit Level: Why More Equal Societies Almost Always Do better by Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett

“Income inequality, they show beyond any doubt, is not just bad for those at the bottom but for everyone. More unequal societies are socially dysfunctional across the board. There is more teenage pregnancy, mental illness, higher prison populations, more murders, higher obesity and less numeracy and literacy in more unequal societies. Even the rich report more mental ill health and have lower life expectancies than their peers in less unequal societies.” Will Hutton

Drugs – I think I’ve made my position on this very clear, it need to be legitimised so it can be regulated, but it needs to be seen in the context of a holistic approach that tackling other socio-economic problems.

*

I think your have a problem in that you seem to think the US is the world (we earthlings) and that you accept what ‘is’ without seeming to wonder why it ‘is’. For example you say its about ‘Greed’ but you don’t seem to wonder why such a dangerous and destructive form of greed has come about.

*

Well first stop being such a defeatist, if you don’t think it possible (and keep telling other people how impossible it is) then you are more likely just to stew in the juices of your own misery than actually get anything done.

Next, who said it was going to be easy or quick? Look at the US, it began as an oligarchy of property owners (only some 10% of the population had the vote) and it can be argued that it didn’t become a modern liberal democracy until 1965 with Civil rights act. That democracy was fought for all along, and in my opinion it still has some way to go.

Who is going to do it? You want someone to come along and order society the way you want? Do you think giving that much power to someone would be a good idea? So why not think in terms of us, of communal action, which brings me on to ‘individualism’. Tackling crime through individual gun ownership is an individualistic approach, and to me is inefficient because it can only deal with the symptoms not the root causes of those symptoms. People need in my opinion to begin thinking in terms of us rather than I, but it seems to me that the mentality that accepts threat of violence, intimidation and suppression as legitimate means of societal control harbours a paranoid outlook were everything and everyone is seen as a potential threat and so puts a check on communal action and thereby gets in the way of them actually working toward solutions to their social and political problems.

 

Here is a post on individualism I wrote some time ago in another gun thread.

Traditionally the right has been the philosophy most associated with individualism the left been seen as promoting community values and ideas.

But to me an individual unless they live on their own on a deserted island and have completely no contact with other humans is part of a community, be it family, tribe, town, city or state.

So there needs to be some type of balance to what is good for the community and the individual.

A few years ago I read an article in a political magazine; sorry can’t remember which one but the right wing libertarian views that were being expressed are not that unusual. The idea is the logical conclusion to the views you express.

The idea was that everyone be given a gun then all the police type institutions would be disbanded and the tax money used to fund them could then be returned and never taken again.

To me that would be horrific but this seems often to be, in a lesser extent, the mentality behind gun ownership “to defend both yourself and your house”.

As in - look I’ve got a gun I can defend myself and my property, why should I pay so much in taxes to a ‘blotted’ police force – anyway there’s not much crime around here it’s over in the black areas of town and why should I pay to have police down there, hell if those people want to kill each other let them, if they come up here, I’ve got my gun, just let them try anything. We only need enough police to contain the violence in those areas any more is a waste.

In other words if people think they can ‘deal’ with things themselves on a individual level they might wonder why they should be ‘forced’ through taxation to pay for community action, even come to resent it.

Individualism can not always be a positive trait.

 

we life here so far, if got shoot mean not lucky, how to banned all the gun in state

 

I’ve been asked why I’m involved with this question and simply put because its interesting.

Why do I think it important, because the US has an influence on the world, its ideas, mentality and attitudes can have an impact globally.

For example just think about the impact of its anti-communism or the mentality behind the Washington consensus.

As I keep pointing out it is the attitudes and mentality that seem to underpin gun ownership that are to me the problem.

 

Please excuse me if I wander a bit here, but the extreme filibustering you have resorted to inorder to dominate this debate (a sure sign of a weak argument) tends to make it dificult to keep your points all in order.

First of all I do not accept that the French were the determining facter during the Revolutionary War. And besides that they had little if anything to do with your defeat in the War od 1812 or the Hog War. this brings me to point out that the three times we've been invaded were all cases of you Brits invading us.

You keep harping on 'the root causes of crime', I agree greed is indeed one of the major causes. for a prime example your own Queen is one of if not the richest people in the world and there is said to be good evidence that her London bankers are instramental in our current fiscal problems today. In the US the bulk of all wealth is vested in 5% or less of the population. These are people whom continue to strive to amass more wealth and power even though they already have enough to last them their life times.
Now as to a solution, if you or I amassed, say comic books to the point we had to take over our neibors houses and steal their money to continue enlarging our collection I'm quite sure the powers that be would have us commited as obcessive compulsive mental cases. This is why I don't advocate a violent solution to the problem but instead would like to see that 5% hospitalized and treated with caring and pity.

As to your contention that the people will never rise up in the numbers needed to overthrow the system the examples you gave are all cases where the government picked wreak and mostly unarmed minorities to go after in most cases and I don't see that being the case in this instance.

 

Stew in my misery? Brother,you have it so wrong,you don't know. I tried to point out what I thought would help humanity as a whole, thru equality of "riches'eg=clean water,land for all ,ect,ect. Anyway,I give up--you win-we're a bunch of miserable,scared little people cowering in our homes peeking thru our windows ready to fire on anything that moves. You haven't separated my philosophical musings regarding the condition of we humans worldwide with the simple desire to protect ourselves in our homes from ---well you know. I wonder if you've ever been over here to see how we,the mass of citizens actually live. Anyway(again) it's been interesting to see your answers and thank you for posting them----adios ,brother. Carry on.

 

Idk. Both sides have their pluses and minuses.

 

maybe you should all have a 55 pound howitzer outside your houses and guard towers and barbed wire fences and anti aircraft guns and loads of ballistic missiles in silo's in the back yard. that would make sense actually because then if the government sent some troops round to your place to take over your street you could blast them with field artillery. Maybe your mom or granny could operate a nuclear sub harboured just off the beach if you live by the sea it would be awesome i think this is definitely the direction the usa should go in

 

To the best of my knowledge the Swiss have one of the most peaceful and secure countrys there are and they are all required bt law to keep and maintain firearms in their homes.

 

yeah but everyones rich in switzerland so nobody goes around house-breaking and killing people for money and stuff, the problem is when people live in rather an unfriendly and uncivilised country that doesnt look after poor people very well. So you get a lot of violence there. the United States is similar in that respect to jamaica or Nigeria, but not as political, more criminal.
The problem with the usa being uncivilised began after the British decided they no longer liked the view from Washington and decided to move home back to Britain where the scenery was much nicer and the beer didnt taste like gnatsbys-old-scrotum

 

you are really a dumbass aren't you?
you know why you have more than 1% of your population in jail?
you know why you still have the death penalty?
you know how many people have guns in your country?
well, there are more GUNS in your country than PEOPLE,
i can go to wal-mart and buy a rifle
isn't there something wrong with that?
unless you are in the military or have a hunting license
YOU SHOULD NOT OWN A GUN

 

Just goes to show who's civilized and who's not----oh wait-----


We're a buncha' wild ass motherfuckers-no doubt. Now draw when you're ready---------

If the Chinese hadn't invented(discovered) gun powder we'd probably have more bow and arrows than anyone else too.

There are a few countries that might be glad we are and have been well armed and a few that wish we wern't.