{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
4/26/2015 6:06:51 PM
2
At least we're not the first in hammer deaths or stabbing deaths. Ie china and uk.
English
-
Yeah that's good
-
Sorry, death by guns is better than stabbing? You know guns are more deadly than knives right? Regardless I'm European and like America too but do agree that a lot of people feel the USA has a "we're better than everyone else attitude", myself included a little.
-
Face facts the vast majority of gun deaths are criminals killing other criminals. Is that a bad thing? Lawabiding citizens are not killing other lawabiding citizens.
-
Thats because when a law abiding citizen shoots another law abiding cititzen he becomes a criminal.
-
That does not fit what I am talking about I was clear in stating "has been to prison at least once" the scenario you mentioned would fall into the other 15 percent
-
Lol this...
-
Right, can you prove this? Regardless of who is killing who, murder by guns is objectively wrong and should be prevented no? Or are you advocating them killing eachother with guns?
-
Not advocating, just expressing a general lack of empathy for those who would harm others. Please state your source that it is objectivly wrong. If the bible is your source please use the older version to make.your case not the new and improved version
-
Well I'm not religious so won't be quoting the bible. Are you a nihilist? If not you have some objective beliefs about the world. If so I can't help you bro lol. If you want a reason from reason - every human life should be valued. You can also argue against free will and go down that route to as why all life should be cherished. I cba to get into such a long debate here though.
-
Don't have to prove it. The information is out there. Do your own fact checking. Would you believe if told just told you it is true?
-
The real problem is the prison system. Something like 75% of all violent crime and 85% of all homicides are committed by people who have been to prison at least once.
-
So better gun regulation could solve that right....
-
Edited by Satanic Mechanic: 4/26/2015 6:26:33 PMMy point exactly I see it everyday it's horrible It's not everyone of course But you see it everywhere
-
Also on a side note and a serious question. Is it your assertion that no guns equate to less murder/death or are you just stating that you believe guns are dangerous and you do not believe that "normal people" should have them? Or are you just merely stating a statistic (not sure of its validity since I haven't checked) about gun deaths in America?
-
No guns don't = violence necessarily if someone wants to kill someone they will find a way to do it... But that doesn't mean we should make them easy to get But more, easier to obtain guns = more gun deaths I don't think guns should be outlawed but I also don't think people should be able to walk around wherever they want with a AR15 or a hand gun strapped to them Kansas just passed a law saying you no longer need a permit to carry your gun wherever you go also know as a canceled and carry permit You can buy ammo online without a background check or even having a gun permits Im a felon and can't own a gun but every year when the gun show comes to town I can go buy a gun without showing id because my state Missouri like most states don't require proof of a permit or a background check at gun shows, Don't you see a problem with this???
-
Regulation will not stop criminals from obtaining guns. They will still get them on the black market and most often get better weapons you can get legally depending on state laws. Such as my state and alot of states fully auto is illegal yet if you know the right people and have cash you can go out and buy a fully auto M16 if you would like. If you put harder regulations out there for guns bought in sporting good stores or gun shows the illegal markets are not going to follow that and they will still be distributed among criminals. Also i am sure most weapons being used in most deaths are not registered to the user of the weapon, it is stolen or purchased illegally. Therefore with our rights to have guns the people need to be more pro active in securing their weapons from theft. Even if we had a strict gun ban they will still be in the criminals hands.
-
Obviously but the point is it will be MUCH more difficult. You still reduce the population of criminals carrying guns which will only have a positive effect.
-
I dont think thats true. Drugs such as cocaine, meth and herione are still here in full force and they are strictly illegal. So i dont see how strict laws about firearms will stop criminals from getting them. If there was a way, i would all for it but the fact is they will always get them if they want them just like drugs. The only thing stricter laws will do is give up more rights to law abiding citizens and give more power to a already over powered and greedy government.
-
I don't think that's true. The fact you have a direct correlation between legal gun ownership and gun crimes should tell you the state endorsing gun ownership makes it even worse. Countries that ban guns have statistically lower rates of gun crimes. Facts are facts... With drugs we have no idea how bad the problem would be if they were completely legalised and un-regulated such that you could go into a store and buy them with no limitations. Imagine how high heroin deaths would be if addicts could walk into a store and buy some without being asked for anything other than ID to prove they are 18+?
-
I see a problem with enforcement. I also see a problem with the law. I also see a problem with irresponsibility. There are lots of problems when it comes down to it. But the question is or should be "are we free?" It seems simple enough but it is a real and true question. Are we free? And to what extent. You cannot protect everyone from everything at all times. Some make (assert) the argument that we can lessen death by restriction/banning guns. Okay fine. We ban them. Deaths still happen. What now. Do we ban something else or accept the level of deaths? Most who want to control behavior want complete control. They would like to ban driving, eating unhealthy, drinking, drug use, religion, etc. all of these things have people shouting that they should be banned or restricted in some way. And if it's for the greater good, our safety, etc, why not ban them? So again I ask, "are we free?" To run our lives as we see fit as long as we do not take anyone else's liberty. I would contend if punishments were harsher, there would be a lot less crime/murder. But it will never get harsher in the foreseeable future so it really doesn't matter I guess. The only logical (and believe me it isn't logical) conclusion of someone who wants softer penalties for committing a crime (except drug crime for some reason) is to try and prevent crimes. Ie banning items, legislating behavior, etc.
-
I don't think the argument is about "are we free". If you want that kind of society we should have anarchy. By your logic you could make the argument to legalise almost anything -we should just leave it up to the population to make sure they do the right thing... Laws obviously impose on our freedom for the greater good. You have to weigh up the pro's and cons of access to guns. In all honesty I can't see ANY pros of access to guns - they only make things worse and escalate violence in every situation they are used. Banning guns is a step to reducing crime. In terms of harsher punishments - this is a deterrent. You still rely on people to be sane enough to be deterred. Some people just won't care either way. Minimising access is a more direct route to prevention. Also when you put "some" in your statement, I feel like it is only people in countries that currently have guns legalised. I have never met a European (and I've lived in France, Switzerland and the UK as well as visited many other countries) that wants to legalised guns in their respective country of birth. Switzerland which you mentioned is a special case, but in general they are a special case. They are not even official EU members.
-
Those countries have never been free. At least not as free until recently. They have always been ruled by one person (dictator), monarchs, oligarchs and the like. They have been told from the time of their existence that having any means of self defense is evil and bad. I'm sorry but no one is better than anyone else. We all have equal value. Kings and peasants are the same. And this is coming from a non-spiritual, non-religious, agnostic. And yes the laws should be up to the people. That is what a constitutional republic is. It is the people (representatives) who decide what laws they support. The constitution specifically lays out that the states have the power to govern themselves. The one size fits all governance of the federal government isn't how this country was founded.
-
You realise America is a young country right? And parliament was established in the UK before America's existence? So technically we have been free longer than you have? Almost 100 years longer in fact... Where the did you pull that ridiculous statement from? And yes, Kings and peasants are equal, I don't think you will find many people here who disagree with that. Tbh based upon that one statement it sounds more to me like you have been slightly brainwashed to believe we are less free? I certainly don't feel less free... I DO feel less safe going to the US knowing there are people who own guns though. Me owning a gun wouldn't make me feel as safe as knowing they are illegal. Why the hell should I have to gamble my life on whether I can pull the trigger faster or not? At least if someone has a knife I can run the -blam!- away. Yes laws should be up to the people, but the people also need to not be ignorant to make well thought out decisions. Your statement about freedom was pretty ignorant. You are ignoring what is staring you in the face - access to guns inevitably increases gun crimes and homicides. It's not about having a means of defence being evil. It is about what is best for everyone and ensuring other peoples liberty to own a gun isn't used to infringe upon other people's freedom. You realise a handgun's ONLY purpose is to kill right? We are arguing about whether it should be legal to own something that is designed to kill a human being. Oh and I am also a non-spiritual, non-religious, agnostic and a scientist by profession...
-
I hope you will too, but I will agree to disagree. Obviously we are rooted in our opinions. And I appreciate the conversation to allow me to challenge my opinions. I have a separate question though. How do you feel about a royal family still in existence in the UK living off of the money that they (their ancestors) took from the populous of the UK?
-
Agreed. I appreciate the debate too. It's interesting to hear what someone from the US actually thinks. OK the royal family - don't get me started lol. I am completely against the monarchy for reasons I stated before - a King and peasant are equal. No one should have that boost in life just because of where they are born, and it sure as hell shouldn't be supported by the state. Opinions are pretty split here though, some people think they bring in a lot from tourism, but it's heavily debatable to as whether we break even on them or not.
