Wow, this site makes logic cry. I even like guns.
Wow, this site makes logic cry. I even like guns.
I can only speak from personal experience, which may not mean much, but here it is: No one in my neighborhood has been threatened with a gun (to my knowledge) since I moved here in 1993. However, there has been one accidental shooting (non-fatal), and one suicide that involved a gun (In an alley three houses away from mine!). If I were keeping score, guns would be -2.
The Nazis did not ban private gun ownership. That is ridiculous. If one more person tells me "an armed society is a polite society" I am going to shoot them. (I am told that is not very polite.)
I don't appreciate the tone of this site, but the some of the reviewers here are amusing. Ostensibly the site is oriented toward US gun owners (they cite the ACLU on one page) and many of the postings here sound as though they're scholars of the Second Amendment, even though they're in Europe or Canada.
Two things: it's our problem, not yours, so don't worry it. Secondly, so many of you seem to think that you succinctly understand the Second Amendment, yet there are entire tomes dedicated to its interpretation with respect to both today and the time in which it was authored. Your piddly "review" comes nowhere near academic rigor (nor does mind) so why not leave it be?
makes sense, funny name this a human right ;) now it sounds like guns we're the right, but self defence.
The gun banner fools would like guns to simply not exist. What fun that would be, the strongest thug, the youngest, the fastest... the ones that spend their lives training to fight, they get to be your master. Of course those gun banners would then want to make it illegal for anyone to own a board with a nail in it. They are the same fascists that banned gun ownership by blacks over 100 years ago! They do the same today but somehow are no longer called racists. They project the darkness in their hearts onto the world and live in fear of themselves. You can see the paranoia dripping from them, in their words and actions. While we trust our friends and neighbors to be armed, they live in fear, because their own dark thoughts consume them, they assume were all as dangerous as them. An armed society is a polite society (this is a self correcting situation, try it).
wasn't going to bother commenting, since the artice was so obvious, but several commenters need correction.
@davide-ga. can't you be bothered to explain your response? what is nonsense about this article? what is biased?
@rahrahmah. the strong have always bullied the weak, with clubs, swords, or guns. the principle is unchanged, only the weapons change.
in the 1700's if a 25 year old, 6 foot 4, 230 pound man attacked a 110 pound, 5 foot 2, 18 year old girl...the odds of her resisting successfully were almost nil.
today if the same man assaulted her with a gun, and she also happened to have a gun, she could very likely walk away unharmed. firearms allow the innocent weak to resist the evil strong better than ever before.
@mikayf. the truth is that there are a multitude of opinions on the subject of gun control from a multitude of groups. however, you can say that most people are either for or against the average law-abiding citizen carrying a gun. (fyi, you yourself made a blatant dichotomy regarding the composition of the gun owners of america. so just watch who you throw labels at)
@BluePeriphery. the world would not be any less violent if everyone carried a gun, but it would be more FAIR. criminals now carry guns whenever they wish to commit violent crimes and most of the time their prey are unarmed. if all carried guns, the sheep would also have teeth. by the reverse token, if all guns were eradicated the world would still be just as violent, but the physically strong would encounter little effective resistance.
bottom line people. if a crime happens to you, would you like to be able to fight back, or would you prefer to let the criminal have his way with you until the police show up in 15 minutes?
the first article I clicked, entitled "gun control" informed me that if there were no more guns at all then the world would slip into chaos, with the "strong bullying the weak" as opposed to what we have now...the armed menacing the unarmed. So much better, obviously. Heaven forbid we level that playing field. It would be a "third world"!
The specific nuances of this issue could be picked at by any interested parties, but the core remains (I think) an important topic. I'm very much against the proliferation of violence in our society.
This makes it all the more noteworthy that I strongly believe in the right to bear arms. I also STRONGLY believe in the need for personal responsibility along with weapon ownership; I think basic self-protection concepts should be part of the education system in fact.
If more people were well-educated/trained in the use of firearms and the application of basic self-protection strategy and tactics, there would be less frivolous violence. The fact is once people are exposed to what guns can really do, and once people understand the real power of even simple self-defense tactics, the movie-like appeal vanishes rather quickly.
Of course this would not apply to those in the "batshit crazies" category mentioned by another reviewer. But I think the folks who honestly enjoy violence are a minority in our society.
The blurb is wrong on every important point. Very few people are interested in completely outlawing guns, and to oppose this with "millions who would fight to keep them" (aka people who have guns and don't want to get rid of them, most of whom wouldn't do more than whine if the government *did* come for them, the rest of whom are batshit crazies who would shoot federal agents if they came for a parking ticket let alone guns) is a false dichotomy.
For that matter, this self-aggrandizing site isn't even entertaining.
The funny thing is that to get to this page you usually have to go through a false choice between a glock being a useful tool or a liability (if you choose "liability" you have to do some stupid form to continue) - if you choose "useful tool" you get to this page, useless thing that it is.
I agree with sickofbush.
Violence is a cultural problem, not a gun problem. Guns dont kill people, people kill people.
Guns are the great equalizer.
The framing fathers intended a document that was flexable over time. They were perfectly aware of the technological advances that would happen in the years following. They did not intend the use of 217 year old firearms against thugs, druglords, rapists, tyranny and invaders in the year 2006. This is what is so amazing about the constitution; it has held this country together and should be respected, and treated as a living document.
I can't believe this site. I can't believe gun advocates! Honestly the gun-right is bullshit, flat out. Read the constitution: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." ...all the 2nd ammendment provides for is that since the US was a young country, fresh from revolutionary war, a militia was necessary and that the militiamen should be allowed to bear arms to defend the freedom of there nation - FROM OUTSIDE INVADERS - you see, that's what militias do! and who cares what the founding fathers "indended"? They intended to keep slaves as well, and they did not intend to see the modern weapons we see today and allow a citizen to have a handgun with 15 rounds in it for self protection when a rifle in those days could barely fire 15 rounds in 5 minutes! And contrary to some reviews militias were not considered regulars, they never have been! In the country with the most gun deaths among all other industrialized countries it's hilarious and saddening to hear people go back to the argument of "protection" and a document that is over 200 years old. People will always read a document in the manner which conforms with their beleifs...grey will become black or white, whichever is the fancy of the observer.
http://www.guncite.com/cnngunde.html - Read it for the stats.
Damn, reading the reviews of this site is depressing. O.K., you think guns make killing much easier and this means they should be outlawed. So, what do we know about criminals? They break the law. So we have established that if guns are illegal only criminals will have them. This seems rational. Will the world be more peacefull if only the criminals and police are packing? I'm not sure about that. What happens when the police are not around to protect the innocent? If you were in the situation of a would-be rapist breaking into your home, would you feel satisfied with the hope of a rescue by the local police department? I wouldn't. I advocate gun ownership for home defense. Protecting the lives and welfare of my family is, as a man, my chief responsibility. I would not feel compassion for a man who would force harm upon them, nor would I allow that man a fair fight. By the way, it is not "paranioa and idiotically lax gun laws" that cause the US to have such high gun deaths. (drdreus, check you facts--you think the U.S. had more gun deaths last year than Iraq? What about the Democratic Republic of the Congo?) The problem of crime in America cannot be examined in a single sentence. Anyone who views the world in such absolutes would best consider shutting the fuck up. America has problems with poverty, ethnic strife, racism, poor education, drugs, homelessness and now we have Muslims pointing planes at our tall buildings. We are a violent society. I grew up in a middle class school district with decent academic performance, yet several of my classmates had been murderered by their peers. (None by guns; 1 by samuri sword and 2 by knife wounds.) I don't know what this rant means, it's hard to cover the causes of violence in American society. I am sure violence doesn't stem from the gun, asmuch as the knowledge of a surgeon does not come from the scalpel.