Should Guns Be Banned?

Spider-Bite said:
that's a lie. How does not allowing felons to legally own a gun stop law abiding citizens from owning one?
I'm not saying that at all. There should be some form of gun control laws such as having the mandatory safety, or not allowing fellons have guns at all, and the waiting period is sensible too. And we should have tougher punishments on people who commit gun crimes. We should do more to promote gun safety programs.

Gun laws that are too strict though (notice how I said too strict) will prevent law abiding citizens from owning firearms for protection, for hunting or even collecting, or whatever reason. Criminals who want a gun will still get a gun, through illegal means. If someone wants to hurt someone, they can still do it, without a gun.
 
Calvin said:
So instead of looking at actual gun accident statistics in the country, you're basing your stance on the people you personally know in Memphis? Wow, sound reasoning there. Like Spider-Bite said, stricter gun control doesn't prevent good law abiding and safe citizens from getting guns, it just goes towards limiting gun usage to said group.
Basing a stance? No. Using them as an example, yes. Since I don't know anyone in New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Detroit, Miami, Phoenix, or other cities in US, why shouldn't I use the people I personally know in Memphis as an example of gun owners that actually practice gun safety and haven't had a gun accident?
 
136macro-hayguys.jpg
 
bwhahahahaha
 
why was guns banned :(
 
Automatic and Semi Automatic firearms should only be available for use in a gun range under strict supervision and kept there in lockers because in all honesty why do you need something like that for home use? Small firearms or weapons used for hunting should be allowed under strict guidelines therefore anyone with a criminal record no matter how petty should have to go through a more advanced procedure to obtain such an item, also selling firearms on should be done solely through lisenced stores or dealerships...

Of course people will have other ways of getting their hands on a firearm if they really want it but at least this way would still keep the constitution right while cutting down gun crime
 
I would like to be able to inherit that machinegun my grandpa took from a nazi in WW2
 
Addendum said:
Basing a stance? No. Using them as an example, yes. Since I don't know anyone in New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Detroit, Miami, Phoenix, or other cities in US, why shouldn't I use the people I personally know in Memphis as an example of gun owners that actually practice gun safety and haven't had a gun accident?
Because we're talking about a national issue. And clearly, the numbers show that we could use a little better gun control. Not a banning, but gun control. If the people in your example are really as sound and safe as you say, they wouldn't have a problem even under stricter rules.
 
A trigger lock is only good when the owner uses it. At one of my jobs I had in college, every gun I sold came with a trigger lock. Every gun sale had paperwork, including a background check done by TBI (Tennessee Bureau of Investigation).
 
if you're so dumb you'd accidentally shoot yourself because you have no trigger lock, you dont deserve to be a part of the gene pool.
 
Addendum said:
A trigger lock is only good when the owner uses it. At one of my jobs I had in college, every gun I sold came with a trigger lock. Every gun sale had paperwork, including a background check done by TBI (Tennessee Bureau of Investigation).
I'm glad we have a background check as a standard, but considering we're issuing out killing machines, there really should be more tests before someone can buy a gun. Give me an IQ test, and a mental health test, and I'll be happy.
 
Calvin said:
I'm glad we have a background check as a standard, but considering we're issuing out killing machines, there really should be more tests before someone can buy a gun. Give me an IQ test, and a mental health test, and I'll be happy.
With the idiots in Memphis, I agree. If you have to take a test to get a driver's license before you can legally drive, why shouldn't there be a test before one gets a firearm?
 
Spider-Bite said:
I've met a few felons. They do not have the ability to buy firearms legally or illegally, because they don't know anybody that will sell them one, even though if they wanted drugs it'd be a peace of cake to get em.

The black market does not work the same for guns as it does for drugs, mainly because of the turnover rate for the product. you can only sell drugs to the same five people, and make a ton of money, because they keep coming back for more. Guns don't work like that because you dont finish smoking your gun in two days only to fien for more.
edit.. not to mention their probation officer or their parole officer can check their house at any time without notice, and send them to prison for 10 years. All felons have to be worried as well that somebody they know can rat on them. Imagine the trailor trash in a fight with his girlfriend. She lets the cop right in and tells them where it is.

About that chip idea, what happens when someone goes hunting?
 
Here's what should happen: A nationwide list of felons or people with charges that would prevent them from legally owning a firearm. When you go to buy a gun your name is run against that list. If it comes back clean, you have your gun, if not you don't. This way the only names the government has are the people who can't have guns, not your law-abiding citizen who want to go armed.
 
I think certain weapons like 50 calibers and uzis should be make illegal for all.

There's simply no purpose for them outside of the military.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
200,569
Messages
21,762,994
Members
45,597
Latest member
iamjonahlobe
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"