Gun Control (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Omium
- Start date
E
Empyrean444
Guest
No. We should maintain our strict policy of gun control, and the US ought to do the same - though it is unable to learn the same lesson from numerous mass killings.
E
Empyrean444
Guest
I was more referring to the fact that ownership and easier access to firearms facilitates and enables mass spree killings to occur - ie more people may be killed faster and in the same place/short time period if one has and uses semi auto/deadlier firearms than if not. Whilst it does not necessarily 'cause' a person to go on a murderous rampage, it can (and generally does) exacerbate in the far extreme the resultant casualties.
Provided that the laws are strict and that application for ownership essentially operates as it does here at the moment, then hunting rifles etc ought to be allowed. Pump action shotguns, semi-auto pistols (and anything deadlier obviously) must be banned.
I can understand that people have the right to defend themselves, but I think that a) people don't need a gun to do so; and b) guns in the hands of civilians probably cause more deaths than they save. Far from being 'protected', people at a whole are put at greater risk.
Chris rock.
blue_chameleon
Shake the sauce bottle yo
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2003
- Messages
- 3,078
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2003
What does gun control have to do with bear arms?
I wish there was a distinction made between low caliber weapons, of limited lethality and full scale murder weapons.
On Q&A they were going on about "guns are made to kill people". That's really not true of all guns.
Under current legislation, .22 weapons and even air rifles are subject to the same restrictions as caliber's that are far more lethal. A .22 is not a murder weapon. It is however useful for taking shots at rabbits.
Low capacity weapons should be easily accessible to all for sporting and hunting purposes.
On Q&A they were going on about "guns are made to kill people". That's really not true of all guns.
Under current legislation, .22 weapons and even air rifles are subject to the same restrictions as caliber's that are far more lethal. A .22 is not a murder weapon. It is however useful for taking shots at rabbits.
Low capacity weapons should be easily accessible to all for sporting and hunting purposes.
Legislation and punishment aren't effective as deterrents.
I'm no firearms expert. The relative legality of various firearms should be decided in consultation with ballistics experts.
If a 9mm can't easily and consistently kill a man, then it should be legal.
boris
Banned
- Joined
- May 6, 2004
- Messages
- 4,671
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2007
Haha funny story guys. I went for my shooting safety course last night. The guy gave us the marking sheet lol and it has in bold "dont hand out" etc and yeah he went through the questions with us and then for the written test gave us the answers lol. Im mad safe with guns so i would have passed easily without his enthusiasm, but it scares me to think about all the retards i know who own guns. Its wayyyy too easy to get a gun as long as you dont have a criminal record.
A 9mm will almost decapitate you with the right type of bullet loaded. i dunno if you were serious or what but yeah
Edit: no but seriously they should atleast make the test harder in general,
A .22lr can and will kill you very easily Graney. Dont make the mistake of under- estimating them. People already dont treat them with enough respect and thats what causes accidents. I shot a roo a .22 last night and usually it wont even hit them let alone kill them but i hit it in the chest and it dropped on the spot.
guns are a very effective and humane way to control the population of feral animal numbers. do you hate native fauna you sick fuck? why do you want it to be eated then?
A 9mm will almost decapitate you with the right type of bullet loaded. i dunno if you were serious or what but yeah
Edit: no but seriously they should atleast make the test harder in general,
Last edited:
X
xeuyrawp
Guest
I've heard that said before, and have no idea where that belief comes from... Our friend from Winnenden managed to kill two people quite easily, and then reasonably accurately shoot at police back through the front windows. And this glass of a car dealership, which I assume would be decent.
I would argue that a 9mm is actually one of the worst offenders simply because of the fact that it's usually used in either handguns (and rarely the sport/hunting type) or SMGs, and not rifles. I personally don't think that handguns, or SMGs for that matter, are necessary in hunting. With regards to sport, I don't see why it's considered to be unfair to keep your handgun in a safe where you do the actual sport practice or competitions. *shrug*
I can understand your view on correlation and causation, but I'd disagree simply because a gun will generally make someone's attempt of killing much easier and, in many cases, almost tempt them to kill. I'd really argue for causation in certain contexts.