Guns or not Guns

[Shantih]

The idea that if everybody is carrying weapons civilians would be safer doesn't seem right to me.

 

People kill themselves and other people with cars all the time because they can't drive or can't follow simple rules and guidelines. Over here car accidents (often related to alcohol) are the most common cause of death for young people.

 

If people can't be trusted with cars how can we be expected to trust them with handguns?

 

The idea of trigger happy untrained civilians posing as vigilantes doesn't sound that appealling when you realize that trained officers who are sworn in can still make mistakes.

 

And I'm not saying anything about automatic weapons... If people start packing then you can expect criminals to be equipped with bigger guns to make up for this. I for one don't see how a pea shooter can make you feel safe when facing a guy with a submachinegun (or any other big gun for that matter). Getting stuck in an arms race is not really a deterrent.

 

IMO if you really need to be packing in order to feel safe then it means that law enforcement has failed in its mission to maintain order and ensure the peace.

[channel0]

The idea that if everybody is carrying weapons civilians would be safer doesn't seem right to me.

 

People kill themselves and other people with cars all the time because they can't drive or can't follow simple rules and guidelines. Over here car accidents (often related to alcohol) are the most common cause of death for young people.

 

If people can't be trusted with cars how can we be expected to trust them with handguns?

 

The idea of trigger happy untrained civilians posing as vigilantes doesn't sound that appealling when you realize that trained officers who are sworn in can still make mistakes.

 

And I'm not saying anything about automatic weapons... If people start packing then you can expect criminals to be equipped with bigger guns to make up for this. I for one don't see how a pea shooter can make you feel safe when facing a guy with a submachinegun (or any other big gun for that matter). Getting stuck in an arms race is not really a deterrent.

 

IMO if you really need to be packing in order to feel safe then it means that law enforcement has failed in its mission to maintain order and ensure the peace.

In an ideal world, all firearms should only be able to shoot peas. Unfortunately, this is not an ideal world. We would have peace if it was.

[myrmaad]

Guns should shoot peace. http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c117/SeaBlossom/icons/busket.gif

[HeyYou]

Much as I would love to have a fully automatic weapon.... (they are indeed great fun.....) I just don't see any real purpose in making them legal. Would make access FAR to easy, and everyone and their cousin would then have one, or more... including criminals. (I know the crims have them already, but, they are still pretty rare.) Cops could easily be outgunned in even minor encounters. Arming the cops with full-auto weapons as a standard carry weapon? I don't see that as a good plan either..... There is no such thing as "carefully placed shots" with an automatic weapon..... after the first round fires, you are now at the mercy of recoil. I think we would see a lot more 'collateral damage' with cops doing the spray 'n pray thing.... just a bad scene all the way around.

 

The criminals, gangs, organized crime already got automatic weapons, and will continue to possess them no matter what measures are taken. And automatic weapons would usually be too expensive for most to buy legally. Who could afford $2500 for a Mac-10? Average Joe probably couldn't. And one could burn up a few hundred dollars worth of ammo very quickly. I know that 33 round mag in a Glock 18 didn't seem like it lasted 4 secs. About $8 worth of ammo in 4 secs. All one would need to defend their home is a good 12 gauge with some 00 buckshot. They could make it where you need a special permit to own a fully automatic weapon, meaning a full 50 state wide criminal background check and mental evaluation exam before you could buy one. Basically if you got a clean record, and aren't mentally ill, they will get you a permit to own one. I would prefer them being sold like any other firearm, but I would be willing to meet in the middle to require permits to own fully automatic weapons, which shall be issued if you meet the requirements. Possibly even require a gun safety course, because fully automatic weapons are completely different, they can jump around on you and the recoil is very hard to manage in the hands of someone inexperienced in shooting them.

 

I'd love to have one of these:

 

 

That guy has to be a gun dealer, otherwise those would normally get you a 10 year federal weapons charge. That is an absolutely devastating firearm. Those were made for 1 purpose, clearing rooms out.

 

I'm not sure if my shoulder would like it though.

 

In 1980, when Miami's homicide rate was at an all-time high, less than 1% of all homicides involved machine guns. (Miami was supposedly a "machine gun Mecca" and drug trafficking capital of the U.S.) Although there are no national figures to compare to, machine gun deaths were probably lower elsewhere. Kleck cites several examples:

 

• Of 2,200 guns recovered by Minneapolis police (1987-1989), not one was fully automatic.
• A total of 420 weapons, including 375 guns, were seized during drug warrant executions and arrests by the Metropolitan Area Narcotics Squad (Will and Grundie counties in the Chicago metropolitan area, 1980-1989). None of the guns was a machine gun.
• 16 of 2,359 (0.7%) of the guns seized in the Detroit area (1991-1992) in connection with "the investigation of narcotics trafficking operations" were machine guns.

Also, it has been illegal for civilians to own machine guns since 1934 without a special federal permit. As of 1986, it was illegal for machine guns to be sold to civilians. Nothing is said about mg's manufactured before 1986.......

 

For purposes here, a "Machine gun" is any weapon that fires more than one shot per pull of the trigger. (submachine guns included.)

[Syco21]

The idea that if everybody is carrying weapons civilians would be safer doesn't seem right to me.

 

People kill themselves and other people with cars all the time because they can't drive or can't follow simple rules and guidelines. Over here car accidents (often related to alcohol) are the most common cause of death for young people.

 

If people can't be trusted with cars how can we be expected to trust them with handguns?

I don't need nor want the government holding my hand. I can cross the street on my own, thank you. As for other people, well part of crossing the street is the realization that there are other stupid people barreling down the road barely controlling a 2,000lb bullet.

 

The idea of trigger happy untrained civilians posing as vigilantes doesn't sound that appealling when you realize that trained officers who are sworn in can still make mistakes.

I'm unaware of trigger happy vigilantes running around shooting at everything that moves. And there are states with wholly unregulated carry.

 

And I'm not saying anything about automatic weapons... If people start packing then you can expect criminals to be equipped with bigger guns to make up for this. I for one don't see how a pea shooter can make you feel safe when facing a guy with a submachinegun (or any other big gun for that matter). Getting stuck in an arms race is not really a deterrent.

I'm just going to be anal here and point out that you did say something about full auto weapons. But I digress. See the post above mine. Further, it is not the size of your package that matters, it is what you do with it. There is a reason why they call full auto fire pray and spray. It's because you're less likely to hit your target by spraying at them. The military only uses full auto for cover fire. When a soldier is shooting at someone to shoot them, they typically fire in bursts and don't lay on the trigger.

 

Furthermore, it's not really an arms race. Criminals don't want to die, well most don't anyway. And one or two civilians packing heat is more than enough to stop even a gang of criminals packing rifles.

 

IMO if you really need to be packing in order to feel safe then it means that law enforcement has failed in its mission to maintain order and ensure the peace.

You know, the police cars in Central Texas don't even have 'to protect and serve' on them anymore. The job of the police is not to stop things from happening, but to respond when they do. Even if their job was prevention, it would be an impossible objective. When seconds count, the police are only minutes/hours/days away. Police response times are high, too high to protect you when SHTF. The only thing to protect you is yourself. Relying on someone that can't respond for minutes or even hours is foolhardy at best.

 

Edit: Hell, the fact that there are self defense shootings only prove that. If the police were always able to protect you from all threats, you wouldn't even have a chance to shoot someone in self defense.

Edited January 29, 2012 by Syco21

[HeyYou]

Where I live, road patrol officer population has dropped 50% in the last ten years. The county is doing major budget cuts, again, so, a couple more road patrol officers are going to disappear. We are going from a high of 32, to the 'new' population of 13.... Yeah, I feel REAL safe.....

 

Cops aren't going to save you from anything. They usually show up LONG after the critical time has come and gone. Even on a GOOD day, response time where I live is almost 15 minutes..... A LOT can happen in 15 minutes, and if I am at the mercy of Joe Bad Guy, I am not going to like any of it. I suspect the women and children my household won't much care for it either.

 

Just recently, a family was held in their own home, the wife and oldest daughter were raped, the house was robbed, their truck stolen........ and those guys have never been caught. NOT something I will allow to happen in MY house. (no, he didn't have any weapons at all.)

[Shantih]

IMO if you really need to be packing in order to feel safe then it means that law enforcement has failed in its mission to maintain order and ensure the peace.

You know, the police cars in Central Texas don't even have 'to protect and serve' on them anymore. The job of the police is not to stop things from happening, but to respond when they do. Even if their job was prevention, it would be an impossible objective. When seconds count, the police are only minutes/hours/days away. Police response times are high, too high to protect you when SHTF. The only thing to protect you is yourself. Relying on someone that can't respond for minutes or even hours is foolhardy at best.

 

Edit: Hell, the fact that there are self defense shootings only prove that. If the police were always able to protect you from all threats, you wouldn't even have a chance to shoot someone in self defense.

 

You (and HeyYou) just made my point. If the police can't protect regular citizens then there is definitely something wrong in the US (no offense meant to our American friends).

[myrmaad]

There's quite a big difference between guns in my home and guns at the daycare center, even if they are strapped to mommy and daddy.

[Beriallord]

If the weapon was made pre-86, you can own a full auto. Apparently there's some obscure method to own new ones as well. But I don't know anything about it.

 

Full auto guns should be legal. There should be no hoops to jump through to obtain them. This blood in the street crap that the Bradys like to bandy about is none sense.

 

You have to have a gun dealer license to obtain anything newer than 1986. And even if you can't directly own one, some shooting ranges will rent them for use. There is one down the road about 5 miles from me that rents pretty much anything one could want. They even got a browning .50 cal machine gun, but .50 BMG rounds aren't exactly cheap, and run about $1 a shot.

[HeyYou]

If the weapon was made pre-86, you can own a full auto. Apparently there's some obscure method to own new ones as well. But I don't know anything about it.

 

Full auto guns should be legal. There should be no hoops to jump through to obtain them. This blood in the street crap that the Bradys like to bandy about is none sense.

 

You have to have a gun dealer license to obtain anything newer than 1986. And even if you can't directly own one, some shooting ranges will rent them for use. There is one down the road about 5 miles from me that rents pretty much anything one could want. They even got a browning .50 cal machine gun, but .50 BMG rounds aren't exactly cheap, and run about $1 a shot.

 

Now there is a place I would like to visit, with about a thousand bucks to just blow. :D