• 173 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
#1 Edited by RainbowCarnage (97 posts) -

Is this really necessary?

So as you might of guessed, (by the caption under the video) I personally am against the Second Amendment. I think that this law causes more harm than good. But thats just my opinion. I'm curious to hear how you guys feel about the issue.

I'll also leave this video here. I think this guy makes some interesting points.

#2 Posted by damnboyadvance (4061 posts) -

If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns. That's the way I see it.

#3 Posted by phuzzybunny (173 posts) -

Being kind of picky here but the Second Amendment isn't a law but a right.

#4 Posted by sissylion (675 posts) -

When the Second Amendment was written, guns were large, ineffective machines that could fire two shots in a minute and easily miss a target from fifty feet away. Guns are no longer that. Might be time for a new amendment.

#5 Posted by MAGZine (438 posts) -

@damnboyadvance said:

If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns. That's the way I see it.

Exactly. I mean, the war on drugs was really successful, right? There are none of those in America.

#6 Edited by H2Yo (18 posts) -

That's pretty accurate; the second video that is.

#7 Posted by Strife777 (1612 posts) -

Guns will end up in the hands of people who would use them to do harm either way, so I think we might as well let the people who would use them for the right reasons have them too. People will always find a way to get a hold of things they want, illegal or not.

That being said, some idiots should really stay away from guns, for the safety of everyone.

#8 Edited by pweidman (2362 posts) -

The 2nd Ammendment was originally established to protect the people from a corrupt government, and foreign invaders. Times have obviously changed. I belong to a Rod and Gun Club and shoot regularly at a range, but I would like to see stiffer purchase policies, and a more rigorous buying clearance procedure. Also, all the assault weapons need to be for military, paramilitary, and law enforcement agencies period, imo. Loonies shooting innocents has to be reacted to with some serious intention at this point imo.

And TC, you might wanna add more text to your op for conversation, or this might get locked.

#9 Posted by RainbowCarnage (97 posts) -

@damnboyadvance said:

If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns. That's the way I see it.

Most outlaws become outlaws after they buy a gun.

James Holmes (the guy that shot people at the movie theater) He wasn't an outlaw before the shooting.

#10 Posted by LD50 (415 posts) -

blah blah blah, I've decided you can't do this, blah blah blah

#11 Posted by damnboyadvance (4061 posts) -

@MAGZine said:

@damnboyadvance said:

If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns. That's the way I see it.

Exactly. I mean, the war on drugs was really successful, right? There are none of those in America.

Wait, people still have drugs? Oh no! I better go get some drugs, just in case they ever use their drugs against me!

#12 Posted by believer258 (12184 posts) -

I believe that I should be able to lawfully keep a gun for defense against those who would unlawfully keep a bigger gun.

Should gun laws be tighter and should they be controlled better? Definitely. But should they be gotten rid of altogether? No.

#13 Posted by Demoskinos (15139 posts) -

I can see this thread going well.

#14 Posted by DivineShadow777 (106 posts) -

I say we should keep the it. Some people feel safer with guns. No matter how hard you try crazy people will still always find a way to get them. When I hit legal age Im going to purchase a gun stuff it in my basement with 12 locks and in case if shit goes bad like Homefront bad i can break it out if not it just sits there and collects dust while im upstairs playing Battlefield 29 and Modern Warfare 58 or maybe Final Fantasy XXXXVII-16 while i wait for Duke Nukem Eternity to be released

#15 Posted by tescovee (362 posts) -

I'm with you op, but what eves people sure love there gunz.

#16 Posted by Rohok (554 posts) -

Nothing in life is necessary except food, water, and oxygen.

But it's god damn fun to fire a 200 round glock. Keep whining because it's never going to go away.

#17 Posted by NlGHTCRAWLER (1210 posts) -

@RainbowCarnage said:

@damnboyadvance said:

If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns. That's the way I see it.

Most outlaws become outlaws after they buy a gun.

James Holmes (the guy that shot people at the movie theater) He wasn't an outlaw before the shooting.

That's just stupid.

I don't mean to sound like a dick, but you can't honestly believe that owning guns causes people to shoot up movie theaters. He was a sick and twisted individual who happened to own guns, not the other way around. Guns are just tools and weapons. It's the people behind them that you should be worried about.

#18 Posted by Stonyman65 (2869 posts) -

Guns are awesome.

#19 Edited by LD50 (415 posts) -

I saw this the other day, that someone that bites the inside of their cheek should be able to shoot a shotgun in the air until it feels better.

I support that.

Also, keep whining because it's NEVER GOING TO GO AWAY.

#20 Posted by Nottle (1915 posts) -

I think people should be allowed to have them, but you know make sure the guns are locked away, people need to be able to use something so powerful responsibly. Also people shouldn't be able to buy guns that can take down entire crowds of people. People should have guns for protection and sport, you don't need anything more powerful than a shotgun for that. I liked it when the amendments were about limiting the power the government had over people.

#21 Posted by mrfizzy (1555 posts) -

@Strife777 said:

Guns will end up in the hands of people who would use them to do harm either way, so I think we might as well let the people who would use them for the right reasons have them too. People will always find a way to get a hold of things they want, illegal or not. That being said, some idiots should really stay away from guns, for the safety of everyone.

By that logic everything illegal should be legal coz "People will always find a way to get a hold of things they want, illegal or not".

@RainbowCarnage:

Look I'm not American so I don't know how able I am to comment on this but I totally get the Second Amendment when put in a historical context. It was put in place in a time when guns were very different to what they are today and in a time when there was limited government, military or police to protect the population. I don't understand why (some) Americans can't understand the idea that you need to update your laws/rights/whatever as the world changes around them.

In the end I live in a country that used to have very slack gun laws until there was a mass killing and the government stepped in and changed them to be some of the toughest in the world. We now have very little gun crime, I'm not saying we have none but we do have very little and even fewer violent gun deaths. I know what the reactions my position are going to be, I've seen it time and again, that America really doesn't have that many gun deaths when you look at its population and even them most of those are suicides, but when you compare it to other developed nations the gun crime in the United States is scary.

I don't think you should ban gun ownership but I don't think it is something that should be encouraged or made easy. If you want to own a gun you should have to pass a written test to show you know at least basic gun safety plus a police check. Also certain things should not be available such as 100 round drum magazines as they exist for no reason other than to help the shooter kill as many people as possible, you do not them to hunt or to hit targets on a range.

That is my position.

#22 Posted by mlarrabee (3060 posts) -

I'll only post regarding your choice of videos.

The two hundred-round Glock is a joke. It's impractical and extremely expensive. If it's part of your argument against handguns, then crystal meth is the argument against marijuana.

Secondly: The Young Turks? I'd sooner cite Daffy Duck. The credibility of thought leaves much to be desired, judging by the dozen videos I've seen.

On second thought, I will comment on the Second Amendment. It is backed substantially by the Declaration of Independence. Any people group should be capable and willing to free itself from an oppressive government.

http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp

#23 Posted by damnboyadvance (4061 posts) -

@NlGHTCRAWLER said:

@RainbowCarnage said:

@damnboyadvance said:

If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns. That's the way I see it.

Most outlaws become outlaws after they buy a gun.

James Holmes (the guy that shot people at the movie theater) He wasn't an outlaw before the shooting.

That's just stupid.

I don't mean to sound like a dick, but you can't honestly believe that owning guns causes people to shoot up movie theaters. He was a sick and twisted individual who happened to own guns, not the other way around. Guns are just tools and weapons. It's the people behind them that you should be worried about.

That's what I thought as soon as I saw his post. But you have to concede that the gun is the tool that allowed him to kill so many innocent people.

#24 Posted by Animasta (14719 posts) -

there's a reason we have the most mass murders around, because gun laws are too lax and shit.

I'd rather not have any guns anywhere near people's homes, but since most americans think guns are as patriotic as apple pie that aint gonna happen.

#25 Posted by Animasta (14719 posts) -

@LD50 said:

Oh christ. The United States Constitution says, you fuckwits, "To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;"

We, U.S. Citizens are Required to have a militia.

let me tell you all about this book called the bible and how we should follow everything it says 100%

#26 Posted by Strife777 (1612 posts) -
@mrfizzy I guess you could say I'm very much a libertarian in that way. Same for marjiuana and maybe some other drugs. I'm not advocating anarchy in any way. So yes, a lot of illegal things shouldn't be in my opinion. I also want to make clear that I don't think guns should be easy to come by. Being able to buy bullets anywhere other than a gun/ hunting shop is kind of dumb and there should be extensive tests and regulations to get a proper permit.

For context, I'm from Canada and I've never owned or fired a gun. I've held one or two. I think I might get a permit one day, to go at a shooting range or something.
#27 Posted by DivineShadow777 (106 posts) -

What about if we ban having guns in highly populated areas like New York or California? Or is that just stupid?

#28 Posted by LD50 (415 posts) -

@Animasta said:

@LD50 said:

Oh christ. The United States Constitution says, you fuckwits, "To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;"

We, U.S. Citizens are Required to have a militia.

let me tell you all about this book called the bible and how we should follow everything it says 100%

go on

#29 Posted by NlGHTCRAWLER (1210 posts) -

@damnboyadvance said:

@NlGHTCRAWLER said:

@RainbowCarnage said:

@damnboyadvance said:

If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns. That's the way I see it.

Most outlaws become outlaws after they buy a gun.

James Holmes (the guy that shot people at the movie theater) He wasn't an outlaw before the shooting.

That's just stupid.

I don't mean to sound like a dick, but you can't honestly believe that owning guns causes people to shoot up movie theaters. He was a sick and twisted individual who happened to own guns, not the other way around. Guns are just tools and weapons. It's the people behind them that you should be worried about.

That's what I thought as soon as I saw his post. But you have to concede that the gun is the tool that allowed him to kill so many innocent people.

Guns kill things. That's what they were made to do.

I'm not going to put blame on guns for this or anyone elses actions. We are grown ass fucking adults. Yes it sucks that we live in a time where a single bullet can kill a person or a single atom bomb can level a city, but that's just the way things are. Shit happens. People suck.

#30 Posted by tutuboy95 (90 posts) -

I have always been iffy about the Second Amendment. I'm in favor of gun control, but not uber-strict gun control.

First though, I would really like to point out the text of the Second Amendment.

"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."

The first phrase is the most important. Well-regulated militia necessary to the security of a free state.

There are two definitions for the word militia (both are taken from Merriam-Webster's online dictionary).

  • a part of the organized armed forces of a country liable to call only in emergency
  • a body of citizens organized for military service

As it stands, the closest thing to the first definition is the National Guard, which is under 500,000 (a far cry from the U.S's estimated 300 million). And the second thing doesn't really happen anymore. Historically, to prevent totalitarian takeover, which was a fear of the new country that recently broke away from the British Empire, people believed that another revolution may be necessary. However, the Election of 1800 (referred to as the "Revolution" of 1800 where power switched from Federalist John Adams to Democratic Republican Thomas Jefferson via democratic election) demonstrated that such things can be done through a legitimate electoral process, rather than a coup.

In other words, what I am asserting is that the 2nd Amendment doesn't really protect our rights to firearms.

But let's look at it another way. I'm not going to be found owning or even holding a gun unless it's a Nerf gun, but others legitimately feel like it's a form of self-defense. That's fine. What should happen is a complete ban on assault weapons sold to civilians, as well as more and more background checks, especially at gun shows. Many shootings could be prevented by a simple background check showing that the buyer is mentally unstable. Will that prevent everything? No. But it wouldn't be completely ineffective either.

#31 Posted by LD50 (415 posts) -

@LD50 said:

@Animasta said:

@LD50 said:

Oh christ. The United States Constitution says, you fuckwits, "To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;"

We, U.S. Citizens are Required to have a militia.

let me tell you all about this book called the bible and how we should follow everything it says 100%

go on

thought so

#32 Posted by Tarsier (1078 posts) -

you need to put more thought into it. go deeper into the subject and use logic, not emotion. thanks

#33 Posted by MikkaQ (10344 posts) -

I think the second amendment is outdated and should probably be removed. It's not the 18th century, no one needs a militia because we have a standing army of trained professionals. We also have no need for bloody revolutions or standing against our government with physical force, one because said standing armies would blow any hick with a gun away and two because we've replaced the need for violent revolutions with politics.

Just like any dangerous tool, I say leave it to the professionals.

#34 Posted by falserelic (5407 posts) -

Guns with hold so much power. You got to just love the recoil..

#35 Posted by wefwefasdf (6729 posts) -

@tutuboy95 said:

But let's look at it another way. I'm not going to be found owning or even holding a gun unless it's a Nerf gun, but others legitimately feel like it's a form of self-defense. That's fine. What should happen is a complete ban on assault weapons sold to civilians, as well as more and more background checks, especially at gun shows. Many shootings could be prevented by a simple background check showing that the buyer is mentally unstable. Will that prevent everything? No. But it wouldn't be completely ineffective either.

I would completely support this form of action. There is absolutely no reason for civilians to own assault weapons of any kind. Increased background checks would be more time consuming to mentally stable and law abiding citizens, but I believe that is a fair cost to help prevent further tragedies from occurring.

What I also find somewhat humorous is the idea that having an armed body of citizens would prevent our government from stepping out of line. Yeah, those handguns and hunting rifles are going to do a lot against our military.

#36 Edited by imsh_pl (3313 posts) -

Well, I believe that violence should be used only in self defence, or in defence of one's property.

If you outlaw guns and a person uses guns, the government will use violence against them.

That violence would not be in self defence, nor in the defence of property. So it would be immoral.

So no, the government should not use violence against those who have guns (unless the gun wielder threatens to use force against the government or its property).

#37 Posted by Jay444111 (2441 posts) -

I think every person should get a free gun once they hit 21. However, before getting said gun, they have to take a 3 month class sometime in their life so they know exactly how to use it and know when not to use it.

Boom... I just logically destroyed this topic.

#38 Posted by Sackmanjones (4761 posts) -

This is sure to go so well

#39 Posted by iam3green (14390 posts) -

well it's good to have a gun. government needs to straighten it out more. make it harder for people to get guns.

i see it as if guns are illegal, than criminals are going to find a different way of getting them. in third world countries cartels have automatic guns, ak-47, and other guns.

i see this thread going places.

#40 Edited by tutuboy95 (90 posts) -

@Jay444111: Classes are a good thing. I may disagree with you with regards to the free gun thing, but I mean, it's actual logical sense. Automobiles are the largest killer in the U.S. However, we take classes and tests and have licenses issued to us to keep such deaths at a minimum. I honestly believe the same process should be applied to guns.

Side-note, I think we should have licenses for any gun. There are several states where you need one to carry a handgun, but not to own it. I think this type of leniency is unacceptable.

#41 Posted by DivineShadow777 (106 posts) -

So if we ban guns or highly restrict them what are we going to do about the people who already have LMG's and all these other dangerous weapons... shoot them? no i joke but really what will we do ask them to come down to the police station and trade them for apple pie's and bacon?

#42 Posted by Jay444111 (2441 posts) -

@DivineShadow777 said:

So if we ban guns or highly restrict them what are we going to do about the people who already have LMG's and all these other dangerous weapons... shoot them? no i joke but really what will we do ask them to come down to the police station and trade them for apple pie's and bacon?

I know what to do... we revive Hugh Glass and send him to kill all gangs... it is the perfect plan for the sane fact that he WILL, NOT, STOP.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugh_Glass

#43 Edited by Canteu (2821 posts) -

I'm just going to leave this here:

Defence*

#44 Posted by BraveToaster (12588 posts) -

Outlawing guns won't prevent mass murders. If someone wants to kill a bunch of people, he/she will find a way to obtain a gun or go online for instructions on how to create a bomb. I totally understand the self-defense reasoning behind keeping a gun, and there are quite a few cases where a civilian has properly used a gun to prevent an assailant from inflicting serious bodily harm or death on a person/persons. Some may argue that citizens should put their trust in police officers to provide protection, but many officers are corrupt and response time may take long or no response is made in some neighborhoods.

#45 Posted by Zandatsu (6 posts) -

I used to think guns were cool when I was a kid. Then I grew up.

#46 Posted by Spuirrel (88 posts) -

Guns are fucking disgusting and letting them be bought by anyone is the worst idea I've ever heard. People who support them are terrible and every argument for them is flawed.

#47 Edited by mandude (2666 posts) -

I don't know anyone that's ever been saved with a gun, but I do know quite a lot of people who've been shot (and killed) with a gun, so I don't really understand the guns save people mentality.

Back in √Čire, even at the height of IRA activity, I never knew anyone that owned a gun, nor anyone that had ever been shot with one, so I also don't understand the outlaws will find a way, regardless mentality.

#48 Posted by mrfizzy (1555 posts) -

@imsh_pl: I get where you are coming from but it could be argued that when a criminal commits a crime they are attacking/threatening society and are therefore attacking/threatening the government. In other words the government (police) would act in order to defend society by removing that person from the society which they are harming (prison).

#49 Posted by Landon (4164 posts) -

@Zandatsu said:

I used to think guns were cool when I was a kid. Then I grew up.

Now I think knives are cool.

#50 Edited by Seppli (10250 posts) -

Not cool with guns. The second amendment should only cover sharpening your teeth on a grindstone. Armed to the teeth.

Switzerland has a lot of guns per capita, mostly because the country's military is a mandatory militia, rather than a professional army. Almost every grown man has an assault rifle at home. Apart from the occasional suicide (well - Switzerland's ranking quite high in that department really), there's almost no gun violence around these parts.

Guess guns and poverty don't mix. Or guns and unhappiness. Or something like that.