Poll trend on Handgun possession

[Secretary Polnut]

Like in Switzerland.

Mind you the 2nd amendment was quite similar to this, mind you it was written before there was a standing Army.

Excuse me, but, there was indeed a standing army at the time the Second Amendment was adopted, if a rather small one.

Please do not make

Permit me to clarify.

It was written at a time when state militia would have been the first line of defence in the event of invasion.

[dead0man]

Like in Switzerland.

No, in Switzerland guns are not treated as sacred.

Yes, the availibility is similar to the US (in fact well beyond), but yet, they don't go bonkers over them.
Also the Swiss laws will change next year when they become part of the Schengen treaty. The Swiss also restrict the degrees to which weapons can be carried outside of homes.

Plus the US has a sizeable military, the circumstances between the US and Switzerland on this key issue is so different that comparisons are pointless.

Right, the comparisons between the US and ANY other country with regaurds to gun rights (education levels or socialized medicine or anything else you care to think of) are pointless.  We're a very unique country for many many reasons.

Mind you the 2nd amendment was quite similar to this, mind you it was written before there was a standing Army.

Right, to protect us from that future standing Army.

Need I point out that all the guns in the massacres, Columbine, V/Tech, all the other school shootings, the Omaha mall shooting were all legally obtained.

You can point it out all you want, but it doesn't make it true.  Cite?

http://www.roanoke.com/news/nrv/breaking/wb/113294
- Virginia Tech

I'm still hunting for the others, I've heard something about others, so I'm tracking them down.

How's the hunt (pun?) going?

[Secretary Polnut]

Sorry, been wrapping presents, and mopping up after leaving a window open during a storm.

I suppose the bottom line of your point is correct.

The US is a "unique" place on many things.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Sorry, been wrapping presents, and mopping up after leaving a window open during a storm.

I suppose the bottom line of your point is correct.

The US is a "unique" place on many things.

No problem, we all make mistakes.

Have youself a Merry Christmas.

[Snowguy716]

It always strikes a nice chord when I hear people talk about the right to bear arms to defend ourselves against a tyrannical government.

But, then logic comes in and I ask myself the question:

"Well, if we were in a situation where the government had become so tyrannical that the people could justifiably revolt, would we all be saying 'boy, I'm sure glad the founding fathers gave us the 2nd amendment, or we'd be really screwed!'"

[Gabu]

One of the few freedoms Americans are near the top at!

That's because you're the only people who consider it an essential freedom.

The Swiss are even free'r. (free'r?)

Yes, but they don't have the mentality "YOU CAN PRY MY GUN FROM MY COLD DEAD HANDS".

Quite frankly, I, along with pretty well the rest of the world, find the average American attitude towards guns to be sick and strange.  It's no wonder American society has gun problems when they're so amazingly paranoid about everything.

[Ebowed]

It's no wonder American society has gun problems when they're so amazingly paranoid about everything.

Except when the government has unrestricted access to your phone calls and library records.

Then it's to fight the terrorists.

[Jacobtm]

Sometimes, you've gotta kill someone to defend yourself. If you know martial arts, or are skilled with other weapons, good for you. But some people want to be able to defend their lives with the utmost of ease.

Just point and click.

[So the Heroes Fall]

There's nothing radical or unusual about the US allowing private handgun ownership.

Yeah, there is.

So what about France and Canada?

[So the Heroes Fall]

No, it most certianly isnt legal to carry handguns in Australia.

But as far as I'm concerned the two ideas are linked anyway. 

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

Er, that article says it IS legal to own handguns in Australia, just only ones below a certain size.

[Secretary Polnut]

No, it most certianly isnt legal to carry handguns in Australia.

But as far as I'm concerned the two ideas are linked anyway. 

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

Er, that article says it IS legal to own handguns in Australia, just only ones below a certain size.

Own them yes, but not to carry them around.

[So the Heroes Fall]

No, it most certianly isnt legal to carry handguns in Australia.

But as far as I'm concerned the two ideas are linked anyway. 

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

Er, that article says it IS legal to own handguns in Australia, just only ones below a certain size.

Own them yes, but not to carry them around.

Yeah, ownership is all that I'm referring to, since that's what the poll's about. It's not legal to carry them in every state either. It is Minnesota but only about 1% of the population does so based on the permits issued to do so, so there isn't quite an obsession here either that people are talking about.

[AkSaber]

If a well-armed citizenry made for a safer society, then America would be the safest country in the world... it's not. The over-abundance of guns leads to situations that interested parties can claim their need for them.

But gun bans are not an effective tool at reducing crime, either. Look at the U.K. The crime they're having to endure is bonkers. Hell, just last year, I think it was Al, he posted a BBC article stating Scotland is the most dangerous country in the developed world.

Yes, but they don't have the mentality "YOU CAN PRY MY GUN FROM MY COLD DEAD HANDS".

Quite frankly, I, along with pretty well the rest of the world, find the average American attitude towards guns to be sick and strange.  It's no wonder American society has gun problems when they're so amazingly paranoid about everything.

Hmmm. I've wondered that myself. Maybe it's cause the the U.S.' involvement in the World Wars, or us being a world superpower, or maybe it's cause the media puts shootings on page 1 is why we're so paranoid. Why we are this way I don't know. Being trigger-happy is not a good thing. But being trigger-sad is just as dangerous. I guess that's why I find the gun grabbers' ideas sick and disturbing. There are evil people out there who want nothing more than to hurt the innocent. No amount of gun control can change human nature. I don't believe guns are the problem. I believe it to be evil people who refuse to control themselves.

[dead0man]

Quite frankly, I, along with pretty well the rest of the world, find the average American attitude towards guns to be sick and strange.  It's no wonder American society has gun problems when they're so amazingly paranoid about everything.

Good for you.  Some Americans (the majority) feels the "wrong" way about a subject you care a lot about.  We don't find your attitude towards guns to be sick and strange.  We respect your right to have your govt produce different laws.  Why the anger and hate from your side?  I could even understand Americans against gun ownership getting angry and irrational over the subject, but not somebody without a dog in the fight.  Maybe you should go shoot some clays or hunt a squirrel or maybe even just fire a few hundred rounds into a rusty car, that would calm your nerves.  Maybe that's not your bag, but why must we take it away from other people who's bag that is?

..and American society doesn't have "gun problems".  We're a nation of 300,000,000 most with a basic set of freedoms that includes gun ownership.  Sometimes 1 of those 300,000,000 will steal a legally owned gun, or even manage to purchase one themselves and use them against others.  Taking guns away from regular people wont change that or stop it from happening.  In fact,it has the potential to make things much much worse.  Look at what "gun free zones" got them at V. Tech.

[Tender Branson]

I still can't comprehend the mentality of these gun control nuts.  They'll argue tooth and nail for the legalization of drugs, but they somehow think Prohibition-style gun control is going to work.

If people didn't have guns, they would just kill each other with axes or something like that.  Or chainsaws.

[MasterJedi]

It seems that the people who are paranoid about people owning guns (and these are the same people who call those that want to keep guns paranoid about them) are scared of them because they don't own them and others do.

The UK banned handguns, so now most crimes are likely to be committed with knives, doesn't change a thing.

[Gabu]

It seems that the people who are paranoid about people owning guns (and these are the same people who call those that want to keep guns paranoid about them) are scared of them because they don't own them and others do.

The UK banned handguns, so now most crimes are likely to be committed with knives, doesn't change a thing.

Hey, you're free to think what you want, but the United States still has by far the highest murder rate per capita in the entire Western world.  Something's obviously wrong there.

The murder rate with a firearm per capita in the United States is 28 times what it is in the United Kingdom.  For all the talk I hear of "banning firearms means that only criminals will have them", I sure don't see evidence of that.

[WalterMitty]

This is why I would be completely unelectable if I decided to become a politician.

[So the Heroes Fall]

It seems that the people who are paranoid about people owning guns (and these are the same people who call those that want to keep guns paranoid about them) are scared of them because they don't own them and others do.

The UK banned handguns, so now most crimes are likely to be committed with knives, doesn't change a thing.

Hey, you're free to think what you want, but the United States still has by far the highest murder rate per capita in the entire Western world.  Something's obviously wrong there.

The murder rate with a firearm per capita in the United States is 28 times what it is in the United Kingdom.  For all the talk I hear of "banning firearms means that only criminals will have them", I sure don't see evidence of that.

OK, let's say the US banned all guns and required their confiscation. How many law enforcement officers are going to get killed by NRA members? Probably more than people killed by guns per year. You really think the gun nuts will peacefully surrender their guns? You know what the phrase "from my cold dead hands" means? Banning guns would cause A LOT more problems in the US than it would solve.

[Boris]

The murder rate with a firearm per capita in the United States is 28 times what it is in the United Kingdom.  For all the talk I hear of "banning firearms means that only criminals will have them", I sure don't see evidence of that.

I think this issue is far too complex to state that guns (or a lack thereof) will either contribute to or decrease gun violence. Hell, look at various locations in the United States. New York City and DC both have strict gun laws. The former is one of the safest cities in the United States, while the latter is one of the most dangerous. Obviously, other factors, such as socio-economic status and poverty levels, contribute to this disparity.

So why does the United States have such a high gun violence rate in comparison to other developed nations? I don't know. Maybe it's the gun culture here. Maybe there's something pervasively wrong with American society. But to say that the relaxation or tightening of gun laws will solely reduce or increase gun violence rates in the United States is naive.

[frenger]

It seems that the people who are paranoid about people owning guns (and these are the same people who call those that want to keep guns paranoid about them) are scared of them because they don't own them and others do.

The UK banned handguns, so now most crimes are likely to be committed with knives, doesn't change a thing.

Hey, you're free to think what you want, but the United States still has by far the highest murder rate per capita in the entire Western world.  Something's obviously wrong there.

The murder rate with a firearm per capita in the United States is 28 times what it is in the United Kingdom.  For all the talk I hear of "banning firearms means that only criminals will have them", I sure don't see evidence of that.

The claim is that having an armed society decreases crime in general, not just muders with firearms. Besdies, most of those crimes happen in inner cities, where gun laws are in general stricter.

[So the Heroes Fall]

The murder rate with a firearm per capita in the United States is 28 times what it is in the United Kingdom.  For all the talk I hear of "banning firearms means that only criminals will have them", I sure don't see evidence of that.

I think this issue is far too complex to state that guns (or a lack thereof) will either contribute to or decrease gun violence. Hell, look at various locations in the United States. New York City and DC both have strict gun laws. The former is one of the safest cities in the United States, while the latter is one of the most dangerous. Obviously, other factors, such as socio-economic status and poverty levels, contribute to this disparity.

So why does the United States have such a high gun violence rate in comparison to other developed nations? I don't know. Maybe it's the gun culture here. Maybe there's something pervasively wrong with American society. But to say that the relaxation or tightening of gun laws will solely reduce or increase gun violence rates in the United States is naive.

Exactly.

You can't solve the US's gun problems through legislation.

[So the Heroes Fall]

This is why I would be completely unelectable if I decided to become a politician.

Glad you finally admit that. Maybe you'll soon also realize your fast food tax idea is not popular and opposing it does not mean one eats tons of fast food.

[WalterMitty]

This is why I would be completely unelectable if I decided to become a politician.

Glad you finally admit that. Maybe you'll soon also realize your fast food tax idea is not popular and opposing it does not mean one eats tons of fast food.

i dont care.  it isnt like i want to run for office.

[So the Heroes Fall]

This is why I would be completely unelectable if I decided to become a politician.

Glad you finally admit that. Maybe you'll soon also realize your fast food tax idea is not popular and opposing it does not mean one eats tons of fast food.

i dont care.  it isnt like i want to run for office.

Yes, but you have in the past referred to your views on guns as "normal" and have acted like I'm some sort of nut for opposing your fast food tax idea which has not been implemented anywhere in the world and assume the only reason anyone can oppose is they must eat tons of Big Macs.