[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Gun Control Question (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 7/2/2006 11:34:17 AM EDT
|
The WAC (Washington Arms Collectors) newsletter has an editorial piece that addresses a single question about gun control. I need answers to this question that are knowledgable and documentable. Example and reliable sources. I'm just starting my research and this is a case where more is better in trying to find an answer. The question is: Can you demonstrate just one time, one place, throughout all of human history, where restricting the access of handheld weapons to the average person made them safer? I agree with the author on this being one of, if not the, most important question(s) in the debate on the control of weapons. Can any of you come up with specific examples that answer this question. I appreciate any help the hive mind has to offer on this. |
I will admit that during my younger years (13-16) it was a good thing I didn't have access to firearms. 
|
I had a firearm in my hand EVERYDAY during that time of my life. Why would it of been a good thing that you didn't? |
Lets just say my parents honestly thought I'd be dead or incarcerated before turning 18. My youth was very troubled to say the least. |
Trust me. You had access to firearms, you just never took advantage of it. I guess that goes to show that "access" isn't the problem. |
Ok 'nuff said. But I think it is good that children are taught firearm safety from a very early age. The kids that shoot kids are never allowed to touch those guns so they are curious. That curiousity kills. Hell at the ages you are talking about I had three guns in my bedroom. A 12 gauge pump, a .22 single fire rifle and a .22/22mag revolver. |
|
Gun control has been extraordinarily successful at increasing the safety for tyrants, thugs, and the JBTs who carry out their orders. Preventing the people from getting simple and effective weapons keeps them much safer while they kidnap, murder, and rape at will. They can even throw in a genocide or two, and their only worry is that some other country might get worked up enough to come in and stop them. All Hail Gun Control! Communism wouldn't be possible without it! |
Why would you ask those idiots? They're just gonna make shit up and find psychotics and liars as sources. History isn't their strong suit anyways. If they actually knew history then they wouldn't be at DU. |
| I know I'm playing with the idjits over there and that I'm going to get banned eventually. If you check the thread you'll see exactly what you said I'd get. I have explicitly asked of a logical historical example and stated that England and Australia won't work since they seen violent crime go through the roof since they imposed their draconian gun laws. Consider it a thought experiment. |
|
I'd have to ask you to define access. Access is not a question of legal possesion or lack of. Access means just means the you are physically able to get weapons. If there were perfect restricted access (it's impossible no doubt), then no one who shouldnt have firearms would have firearms and therefore people would be safer. It doesnt work that way though. Access is unlimited in a technical sense, so by restricting access the only people who would not have weapons are the ones who choose to abide by those restrictions. |
If it is addressed to an individual, then anyone who has never been shot can claim they are safer. If it is addressed to a society, then Japanese with only a handful of murders a year can claim they are safer. For the hundreth time, the right to bear arms is not about duck hunting, sport shooting or home defense. |
I love the Lib truck driver over there who hauled M-16s out of the Charter Arms Factory! 
|
|
Some people fail to realize that it is not the gun that makes dangerous places unsafe. It is the people who have no moral or social concerns with taking a life. Even in a perfect world (for a liberal) where there were no guns.....violence and death would still occur at the same rate as before, only the method would change. People who are going to assault and kill will continue to do so with whatever means are at their disposal. Human beings were killing each other long before the first firearm was invented. Any "proof" that could be provided that gun control works, would simply be a lull until effecient methods of killing were rediscovered. |
Now there's some clear thinkin'.
|
Look asshole, I have have never heard or, nor ever been to DU, nor have I ever heard or read that you cannot link to that website. I was simply trying to help another poster who asked for the link.....STOP FUCKING YELLING!!!! |
|
I went ahead and posted over there under the Schwindj sn. I am curious to see what their response is to my post. I cannot think of anytime gun control actually helped people, though I can think of several where millions of people died because of gun control. I also thought it was funn that the Blimpie guy is worried about his friend who has a .22 rifle and a .38 pistol. Apparently his friend is ready for the zombie.  James |
Bwhahahaha. You may want to read what is right under his title. |
the red was to keep others from doing the same thing. check you email and we will dicuss it. |
:spank: |
Why can't we have a few libtards over here?? 
did you just call The_beer_slayer an asshole? |
I call him one three or four times a day  SG |
More if you're drunk or caught him feeling up the missus again. |
|
It has now been two days since I posted the question in DU. I've gotten a lot of emotions and feeling but like here no solid reference to any benefits of these restrictions. I have turned up the heat while avoiding the usage of the term moon bats. (Damn, but they have the corner on the moon bat market over there.) The topic has been moved from the general discussion area to the gun topic forum even though my question addresses handheld weapons. The new link is at the bottom of this post. Again do not make it a hot link The whole issue of handheld weapons seems to have escaped the responders on DU. They seem to equate handheld weapon with gun. I've gotten several references to how safe England has become as a result of abolishing gun ownership. I have made direct reference to the fact that one can bear someone to death with bare hands and that criminals are criminals. I have avoided name calling and stuck to what seem to me as logical arguments and statements. I have maintained my position of being part of a debate as I best I can. Please point out any problems with Spica's statements. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x126155 Leave the above link cold. Do not hot link to DU |
I must say that the thread over there is fairly interesting and offers some insight to the way these people think, or lack thereof. While most of the responses are pure emotion and are void of all logic, some of them are acutally thought out and make some sense. I wonder what those peoples' AR15 screennames are? 
|
