A Poll About Gun Control

Discussion in 'Clean Debate Zone' started by Noomi, Aug 20, 2013.

?

Answer The Question!

Poll closed Nov 28, 2013.
  1. Option A

    23.3%
  2. Option B

    76.7%
  1. Noomi
    Offline

    Noomi Ninja Kicker Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2012
    Messages:
    18,121
    Thanks Received:
    3,479
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    Australia
    Ratings:
    +3,880
    Sort of.

    Hypothetical:

    You have 100 people living in a small town, and in order to be safe (lets not question why, as this is NOT the topic of the thread) they decide to hand in their firearms.
    The only person who refuses to is a man who is known to be dangerous, and is not trusted.

    So. Do you a) forcibly remove the guns from that one person in order to make everyone safe, or do you b) give back guns to 99 people to protect themselves from one person?
     
  2. Ragnar
    Offline

    Ragnar <--- Pic is not me

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2010
    Messages:
    3,271
    Thanks Received:
    800
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Location:
    Cincinnati, OH
    Ratings:
    +843
    I picked "B".

    You don't violate the rights of one man because 99 volunteered to give up theirs.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  3. bayoubill
    Offline

    bayoubill aka Sheik Yerbouti... Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2008
    Messages:
    8,167
    Thanks Received:
    915
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Location:
    Cajun Country
    Ratings:
    +930
    If your little town was absolutely and completely isolated from the rest of the world (i.e., never, ever subject to occasional visits by bands of outlaws, rogue government agencies, pissed-off ex-spouses, or other such folks with bad intent), then I might be tempted to vote for "A"...

    otherwise, I'd vote for "B"...
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  4. dblack
    Online

    dblack Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2011
    Messages:
    22,383
    Thanks Received:
    2,173
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +4,643
    Hmm.... if this man is 'known to be dangerous' he should be in jail. He certainly shouldn't have a gun.
     
  5. syrenn
    Offline

    syrenn BANNED

    Joined:
    May 10, 2010
    Messages:
    47,839
    Thanks Received:
    10,386
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +10,406

    sorry, no gun control.

    if the other 99% want to give up their guns..... that is their right to do so.


    and just an fyi..... the most dangerous person is usually the one you would never suspect.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  6. RetiredGySgt
    Offline

    RetiredGySgt Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    41,188
    Thanks Received:
    6,387
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Ratings:
    +11,067
    Unless the individual has violated the law or is properly adjudged mentally incompetent you and the other 99 people do not get to decide his rights do not apply.

    The Constitution is clear. The laws are clear. Just because 99 people do not trust or like one man does not give them the right to take away his rights.

    How about the fact you insist a man found not guilty by a Jury of his peers is still guilty? Your opinion nor that or x amount of citizens does not allow for violating the law or the Constitution. Your feels have nothing to do with it.

    And that in the end is what you are basing this hypothetical on, not facts, not the law, nothing tangible, just your feelings. Exactly why the Constitution and the laws exist, to protect us from a majorities FEELINGS.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 3
  7. C_Clayton_Jones
    Offline

    C_Clayton_Jones Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2011
    Messages:
    42,415
    Thanks Received:
    9,156
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Location:
    In a Republic, actually
    Ratings:
    +25,161
    The government may not take property without due process, and that someone is known to be dangerous is not justification for taking property, or subjecting someone to other punitive measures.

    Ideally the person in question would receive the mental health treatment he needs to avoid potential dangerous behavior.

    The problem is not the availability of firearms, but the inability or unwillingness to address mental health issues in a comprehensive and responsible manner.
     
  8. westwall
    Offline

    westwall USMB Mod Staff Member Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2010
    Messages:
    48,698
    Thanks Received:
    10,050
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Location:
    Nevada
    Ratings:
    +30,206





    Dangerous people don't need guns to harm people.... They use whatever is easy to hand...even using their hands... You see dear person, it's not the weapon that is dangerous..it is merely a hunk of whatever. The dangerous thing is the person using it....


    Below are all Canadian Axe murderers..... You going to outlaw all axes? All knives? All hammers? Some day you might get it.... You can't outlaw everything...




    B.C. Axe Murderer Who Killed His Mother 'Psychotic'

    Girlfriend found guilty in Toronto axe murder - News - MSN CA

    North Vancouver axe murderer gets life - News - North Shore News
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  9. auditor0007
    Offline

    auditor0007 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2008
    Messages:
    12,566
    Thanks Received:
    2,257
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    Toledo, OH
    Ratings:
    +3,223
    This goes to the simple point of how gun control can work. It can only work if all guns are removed completely as is done in countries such as Great Britain. And even with that, murders will still happen, but the overall deaths are likely to decrease. The problem is that we live in a society where one governmental jurisdiction wants guns banned, but anyone can still get a gun by leaving that jurisdiction and then bring the gun back into that jurisdiction to do what they may with it. Without removing all guns from society, the bad guys will still have them, so nobody is any safer.
     
  10. S.J.
    Offline

    S.J. Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2012
    Messages:
    30,808
    Thanks Received:
    6,053
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    So. Cal.
    Ratings:
    +26,568
    "Known to be dangerous", how? Did he commit a violent crime? Who determines he is dangerous?
     

Share This Page