Do We Really Need Guns?

[M14 Shooter]

The thing is, that America has far too many guns and not enough measures to keep them out of the wrong hands.

99.997% of the guns in the US are NOT used to commit murder.
Where's the problem?

Do you know, that gun violence has claimed more than 4,350 lives since January 1st (and killed or injured 475 children), a fact that is as mundane as it is grim. That's really horrible.

This number represents 0.00145% of the guns in the US.
Where's the problem?

 

[Conservative65]

It's my first thread here, and I want to start with the issue, that worries me a lot.

Gun owners always claim that they own guns for self protection, even though the guns in their homes impose a much greater risk to their lives than an intruder. They also state they need guns to protect themselves from the government and from tthr police. Oh, seriously? Other argument for guns is hunting. Food production in the US is quite complex and capable of providing all types of foods to all parts of the country. And, if someone is too poor to buy food to eat, they are too poor to buy weapons. So what for?! Explain me, please.

I truly believe, that guns only do harm There is no use for guns in our society. The 2nd amendment was made in a time where guns were necessary because of the British.

I truly believe that if you think I shouldn't own guns that you should attempt to take mine. Typical Liberal gun hater that believes is they don't like guns no one should have them.

 

[Conservative65]

I truly believe, that guns only do harm There is no use for guns in our society. The 2nd amendment was made in a time where guns were necessary because of the British.

I totally agree with you, and congratulations on having the cojones to raise this issue.

Countries with less guns are almost always safer than the US, and that is simply a cold, hard truth that few gun rights fanatics are willing to admit.

I totally support peoples' right to own a gun for hunting or target shooting, but all of countries should have safety-based gun laws aimed at protecting life first and foremost. No one needs an assault rifle at home.

And it doesn't seem to have been noted here, but the key word in the thread premise is "need". Once we figure that out we might go somewhere.

When it comes to what I need, no one else has a say.

 

[Conservative65]

I truly believe, that guns only do harm There is no use for guns in our society. The 2nd amendment was made in a time where guns were necessary because of the British.

I totally agree with you, and congratulations on having the cojones to raise this issue.

Countries with less guns are almost always safer than the US, and that is simply a cold, hard truth that few gun rights fanatics are willing to admit.

I totally support peoples' right to own a gun for hunting or target shooting, but all of countries should have safety-based gun laws aimed at protecting life first and foremost. No one needs an assault rifle at home.

I have two AR-15 models. If you think I don't need it, come get them.

 

[hadit]

To apply an argument we frequently hear in the abortion argument, if you don't want to own a gun, don't buy one.

 

[Pogo]

I truly believe, that guns only do harm There is no use for guns in our society. The 2nd amendment was made in a time where guns were necessary because of the British.

I totally agree with you, and congratulations on having the cojones to raise this issue.

Countries with less guns are almost always safer than the US, and that is simply a cold, hard truth that few gun rights fanatics are willing to admit.

I totally support peoples' right to own a gun for hunting or target shooting, but all of countries should have safety-based gun laws aimed at protecting life first and foremost. No one needs an assault rifle at home.

I have two AR-15 models. If you think I don't need it, come get them.

Yet another demonstration that gun wacks can only argue from emotional diaper rash, threats of violence and infantile fetishism about one's toys.

 

[RKMBrown]

The thing is, that America has far too many guns and not enough measures to keep them out of the wrong hands.

99.997% of the guns in the US are NOT used to commit murder.
Where's the problem?

Do you know, that gun violence has claimed more than 4,350 lives since January 1st (and killed or injured 475 children), a fact that is as mundane as it is grim. That's really horrible.

This number represents 0.00145% of the guns in the US.
Where's the problem?

The problem is the authoritarians like their victims to be helpless.

 

[Conservative65]

I truly believe, that guns only do harm There is no use for guns in our society. The 2nd amendment was made in a time where guns were necessary because of the British.

I totally agree with you, and congratulations on having the cojones to raise this issue.

Countries with less guns are almost always safer than the US, and that is simply a cold, hard truth that few gun rights fanatics are willing to admit.

I totally support peoples' right to own a gun for hunting or target shooting, but all of countries should have safety-based gun laws aimed at protecting life first and foremost. No one needs an assault rifle at home.

I have two AR-15 models. If you think I don't need it, come get them.

Yet another demonstration that gun wacks can only argue from emotional diaper rash, threats of violence and infantile fetishism about one's toys.

I didn't threaten violence. I issue a challenged that apparently you don't have the the guts to accept.

I'm not a gun whack. I'm someone exercising a CONSTITUTIONAL right you don't think I have. I can promise you that the guns I own aren't toys. You coming or are you going to keep running your damn mouth about what I shouldn't have?

 

[westwall]

I truly believe, that guns only do harm There is no use for guns in our society. The 2nd amendment was made in a time where guns were necessary because of the British.

I totally agree with you, and congratulations on having the cojones to raise this issue.

Countries with less guns are almost always safer than the US, and that is simply a cold, hard truth that few gun rights fanatics are willing to admit.

I totally support peoples' right to own a gun for hunting or target shooting, but all of countries should have safety-based gun laws aimed at protecting life first and foremost. No one needs an assault rifle at home.

I have two AR-15 models. If you think I don't need it, come get them.

Yet another demonstration that gun wacks can only argue from emotional diaper rash, threats of violence and infantile fetishism about one's toys.

You disappoint me Pogo. You used to have some decent arguments. Now though, you merely resort to infantile insults.

 

[Conservative65]

I truly believe, that guns only do harm There is no use for guns in our society. The 2nd amendment was made in a time where guns were necessary because of the British.

I totally agree with you, and congratulations on having the cojones to raise this issue.

Countries with less guns are almost always safer than the US, and that is simply a cold, hard truth that few gun rights fanatics are willing to admit.

I totally support peoples' right to own a gun for hunting or target shooting, but all of countries should have safety-based gun laws aimed at protecting life first and foremost. No one needs an assault rifle at home.

I have two AR-15 models. If you think I don't need it, come get them.

Yet another demonstration that gun wacks can only argue from emotional diaper rash, threats of violence and infantile fetishism about one's toys.

You disappoint me Pogo. You used to have some decent arguments. Now though, you merely resort to infantile insults.

Seems like Pogo has a problem with someone exercising their 2nd Amendment rights. Interesting something the Constitution says I can do is somehow an emotional diaper rash argument and that guns are considered toys.

 

[MrDVS1]

It's my first thread here, and I want to start with the issue, that worries me a lot.

Gun owners always claim that they own guns for self protection, even though the guns in their homes impose a much greater risk to their lives than an intruder. They also state they need guns to protect themselves from the government and from tthr police. Oh, seriously? Other argument for guns is hunting. Food production in the US is quite complex and capable of providing all types of foods to all parts of the country. And, if someone is too poor to buy food to eat, they are too poor to buy weapons. So what for?! Explain me, please.

I truly believe, that guns only do harm There is no use for guns in our society. The 2nd amendment was made in a time where guns were necessary because of the British.

I truly believe that if you think I shouldn't own guns that you should attempt to take mine. Typical Liberal gun hater that believes is they don't like guns no one should have them.

Just some food for thought, not all liberals are gun haters and not all so called conservatives are gun supporters.

 

[2aguy]

Just some food for thought, not all liberals are gun haters and not all so called conservatives are gun supporters.

Something else to ponder...from Murphy's Laws...

Every race does not go to the swift, nor every battle to the strong....but that's the way to bet......

 

[Conservative65]

It's my first thread here, and I want to start with the issue, that worries me a lot.

Gun owners always claim that they own guns for self protection, even though the guns in their homes impose a much greater risk to their lives than an intruder. They also state they need guns to protect themselves from the government and from tthr police. Oh, seriously? Other argument for guns is hunting. Food production in the US is quite complex and capable of providing all types of foods to all parts of the country. And, if someone is too poor to buy food to eat, they are too poor to buy weapons. So what for?! Explain me, please.

I truly believe, that guns only do harm There is no use for guns in our society. The 2nd amendment was made in a time where guns were necessary because of the British.

I truly believe that if you think I shouldn't own guns that you should attempt to take mine. Typical Liberal gun hater that believes is they don't like guns no one should have them.

Just some food for thought, not all liberals are gun haters and not all so called conservatives are gun supporters.

I didn't say that all Liberals were. My statement of "typical Liberal gun hater" meant those Liberals that were. Also, while I have met Conservatives that aren't gun owners, I can't say I've met any that advocated people not owning them if they chose to do. I have found Liberals with the mindset that because they didn't like them, they shouldn't be able to be owned.

 

[westwall]

I truly believe, that guns only do harm There is no use for guns in our society. The 2nd amendment was made in a time where guns were necessary because of the British.

I totally agree with you, and congratulations on having the cojones to raise this issue.

Countries with less guns are almost always safer than the US, and that is simply a cold, hard truth that few gun rights fanatics are willing to admit.

I totally support peoples' right to own a gun for hunting or target shooting, but all of countries should have safety-based gun laws aimed at protecting life first and foremost. No one needs an assault rifle at home.

I have two AR-15 models. If you think I don't need it, come get them.

Yet another demonstration that gun wacks can only argue from emotional diaper rash, threats of violence and infantile fetishism about one's toys.

You disappoint me Pogo. You used to have some decent arguments. Now though, you merely resort to infantile insults.

Seems like Pogo has a problem with someone exercising their 2nd Amendment rights. Interesting something the Constitution says I can do is somehow an emotional diaper rash argument and that guns are considered toys.

Indeed. Guns are tools, thus they are no better than those who use them. However, the Founders realized that they were such an essential tool in the maintenance of Liberty, that they memorialized their importance in the Bill of Rights.

How unsurprising that those who advocate for maximum government control (thus limiting LIBERTY for the individual, a founding concept of THIS country) also advocate for the control of firearms, up to and including an outright ban on the very weapons the 2nd Amendment specifically refers too, i.e. MILITARY TYPE FIREARMS.

 

[Conservative65]

I totally agree with you, and congratulations on having the cojones to raise this issue.

Countries with less guns are almost always safer than the US, and that is simply a cold, hard truth that few gun rights fanatics are willing to admit.

I totally support peoples' right to own a gun for hunting or target shooting, but all of countries should have safety-based gun laws aimed at protecting life first and foremost. No one needs an assault rifle at home.

I have two AR-15 models. If you think I don't need it, come get them.

Yet another demonstration that gun wacks can only argue from emotional diaper rash, threats of violence and infantile fetishism about one's toys.

You disappoint me Pogo. You used to have some decent arguments. Now though, you merely resort to infantile insults.

Seems like Pogo has a problem with someone exercising their 2nd Amendment rights. Interesting something the Constitution says I can do is somehow an emotional diaper rash argument and that guns are considered toys.

Indeed. Guns are tools, thus they are no better than those who use them. However, the Founders realized that they were such an essential tool in the maintenance of Liberty, that they memorialized their importance in the Bill of Rights.

How unsurprising that those who advocate for maximum government control (thus limiting LIBERTY for the individual, a founding concept of THIS country) also advocate for the control of firearms, up to and including an outright ban on the very weapons the 2nd Amendment specifically refers too, i.e. MILITARY TYPE FIREARMS.

How unsurprising that those who advocate maximum control on liberty when it comes to the 2nd Amendment because they say "guns kill" seem to want unlimited access to things not even remotely mentioned in the Constitution (abortion) that have killed over 50 million innocent unborn babies.

 

[BullKurtz]

With an "almost inevitable" Christmas attack on London, you can be sure the Brits have the firepower to handle it....Local police often team with MI5 for domestic terror threats:

 

[52ndStreet]

So with this logic only terrorist and criminals would be armed to the teeth.Everybody else would be considered
unarmed pray. ? and would not need guns.?!
I would rather have guns, and not need to use them, than not have them and then need them!!

 

[BlackSand]

So with this logic only terrorist and criminals would be armed to the teeth.Everybody else would be considered
unarmed pray. ? and would not need guns.?!
I would rather have guns, and not need to use them, than not have them and then need them!!

Uh ... Not a good idea to discuss countries where only the government and criminals (when you can tell the two apart) have firearms. Most of them are not the United Kingdom and genocide, slavery as well as wholesale slaughter is rampant.

.

 

[Pogo]

I truly believe, that guns only do harm There is no use for guns in our society. The 2nd amendment was made in a time where guns were necessary because of the British.

I totally agree with you, and congratulations on having the cojones to raise this issue.

Countries with less guns are almost always safer than the US, and that is simply a cold, hard truth that few gun rights fanatics are willing to admit.

I totally support peoples' right to own a gun for hunting or target shooting, but all of countries should have safety-based gun laws aimed at protecting life first and foremost. No one needs an assault rifle at home.

I have two AR-15 models. If you think I don't need it, come get them.

Yet another demonstration that gun wacks can only argue from emotional diaper rash, threats of violence and infantile fetishism about one's toys.

You disappoint me Pogo. You used to have some decent arguments. Now though, you merely resort to infantile insults.

You must not be familiar with M14's recurring auto-post, of which that's a parody. Inside joke.

Wow, tough crowd tonight.

 

[Pogo]

I truly believe, that guns only do harm There is no use for guns in our society. The 2nd amendment was made in a time where guns were necessary because of the British.

I totally agree with you, and congratulations on having the cojones to raise this issue.

Countries with less guns are almost always safer than the US, and that is simply a cold, hard truth that few gun rights fanatics are willing to admit.

I totally support peoples' right to own a gun for hunting or target shooting, but all of countries should have safety-based gun laws aimed at protecting life first and foremost. No one needs an assault rifle at home.

I have two AR-15 models. If you think I don't need it, come get them.

Yet another demonstration that gun wacks can only argue from emotional diaper rash, threats of violence and infantile fetishism about one's toys.

I didn't threaten violence. I issue a challenged that apparently you don't have the the guts to accept.

I'm not a gun whack. I'm someone exercising a CONSTITUTIONAL right you don't think I have. I can promise you that the guns I own aren't toys. You coming or are you going to keep running your damn mouth about what I shouldn't have?

Where did I suggest what you "shouldn't have", little man?
I'm not scolding you -- I'm laughing at you. I find hissyfits hilarious. So sue me.