40 Reasons for GUN CONTROL

**min0 lee** · 03-03-2008, 04:09 PM

1. Banning guns works, which is why New York, DC, and Chicago cops need guns.

2. Washington DC's low murder rate of 69 per 100,000 is due to strict gun control, and Indianapolis' high murder rate of 9 per 100,000 is due to the lack of gun control.

3. Statistics showing high murder rates justify gun control but statistics showing increasing murder rates after gun control are "just statistics."

4. The Brady Bill and the Assault Weapons Ban, both of which went into effect in 1994, are responsible for the decrease in violent crime rates, which have been declining since 1991.

5. We must get rid of guns because a deranged lunatic may go on a shooting spree at any time and anyone who would own a gun out of fear of such a lunatic is paranoid.

6. The more helpless you are, the safer you are from criminals.

7. An intruder will be incapacitated by tear gas or oven spray, but if shot with a .357 Magnum will get angry and kill you.

8. A woman raped and strangled is morally superior to a woman with a smoking gun and a dead rapist at her feet.

9. When confronted by violent criminals, you should "put up no defense â€” give them what they want, or run" (Handgun Control Inc. Chairman Pete Shields, Guns Don't Die - People Do, 1981, p. 125).

10. The New England Journal of Medicine is filled with expert advice about guns; just like Guns and Ammo has some excellent articles on heart surgery.

11. One should consult an automotive engineer for safer seatbelts, a civil engineer for a better bridge, a surgeon for spinal paralysis, a computer programmer for Y2K problems, and Sarah Brady for firearms expertise.

12. The 2nd Amendment, ratified in 1787, refers to the National Guard, which was created 130 years later by an act of Congress in 1917.

13. The National Guard, funded by the federal government, occupying property leased to the federal government, using weapons owned by the federal government, punishing trespassers under federal law, is a "state militia".

14. These phrases,"right of the people peaceably to assemble," "right of the people to be secure in their homes," "enumeration's herein of certain rights shall not be construed to disparage others retained by the people," and "The powers not delegated herein are reserved to the states respectively, and to the people," all refer to individuals, but "the right of the people to keep and bear arms" refers to the state.

15. We don't need guns against an oppressive government, because the Constitution has internal safeguards, but we should ban and seize all guns, thereby violating the 2nd, 4th, and 5th amendments to that Constitution.

16. Rifles and handguns aren't necessary to national defense, which is why police departments, federal enforcement agencies, the armed forces, and the US Coast guard have millions of them.

17. Private citizens shouldn't have handguns, because they serve no military purpose, and private citizens shouldn't have "assault rifles," because they are military weapons.

18. The ready availability of guns today, with waiting periods, background checks, fingerprinting, government forms, et cetera, is responsible for recent school shootings, compared to the lack of school shootings in the 40's, 50's and 60's, which resulted from the availability of guns at hardware stores, surplus stores, gas stations, variety stores, mail order, et cetera.

19. The NRA's attempt to run a "don't touch" campaign about kids handling guns is propaganda, and the anti-gun lobby's attempt to run a "don't touch" campaign is responsible social activity.

20. Guns are so complex that special training is necessary to use them properly, and so simple to use that they make murder easy.

21. A handgun, with up to 4 controls, is far too complex for the typical adult to learn to use, as opposed to an automobile that only has 20.

22. Women are just as intelligent and capable as men but a woman with a gun is "an accident waiting to happen" and gun makers' advertisements aimed at women are "preying on their fears."

23. Ordinary people in the presence of guns turn into slaughtering butchers but revert to normal when the weapon is removed.

24. Guns cause violence, which is why there are so many mass killings at gun shows.

25. A majority of the population supports gun control, just like a majority of the population supported owning slaves.

26. A self-loading small arm can legitimately be considered to be a "weapon of mass destruction" or an "assault weapon."

27. Most people can't be trusted, so we should have laws against guns, which most people will abide by because they can be trusted.

28. The right of online pornographers to exist cannot be questioned because it is constitutionally protected by the Bill of Rights, but the use of handguns for self defense is not really protected by the Bill of Rights.

29. Free speech entitles one to own newspapers, transmitters, computers, and typewriters, but self-defense only justifies bare hands.

30. The ACLU is good because it uncompromisingly defends certain parts of the Constitution, and the NRA is bad, because it uncompromisingly defends other parts of the Constitution.

31. Charlton Heston, as former president of the NRA, is a shill who should be ignored, but Michael Douglas, as a representative of Handgun Control, Inc., is an ambassador for peace who is entitled to an audience at the UN arms control summit.

32. Police operate with backup within groups, which is why they need larger capacity pistol magazines than do "civilians" who must face criminals alone and therefore need less ammunition.

33. We should ban "Saturday Night Specials" and other inexpensive guns because it's not fair that poor people have access to guns too.

34. Police officers, who qualify with their duty weapons once or twice a year, have some special Jedi-like mastery over handguns that private citizens can never hope to obtain.

35. Private citizens don't need a gun for self-protection because the police are there to protect them even though the Supreme Court says the police are not responsible for their protection.

36. Citizens don't need to carry a gun for personal protection but police chiefs, who are desk-bound administrators that work in a building full of cops, DO need a gun.

37. "Assault weapons" have no purpose other than to kill large numbers of people. The police need assault weapons. You do not.

38. When Microsoft pressures its distributors to give Microsoft preferential promotion, that's bad; but when the Federal government pressures cities to buy guns only from Smith & Wesson, that's good.

39. Trigger locks do not interfere with the ability to use a gun for defensive purposes, which is why you see police officers with one on their duty weapon.

40. Handgun Control, Inc., says they want to "keep guns out of the wrong hands". Guess what? *You've got the wrong hands.*

**KentDog** · 03-03-2008, 06:19 PM

**clemson357** · 03-03-2008, 06:50 PM

41. The New England Journal of Medicine authored the most frequently cited gun control statistic ever when they said "A gun in the home is 22 times more likely to be used against a friend or relative than an intruder." They later admitted that they excluded all instances in which the intruder wasn't killed, which account for 98% of all incidents where a gun is used in self defense.

42. The majority of violent criminals are males between the ages of 15 and 35, and they need a gun to kill their victims. The majority of violent crime victims are women and the elderly, and they do not need a gun to protect themselves.

43. England banned guns in 1997 due to a school shooting. Since then, gun crime, murder, rape and robbery have all increased.

44. Australia banned guns in 1996 due to a mass shooting. Since then, gun crime, murder including manslaughter, rape, robbery, and home invasion have all increased.

45. Guns are involved in roughly 14,000 murders per year, and thus should be banned. DUI kills 16,000 per year, but alcohol should remain legal.

46. Guns are involved in roughly 16,000 suicides per year. No study has ever shown that in the absence of guns, these people would not jump off a building, slit their wrists, swallow too many asprin, or drop a hairdryer in the tub.

47. The war on drugs is bad because it gives the government more power over the people, incarcerates millions, and dictates people's private lives in terms of what they put in their body. A war on guns would be good because it would give the government more power over the people, incarcerate millions, and dictate people's private lives in terms of how effectively they can deter a murderous attack.

48. A waiting period for an abortion, which isn't mentioned in the constitution, is unconstitutional. A waiting period for a gun, which is protected under the 2nd amendment, is not.

49. Abortion should be legal because people should have great freedom over private decisions having to do with their bodies and their personal safety. Guns should be banned because people do not need the freedom to effectively defend their bodies or their personal safety.

50. After trillions of dollars and man-hours spent, the US government has no control over the easy flow of illegal narcotics into the hands of criminals. If guns were banned, the US government could easily ensure that no criminals have guns.

51. Guns are involved in about 30,000 lives lost every year if you include suicide. 13 independent studies estimate that guns are used between 800,000 and 2.5 million times per year, saving an estimated 400,000 lives each year.

**HOOPIE** · 03-04-2008, 12:35 AM

Lock'm -N- Load'm

**DOMS** · 03-04-2008, 08:07 AM

Originally Posted by KentDog

Not a fan of the facts, are you?

**KentDog** · 03-04-2008, 06:14 PM

Originally Posted by DOMS

Not a fan of the facts, are you?

Not a fan of the rhetoric.

**ALBOB** · 03-04-2008, 06:39 PM

Originally Posted by KentDog

Not a fan of the rhetoric.

Care to dispute it?

**maniclion** · 03-04-2008, 06:54 PM

Originally Posted by KentDog

Not a fan of the rhetoric.

Which is worse for you, rhetoric backed by logic or rhetoric backed by emotion?

**bio-chem** · 03-04-2008, 08:15 PM

Originally Posted by DOMS

Not a fan of the facts, are you?

**KentDog** · 03-04-2008, 09:09 PM

Originally Posted by maniclion

Which is worse for you, rhetoric backed by logic or rhetoric backed by emotion?

Irrelevant.

**danzik17** · 03-04-2008, 10:32 PM

Originally Posted by KentDog

Not a fan of the rhetoric.

Rhetoric or not, we are guaranteed that right under the Constitution. If we feel that this right is out-dated then we should properly amend the Constitution, and good luck pushing that one through.

I would support an amendment to deny weapons to people with a criminal history though, although that's more symbolic than anything because it's not like they buy them legally anyway.

No matter what though the solution isn't too "interpret" the Constitution to fit what you want, it is meant to be followed literally. If it needs to be changed, fine, that's what an amendment is for.

**Will Brink** · 03-05-2008, 03:37 PM

Originally Posted by KentDog

Which one? Details, details....

**Will Brink** · 03-05-2008, 03:39 PM

Originally Posted by min0 lee

8. A woman raped and strangled is morally superior to a woman with a smoking gun and a dead rapist at her feet.

This list has been around for a long time, but it's a good one. For some reason, #8 is my favorite for driving the point home.

**Will Brink** · 03-05-2008, 03:42 PM

Originally Posted by KentDog

Irrelevant.

Translated, you prefer the latter....

**Will Brink** · 03-05-2008, 03:44 PM

Originally Posted by danzik17

I would support an amendment to deny weapons to people with a criminal history though,

Why? There is not one state in this nation a felon can legally purchase a gun.

Originally Posted by danzik17

although that's more symbolic than anything because it's not like they buy them legally anyway.

Bingo

**KelJu** · 03-05-2008, 03:51 PM

My cousin's wife was shot by some redneck at a party. Its a shame. We should ban all guns, and this stuff wouldn't happen.

**danzik17** · 03-05-2008, 03:57 PM

Originally Posted by WillBrink

Why? There is not one state in this nation a felon can legally purchase a gun.

Bingo

I know it's currently not "legal", but I see it differently. The Constitution is the Supreme Law of the land, and it doesn't differentiate between criminals and non-criminals in the second amendment. Although I know not a single state will look at it this way, I feel that although they are justified those laws are also unconstitutional in a literal sense.

It's just another example where I feel that we shouldn't simply ignore the Constitution, we should amend it - and it wouldn't be hard either. What state will say no to amending it to deny guns to felons?

**Will Brink** · 03-05-2008, 03:58 PM

Originally Posted by KelJu

My cousin's wife was shot by some redneck at a party. Its a shame. We should ban all guns, and this stuff wouldn't happen.

What part of "13 independent studies estimate that guns are used between 800,000 and 2.5 million times per year, saving an estimated 400,000 lives each year" were you not following? Tell your cousin's wife to stay out of parties full of idiots and consider actually knowing some facts on the topic.

I have now known 5 people who have died in car accidents of various kinds, yet amazingly, I don't want to ban them.

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him think...

**Will Brink** · 03-05-2008, 04:02 PM

Originally Posted by danzik17

I know it's currently not "legal", but I see it differently. The Constitution is the Supreme Law of the land, and it doesn't differentiate between criminals and non-criminals in the second amendment.

It does not need to, nor does it for any of the Amendments.

**KelJu** · 03-05-2008, 04:03 PM

Originally Posted by WillBrink

What part of "13 independent studies estimate that guns are used between 800,000 and 2.5 million times per year, saving an estimated 400,000 lives each year" were you not following? Tell your cousin's wife to stay out of parties full of idiots and consider actually knowing some facts on the topic.

I have now known 5 people who have died in car accidents of various kinds, yet amazingly, I don't want to ban them.

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him think...

I guess you can also make a joke, but you can't make a dickhead get it.

**Will Brink** · 03-05-2008, 04:10 PM

Originally Posted by KelJu

I guess you can also make a joke, but you can't make a dickhead get it.

If that was a joke, it sucked. Carry on with your funny self.

**danzik17** · 03-05-2008, 04:11 PM

Originally Posted by WillBrink

It does not need to, nor does it for any of the Amendments.

Got to head to class but I agree, it doesn't differentiate. That's why criminals still have their rights, including the rights against self incrimination, the right to speedy trial, etc.

I'm not saying criminals should have guns, I'm just saying that I feel the wording of the amendment should be modified through another amendment to fit current times. That's what we have a Congress for, not to investigate whether or not Roger Clemens cheated at baseball.

**KelJu** · 03-05-2008, 04:19 PM

Originally Posted by WillBrink

If that was a joke, it sucked. Carry on with your funny self.

Fuck off. I wasn't quoting your shit, don't quote mine, dork.

**Will Brink** · 03-05-2008, 04:21 PM

Originally Posted by danzik17

I'm just saying that I feel the wording of the amendment should be modified through another amendment to fit current times.

I have no interest in going down that slippery slope and i don't think the entire bunch from Congress have half the brains of a single man who wrote his part of the Const. I can't think of a worse idea than any of them altering the Const. to fit the "current times."

**Will Brink** · 03-05-2008, 04:26 PM

Originally Posted by KelJu

Fuck off. I wasn't quoting your shit, don't quote mine, dork.

I will quote what ever I want when ever I want, and not a damn thing you and your stupid cat wearing glasses avatar can do about it, unless you are a mod and wish to ban me. Short of that, keep your stupid jokes to yourself and I will keep my nasty comments (though you started with the insults here, not I) to myself. I thought you were being serious, you were making a joke, and instead of simply stating "it was just a joke" you chose to insult me. That's fine, just don't turn into a whiny bitch when the insults come back to you "dork."

**KentDog** · 03-05-2008, 05:01 PM

Originally Posted by WillBrink

Translated, you prefer the latter....

Once again you insist on putting words in my mouth. Perhaps I should elaborate on what I had meant.

A. "The brown dog barked."
B. "The coffee colored canine let out a loud woof."

Both are the same facts; the rhetoric is what is different. The posted material could have been better written.

I don't understand why some people are so sensitive about gun control. The phrase in itself is broad and interpreted differently depending on the person.

**KentDog** · 03-05-2008, 05:07 PM

Originally Posted by WillBrink

Which one? Details, details....

"6. The more helpless you are, the safer you are from criminals."
You don't need a gun to not be helpless.

"20. Guns are so complex that special training is necessary to use them properly, and so simple to use that they make murder easy."
Opinion-based. You don't need special training to be able to murder someone with a gun.

"15. We don't need guns against an oppressive government, because the Constitution has internal safeguards, but we should ban and seize all guns, thereby violating the 2nd, 4th, and 5th amendments to that Constitution."
This goes back to how one defines "gun control." On one extreme end of the spectrum, it may be to ban and seize all guns, but that is rarely the issue at hand. The other spectrum may be to insure convicted felons cannot purchase firearms. This is a measure of "gun control." Are you against it?

**Will Brink** · 03-05-2008, 05:07 PM

Originally Posted by KentDog

Once again you insist on putting words in my mouth. Perhaps I should elaborate on what I had meant.

A. "The brown dog barked."
B. "The coffee colored canine let out a loud woof."

Both are the same facts; the rhetoric is what is different. The posted material could have been better written.

Again, I would ask you which part, but sure, it's a list that is designed to get a response from people vs. being a detail driven fact sheet per se. As you know, plenty of that exists also.

**DOMS** · 03-05-2008, 05:25 PM

Originally Posted by KentDog

"6. The more helpless you are, the safer you are from criminals."
You don't need a gun to not be helpless.

Fair enough. You can play the role of the blackbelt wearing, knife wielding homeowner, and I'll play the part of the Smith & Wesson .45 wielding intruder.

I case it's unclear, you're going to lose. But you can be happy that you didn't resort to using a gun.

**Will Brink** · 03-05-2008, 05:32 PM

Originally Posted by KentDog

"6. The more helpless you are, the safer you are from criminals."
You don't need a gun to not be helpless.

But a gun makes you less helpless as the data shows and the fact is, a 120lb 50 year old women is in fact helpless to a 210lb 25 year old rapist unless she has a means of self defense. You have to think of people that are not YOU. The data is quite clear on that fact of guns being the only thing that makes people equals on that front, thus the well known Colt quote.

Originally Posted by KentDog

"20. Guns are so complex that special training is necessary to use them properly, and so simple to use that they make murder easy." Opinion-based. You don't need special training to be able to murder someone with a gun.

And you don't need special training to use a gun to defend yourself, thus the point made in #20. Anti guns types love to talk about how most people are not trained well enough to use a gun in self defense (though the data shows otherwise) yet claim guns make it so easy for criminals to kill, thus the irony of #20.

Originally Posted by KentDog

"15. We don't need guns against an oppressive government, because the Constitution has internal safeguards, but we should ban and seize all guns, thereby violating the 2nd, 4th, and 5th amendments to that Constitution."

This goes back to how one defines "gun control." On one extreme end of the spectrum, it may be to ban and seize all guns, but that is rarely the issue at hand. The other spectrum may be to insure convicted felons cannot purchase firearms. This is a measure of "gun control." Are you against it?

It's clear you have not actually done much in the way of real research on the topic. For example, as already stated, not one state in the nation allows convicted felons to purchase firearms, but shockingly, they have no problems getting guns with data showing increased restrictions = increased crime rates, etc, etc as covered many times...And yes, it is in fact about banning guns as that is the stated objective of most anti gun groups when actually pushed on the matter.

What you are talking about is what some may refer to as "reasonable" gun control, and that is where the debate exists.

Thread: 40 Reasons for GUN CONTROL

Thread Tools

Display

40 Reasons for GUN CONTROL

Similar Threads

Reasons for using..

Reasons

Top 10 reasons

7 reasons NOT to go to the gym!

One of the Reasons why I don't use e-Bay!

Posting Permissions