I Think everyone should be able to own a gun that can use it properly

DlCE wrote

Miss wrote

Motioncorey wrote I don't support them. Why? You don't NEED them. They are a want. Guns have killed more people than animals.

For self defense you don't need a gun.

Any kind of firearms or bombs are pointless in my opinion.


Want them for hunting? You don't need a fully automatic Assault Rifle to kill an animal.

They teach Mixed Martial Arts for a reason. Weapons are for "wimps" anyways and self defense by hand on hand combat is safer anyway.

I'd like to see you say this when either someone robs you at gunpoint, or the government takes over by force, like Nazi Germany did. Let's see if you still don't support guns.

Martial Arts can teach you self defense, and weapon disarmament but in most cases involving guns its not going to help. "weapons are for wimps anyways" - Your hand is considered a weapon, "self defense by hand on hand combat is safer anyway." a criminal is Not going to fight you hand to hand either.

And If i do believe it is illegal to hunt with a Full-Automatic Assualt Rifle. I know you can hunt with a Semi-Automatic.

-"Guns have killed more people than animals." This is one of the most ignorant statements, and instead of arguing with it Ill just say this
-"Alcohol kills more people that most weapons"
-"Cars kill more than 30,000+ People a year"
-"Food causes more deaths than guns"
Theres more of these but heres and even more shocking one
-"Tobacco kills more than 480,000 People in the U.S alone every year"(including those who have never touched it before"
-Tobacco kills more people than animals ;)

But I guess maybe we should get rid of Alcohol, Cars, Food, Tobacco, ETC...

LEGAL prescription drugs have just passed tobacco in most deaths caused this year in the US as well. Don't see anyone being against those really.

CookeFarmer wrote I Think everyone should be able to own a gun that can use it properly

What is your definition of proper, that is more of a statement than being informative? I'm sure it varies for the beholder.

Miss wrote

DlCE wrote

Miss wrote

Motioncorey wrote I don't support them. Why? You don't NEED them. They are a want. Guns have killed more people than animals.

For self defense you don't need a gun.

Any kind of firearms or bombs are pointless in my opinion.


Want them for hunting? You don't need a fully automatic Assault Rifle to kill an animal.

They teach Mixed Martial Arts for a reason. Weapons are for "wimps" anyways and self defense by hand on hand combat is safer anyway.

I'd like to see you say this when either someone robs you at gunpoint, or the government takes over by force, like Nazi Germany did. Let's see if you still don't support guns.

Martial Arts can teach you self defense, and weapon disarmament but in most cases involving guns its not going to help. "weapons are for wimps anyways" - Your hand is considered a weapon, "self defense by hand on hand combat is safer anyway." a criminal is Not going to fight you hand to hand either.

And If i do believe it is illegal to hunt with a Full-Automatic Assualt Rifle. I know you can hunt with a Semi-Automatic.

-"Guns have killed more people than animals." This is one of the most ignorant statements, and instead of arguing with it Ill just say this
-"Alcohol kills more people that most weapons"
-"Cars kill more than 30,000+ People a year"
-"Food causes more deaths than guns"
Theres more of these but heres and even more shocking one
-"Tobacco kills more than 480,000 People in the U.S alone every year"(including those who have never touched it before"
-Tobacco kills more people than animals ;)

But I guess maybe we should get rid of Alcohol, Cars, Food, Tobacco, ETC...

LEGAL prescription drugs have just passed tobacco in most deaths caused this year in the US as well. Don't see anyone being against those really.

While I think that guns shouldn't be banned, you guys are on a very slippery slope with this argument.
The difference between guns and all of the things you've listed are guns are made with the intention of being weapons.
Prescription medication, food, cars, tobacco, etc. all aren't made with that intention, deaths because of them are side effects of their primary purpose.

You can't argue that someone being killed by a gun is a side effect of it's primary purpose.

Literate wrote

Miss wrote

DlCE wrote

Miss wrote

Motioncorey wrote I don't support them. Why? You don't NEED them. They are a want. Guns have killed more people than animals.

For self defense you don't need a gun.

Any kind of firearms or bombs are pointless in my opinion.


Want them for hunting? You don't need a fully automatic Assault Rifle to kill an animal.

They teach Mixed Martial Arts for a reason. Weapons are for "wimps" anyways and self defense by hand on hand combat is safer anyway.

I'd like to see you say this when either someone robs you at gunpoint, or the government takes over by force, like Nazi Germany did. Let's see if you still don't support guns.

Martial Arts can teach you self defense, and weapon disarmament but in most cases involving guns its not going to help. "weapons are for wimps anyways" - Your hand is considered a weapon, "self defense by hand on hand combat is safer anyway." a criminal is Not going to fight you hand to hand either.

And If i do believe it is illegal to hunt with a Full-Automatic Assualt Rifle. I know you can hunt with a Semi-Automatic.

-"Guns have killed more people than animals." This is one of the most ignorant statements, and instead of arguing with it Ill just say this
-"Alcohol kills more people that most weapons"
-"Cars kill more than 30,000+ People a year"
-"Food causes more deaths than guns"
Theres more of these but heres and even more shocking one
-"Tobacco kills more than 480,000 People in the U.S alone every year"(including those who have never touched it before"
-Tobacco kills more people than animals ;)

But I guess maybe we should get rid of Alcohol, Cars, Food, Tobacco, ETC...

LEGAL prescription drugs have just passed tobacco in most deaths caused this year in the US as well. Don't see anyone being against those really.

While I think that guns shouldn't be banned, you guys are on a very slippery slope with this argument.
The difference between guns and all of the things you've listed are guns are made with the intention of being weapons.
Prescription medication, food, cars, tobacco, etc. all aren't made with that intention, deaths because of them are side effects of their primary purpose.

You can't argue that someone being killed by a gun is a side effect of it's primary purpose.

We're not arguing, just stating things.

And that is very true, but guns aren't specifically made to kill people. They're made to protect you from bad people. It also strengthens your mind. No one goes out and legally buys a gun and thinks; "hey. Ima go shoot someone". No. People buy it to keeo in their house just in case anyone ever tries to rob, kill, or anything like that to them in their house.

Just think about what someone else said earlier in this post.

"If guns weren't around, we wouldn't be free right now."

Something like that.

Bhoy wrote

r00t wrote The problem is, and has always been, the mental health and social problems. The solution in America is to promote responsible gun ownership and mental health. The restrictions we have in place (background checks, etc.) are all that are needed and, in some places, excessive and unconstitutional. Civilian gun ownership allows our government to exist and has always been part of our culture.

Laws only affect those that follow them and legal gun owners follow the laws. Legal gun owners are not the problem, but restrictions target them only. Gangbangers in Chicago don't care that putting a $20 stock on their Glock handgun requires a separate tax stamp or that the NFA has something to say about them sawing off their shotgun.

You've seen more mass shootings because people around the world are becoming less sane and the media makes big money by making serial killers famous. Access to guns has not changed and if you think the solution is to let people go crazy but not have guns, I hope you don't join the politicians here that agree with you.

I don't agree that everyone has the right to a gun and I never will. I think only those who have a job in protecting civilians should have them if any.

Yes, some civilians may not be able to protect themselves and some lives may be lost but if you compare that to the amount of civilians who die cause of guns in circumstances where they had nothing to deserve that, people just overlook it and say it's okay because some people can protect themselves?

If there was proper gun restricions, there would be less civilians dying and that's simply the reason for my point of view.

Our background checks make sure that people who aren't fit to own guns can't get them legally. People who have CCW permits are among the most law-abiding citizens in the country (interesting statistics there). What troubles me is that you think that if there were "proper" gun restrictions, fewer people would die and it would be "these people" not "those people." Assuming that you'd suggest confiscation because that would be the only feasible way to reduce the number of gun owners, this makes absolutely no sense. Instead of trying in vain to confiscate hundreds of millions of guns from law-abiding civilians, our law enforcement could be addressing the real problems like mental health (once again), gang violence, and drug organizations. What anti-gunners suggest will not work in the United States.

Miss wrote

Literate wrote

Miss wrote

DlCE wrote

Miss wrote

Motioncorey wrote I don't support them. Why? You don't NEED them. They are a want. Guns have killed more people than animals.

For self defense you don't need a gun.

Any kind of firearms or bombs are pointless in my opinion.


Want them for hunting? You don't need a fully automatic Assault Rifle to kill an animal.

They teach Mixed Martial Arts for a reason. Weapons are for "wimps" anyways and self defense by hand on hand combat is safer anyway.

I'd like to see you say this when either someone robs you at gunpoint, or the government takes over by force, like Nazi Germany did. Let's see if you still don't support guns.

Martial Arts can teach you self defense, and weapon disarmament but in most cases involving guns its not going to help. "weapons are for wimps anyways" - Your hand is considered a weapon, "self defense by hand on hand combat is safer anyway." a criminal is Not going to fight you hand to hand either.

And If i do believe it is illegal to hunt with a Full-Automatic Assualt Rifle. I know you can hunt with a Semi-Automatic.

-"Guns have killed more people than animals." This is one of the most ignorant statements, and instead of arguing with it Ill just say this
-"Alcohol kills more people that most weapons"
-"Cars kill more than 30,000+ People a year"
-"Food causes more deaths than guns"
Theres more of these but heres and even more shocking one
-"Tobacco kills more than 480,000 People in the U.S alone every year"(including those who have never touched it before"
-Tobacco kills more people than animals ;)

But I guess maybe we should get rid of Alcohol, Cars, Food, Tobacco, ETC...

LEGAL prescription drugs have just passed tobacco in most deaths caused this year in the US as well. Don't see anyone being against those really.

While I think that guns shouldn't be banned, you guys are on a very slippery slope with this argument.
The difference between guns and all of the things you've listed are guns are made with the intention of being weapons.
Prescription medication, food, cars, tobacco, etc. all aren't made with that intention, deaths because of them are side effects of their primary purpose.

You can't argue that someone being killed by a gun is a side effect of it's primary purpose.

We're not arguing, just stating things.

And that is very true, but guns aren't specifically made to kill people. They're made to protect you from bad people. It also strengthens your mind. No one goes out and legally buys a gun and thinks; "hey. Ima go shoot someone". No. People buy it to keeo in their house just in case anyone ever tries to rob, kill, or anything like that to them in their house.

Just think about what someone else said earlier in this post.

"If guns weren't around, we wouldn't be free right now."

Something like that.

When I say argument I don't mean it in the sense of two people shouting at one another, I mean a point or a line of thought.
and yes, they protect you by harming other people. Also, the purpose of a gun really depends on who buys it. A criminal would buy it to harm someone, a hunter to hunt, and so on.
What remains through all of these purposes is that they all damage things.
The all-encompassing purpose of a gun is to damage something.

None of the things you or DICE listed have that as their primary purpose.

Also, I don't know if I would go so far as to say that guns = freedom.

Cinema4D wrote

Scizor wrote

Cinema4D wrote

Scizor wrote The idea of everyone owning a gun is a scary thought, considering the amount of mentally unstable and on edge members of society we have. I am very pro gun ownership, I believe that the knowledge and responsibility of owning, firing, and maintaining a firearm is a very valuable thing, and it would be nice for every responsible american to learn, but I obviously know this can't happen.

---

As for people who say that they wish to own a fully automatic rifle in the states, while I wont question your constitutional right to bear arms, I do have to ask, why? Yes a very small minority of you may have the practical use for one, but this also requires VERY expensive government permits, review boards, tax stamp, and then AT LEAST 20 grand for the weapon. I also question the method to the madness for people who believe in suppressor ownership in the states for the average licensed gun owner. There is no need. If you're hunting with a relatively cheap .223 Winchester for example, you don't have any use for a suppressor in those situations, it's a very expensive piece of equipment for such a small "need".

---

I got a little off topic there, but yes I understand it can be angering seeing people with absolutely no firearms experience trying to tell you what you should and should not do with yours. A general public teaching of firearms could really help the public opinion of firearm owners in my opinion, but this isn't going to happen on a large scale sadly. I'd say our best bet is to help inform people in a non down-bringing manner and show that we aren't all fanatical, mentally damaged, gun owners. When we attack anyone and everyone who disagrees with our opinions on ownership we are only adding fuel to the Stereotype fire.

You bring up the word "need" a lot. The 2nd Amendment guarantees a "right", meaning it is guaranteed to the people. It is called the Bill of Rights and not the Bill of Needs for a reason. Why does someone need a vacation home? Why do you need two houses, you can't be in both at the same time? Why does someone need a Ferrari? Speed limits are at 60 usually and that is a car capable of going well over triple that. Why do you need a car that can do that? Why do you need half of the things you have? Why do you need an Xbox or Playstation? The answer is you don't, it is a want. But you are still allowed to have it. Guns are guaranteed in the Constitution as a Right protected by the government, they are not simply a want, but a right.

I'm sorry, I should have specified "want", rather than need. I understand that our ownership is rightfully protected, however their is a difference. Just because you can go out and get a loan for a million dollar home, should you? It's a question of morals I'm posing, not right or wrong. I personally will defend the right for a citizen to own those, but I will not be personally pursuing my ownership of them.

I understand your viewpoint, but I equate it with asking why did blacks in the 60's need to sit in the front of the bus or drink the same fountain? They didn't, and we didnt question that, or question their motives or desire, we just realized that all men are created equal under our constitution. We respected their want because it was a guaranteed right to be equal and not be discriminated against because of the color of their skin.

We do absolutely "need" guns for our government to function. It's not about hunting, self-defense, or recreation; it's about civilians having the power to defend against their own government. Civilians are armed for the same reason we build F-35s and don't use them in conventional warfare. They're strategic assets that keep the balance of power how we want it. The Bill of Rights is protected by the 2nd amendment.

Amen. Best thing I've heard all day.

Literate wrote

Miss wrote

Literate wrote

Miss wrote

DlCE wrote

Miss wrote

Motioncorey wrote I don't support them. Why? You don't NEED them. They are a want. Guns have killed more people than animals.

For self defense you don't need a gun.

Any kind of firearms or bombs are pointless in my opinion.


Want them for hunting? You don't need a fully automatic Assault Rifle to kill an animal.

They teach Mixed Martial Arts for a reason. Weapons are for "wimps" anyways and self defense by hand on hand combat is safer anyway.

I'd like to see you say this when either someone robs you at gunpoint, or the government takes over by force, like Nazi Germany did. Let's see if you still don't support guns.

Martial Arts can teach you self defense, and weapon disarmament but in most cases involving guns its not going to help. "weapons are for wimps anyways" - Your hand is considered a weapon, "self defense by hand on hand combat is safer anyway." a criminal is Not going to fight you hand to hand either.

And If i do believe it is illegal to hunt with a Full-Automatic Assualt Rifle. I know you can hunt with a Semi-Automatic.

-"Guns have killed more people than animals." This is one of the most ignorant statements, and instead of arguing with it Ill just say this
-"Alcohol kills more people that most weapons"
-"Cars kill more than 30,000+ People a year"
-"Food causes more deaths than guns"
Theres more of these but heres and even more shocking one
-"Tobacco kills more than 480,000 People in the U.S alone every year"(including those who have never touched it before"
-Tobacco kills more people than animals ;)

But I guess maybe we should get rid of Alcohol, Cars, Food, Tobacco, ETC...

LEGAL prescription drugs have just passed tobacco in most deaths caused this year in the US as well. Don't see anyone being against those really.

While I think that guns shouldn't be banned, you guys are on a very slippery slope with this argument.
The difference between guns and all of the things you've listed are guns are made with the intention of being weapons.
Prescription medication, food, cars, tobacco, etc. all aren't made with that intention, deaths because of them are side effects of their primary purpose.

You can't argue that someone being killed by a gun is a side effect of it's primary purpose.

We're not arguing, just stating things.

And that is very true, but guns aren't specifically made to kill people. They're made to protect you from bad people. It also strengthens your mind. No one goes out and legally buys a gun and thinks; "hey. Ima go shoot someone". No. People buy it to keeo in their house just in case anyone ever tries to rob, kill, or anything like that to them in their house.

Just think about what someone else said earlier in this post.

"If guns weren't around, we wouldn't be free right now."

Something like that.

When I say argument I don't mean it in the sense of two people shouting at one another, I mean a point or a line of thought.
and yes, they protect you by harming other people. Also, the purpose of a gun really depends on who buys it. A criminal would buy it to harm someone, a hunter to hunt, and so on.
What remains through all of these purposes is that they all damage things.
The all-encompassing purpose of a gun is to damage something.

None of the things you or DICE listed have that as their primary purpose.

Also, I don't know if I would go so far as to say that guns = freedom.

Actually I have to completely disagree with you, The items I listed all have many different reasons they where made, All of them share a purpose (1 of many) to actually cause harm to things. Just like Guns. Not all guns are designed to damage things. The original purpose of Guns was to be able to propel a projectile at high velocity over long distances. It was never meant to be a device meant for killing but instead a tool, but when Cultures realized its capability of causing damage to the human body it developed a new purpose. Same with Cars, Many original "Transport Vehilces" where designed to Kill or damage something. Alcohol was originall developed for pleasure but over time has been utilized to kill bacteria and or Other forms of life. Same with everything else I listed, They all have a purpose and one of those many purposes is to kill, i can assure you once humans realized what damage these products could cause they immediately went to weaponize them. But My guns purpose is to protect me at all times.