Who Has Reason to Own (& Use) a Gun?

Remove all ads!

My primary concern about widespread weapon ownership is their availabbility to virtually *everyone*. An old german saying is that the opportunity makes the thief. I think I fully agree with Bogi, who said that the psychological barrier to hurt someone with a knife is bigger than just to pull a trigger. Every wimp can kill with a gun.

I don´t want to reflect about the reasons for gun-related violence among teenagers for I don´t know about that. The availability of a gun however may be a key for gun related crimes. Without a gun criminals would however still be violent, but in a less dangerous way.
Access restricion is a must considering the damage a gun can cause. I think strict ownership regulation is a good way to achieve this goal.

The argument that you might need to be armed because there are illegal weapons around isn´t really convincing either. Here in germany we have strict regulations as I mentioned. Despite that, and I fear that´s unavoidable, there are illegal and unregistered weapons around. This however doesn´t result in a very high number of crimes with guns. So the reason for gun related crime must be somewhere else.

Switzerland, that has soft gun laws similar to the US, has a very low crime rate in general and a low number of gun related crimes. Though, every army reservist has his assault rifle with ammo in a safe *in his home*. Surprisingly this hasn´t been a deterrant from burglary.
The few problems with gun ownership there maybe a result of the low differences in wealth there - in sharp contrast to the situation in the US.

People that are wealthy are afraid of burglary and crimes in general and so they arm themselves. A scared honourable citizen with a gun is just as much a menace as a freak-out drug addict with one. Both don´t act rational and are potentially dangerous to their environment, law abiding or not.

And Mathetais (no insult intended): Please don´t come up with the china or russia, iran, india or iraq. I think the largest defence budged in the world should maintain a degree of national and constitutional safety that IMHO can´t be much improved with private gun ownership.

So I fear that, to the contrary, the widespread legal and illegal ownership of firearms in the US may be a much bigger risc for national and constitutional stability than any of these countries.
And insisting in an (in my eyes) obsolete law doesn´t help much improve this situation.

[This message has been edited by Ragusa (edited May 31, 2001).]

 

Well, one thing to remember is, that having a law is not enough to rid the streets of guns. What is needed is a change in the attitude of the people. People in the US see a need for a gun. Therefore they have a gun, law or no law. In Denmark, we don't have this 'tradition', which means noone has any need for guns.

One of the reasons criminals ín america is so trigger happy, is that they know, that whereever they make a break, someone might come and shoot them. Take the street police in the UK. They don't wear a gun during work, and people, including the criminals, know this. Therefore, a potential criminls first reaction to being caught is NOT necessary to shoot the officer, because the officer is not viewed as a lethal treath.

But to get rid of guns is a looong road, and getting rid of old traditions is very cumbersome. But it must begin somewhere.

EDIT: Whooooops!

[This message has been edited by Grovflab (edited May 30, 2001).]

 

That´s a really good point grovflab.

Edit: Sorry Grovflab

[This message has been edited by Ragusa (edited May 30, 2001).]

 

About firearm ownership as a garant for democracy:

Why do dictatorships worldwide usually, almost immediately after they come to power, first do things like restricting freedom of speech and freedom of press/ radio/ tv and supressing the opposition?

Look to the UK, the country with the oldest democratic tradition in the western world: Since the magna carta there has only once been a revolution - done by the parliament to maintain democracy (which on the other hand ironically resulted in the dictatorship of Cromwell).
I think that the democratic tradition and mentality - stronly linked with institutions like fair election, fair trial, freedom of speech, religion and press - is a much stronger garant for freedom and constitution than private gun ownership.

Since america basically has most of these things - why should it need private gun ownership to uphold democracy any longer?

[This message has been edited by Ragusa (edited May 31, 2001).]

 

Very interesting topic indeed. There really is no valid reason for the average individual to own a gun these days. We don't have to hunt and we don't have to protect our family and land from savages and invaders. That being said, there really is no need for the avg. individual to own a car or a vacuum cleaner or a computer. We can get by without any of these things.

The point I'm trying to make is that it is easy for us to condemn guns when we really have no use for them personally. My dad lives on a farm, and having a firearm is just a way of life. Coyotes start killing calves, and out comes the high powered rifle to scare off the coyotes, an animal breaks a leg or becomes mortally injured, the gun is a fast and humane solution. Some people do have use for firearms, and the problem with certain legislation is that it is all encompassing. The law doesn't care if you are a farmer/hunter or if you are a crimiinal, but do you think gun laws are going to stop criminals? Last time I checked, robbery and murder was also a crime, but they still happen. Gun laws seem to only hurt the innocent, because they are the ones who will follow the rules.

We have all tried first person shooter games, and like them or not, you have to admit that there is a certain thrill to be found when shooting at a target. Firing a gun in real life also has that thrill, if we can forget about the bad things that guns have been used for. They really are mechanical marvels, it's too bad that they are aften misused.

 

ok gotta give my 2 cents worth...lol

As far as i am concerned guns are for one thing and one thing only KILLING.

Therefore, why in the world would you want it to be a law that every man and women be allowed to hold one at the young age of 18? i believe it is in the states.

Also, it is silly to believe you need a gun to protect you from the chinese. I think that chemical warfare or nuculer bombs are the most likely weapons you will be needing to defend yourself against not ground combat.

Not only that... an interesting fact you may not know.. but the people who manufacture toys in the states namely mattell also manufacture semi-automatic handguns.. hmmmm coincedence or sick irony.

Here in Canada we do not have a big a problem with guns. Actually the biggest problem we have is the illegal weapons being brought here from the states.

 

At the very least, I feel liscensing for guns should be mandatory. You need a liscense to drive a car, which IS NOT designed to kill people (though it does). YOu don't need a liscense to own a gun, which is ONLY designed to kill people. Care to explaint the logic there? Now, I'm not denying there are other applications for firearms, but what do you think the primary application is?

as for teens and guns... as a teen, I'd say there are two primary causes:

1)mental instability (sometimes combined with inadequate parenting). this has been the case in many of the recent shootings in America.
2)Rage. Pure and simple. Some people just can't handle being incessently taunted by their peers for 5-10 years. As a group, we aren't mature, we don't have a lot of responsibilty, and we don't act with a lot of forethought. When we feel strong emotions, we act on them. When we have tools such as guns available... it's not good.

 

I agree with registration...I don't even own a gun, nor have I ever had the need to own a gun. I do however, support the right to have them.

I don't know if it's because the current version of the Constitution says I can have one, or because our country was founded on warfare and bloodshed. Either way, it is part of our culture - Regardless of what perception is around the world...America is a land of cowboys, plain and simple.

Just as Japan has its Bushido heritage with the code of the SAmurai - I think Americans as a whole see themselves as cowboys, striving and fighting to build a better place to live for themselves and for their families. It is this fighting/gun toting spirit that built America...I think it is ingrained in our national soul.

So, with that in mind, the price we pay for freedom (like Ragusa said) IS vigilance. With freedom comes responsibility. Unfortunately, many children today are not taught that - and the result is what you see in the paper...Shootings in schools, McDonald's, etc...I don't condone the behavior, but everyone should have the right to own a firearm.

 

There are two reasons you could possibly need a gun, and i am talking about rifles not handguns. Handguns were made for 1 thing and only 1 thing and it isnt hunting. Ever try to hunt with a handgun?? Good luck.

1. Because you live or are in a sparsly populated area where you have to worry about wild animals and may go hunting even.

2. You are in the armed forces, or you are a police officer needing it to uphold the law.

In both of these cases you should be licensed at least. Is not that difficult to take a class in gun safety

The more guns that are made and sold legit, the more guns end up in the hands of theives and children. Common Sense.

 

But what about those who want to take the law in there own hands? I think you're Purposefully excluding this very influential sector of American society!

For those of you with your jaws hanging open...I AM JUST KIDDING. Happy Wednesday!

 

It's just not that simple. america has almost twice as many stabbings as great britian. Yes, handgun crimes dwarf those numbers, but I think it makes my point. We are a violent society, we bombard our children with images of violence.

Guns have never been as tightly regulated in the US as they are today, but gun crimes have never been as prevalent(sp).

I have the same memories, wandering around the ranch at the age of ten with my .22, hunting pheasant and rabbits. I never would have dreamed of trying to take that gun ANYWHERE I wasn't supposed too.

Maybe thats the difference. When you're raised hunting, you have a deeper appriciation for what guns can do, and what death is. I got my first deer when I was 16, and yes, I cried. I never could have shot a human being after that except in the direst of self defense circumstances.

We don't have the right to bear arms to protect ourselves from muggers and thieves. My guns are all in a safe at my uncles house,
I don't feel the need to keep them in my home.

The one thing that needs to happen, though, is that when children get their hands on guns, the provider (ussualy the parent) needs to be held fully responsible. I don't mean the slaps on the wrist they get now, I mean tried for Manslaughter or negligent homocide.

I don't "need" my swords either. The only thing they where designed for is killing people. Honestly, faced with a packed crowd of un-armed people, I could probably kill more with my glaive than with a handgun. It doesn't need to be re-loaded. But that isn't why I own swords, pole arms, and bows. It's also not why I own guns.

No offense intended, the English history of democracy is where ours evolved from, But Iceland is actually the longest standing democracy

In how many other nations could the combined might of the citizenry easily dispatch the military? I sleep better knowing we as a people have the ability to overthrow our government should it ever become necassary.

Ok, just had to say this. Why is it that I have to come to gaming forum to have intelligent conversations about real issues?
All people on politics forums do is call each other queers. To all the people who have made such well reasoned posts, resisted the temptation to sink to personal insults, and taken the time to read my verbose opinionated posts, thanks!!!! this is fun

[This message has been edited by jester1137 (edited May 31, 2001).]

 

Just a thought...

Sure accidents would be avoided, but crime? If a criminal knew he could break in without getting shot, being of criminal mentality already mind you, what would really stop him/her? Whats to stop him/her from having a gun? They're already breaking the law, might as well be armed.

If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns...

Amon-Ra

 

here in singapore, NOBODY has a gun. well, actually every once in a while someone turns up with one, but thats beside the point. the point is, even if a POLICE OFFICER, fires ONE shot for ANY reason, he has to write a f**king long report on it. and he has to prove that his life was threatened or else he can be sent to jail for a long long time. ONE shot, ANYWHERE at all, even if he points to the sky and fires. and all they get are shitty revolvers with a cord attaching it to their belt. heh.
but anyway thats a different case, cos like i said, NOBODY has a gun here, and nobody can get one, it is f**king difficult to get one in. i guess if they outlawed guns in america, they are going to have a damn hard time making sure absolutly NOBODY has a gun, and given the ease at which the bad guys can get them, its not going to work, which just means the good guys are going to dieeeeeee.....

 

um how about a rotweiller or a baseball bat. There are lots of weapons you can use to defend yourself that dont go through apartment building walls and kill people in their beds.

I also believe it is too late for the united states to change the law. They have already manufactured and distributed too many guns to turn back. Only honest people would turn in their guns.

But licenseing your guns may at least educate people enough to not have them where a child can get a hold of them. Plus there are ways to safely take apart a gun so only an experienced user could use it.
Just a thought.

[This message has been edited by Kitiara (edited May 31, 2001).]

 

We do require the registration of all guns in america. Unfortunately it's not exactly a liscense. All you have to do is pass a back ground check to see if you're a convicted felon or have a history of dangerous mentall illness.

I don't know if you've heard of the NRA, they are powerful pro-gun lobby here. All of their publications say that everyone considering purchasing a gun should take a 6 hour saftey course. Then they oppose legislation that require it!!
For the love of god, I had to take a 12 hour course to get my Motorcycle liscense. I don't think requiring education impinges in anyway on our right to keep and bear.

 

Some more notes - IIRC a lot of people in the US are even against *registration* of their weapons. I find it a strange thing that a 16 year old may use a firearm but isn´t allowed to leave his house after 8pm in some states and isn´t allowed to drink alcohole.

I don´t quite get the reason for such a difference. *I* would rank my freedom of movement as higher as the right to use and own a gun. And if I consider someone not having enough selfcontrol to drink alcohole moderately - the last thing I´d do is to give him a firearm. These differences aren´t rational. But remind that weapons are only made for one thing: killing.

I agree that it is a nice and funny thing to shoot claybirds or on paper targets, no doubt. I also think that hunting is a legitimate thing in the rural areas. But this requires weapons other than assault rifles, submashineguns or high-capacity automatic pistols.
Would it be so much to demand that reliable people may own firearms but need to register them and have to be in a shooting club to aquire the knowledge and training necessary to keep them? I´m not talking about banning guns in general but about closely regulating these dangerous things.
Licensing doesn´t even hurt, except when the license is denied to an instable or unreliable person. If this means that he has to give back his armory this may be painful for him but it is necessary for a safe society.
I can imagine what would happen, when the police would try to disarm such a fool: He would barricade in his house and shoot at everything moving outside, to defend his constitutional right to be an idiot ... and the NRA would make a patriotic hero out of him <shakehead> So I agree, that it is basically the mentality that makes people feel that they need a gun and it is also right that no state could ever enforce a law that the population doesn´t accept. The key is *education*, and yes, changing an attitude take quite a while.

And vigilance - to be vigilant against what or whom? And why with a gun?

Is a gun needed to vigilantly watch the measures of your government? You elected them and you can vote different the next time, that´s the game. You can´t be serious to speak of a gun as a backup option to overthrow a democratically elected government at need, jester ...
Is a gun needed to be vigilant towards neighbours or criminals? Isn´t that a police job? Such a mentality is undermining the foundation stone of a peaceful society: the executive government´s monopoly of the use of force.

 

Germany was a fully democratic republic prior to the rise of hitler. A democracy is not immune from a puscht. Don't ever make the mistake of thinking it is.

 

You can get a shotgun legally when you're 16 in Norway . But we aren't crazy. We just use them for hunting. Hunting must the the greatest activity alive!

 

LIke I said before...I think gun ownership is part of American culture.

I also think that the speed of information through the media helps to highlight gun violence. I would be interested to see how many gun related crimes were committed 50-75 years ago in the US. I wonder if there really were that fewer gun crimes or we just hear about most of them now?

I really do like the fact that any American can own a weapon. To hunt with, practice shooting with, and if needed - to protect their home and family with them. This may sound radical - but I also like the idea of having local non-governmental militia in case of problems with government.

I know they always make them out to be psychopaths on TV, but I like their spirit and the strength of their convictions. I think we'd have a hard time de-gunning the US. I mean, when I was a kid, two of my favorite movie stars were John Wayne and CLint Eastwood.