newboy2011 Posted March 5, 2011 Share Posted March 5, 2011 Knowing what you know about drugs, you'll know that guns cannot be banned either. Restricted access and airsoft guns are a better alternative. Airsoft guns are really restricted. The realistic firearms act has just about banned them. They are toys, yet you can be jailed for having one. Yet it's a fun activity/sport like paint balling. A paint ball gun is leathal yet we have little to no restriction on the ownership of one. Far more people are killed by drivers under 25. Year in year out. Ban them to save lives. Ban drink drivers for life. On the drugs issue I agree the situation is a farce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted March 5, 2011 Share Posted March 5, 2011 thank ya'll for the answers. still, as the reasons are for 'enjoyment' couldn't we just say a blanket ban as it seems to have infinitely more benefits than the alternative. after all, it takes a bad day and a 'he was so nice quiet sort of fella lets rip on a shopping mall'. LMAO! Now there's a stereotypical British attitude for you! 'People enjoy it, so we should ban it' :hihi: Does your liberalism apply the other way? People should be allowed access to grenades, flamethrowers or bazookas? Where I grew up, they are. 'Every man may possess a musket and a pound of powder' - Interpreted very liberally. - If you have a 3" rocket launcher, you may hold up to 3 rockets for it. Self-propelled weapons are excluded (no tanks!) They have no gun crime. People own guns, usually because they collect them. Some of the guns are used on shooting ranges. Keep the guns and ban the nutters. Oh, you can't do that - What about 'nutter's rights'? Shortly before the Dunblane massacre, the firearms officer of the local police advised the local magistrates that they should NOT renew Hamilton's Firearm certificate. The magistrates ignored the professional advice they had been given. What happened to them? ...errr ... nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vwkittie Posted March 5, 2011 Share Posted March 5, 2011 A knife is a useful tool which can also serve as a killing weapon. A gun is a killing weapon and nothing else. Hence the desire to severely restrict where, and how, the general public might run into the things. Above all else, making it routinely illegal to carry a firearm makes the job of the police a lot easier; anybody who they know to be part of a gang but cannot prove has committed a crime, is likely to be carrying a gun. If they stop him and find it, he can go straight inside without waiting to catch him in any other criminal act. Rubbish, clay pigeon shooting, target shooting, paintballing etc - you're not killing anything so it's not *just* a killing weapon. Your second point sounds like nonsense to me too - I highly doubt gang members carry weapons that are legal in the present situation anyway, so surely just tightening up the laws surrounding carrying unauthorised weapons e.g. automatic hefty prison sentence would achieve the same end without ruining it for everyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted March 5, 2011 Share Posted March 5, 2011 Would you say guns were good for society or bad? Access to guns should be an option for people, relative to safety laws and stuff like that? I would say that guns are as good or bad for society as hockey sticks, javelins and baseball bats are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newboy2011 Posted March 5, 2011 Share Posted March 5, 2011 Ok, if you were told you could ban all guns, every type. But to do it you had to make all drugs legal and free, and the burka had to be banned and drivers under 25 could only drive electric cars vans etc. Would you want all guns banned? Give up some freedoms, to gain some safety/security? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted March 5, 2011 Share Posted March 5, 2011 Anyone can get a gun licence tho. Anyone can turn up to a shooting club and use a gun. All it takes is for one person to go crazy and shoot something there not supposed to. A lot of people will use a gun safely and only shoot when and where they are supposed to. There will be a small percentage of people who take it too far and kill someone. I say let's reduce the RISK of this happening and ban ALL guns!! Plenty of people DO go crazy and kill people, but usually not with guns. Can anyone against guns answer this please: How many people are killed annually by legally posessed firearms? (intentionally) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newboy2011 Posted March 5, 2011 Share Posted March 5, 2011 I shoot for sport and really enjoy it. But if I were given the power to ban all guns with the trade off of the points made in previous post. I might do it. I'm thinking the greater good thing. But to hammer law abiding gun owners because of the actions of nutters and criminals only is insane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conrod Posted March 5, 2011 Share Posted March 5, 2011 Anyone can get a gun licence tho. Anyone can turn up to a shooting club and use a gun. All it takes is for one person to go crazy and shoot something there not supposed to. A lot of people will use a gun safely and only shoot when and where they are supposed to. There will be a small percentage of people who take it too far and kill someone. I say let's reduce the RISK of this happening and ban ALL guns!! My bold - both statements are very wrong. There are many strict and firmly applied legal filters in place for obtaining a firearm certificate - and conditions on turning up to a club and shooting. Why not apply your caution to knives as well, after all they kill far, far more people? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conrod Posted March 5, 2011 Share Posted March 5, 2011 I shoot for sport and really enjoy it. But if I were given the power to ban all guns with the trade off of the points made in previous post. I might do it. I'm thinking the greater good thing. But to hammer law abiding gun owners because of the actions of nutters and criminals only is insane.I too shoot for sport and have done for many years - my fellow shooters are among the most trustworthy and reliable people I know, but that didn't stop knee-jerk legislation after both Hungerford and Dunblane. The sad situation at Dunblane should have been prevented by existing laws - Hamilton should not have had guns under standing conditions of the fireams act but Strathclyde Police screwed up and let him keep them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted March 5, 2011 Share Posted March 5, 2011 The majority of guns that are involved in gun crime are already banned. Since the banning of (most) handguns, gun crime has increased greatly. Most guns used are imported illegally or blank firers and decommissioned guns that have been converted back. How would banning guns that are rarely used in crime make anything safer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.