WingColors

Funny, because I was just reading that article, and then came to 9rules and first thing I saw was your note.

Best quote:
"Still, I'm glad he was able to get his FOID card. It makes an adorable addition to his baby book."

Arm the youth! The revolution will be toddlerized!

We shouldn't be outraged that a 10 month old could get a license, we should be outraged that they even require a license. When will silly politicians learn that gun control and licensing doesn't work.

1. Criminals, by definition, break the law. So we are setting up laws to prevent law breakers from breaking the law.

2. Violent crime goes up with an increase in gun control, and we see this over and over again.

Is your right to freedom of speech still needed today? You can not pick and choose your rights, you have them and can choose to use them or not.

If you arm your police, criminals use guns more.

I'd say we have less gun crime here in the UK, but probably more knife crime.

Oh and I would question if I have the right to free speech over here! :P

We need more knife crime in the U.S. (and less gun crime to offset it) ;-)
I can respect someone coming up and stabbing me.
I can't respect the idiot who will use a boomstick from a distance.

Was he at least a good shot? I don't think I'd be ok with him being licensed if he wasn't well trained.

ComputerJoe,

I believe in natural rights derived from our existence. The Bill of Rights, in America at least, helps to outline these rights, however, there are others. Everyone has those rights, and they can't be taken away by government. You can, however, be imprisoned (or killed) by authoritarian governments for using a right, that however does not mean that that right does not exist, instead it means that you were unable to realize your right without persecution.

"2. Violent crime goes up with an increase in gun control, and we see this over and over again."

quite possibly the stupidest thing I have ever read!

You have data that shows otherwise?

Gun Control ultimately serves to punish those who follow the law.

If you're not concerned with the legality of your actions what makes you think you're going to bother with something as trivial as a gun law.

When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.

yes, we (the UK) have very strict firearms laws, hardly anybody gets shot, the USA doesn't and tens of thousands of people get shot.

i'm thinking, that's because there are lots of guns around not because Americans are pre-disposed to bouts of homicidal mania. The Virginia Tech shooter killed all of those people with legally owned handguns. No guns, no shooting.

I spent five years in the army, shooting guns, blah, blah, can't honestly see the attraction.

your last sentence is as ludicrous as any argument supporting the second amendment, which was written more than 200 years ago but you already know that, etc, etc, etc, ad-tedium.

Article19,

If you are correct then how can Switzerland have a lower murder rate than the UK?

Also, there are cultural differences, and for this reason I think you see a difference in murder rates, however if you take a region and introduce gun control, rates of violence go up, particularly in the American context but also in the UK case as well.

Because we're gritty bastards that like to knife people.

I live in Illinois, what you don't know is that at birth all babies begin an intensive arms and explosive training program. After 10 months of training they are awarded their FOID card along with a new NRA Sippee Cup.

The Swiss are clearly too busy eating and making delicious chocolates to kill anyone.
Unless they try to steal the chocolates...
At least.. that's what I would do.
(Make/Eat chocolate, not kill people.)

Let's put it this way. Most murders are the result of an argument or are derived from anger. They are spontaneous and not thought out. Isn't it fairly obvious that an angry person is much more likely to kill if he has a gun on him? I don't know about you, but if we were all packing, I would be a much more courteous driver. Think about all those road rage incidents that would go bad if each of us had a gun and started shooting first and asking questions later. Sure they could use other weapons that are available now, but those are up close and personal, and they take effort. With a gun, it's a detached action, pulling a trigger and killing from a distance.

That bastard cut me off! He's dead! *Pulls out my (completely unregulated because of lack of gun control) submachine gun.*

The logic you're putting up doesn't hold water next to the real data.

Individuals licensed to carry a firearm in all states that have concealed carry laws are FAR less likely to use their handguns on impulse than those NOT trained.

The concept of mutually assured destruction is a very effective crime deterrent. If you know I COULD be packin... would you mug me?

Isn't requiring an individual to be licensed before carrying a concealed firearm still gun control? I was talking about the absence of any sort of gun control, which was being argued for above. And yes, I would mug you because my gun would be out while yours was still holstered. I like those odds when all I have to do is pull a trigger.

It's a lot easier to say than do... of the last three incidents involving concealed carry interventions the perp DID have his gun drawn and yet not surprisingly he was still overpowered.

Contrary to popular belief owning a gun doesn't make you trigger happy so no, I still believe that an armed public, license or not would not turn the US into the wild wild west. Normal people are typically responsible.

I agree with tmht it has been proven that when you take guns out of the hands of people who wont use them for evil, you inadvertently place them in the hands of people who will use them for evil.

In england no one other than the military and the police (and even then only under heavy restrictions in public places) can carry a hand gun. However some places I have walked through almost every criminal owns one. You just don't hear about it in the media anymore unless it's a really big deal.

The excuse that our police use for not carrying weapons is that they would be involved in more gun related crime. Ironic considering is that not what they are supposed to be combating? The police have already recognised that gun control doesn't work it just made people more vunurable.

Also for those of you interested, British gun laws where amended as a political tool to get a prime minister into power. There had been a big shooting not too long before the elections and the person who won the election was the one who said they would outlaw gun possession. Had the shooting happened at ANY OTHER TIME the laws would not have been amended.

Also I can't believe no one has said:

bang bang (my baby shot me down)

yet...

Perhaps 95% of people on this planet would be responsible, that still leaves 5% who can do a lot of damage if they were able to purchase any kind of weapon (assault rifles and such).

I wouldn't want to be a politician or public official, thats for sure. Especially an unpopular one. How long do you think Bush would last if everyone at his speeches and rallies had guns on them? That would make government interesting.

No gun regulations would allow children of any age to own a gun. How many more gun accidents would there be? How many school yard pushing matches would end in violence because children don't understand the full repercussions of pulling that trigger? Maybe that is the parents responsibility, but we all know how many unresponsible parents there are out there. I wouldn't want my child's safety hinging on how responsible other parents are.

There are a million more scenarios that I won't bore you with. I just don't see how having SOME gun control is a bad thing. Why not keep guns out of the hands of children? Why not regulate the types guns to be sold? I can't see our country needing a militia anytime soon. We all know that if someone wants a gun badly enough, they are going to buy a gun, legally or illegally. We all know that if someone wants to kill badly enough, they are going to kill, with or without a gun. The thing about gun control is that it makes it just that much harder for that person who wants to do those things, which in many cases is deterrent enough.

I've never advocated full and complete removals of ALL gun control from society sir, but I DO advocate the repeal of ANY laws that would bar anyone from owning one on the basis that "we just think the government should be the only one with the guns".

Do I think anyone under the age of 25 should legally be able to purchase a firearm? - NO

Do I think anyone who has received medical treatment for a mental disorder should be able to own a gun? - NO

Do I think that a convicted felon (served or not) should be able to own a gun? - NO

I also do not believe in being told what type of gun I can and cannot buy.

I do think that anyone who DOES own a gun should be required BY LAW to undergo rigourous training before being allowed to carry as, statistics prove that people who are trained to use a weapon are far more safe than someone who isn't.

In ten years plus as a street cop, I have SELDOM seen a violent crime comitted with a LEGAL firearm. That means, listen carefully, that gun control does not work.

AK47 assault rifles are unlawful. They kill dozens in gang shootings every year.

No one under 18 is allowed to carry a firearm (in most states). License or not. Yet most gang violence is committed by these children.

By the way, even if the gun is lawfully obtained, it is probably pawned or stolen by the time it commits a crime.

I have a better idea. Let law abiding citizens carry guns to protect themselves. In each state that has tried this method, gun-related violence has gone down. Period.