Can someone explain the argument for gun control

Uncle Bob's nephew wrote:

Trying to ban guns, or take guns away from law abiding citizens in the USA will never work as there are just too many out there on the market. Outlawing just the "assault weapon" gun won't work easily either as an "assault weapon" and a standard deer hunting rifle are essentially the same thing as far as mechanics are concerned.

It would be much easier instead to ban all ammunition sales as well as gun powder and reloading supplies. As the years go by old ammo supplies would be gone or used. Yes, "my uncle Bob" probably has 4,000 rounds of this and 7,000 rounds of that stored in his basement but for all practical reasons he's probably not the one you need to worry about.

I don't see a problem with anyone owning that much ammo. Nothing worse than being at the range and running out of ammo.

Gun Control is very important part of hitting the target

KudzuRunner wrote:

mylegshurt wrote:

I have yet to hear a legitimate answer. Inform me

I guess the best argument might be that our rate of gun ownership is twice the rate of any other country in the world, and our annual rate of firearm deaths per 100,000 inhabitants is much, much higher than any first-world country.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

Gun control would certainly decrease suicides.

The truth is, there is no good argument AGAINST gun control, in an American context--except that gun control would lead to fewer gun sales and thus lower the profits of gun manufacturers. The only argument beyond that is based on an interpretation of the Second Amendment that forbids gun control in the interests of retaining a "well-regulated militia."

Interestingly enough the countries with very strict gun laws such as Mexico and Venezuela have an incredibly high amount of homicides by gun. Gun control would not decrease suicide....there are so many other ways to commit suicide.

Lastly, the 2nd amendment says the right to bear arms shall not be infringed and back in that time the militia consisted of anyone who showed up with a gun to fight.

mylegshurt wrote:

why bother? wrote:

do you need an argument against cancer as well? or eating lead paint chip?

Neither cancer or eating a lead paint chip yield any positives. Moronic response

no need to be so hard on yourself

UsedToBeKnowItAll wrote:

There are so many guns in this country that they could probably ban sales and manufacturing of new guns and no one would notice for 100 years.

IMHO this is the solution. No new guns, except for police, military.

Any guns confiscated by cops or turned in will be destroyed.

Over time (decades) the supply will shrink. Prices will go up. Guns will be available but owners will be more careful with them (harder to steal from homes than now) because it will be harder to get them. Preserves right to bear arms, but no one said they had to be cheap or easy to get.

You are not safe:

at church

your home

at movie theater

at restaurant

at nightclub

at your grandma's house

at school

at work

at a nursing home

at your ym

at a mall

at a rally

You are not safe anywhere unless you have a gun.........and you will be to frightened to use it.

America the greatest country on earth where over 11,000 people die each year because of......oh I know 2nd amendment SMH

mylegshurt wrote:

If you argue for citizens owning assault rifles based on the 2nd amendment then you are logically obligated to argue for them owning rocket launchers too.

I've yet to hear a legitimate response to this.

as·sault ri·fle

noun

a rapid-fire, magazine-fed automatic rifle designed for infantry use.

Automatic weapons have been illegal since the 80s. An AK47, AR15, or any other gun that is semi automatic is not an assault rifle. With that being said, rifles are used in around 1% of massing shootings so the attack on them is beyond me. The funny thing is the people who say assault rifles should be banned would say ban an AR15 but not an M14 all based on their appearance. Both are semi automatic .223's but due to lack of knowledge people think black guns are scary.[/quote]

and yet again the alt-right looney side-steps the question.

Do you support infringing the right of citizens to own surface to air missiles?

mylegshurt wrote:

why bother? wrote:

do you need an argument against cancer as well? or eating lead paint chip?

Neither cancer or eating a lead paint chip yield any positives. Moronic response

and guns do?

Why are Americans so obsessed with hunting? Unless for good it's just barbaric.

If someone is robbing you most likely they've already got a gun on you. You are not Clint Eastwood and your gun is useless.

90% of people are morons. Guns should be in the hands of professionals who are least have training to use them.

nogunhere wrote:

You are not safe:

at church

your home

at movie theater

at restaurant

at nightclub

at your grandma's house

at school

at work

at a nursing home

at your ym

at a mall

at a rally

You are not safe anywhere unless you have a gun.........and you will be to frightened to use it.

America the greatest country on earth where over 11,000 people die each year because of......oh I know 2nd amendment SMH

Considering the majority of gun deaths are from animals in Chicago killing each other that makes the entire comment irrelevant. My gun is on my hip all the time and it has yet to harm anyone.

Armstronglivs wrote:

Guns kill people. How afraid are you of an unarmed person?

I guess you can use that argument when a woman is raped or beaten by a man bigger than her because he was unarmed. Or maybe you can understand that guns are used for self defense every single day and that you have no right to tell someone they don't have the right to defend themselves.

mylegshurt wrote:

I have yet to hear a legitimate answer. Inform me

when a really angry, homicidal person wants a gun, it would be much harder for him to get it.

not sure why this is so hard.

mylegshurt wrote:

nogunhere wrote:

You are not safe:

at church

your home

at movie theater

at restaurant

at nightclub

at your grandma's house

at school

at work

at a nursing home

at your ym

at a mall

at a rally

You are not safe anywhere unless you have a gun.........and you will be to frightened to use it.

America the greatest country on earth where over 11,000 people die each year because of......oh I know 2nd amendment SMH

Considering the majority of gun deaths are from animals in Chicago killing each other that makes the entire comment irrelevant. My gun is on my hip all the time and it has yet to harm anyone.

most people drive drunk and never kill anyone.

legalize drunk driving, definitely.

TheRunningTroll wrote:

Interestingly enough the countries with very strict gun laws such as Mexico and Venezuela have an incredibly high amount of homicides by gun. Gun control would not decrease suicide....there are so many other ways to commit suicide.

Lastly, the 2nd amendment says the right to bear arms shall not be infringed and back in that time the militia consisted of anyone who showed up with a gun to fight.

once again some nutjob cites the 2nd amendment w/o answering my question:

Do you think a citizen's right to own a surface-to-air missile should be infringed upon?

ukathleticscoach wrote:

mylegshurt wrote:

Neither cancer or eating a lead paint chip yield any positives. Moronic response

and guns do?

Why are Americans so obsessed with hunting? Unless for good it's just barbaric.

If someone is robbing you most likely they've already got a gun on you. You are not Clint Eastwood and your gun is useless.

90% of people are morons. Guns should be in the hands of professionals who are least have training to use them.

Yes, guns do. Go search "active self protection" on YouTube and you can get an idea of how people stop criminals with guns all the time.

mylegshurt wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

Guns kill people. How afraid are you of an unarmed person?

I guess you can use that argument when a woman is raped or beaten by a man bigger than her because he was unarmed. Or maybe you can understand that guns are used for self defense every single day and that you have no right to tell someone they don't have the right to defend themselves.

Yet rapes and muggings occur all the time. It seems having guns doesn't offer much in the way of protection. The "good ol US of A" has 5x the homicide rate of any other developed country. Homicides - if it escapes you - aren't self-defence.

still waiting... wrote:

TheRunningTroll wrote:

Interestingly enough the countries with very strict gun laws such as Mexico and Venezuela have an incredibly high amount of homicides by gun. Gun control would not decrease suicide....there are so many other ways to commit suicide.

Lastly, the 2nd amendment says the right to bear arms shall not be infringed and back in that time the militia consisted of anyone who showed up with a gun to fight.

once again some nutjob cites the 2nd amendment w/o answering my question:

Do you think a citizen's right to own a surface-to-air missile should be infringed upon?

Considering a tomahawk cruise missile costs $1.5 million for 1 i don't honestly think your question is worth answering.

mylegshurt wrote:

nogunhere wrote:

You are not safe:

at church

your home

at movie theater

at restaurant

at nightclub

at your grandma's house

at school

at work

at a nursing home

at your ym

at a mall

at a rally

You are not safe anywhere unless you have a gun.........and you will be to frightened to use it.

America the greatest country on earth where over 11,000 people die each year because of......oh I know 2nd amendment SMH

Considering the majority of gun deaths are from animals in Chicago killing each other that makes the entire comment irrelevant. My gun is on my hip all the time and it has yet to harm anyone.

So you really didn't want a legitimate answer...you just wanted to argue your point. I understand now... to you there is no legitimate answer. And thus this thread is a waste of everyone's time.

also, i'll note you used to word 'animals' to describe people, i'm guessing you did that to get folks even more angry so they'd argue more with you... very mature of you.

It's sad that people draw lines in the sand and refuse to compromise but hey, that's the world we live in today... look at what we've got for a president... a complete and utter joke.

Cheers!

(Here's a thought... I wonder if the next president can just change the 2nd amendment with an executive order. I guess he/she could if trump can change the 14th with an EO.)

TheRunningTroll wrote:

still waiting... wrote:

once again some nutjob cites the 2nd amendment w/o answering my question:

Do you think a citizen's right to own a surface-to-air missile should be infringed upon?

Considering a tomahawk cruise missile costs $1.5 million for 1 i don't honestly think your question is worth answering.

so in other words you are flustered and have no answer.

so weak.

So I assume you would support citizen ownership of grenades and RPGs?

A total of 3 (yes 3) people were killed in gun related incidents in Japan in 2017. In the US there were over 15,000, excluding suicides.

Let's say the goal is to reduce the number of gun deaths in the US by 75% to around 5,000. I'm curious about what solutions gun advocates would propose. Or as we as a society just willing to accept a lot of people dying in gun violence every year. It seems like such a waste and tragedy.