Ban Guns

[JohnLVT]

I have lived around the world, and been to countless countries. When I see police on the streets of England without wearing a gun I feel very safe. I was in Romania a few months back, guns are near banned there as well. Again a very safe country.

The USA has to start the process to be in line with these safer countries. Death via gunshot in the USA each year is carnage. Enough is enough. The US has to start to be civilized on this point and get into the 21st century.

[jdmyprez_deo_vindice]

I really hope this is a joke.

[JohnLVT]

I really hope this is a joke.

Banning guns is no joke. Look around the world at countries which ban them. Far safer societies.
Death via gunshot in the USA each year is carnage. Enough is enough. Civilization has to prevail.

[LibertyEagle]

John, your knowledge of history is very poor. Because if you knew history, you would know that in country after country, the citizenry was disarmed prior to total tyranny being enacted by the government.

[tod evans]

Here's a "cut-n-paste" from your other anti-gun post;

Come on man you've joined an internet forum that is premised on constitutional liberty, the second amendment was written for a reason.

I'm pretty sure any of the socialist European countries you keep referencing would be proud to call you "comrade" and let you toil on their soil "for the greater good".

Just think how safe you would be.........only the government would have weapons.....a venerable utopia.

[LibertyEagle]

Just think how safe you would be.........only the government would have weapons.....a venerable utopia.

Well, the government and also the common criminals. Because the criminals would not give up their guns.

[WilliamC]

I really hope this is a joke.

No, but the person posting it is.

[Dsylexic]

johnlVT. nonsense on stilts.really.switzerland is the most heavily armed citizenry.almost everyone there owns guns and is well trained to use it. they have the lowest shooting accidents or killing rates.
i am from india and watched in frustrated impotence when terrorists hijacked a plush hotel few years back in mumbai.an unarmed citizenry depending on the inefficient and feckless state for protection is as good as dead .if our citizens had been armed,the casualties would have been far lower.
you want to ban guns? why not cars? in india where guns are banned,cars and govt buses mow down more people every year.why not ban any automobile.

unless you were being facetious,you are on the wrong forum and with the wrong ideas

[JohnLVT]

johnlVT. nonsense on stilts.really.switzerland is the most heavily armed citizenry.almost everyone there owns guns and is well trained to use it.

That is nonsense! See my other post on that.

i am from india and watched in frustrated impotence when terrorists hijacked a plush hotel few years back in mumbai.

Terrorists would not be deterred by people with handguns. Who would not use them against an organized gang. Look at the mass murders in the USA of school kids. An armed nation never stopped that. Get real. Being from India you must be aware of the UK and its laws.

Look at the countries that have banned guns. Great places to live - very safe. They have the freedom to walk down the street and not be threatened by people with firearms, private people or the state. This freedom is denied to many in countries like the USA. Americans need to get heir basic freedom back.

you want to ban guns? why not cars?

So two wrongs make a right then. Warped logic. Cars and guns are mutually exclusive.

[Dsylexic]

That is nonsense! See my other post on that.



Terrorists would not be deterred by people with handguns. Who would not use them against an organized gang. Look at the mass murders in the USA of school kids. An armed nation never stopped that. Get real. Being from India you must be aware of the UK and its laws.

Look at the countries that have banned guns. Great places to live - very safe. They have the freedom to walk down the street and not be threatened by people with firearms, private people or the state. This freedom is denied to many in countries like the USA. Americans need to get heir basic freedom back.



So two wrongs make a right then. Warped logic. Cars and guns are mutually exclusive.

how the f*** are you going to ban guns? by arresting people who carry guns? in india,the criminals have guns anyway,the politicians and rich businessmen do. the british ruled over india by ABOLISHING first the indian citizens right to bear arms.it was designed to curb any chance of violent action against british rule after the first war of independence in india (1857).the socialist indian govt continued that very abhorrent british law.
you must be naive to think that senseless murders in america will reduce by banning guns.crazy violent people will obtains guns by any means.
you obviously have no right to be 'not intimidated' by the mere action of your fellow citizen carrying guns unless they threaten you.
if they are just carrying guns for their own protection,you must infact pay them for the free riding you are doing :s
being intimidated without cause is paranoid .

[angelatc]

Look at the countries that have banned guns. Great places to live - very safe. .

Murders per capita - the US doesn't even rank in the top 40. http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita

[JohnLVT]

Murders per capita - the US doesn't even rank in the top 40.

OH the percentage game to confuse. What is it? 60,000 a year die from gunshot - carnage. The aim is ZERO. ZERO tolerance.

[PaulConventionWV]

t

That is nonsense! See my other post on that.



Terrorists would not be deterred by people with handguns. Who would not use them against an organized gang. Look at the mass murders in the USA of school kids. An armed nation never stopped that. Get real. Being from India you must be aware of the UK and its laws.

Look at the countries that have banned guns. Great places to live - very safe. They have the freedom to walk down the street and not be threatened by people with firearms, private people or the state. This freedom is denied to many in countries like the USA. Americans need to get heir basic freedom back.



So two wrongs make a right then. Warped logic. Cars and guns are mutually exclusive.

The bolded part is not freedom, far from it. Your view is so warped that I don't even know how you can logically process these contradictory thoughts. The freedom to not be threatened is not freedom. The freedom to be threatened and do something about it is freedom. If you ban guns, people will still be threatened with guns by criminals who have them because, guess what, they're criminals. Then, the people who are not criminals do not have the means to defend themselves. That is the opposite of freedom. Taking away guns is taking away freedom, not adding it.

Also, mass murders in schools occur in places where guns are not allowed anyway because the school has the right to make that choice, not the government. Your example works against you because these murders happened despite the fact that nobody in the school was permitted to have a gun. But oh, guess what, someone DID have a gun because they didn't care about the rules. And guess what else, they killed people because they were the ONLY ones with guns in the whole school. Telling people they can't have guns by a private insitution on their private property is different than the government telling everyone they can't have guns. The private institution has the right to do that. I know most schools are public these days, but in terms of guns, they behave like private institutions.

Terrorists would be deterred by people with handguns because they would be dead. Just because they ain't skeered, doesn't mean they won't get shot if other law-abiding citizens have guns. It's pretty simple. If a lot of people have guns, they can shoot the terrorists dead, therefore disabling them from committing acts of terrorism. That cannot possibly happen in a society where all law-abiding citizens don't have guns. That is, unless you think other criminals are going to shoot the terrorists.

[JohnLVT]

t
The bolded part is not freedom,

The freedom to walk down the street and not be threatened by people with firearms, private people or the state. This freedom is denied to many in countries like the USA. Americans need to get heir basic freedom back. Get into the 21st century.

[otherone]

The freedom to walk down the street and not be threatened by people with firearms, private people or the state. This freedom is denied to many in countries like the USA. Americans need to get heir basic freedom back. Get into the 21st century.

Hello. Welcome to the RPF. I don't think you are aware of the basis and intent of the 2nd amendment. That's ok. This forum is an educational springboard for those who wish to honestly debate political issues. 911 exposed a basic human principle of which the founding fathers were keenly concerned:
They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety
-Benjamin Franklin
Your Right to Safety is a positive Right, meaning someone or something must provide it for you. Where does that positive Right come from? Are you a tax payer? You realize that your positive Right comes from unwilling theft of someone else? Positive Rights, by their nature, come from the STATE. The State giving and taking away Rights is a terrifying prospect.

[Flugel89]

That is nonsense! See my other post on that.



Terrorists would not be deterred by people with handguns. Who would not use them against an organized gang. Look at the mass murders in the USA of school kids. An armed nation never stopped that. Get real. Being from India you must be aware of the UK and its laws.

Look at the countries that have banned guns. Great places to live - very safe. They have the freedom to walk down the street and not be threatened by people with firearms, private people or the state. This freedom is denied to many in countries like the USA. Americans need to get heir basic freedom back.



So two wrongs make a right then. Warped logic. Cars and guns are mutually exclusive.

Thanks for countering your own point. Of course mass shooting happen at schools. There's rarely if ever a single firearm being carried by a responsible person.

Try searching for any mass shootings at shooting ranges or gun dealers. They don't happen. An armed populace can respond and stop the threat before there is a large body count.

Gun control only negatively affects peacful citizens. The criminals -who don't care what the law says- have a guarantee that their victims are unarmed and are of no threat to them.

Do you REALLY think when the UK and Australia banned firearms that the criminals gave theirs up? The answer is no. If you actually did some reasearch instead of basing your positions off of pure misguided emotions you'd notice that every country that bans firearms experiences a subsequent explosion in crime rates, including crime using firearms.

Gun control is one of the largest, and most obvious of logical fallacies.

More guns = less crime. No exceptions.

Also, obvious troll is obvious. I'm just having fun feeding it.

[otherone]

Try searching for any mass shootings at shooting ranges or gun dealers.

What an awesome concept for a video game!

[Travlyr]

Lol... ban guns and pay your land tax or lose it. That there is True Liberty. How about paper money JohnLVT? Would that make us even more free?

Sheesh...

[awake]

lol...Do you know where you are?

[marcirvine]

hahahahahahahaha

another attempt to take away our Bill of Rights? Better to talk to Hillary Clinton about this. She is working with the UN on banning guns worldwide!
Once they take away our guns they can move in and take over our lives without us being able to defend ourselves. Do not think the powers that be do not want a defenseless America. The 2nd amendment was given to us for a number or reasons. One of the prime reasons was that if any foreign, domestic, or now international (UN) government tries to take away our Constitution and our Bill of Rights and all of the freedoms that they entail, then that enemy would have to fight tooth and nail every armed American if need be. That position will always hold true.

[NoOneButPaul]

Wow.... just woow....

[KMX]

I say more gun laws and more gun restrictions more crime. Less gun laws and restrictions less crime.

[NoOneButPaul]

I say more gun laws and more gun restrictions more crime. Less gun laws and restrictions less crime.

As someone who lives in Chicago this is without a doubt true.

How is it no one notices that the cities with the most gun control are always the most unsafe...

[PaulConventionWV]

As someone who lives in Chicago this is without a doubt true.

How is it no one notices that the cities with the most gun control are always the most unsafe...

Some of us don't live close to big cities and don't study our big city gun law history. I know, shocking.

[zHorns]

[KMX]

WHo are you more likly to robb?... Someone that more then lilkly has no gun b/c the law won't allow it , OR a guy that is most likly armed b/c the law allows it?

[angelatc]

Cops in the UK started carrying guns quite a few years ago, yet the myth lives on.

Of course it the poster is saying that society is better off if the police are unarmed, I might be inclined to agree with him to some extent.

[eduardo89]

Cops in the UK started carrying guns quite a few years ago, yet the myth lives on.

Of course it the poster is saying that society is better off if the police are unarmed, I might be inclined to agree with him to some extent.

Very few cops have guns in the UK. The ones that have guns are only at airports, train stations, government buildings etc. 99% of cops do not have a firearm.

[Demigod]

Very few cops have guns in the UK. The ones that have guns are only at airports, train stations, government buildings etc. 99% of cops do not have a firearm.

Eduardo they do not carry guns cause the politicians are afraid they will shoot someone and start protests that will take them done from power.And that is the only reason.

[eduardo89]

Eduardo they do not carry guns cause the politicians are afraid they will shoot someone and start protests that will take them done from power.And that is the only reason.

Well British cops actually have never carried more than a baton and a whistle. It's been like that since the formation of modern police forces in Victorian times.

I personally see it as the government not even trusting the police and wanting to keep EVERYONE disarmed.

Handguns are completely banned in the UK. Guess what happened to knife crime when then went into effect? It went up exponentially.