Discussing and Debating! discussion

No. Plain and simple. It's unconstitutional, I have the right to bear arms. Nobody can take that away. And if they do, don't you think that the ones who don't obey the law will just start to? No, they'll get guns somehow and people will still get hurt.

Y'all I'm from Texas! No! I wholeheartedly agree with Erin. Banning guns is just a bad idea. And honestly, if guns get banned, people will just find a new thing. Not too long ago, someone drove a car through a gas station! In fact, car accidents have caused so many deaths. But do we ban cars? No! I. Love. My. Guns.

Guns are meant for war. I don’t see the appeal in keeping them.

Using cars as an example is a very weak argument. Cars are meant for driving and accidents happen. But guns are meant for killing. A top priority for a country is to keep its civilians safe.

Yes, so allowing us to have guns to protect ourselves is the safe thing.

Guns are impacting the United States in a negative way. New Zealand is already doing something about their gun laws just from that one shooting. How more shootings will America have to endure before you guys do something about it?

I understand why you guys want your guns. I know that a lot of people in America love to use them for hunting but I just don’t think it is worth the risk.

I think that there should be better stipulations on people who can buy a gun. But no, I do not think guns should ever be banned.

Your right, Reeshi. Cars is not the best example. But honestly, if you ban guns, people will just find another thing to use.

I feel like you guys care too much about your firearms but if the United States can't ban guns then the country should try to have stricter gun laws. Doing something about the situation is better than nothing.

I don't own a gun. I agree Reeshi, this country should do something. But I don't think banning guns is the right way to go.

So say find get banned. And all the law abiding citizens give up their guns. Then one day you are walking down the street and a guy jumps.out with a gun. How are you going to defend yourself without something of equal force? You can't, you will get hurt.

No. Banning guns is not an effective solution to decreasing crime in which guns are used. All banning guns dose is remove law abiding citizens ability to defend themselves and turn law abiding citizens into felons. I live in Missouri, a state that just passed a bill that outlaws all federal laws limiting and infringing the second amendment, I own multiple firearms and so do my friends, family, neighbors as well as a great majority of the people in my town, there is very little violent crime, little to no robberies or muggings. even if the federal and state governments attempted to ban guns and confiscate them from the citizens of the united states there would me serious retaliation which would most likely result in massive casualties. the second amendment and the peoples right to keep and bear arms is something that will never be taken away from those who seek to live safely and freely.

When people say they want to keep their guns for their safety, how does that work? Like are you going to carry a gun with you everywhere you go?

Reeshi wrote: "When people say they want to keep their guns for their safety, how does that work? Like are you going to carry a gun with you everywhere you go?"

I understand the point you are trying to make, my experience when it comes to firearms and violence is most likely very different from yours, I grew up around firearms all my life, it the town where I live firearms are a daily occurrence, they are everywhere from the house to the gas station, to the grocery store and even at church. I see people carrying guns with them everywhere even I carry a gun in and out of the house. even though there are guns everywhere there is very little crime, yet in city's such as Chicago, Detroit and New York where are not nearly as many firearms and firearm laws are much more strict there is a much greater occurrence of violent crime. As Robert A. Heinlein said “An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.”

Reeshi wrote: "I feel like you guys care too much about your firearms but if the United States can't ban guns then the country should try to have stricter gun laws. Doing something about the situation is better t..."

What do you think should be done about the "situation", what regulations do you think the United States government should put fourth in order to solve or help regulate things such as shootings, robberies, muggings ect, and how would federal, state and local law enforcement enforce such regulations?

I know a lot of Americans love their guns so perhaps going through a series of tests before being allowed to own a gun. Like psychological tests, classes for firearms, background checks, age restriction, stating their reason for wanting a gun (and I don't think self-defense is a good reason, sorry), certain types of guns should be banned, punishment for illegally owning a gun, only allowed to own a certain amount of guns, must renew their weapons every once in a while. In short, make it really difficult to own a gun.

In America, there are more guns than people. No wonder gun violence is such a problem in the United States. I know there are a lot of gun owners who are such good people with nothing but the best intentions. Sorry you guys are going through this.

Reeshi wrote: "In America, there are more guns than people. No wonder gun violence is such a problem in the United States. I know there are a lot of gun owners who are such good people with nothing but the best i..."

With an estimated 371 million firearms owned by 319 million people (this is only the estimated number of firearms that the government knows about) how would the united states federal and state law enforcement enforcement enforce banning certain types of firearms especially those already owned by a extremely large number of citizens. do you suggest a sort of confiscation or a mandatory buy back program. I am also curious to know what types of firearms should be banned/regulated and why you think these certain firearms should be banned. and i would refer you to look at the statistics of violent crime and murder rate in accordance to gun bans in both the United States and London. As i see it firearm bans only increase the amount of violent crime and homicide because the only people who abide by the laws are law abiding citizens. which means that if the united states were to enact a firearm ban the only people who would still have firearms are criminals, this also means that law abiding citizens would have no way of defending themselves. https://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol....

As soon as I saw your long message I thought crap I’m know I’m about to get owned😂

Here’s the thing, I don’t know anything about guns. The type of guns or how they work. I only shot a gun once in my life but only because it part of a school trip. At first I thought you guys are crazy but now I see why some want to keep guns. I’m not pro gun but I can still understand your side.

Reeshi wrote: "As soon as I saw your long message I thought crap I’m know I’m about to get owned😂

Here’s the thing, I don’t know anything about guns. The type of guns or how they work. I only shot a gun once in..."

lol, Great thanks for your thoughts on the matter, it is very rare that i find a person civilized enough to have a thought out discussion on such a politically heavy and controversial topic. I admire the way you thoughtfully construct your arguments. I greatly enjoyed having this discussion with you.

I think it depends on who owns them. I personally don't like people hunting but without them humans wouldn't have food. I don't like when people hunt for sport,laugh at the dead animal,and leave it there.

The same goes for you James! You put up quite a good argument :)

Reeshi wrote: "The same goes for you James! You put up quite a good argument :)"

Thanks! :)

This is more of a debate than a discussion.

Rumell wrote: "This is more of a debate than a discussion."

Yea I noticed this chat wasn't in the debate section too.

A common argument i hear used by anti gun activists is the Australian gun ban. In 1996 a gunman opened fire on shop owners and tourists with two semi-automatic rifles killing 35 and wounding 23. following the massacre the Australian government banned certain semi-automatic, self-loading rifles and shotguns, and imposed stricter licensing and registration requirements. It also instituted a mandatory buyback program for firearms banned. During the buyback program, Australians sold 640,000 prohibited firearms to the government, and voluntarily surrendered about 60,000 non-prohibited firearms. In all, more than 700,000 weapons were surrendered. These new gun laws had little to no effect on the crime rate. prior to the shooting and the gun ban the overall crime rate in Australia had been steadily decreasing and after the new laws were passed the decrease in crime stayed the same.

I don't feel safe with the thought that people can have a gun freely and use it freely but sometimes, for example, people like my uncle who has been in the army. He does not feel safe without a gun by his bed (I'm not sure if he takes it with him). That is because he went through that traumatic experience and having a gun for him is like his protection and I will allow that. I know people with there guns have their reasons but sometimes it can be as a legitimate weapon.

i dont really care as long as its not used for violence

If you look at other countries who ban guns they have less crimes relating to guns. If they are going to restrict guns they should also restrict knife-crimes too.

I think we have the right to bear arms. Do guns kill people? No. People kill people. If we give up our guns, what happens when the goverment take over. What happens when gangs come with their illegal guns. How will we defend ourselves?

I believe that you should be allowed to buy and carry guns if you have a very specific permit that you have to take a lie detector test and a background check to get. I also don't think that banning guns will really help to control the crime rate, it will just anger the American that use them from hunting and other legal practices. And what about the terrorist that get them on the black market? We won't be stopping them, just helping them by making their target defenseless. Bad people will do bad things but you shouldn't punish the people that try to stand up and protect themselves and their families just because they own a gun and therefore might be a possible terrorist. You can't stop people from doing bad things but you can inform and prepare the innocents for what those people might do.

Grace wrote: "I believe that you should be allowed to buy and carry guns if you have a very specific permit that you have to take a lie detector test and a background check to get. I also don't think that bannin..."

Finally someone who has brains.

When there is a shooting and people get killed we blame guns. But can a gun fire itself? No. It cannot. It’s the person with the gun that is a problem. When others will realize that, I don’t know. What I do know is that teachers in Texas are being trained on how to use a firearm. They can choose if they want to carry for their students or not. So far, a lot of them have chosen to carry. Pastors carry in order to ensure the safety of the congregation. Adults take firearms to the movie theaters, because you just never know. My mom and dad both carry, and they take their guns everywhere they can. Banning guns will take away my parents right to protect their children, and teacher’s rights to protect students. So many people carry for safety, some just have guns to shoot on a range(me), or hunt. Banning guns is just a bad idea. It would take away our freedom to protect ourselves. You don’t have to agree with me, I honestly don’t care. And no one is wrong with how they feel about banning guns. Sure, we might not agree, but I believe everyone’s opinion matters.

I used to think banning guns was the best idea but then I realized it wouldn't be fair for others. Do I hate guns? Yep I really do. Will I ever understand the love for them? Nope. I do agree with Robert and it's safe to say I do have a brain Wolf haha

Karsyn wrote: "When there is a shooting and people get killed we blame guns. But can a gun fire itself? No. It cannot. It’s the person with the gun that is a problem. When others will realize that, I don’t know. ..."

Yes, thank you Karsyn, we definitely think alike.

@Robert, I'm not saying that only people with brains oppose gun control. You're putting words in my mouth.

I see your point, Robert when you say that guns with high fire rates and overly large magazines aren't necessary and I agree with you. On that same hand, how much do people legally use those kinds of guns? But on the other hand do we need to ban all the guns from hand pistols to hunting rifles to the big assault rifles? No we don't. You said it yourself that the guns used at mass shootings aren't pistols and other small guns or ones used at ranges or for hunting, and your very right. If we just get rid of the guns that are proven to be used by terrorists and not by the innocents then I don't see a problem. You just shouldn't ban something that's not being used illegally.

I'm just trying to find a way to look at both view points

I think that canada is fine with gun control but i don't think they should be banned because i like to hunt and so do lot's of other people.

There will never be a perfect law about guns. And if there was it would be broken, I agree that there are lots of people in possessions of guns who aren't mentally stable and can cause serious damage, but there will be more damage if it was illegal to have guns.
If guns were illegal, then some people would have guns, because there would be a black market for them, and some people might be exempt from this law, and the few people who have guns could and probably would become dictators, because they have a weapon no one else has. And no one can stop them, because they wouldn't be able to get through gunfire.

In conclusion, I think the way last are now should stay the same, because it may not be perfect, but this is something where 'cracking down the wip' may prove catastrophic

The way laws are not last, sorry

Reagan wrote: "There will never be a perfect law about guns. And if there was it would be broken, I agree that there are lots of people in possessions of guns who aren't mentally stable and can cause serious dama..."

Damn i like the way you think Reagan and Keerthi

Agreed

Grace wrote: "Agreed"

Do you hunt

Robert wrote: "Reagan wrote: " few people who have guns could and probably would become dictators, because they have a weapon no one else has."


have you read this?
https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/14/us/jos......"

holy s**t this happened on my brothers birthday and i didn't know

I think the gun debate should be framed in an urban vs rural setting. It may not make sense to own guns in a big city. But it certainly makes no sense to ban all guns in Alaska.

Good point. But what if you have a cabin and hunt there but live in the city

I imagine the best compromise would be with zoning laws. All guns within the city are banned. But once you leave the city limits. They are legal again.

I agree but what if someone bought a gun out of the city and then brought it in? And I know this is off topic but if you don't mind me asking you if you live in Alaska, Austin?

And yes Brayden I do hunt