I'd like to chime in on this topic.

The reason this is so controversial.. isn't so much a second amendment fight. its a States rights issue. The Federal government is not supposed to interfere in States issues. period. It was a handgun ban in Wash DC, nothing concerning interstate commerce/trade or anything relating to cross state relations. I felt that it was a waste of federal tax dollars to even have this heard. Shouldn't the state courts be able to take care of this sufficiently?
However, I feel like handgun bans aren't really there to keep the streets gun free. Its just easier to lock a drugdealer up on gun charges for a couple years vs them getting out in 3-6 months on just drug charges, and thats why they made them illegal.

>


Question 1: Because everyone else is. In a lot of ways yes its adding fuel to the fire, yes its one more gun on the street, yes it makes you just as dangerous as the guy robbing you. But here is the thing, as stated before, you will lose if you take a knife to a gun fight. Most will anyways. And id rather be on even playing ground when confronted with another person with a gun. A friend of mine had the best answer i have ever heard about carrying a gun with you at all times. He is a cop and when he is off duty he carrys his guns with him at all times. When asked "Why do you always carry your guns with you?" he replied," Id rather have it with me and never need it, then not have it and need it"
Question 2: Because although people are the only really weapon on the street, most feel they need help to kill some one. And again, i want the game to be an even match.

>
I have to disagree with this. Each state is entitled to its own laws and constitution within the confines of the US Constitution. But federal law trumps state law, period. California's medicinal marijuana law is a perfect example of this, as is Oregon's assisted suicide law. There can be a federal raid on those doing something that is perfectly within the confines of the state law, but goes against federal law.

Further, by the argument that the Federal government is not supposed to interfere in State issues, this would mean that basically states could do whatever they wanted— segregation, polygamy, the list could go on and on. But they can't do this, because we have the Constitution to defend these rights.

Again— the rights afforded to us by the Constitution are inalienable. It is not the role or right of any state or local jurisdiction to take away those rights because they feel like they want to.

For whatever it's worth, I grew up outside of DC and I remember what it was like, especially in the early 80s when crack first came on the scene. I know all about Camden and Newark too, for that matter having left the DC area for NYC, I know all about Flatbush and BedStuy. I'm not arguing for or against guns, my argument is for upholding the Constitution.

I just have to throw this in real quick and then I'm done:
>

That's the 10th Amendment. Basically it simply means that the federal government is limited only to the powers granted in the Constitution. So it's kind of a balance between where the line is that federal law trumps state law. I know it's still a gray area, really I do. But it's not a gray area where constitutional right comes in. The state does not have the power to violate our constitutional rights.

Back to the main topic. The SC ruled in favor of gun owners, some will say they didn't do enough and others will argue the opposite.

At the end of the day everyone will have a different opinion, this argure ment could go one for days and days, but we dispite our logical thinking it wont be enough to shake someones core beliefs. That can only happen when something happens to them to make it personal. When someone breaks into their house, and does bad things(sums up alot of naaaasssttty things there) only because the are holding you at XXXXX point, it doesnt matter if it is a gun, a knife, dynamite, or a RPG, people have always killed, the only thing that has changed over the years is how we kill eachother...

I am not trying to end this discussion at all, so please keep going, but no one is going to change a core belief because of what someone said on the internet, when it becomes real to them.


>

Truer words have never been spoken

>


You dont need to look at other countries just try to comprehend this...

More people die every year from car accidents every year than from all the guns deaths,

More people die from doctor negligence than from guns (its like a 400% difference, this guy at my work brought in all this stuff about stuff like this last week, i will be trying see where he got it from, but that will have to wait untill monday:/)

Strict gun laws only affect the future victims, as crooks are crooks and wont care about the law, hence them being crooks...
No one wants to be in gun fight, but that doesnt mean it wont happen, and i would rather be prepared and overly cautious, than dead. Its not that we need to have gun fights, but they happen...

There is no need for car accidents... but by following your "logic" we should just get rid of seat belts and airbags cause we shouldnt need them???

I dont see an argument forming here, its just a educated debate. I assure you im not arguing with anyone. and i dont think anyone should let it get that far. we talk about being able to have adult conversations with out them turning into arguments then keep it a discussion and everything is kool. Dont call it arguing people tend to get pissed off when its called that and things start to go down hill and it becomes a fight.


Second. I dont agree with your statement. Words change minds on a daily basis. Its whether or not those words are well thought out, and if people are listening.

clap clap clap I would like to commend everybody that replied to this thread for it was kept clean, rational and mature...

>

This is not what I meant... Seatbelts and airbags are meant to prevent you from getting more injuries or be killed thus a positive thing, hand guns are not meant to prevent you from being killed. Seatbelts and airbags are solutions/preventions for accidents and hand guns are not solutions for accidents or crime. Got it? again, 2 wrongs don't make it right.

Havok and Griff: Very well said.

edit: speaking of prevention for getting killed by a gun, maybe somebody would just invent something like a kevlar that you could use everyday, like incorporate in our daily clothes. lol a bulletproof brief or thong hahahaha

This post has been edited by Jeunesse: Jun 28, 2008 - 8:27 AM

guns can keep you from getting killed if your a better shot then the guy shooting at you.

>

>

Sorry dude but its true... we shouldnt need seat belts or airbags, if everyone drove slow and safe. But that isnt how it works, people speed drink and drive and drive poorly, hence the need to protect yourself with those precautions, seat belts and airbags. BUT people do dumb stuff, like rob you, rape you, assault you or anyone around you, you can have alot of precautions for that stuff, never travel alone, stay away from bad areas late at night, take a karate class, or carry/own a gun.

I am sorry if you cant see that as a rational thought.

>

Airbags kill people. Seat belts kill people.

My friend died in highschool becuase he wore his seat belt when he was in a car accident... they are supposed to help you but sometimes that isnt how it works out. Same can go for a gun. When you used properly they can protect you, and put food on your table, but when used improperly or illegally they can kill you or someone else...

Guns are a tool. Used to hunt and to protect ourselves and our country. that is a pretty positive thing if you ask me...


>


>

IF i may chime in here... If you got into a situation where the the people/person you were fighting pulled out a knife on you, or a metal pipe, or a bat or....... i would rather pull out a gun. NOTE i did not say i would shoot them, but in most cases when someone pulls out a gun everyone kinda stops what they are doing, and then you can get out of a bad situation.

Watch the movie Pretty Women, there is a great scene where they are getting hassaled by like 3 or 4 people some wiht knives, his bodygaurd just flashes his gun and everyone kinda stops and goes away... granted its a movie, but i think that would be pretty true to forum...

>
So, most crimes are committed with illegal guns?
Not really a surprise, which makes me wonder why those of us that have LEGAL guns receive so much flak...
In addition to that, going by the statistics you provided the problem isn't the gun laws, it's lack of reinforcement.
Why then are you [collective] pushing for new laws and not pushing for enforcement of the current ones?

Here's some more statistics about kids and guns.
From http://www.keepandbeararms.com/Information...Item.asp?ID=563

"The study was conducted from 1993-1995 by the U.S. Department of Justice's Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Child psychologists tracked 4,000 boys and girls aged 6 to 15 in Denver, Pittsburgh, and Rochester, N.Y. Their findings?

-- Children who get guns from their parents don't commit gun crimes (0 percent) while children who get guns illegally are quite likely to do so (21 percent).

-- Children who get guns from parents are less likely to commit any kind of street crime (14 percent) than children who have no gun in the house (24 percent) -- and are dramatically less likely to do so than children who acquire an illegal gun (74 percent.)

> So, the fact that criminals prefer illegal guns means nothing.

>
So by that logic, no one should own cars because some people are too dangerous to drive, no one can serve in the military or police because some aren't fit, no one can be a teacher because some aren't fit, etc, etc.

Alcohol impairs your control and judgment, period. Some more than others, but anyone that consumes alcohol is effected.
Anyone that owns a gun isn't guaranteed to attempt to use it in a crime. The majority of gun owners never will.

> So, if I pull a .45 on a burglar breaking into my house [we don't know why, could be to steal my things, to rape my wife/daughter, to kill me, intentionally or not], that's not going to stop him?
And if he has a gun, what's to say he didn't intend to use it in the first place? If I get the drop on him, he doesn't have much chance to use it.
Sounds a lot like prevention to me.

And, since when is self defense "wrong doing"? In case you hadn't noticed, no one is advocating armed vigilante groups that hunt down "bad guys". No one is advocating we hunt down someone that committed a crime against us and shoot them. We are SPECIFICALLY talking about preventing harm to us and our families. How exactly is that "wrong doing"?

> Again, see my last reply.

>So you have to live in a particularly dangerous area to be the victim of a violent crime? I'll keep that in mind next time one iis committed in a "safe" area.
Aside from the fact that it's legal to defend yourself [pretty much anywhere; even in Ma you can shoot someone if they pull a gun on you], have you ever heard the expression "it's better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6"?



>

And you must be the toughest of them all.....
We don't care that you don't want to own a gun, no one is trying to force anyone to one one, we just want to keep our RIGHT to own one if we wish, whether for self defense or just because we like guns.

Oh, I'm more than willing to see who will win if you have as many "knife,bat,hammer,poison,rope,broken bottle,chainsaw, screw driver, bricks" as you want, and all I have is loaded .45. Sounds like a fair fight, at least according to you.

again Jeremy it scares me that you own a gun...nah Im just joking... I think this is a good thing..Im dont plan on owning a gun bc In any situation i would need one i wouldn't no how to use it..and im sure my bf will be there so can go buy the gun that way he can protect me. It just gives you that extra comfort of knowing its there if god forbid you ever needed it.

>


ITs refreshing to hear that, really it is When i was buying my shotgun and waiting for everything to go through, in those 15-20 minutes i was standing there, TWO people came up to buy hand guns, having never shot a gun. Now that is ridiculous, and this is were we wcould use better guns, like you have to take a 4 day class on how to shoot before you can get your gun, stuff like that. So it is good to hear that you understand that you dont know how to use a gun, therefore you dont buy one, to many just think, "oh its point shoot, i got it" and that isnt the case at all.

Good stats ALLTRACMAN78, i did a report in college about all this, with alot more stats, among other things, but i couldnt find it on this computer, so i dont know where they went:(

Basically alltracman78 said it all... you are my new hero lol, but seriously

honestly i think one of the greatest ways to help improve the gun control for the US would be to have a stolen gun serial database. granted the serial numbers can be changed a bit and they can be removed completely, it would GREATLY increase the number of stolen guns sold at gunshows all around the states.

Coming from a country where virtually nobody has a gun, i think you should keep the right.

Gun crime is on the increase in the UK, I don't think it's any more difficult for a criminal to get hold of a gun illegally here, than it is in the US.

It's the illegal owning of guns that needs to be stopped!

There was a high profile case here a while ago where a guy shot a burglar robbing his house (not lethally) and got sent down for it. Crazy!


The only thing i hate is the increase in 'gangs' which is increasing here and is in no doubt because of influence from the US, where gun carrying gangs are 'cool'

I'm so glad that it's very unlikely that i will ever see anyone pull a gun on me, but if things do go similar to the US then i'd like the option to be able to have one too.

>



Yes Alltracman78 is my hero 2..you should talk to him person or on the phone just once the amount of knowledge he has is just amazing..he just doesn't shut up hahaha...Any way yea I do no how to use a gun I was taught since i was little by my dad...no classes tho...Its one thing to be using the gun at a range or where ever but once you add in someone is breaking in or attacking you its completly different and I think many people me being one would panic and just freeze and cry and not no what to do....yes since I was little my dad always had me go places to do shot different guns and stuff but half of it I dont remember and even if I did it def is not enough for me to feel comfy protecting myself I def would make it worse....My bf has done all those classes and he hunts and all that fancy stuff...not as much as you tho Sgt Jeremy so yes thank you for compliment bc in most cases I try to be pretty logic and be like Shannon really what would you do with a gun...clean it stare at it idk brag about it..so in conclusion unless I become Lora Croft im not gonna own a gun. All you men enjoy your toys...and dont hot your eye out

>

Again - you don't live in Houston. I had an HPD officer give me the instructions and advice on how to properly shoot someone who was breaking into my car. It's perfectly legal in Tx to protect your property [including car, home, children, wife, yourself etc.] with killing force. In TX if someone is in the act of breaking into your car you are well within your rights to shoot him. The officer said it would be best to put the bullet through a window and into the thief - that way the evidence is obvious and you go back home that night.
BTW - I've lived a significant portion of my life in the NY/NJ/NYC area - you're not telling me anything I didn't already know.

>
Funny that you speak of internet toughies when you're the biggest blow hard on this site. You talk a big game anywhere and anytime you think someone will listen. Problem is - noone cares.

This post has been edited by DEATH: Jun 30, 2008 - 5:11 PM

^^^ That however is just ludicrous!

How can a car ever be placed higher than anyone's life.

Gimme a break! You can't think that's ok?!?

Sorry - but I agree with it. If you're a big enough POS to break into someone's property then the world is better off without you. Forgiveness is for your god and the courts to decide on. And what is this automatic value on human life? The value of a human life is much like respect - it has to be proven to be worth something. By itself it means very little.
Doesn't mean I'd not have a hard time coping with having killed someone afterwards.

>

the problem is defining what is right.

Guns were originally created to hunt for basic survival...now America thinks they're okay to stop crime. The same America thinks sex is okay at the age of 14...Horray America. :-(

>


I agree with your statement, but i dont think i could go through with it for a car. But thats a personal thing not because i dont think your right. I agree with you about human life and whether it has value should be proven worth. But its hard to make yourself that judge, yah know? I mean that person might be a car guy who never stole anything in his life, have children who have no one to turn to if hes gone. Maybe thats why he steals your car. because hes all alone in the world with these kids and they have to eat. You can say he could just get a real job, but maybe he cant work. what if he has some kinda injury that wont allow him to work, maybe he spent his life working for something and it all feel apart, then what? you have to make a living for him and these kids so stealing cars makes a crap tone of money. so he does that.

My point is when is desperate times, people dont always think, and just act. And its not always the best thing to do, but it seems the only thing they can do. The Law may say that you can shoot someone for stealing your car, but what happens if you shoot someone who made a bad choice thinking it was his and his families only choice?

I agree this may never be the case, but what if? I dont know like i said, if you in my house your dead. But i just dont know how good my aim would be if your stealing my car.