well i voted "No" as if every single gun around the world was destroyed at the same time we have absolutely now need for them for protection, hunting or anything else. they might speed things like hunting up a little and they're great for speeding up the end of a battle so long as only one side has them but they're just a gadget. A knife serves the same purpose it's just not as quick.

not that removing every gun would make much of a difference. everyone who previously carried a gun would carry some other kind of weapon instead whether it's for "self-defence" or to purposefully harm or kill something. however, i would say it probably takes more guts to use a knife and get into physical contact with someone and get their blood on your hands if you were to do it on purpose. guns balance out the strong and the weak. a skinny 12 year old can kill a Marine with a gun if they don't know they're there, a bit harder in close combat!

removing all the guns would also make mass killings by young people less likely or at least reduce the scale as it takes time and several people could overpower someone with, say, a knife before too many were hurt while a gun can kill 20 people in less than 30 seconds.

Yeah, but thats just in theory, "removing all guns" will not live on this Earth, yet by other means we can do a lot, not just theoretically, and that is by laws, restrictions, and sanctions.

Yes, we need them, some people just can't undestand (only jokin').

Do we need guns? it has been very hard to me to say yes, because i like peace, but the culture define that, the country. Guns are a high responsability, carry one is carrying the life of a human being. It stays with our minds, from the beginnings of time we wanted guns, that's the way we have evolved. Now we analize the guns, but they were a very important part of the history, we just couldn't stay in one part of our livin' timeline.

Written by [user id=28048] on 04.01.2008 at 05:31

We need guns to protect ourselves from the governments who rule us. If we give them up, we surrender completely to the will of those in control.

What about voting? You do live in the greatest democracy in the world, right? If you don't like the government that rules you, go to the ballots and vote them out. And if you try to overthrow a legitimately-elected government, then you're no better than a terrorist. This statement doesn't make any sense.

Written by [user id=28048] on 04.01.2008 at 05:31

If some fools kill people for simply swimming in a lake, then those individuals need to go to prison for a very long time, but you simply cannot take away a person's right to defend themselves.

What makes me feel safer? (1) Nobody has a gun. (2) Every damn fool has a gun because it's their "right." Sorry, I'll go with the first choice. My next door neighbor scares me way more than my government. Honestly, if some jackass like him wants to blow me away - and I don't even see it coming - packing heat isn't going to help me much, is it? I'd rather that said jackass didn't have the right to a firearm in first place.

Written by [user id=28048] on 04.01.2008 at 05:31

Now, I know it sounds cliche coming from an American (we seem to be known as gun toting rednecks worldwide)...

Cliche is an understatement here. I could swear you were quoting this stuff verbatim. I've heard exactly these same words many, many times before...

Written by [user id=28048] on 04.01.2008 at 05:31

...but I sincerely believe that when you outlaw guns, only the outlaws will have guns, and we law abiding citizens will be defenseless.

Aw, c'mon man... this isn't the Wild West. Don't you have cops where you come from? And since when was taking the law into your own hands "law-abiding." Last time I checked, being a vigilante and taking on the "bad guys" by yourself was actually against the law. And if your whole neighbourhood does it, that's a lynch mob. What about dialing 911? It's a lot easier, right?

Dude, you seriously sound like you're freaking out. Relax.

Written by [user id=27451] on 07.01.2008 at 22:50

well i voted "No" as if every single gun around the world was destroyed at the same time we have absolutely now need for them for protection, hunting or anything else. they might speed things like hunting up a little and they're great for speeding up the end of a battle so long as only one side has them but they're just a gadget. A knife serves the same purpose it's just not as quick.

not that removing every gun would make much of a difference. everyone who previously carried a gun would carry some other kind of weapon instead whether it's for "self-defence" or to purposefully harm or kill something. however, i would say it probably takes more guts to use a knife and get into physical contact with someone and get their blood on your hands if you were to do it on purpose. guns balance out the strong and the weak. a skinny 12 year old can kill a Marine with a gun if they don't know they're there, a bit harder in close combat!

removing all the guns would also make mass killings by young people less likely or at least reduce the scale as it takes time and several people could overpower someone with, say, a knife before too many were hurt while a gun can kill 20 people in less than 30 seconds.

Ye sbut still UK cops dont have guns, and there % less ppl die from guss, only nowdays whan idioys terorist move there thay use guns, but pure british historicaly dont use guns heheh and football hools too

In my country, no one can own guns except of some security guard or troops in army. But sadly frictions still are settled by knife, damn no guns, but still people know how to harm each other, by knife insteadly

I think guns should be controll in moderation, more or less, that they are used to harm each other between people.

Written by FOOCK Nam on 14.01.2008 at 12:12

In my country, no one can own guns except of some security guard or troops in army. But sadly frictions still are settled by knife, damn no guns, but still people know how to harm each other, by knife insteadly

I think guns should be controll in moderation, more or less, that they are used to harm each other between people.

Damn man you can kill a man even what that big nife man and bambus tree whit small nedle shoot poisen in leg and he dies

And mines from war thay still are there

no, we would use them

Written by [user id=28048] on 04.01.2008 at 05:31

We need guns to protect ourselves from the governments who rule us. If we give them up, we surrender completely to the will of those in control. If some fools kill people for simply swimming in a lake, then those individuals need to go to prison for a very long time, but you simply cannot take away a person's right to defend themselves. Now, I know it sounds cliche coming from an American (we seem to be known as gun toting rednecks worldwide), but I sincerely believe that when you outlaw guns, only the outlaws will have guns, and we law abiding citizens will be defenseless.

This man speaks the truth really opened my eyes

I find it hilarious that so many people seem to think you need a gun in order to be able to defend yourself. there are laods of ways to defend yourself without a gun.
And also the people that go on about hunting and needing gns for that are hilarious, there are so many more ways to hunt.

It would be best for all if there where no guns. Now there are guns invented the best solution is to make sure that the "bad" guys (such as criminals, government, insane people, drug addicted people, intelligence services) don't get guns. With other words, everyone who could supposedly use a gun.

I dont think there is any need for guns either as they only create more problems rather than fix them. Guns are evil weapons and should not be used for shooting people. Its ok to have a gun if your a hunter and all your doing if hunting animals such as ducks, foxes, rabbits etc but owning a gun for other purposes is only going to provoke danger on yourself and others.

im sorry this is totally random but this whole topic reminds me of killwhitneydead the song it aint gonna suck itself

Written by [user id=23805] on 27.08.2008 at 07:00

So, I vote yes. They level the playing field in a world that isn't playing fair.

took the words outta my mouth. word for word.

Written by [user id=23805] on 05.09.2008 at 22:25

Written by LeChron James on 05.09.2008 at 21:46

Written by [user id=23805] on 27.08.2008 at 07:00

So, I vote yes. They level the playing field in a world that isn't playing fair.

took the words outta my mouth. word for word.

Woo-hoo!

I don't even remember posting this, but I think i agree with me too.

BLACK OUT.

Pretty general, do we as citizens need guns or does our nation need guns?
Then there's the need for guns to do what? Self defense, hunting, sport, America's ego... etc...
We should also take into account once a person has a gun ammo is not an issue seeing as people can make ammo easily.

I voted no, because if their was a ban on guns that poor guy you where talking about would still be alive

I propose we destroy all modern weapons: guns, missiles, tanks, jets, nukes, etc... and revert back to using medieval era weaponry. That way I don't have worry about a nuclear holocaust AND I get to have a sword.

At the very least, if people can have concealed weapon permits, why can't I have a sword permit?!?!

Seriously though, I don't think we "need" guns by any means. Unfortunately, I don't see us banning them anytime soon, so I'm satisfied with heavy regulations on them.

Did anyone else hear about how now in florida you are allowed to take your gun to the parking lot of where you work, and your company has no say in the matter? Many people already get crazy when they get fired, what do you think is going to happen if they have a gun waiting in their car?

...it's terrible i don't think ppl shouldn't carry guns or any type of weapon...violence leads to violence, it's never going to end if they allow this...kids can easily take their parents guns and why not take it to school as many have done and shot someone they don't like, the teacher of the 1st guy that crosses by their way...it's really sad actually and kind of frightening...

Written by Powerslavex on 23.11.2008 at 14:42

I voted no, because if their was a ban on guns that poor guy you where talking about would still be alive

Unfortunately, you are wrong. I hate to sound cliche here, but the gun did not kill, the person did. If it were not with a gun, then with something else.

Gun bans create an even more dangerous black market. And that market is usually responsible for more deaths than you can imagine.

Written by [user id=36189] on 02.12.2008 at 10:28

Written by Powerslavex on 23.11.2008 at 14:42

I voted no, because if their was a ban on guns that poor guy you where talking about would still be alive

Unfortunately, you are wrong. I hate to sound cliche here, but the gun did not kill, the person did. If it were not with a gun, then with something else.

Gun bans create an even more dangerous black market. And that market is usually responsible for more deaths than you can imagine.

if the man didnt own a shotgun how would have he killed that man with his hands I dont think so, also some people maybe capable of killing only if they had a gun to use because killing by a knife or some other way is much harder and more brutul only really sick people can do that, and drive by murders(which happen alot in the US) cant be commited with out the use of guns, do really think if there where no guns more deaths will happen?

Quote:
do really think if there where no guns more deaths will happen?

America owns the most civilian guns in the world, yet we rank 24 in murder/homicide. Some of the countries in the top 23, are countries where civilians are prohibited from owning guns. So it does not appear that more guns = more murder.

Should a person not be able to defend themselves and their property by use of gunfire? You just said you didn't think it was possible for that man to kill with his hands. Do you think I would be able to defend myself with my bare hands against an attacker 3 times my size?

Guns are not evil. Humans give them that power.

Quote:
That is not entirely true, usa ranks 8th in the world when it comes to gun related homicide:

Actually, I read that we (Americans) are 4th in gun related homicide in 2008. I did not say "Gun related" in my post, I was speaking for all murder/homicide cases.

Gun crime statistics are actually irrelevant to my post. My point was, we have the most guns, and we're not in that number 1 spot, for overall homicide, or gun related homicide for that matter.

I voted no for the obvious reasons however I don't think we'll ever get rid of guns. They're accepted to varying degrees around the world and that will never change. The only way to decrease the level of murders and such through the use of guns is to have strict governing laws. Australia does quite well with it's laws and I think other countries (America springs to mind, as per usual) should seriously look into placing some form of law in place in regards to obtaining guns.

The problem is not the gun itself, the problem is the psycho who owns it. I mean, if someone wants to enter into your house/flat/castle/cave and he/she is probably with a knife or gun, you should be able to defend yourself too, but walk with guns in the street? OK, a lot of people also steal you there but...that kinda of creepy, if you're angry you can kill anyone.
We have the Virginia Technologyc stuff too. You can buy a gun anywhere (in the US), a few bullets and yeah! You're oficially a Bad Guy now, come on dude...use your brain! There is no logical reason to kill a person (or a dog...) except for a self defense issue or life-or-death, don't because he is now with my girlfriend.

I think society is just too inmature about this topic, but I'm agree with guns...if you had a good breakfast before leaving your house and you don't have any psychological problem...everything will be nice

Well, people do not need guns. Guns are the kind of thing that create a false feeling of security, as if having a gun would automatically rid you of being robbed, assaulted, or getting your house invaded. All it does is give one reason to do something stupid under the pressure of a critical situation.

By allowing common people to have guns, we are not only increasing the chances of having domestic accidents happen, but we are also giving one more option for a criminal (doesn't even have to be a criminal...might be that young son of yours who just want to scare a friend) to put his/her hand on a weapon. Criminals can buy one at the black market? Yes they can...but it is much harder and expensive than stealing it from a citizen or buying it legally from a store. And if those people are able to put their hands at these weapons, it's not by allowing people to have them that will solve the problem. The problem is with your country's government that doesn't have control over this issue.

Also, if you are holding a weapon when you are being mugged...if you react, and kill him ( the least likely thing to happen ), in some countries you are going to jail, for murder...if you react and lose, you just gave the criminal a weapon...By just showing you have a gun, you put him under so much pressure (because of fear) that he is much more likely to kill you if he ever gets the chance. So having a firearm didn't exactly put you under a coat of safetiness...to be exact, you are in more danger that if you were unarmed, just because possessing the weapon gives you enough courage to try things you wouldn't try if you didn't.

If we weren't allowed to own weapons there would be people that would still try to kill with knives, etc? Of course. But, once again, that's not something that will be fixed by allowing guns...it's the opposite....

Concerning safety, we should focus our efforts in improving our police force ( as ineffective that might seem) other than giving weapons to unprepared people (and don't come saying you are very skilled with weapons, you did the shooting courses, you store it in an appropriate manner and you wouldn't ever point that to someone....you are just one exception ).


This whole gun thing is becoming just like the nuclear war....just because someone has one, I must have it too...even if I don't know how to use it....We'd be better if none of us had one...

Written by [user id=35638] on 27.12.2008 at 22:50
This whole gun thing is becoming just like the nuclear war....just because someone has one, I must have it too...even if I don't know how to use it....We'd be better if none of us had one...

That's the worst problem. Because a criminal has a knife, I must have a sword, now he has a katana, I must have a sable, now he has a gun, I must have a shotgun, now he has a AK-47, I must have a...
Is really paranoid, and I know...having a gun in your house is not the solution to the problem, actually is (an important) part of the problem, but is the most realistic solution if you're in your house and you are afraid of someone.

Guns are not dangerous it's who holds the gun determines evrything. that what i was told in my army days.

I vote no, but ...

I'm Swiss and i live in Switzerland, a Small country in the middle of Europa.

Here, every men go the army (almost) and receive a nice gun ( a SIG, almost a automatic weapon, 20 bullets, kill a man at 300 m). And at the end of their service, every men keep his gun at HOME. I had a gun at home for 12 years and well...

3-4 times a year, you can hear that someone fire with his personnal gun, and 1-2 times, kill some one.

But you can read almost every day (around 100-150 a year) that one commited sucide with his personnal gun.

Age 21 cant come quick enough. permit to carry here i come...