Why Are People Opposed to Gun Control?

Cottontown, Tennessee

Apr 10, 2012 @ 00:54:24

Before anything else, I want to state that by "gun control," I do not mean the banning of guns. I'm talking about laws meant to control the sale and use of firearms for safety purposes.

Whenever I hear someone complain about gun control, they act as if it's the end of the world, the end of freedom itself, as if any sort of gun control means that we the public will no longer be able to defend ourselves against evil-doers and oppressive governments. Why?

Gun control can be as crazy as outright banning all firearms, but it can also be as simple as not allowing civilians to own armor-piercing bullets or anti-tank guns, or enforcing rules that prohibit those with a history of severe mental disorder from buying guns. So why is it that people cannot seem to be able to talk about gun control at all? Why does it seem to be an either-or thing, where you either want the freedom to own an insane arsenal without any restrictions or you want all guns to be melted down and turned into playground equipment?

I'm not pushing any opinion of gun control here. I'm just asking why dialogue shuts down whenever the magic phrase "gun control" is mentioned. Personally, I'm in the middle, believing that most people should be allowed to own guns but that no one needs machine guns or heavier weaponry, and I think most gun control laws fit that criteria, meant to avoid excess without prohibiting freedom, but that sort of stuff is rarely mentioned. It's always "Ban all guns!" or "From my cold, dead hands!" And I don't get it. You'd still be able to have your shotgun and handgun and rifle; just don't think about getting a bazooka. Is that so bad?

0

jonnythan

Bringer of rad mirth

Deleted

Here and there,

#2

Apr 10, 2012 @ 00:56:03

Simple: because criminals ignore gun control laws. Criminals mostly own their guns illegally. Gun control laws only serve to disarm law-abiding citizens while having zero real effect on criminals.

That's why.

7

Demented

, Australia

#3

Apr 10, 2012 @ 01:05:19

@Five_Tailed_Fox Said

Before anything else, I want to state that by "gun control," I do not mean the banning of guns. I'm talking about laws meant to control the sale and use of firearms for safety purposes.

Whenever I hear someone complain about gun control, they act as if it's the end of the world, the end of freedom itself, as if any sort of gun control means that we the public will no longer be able to defend ourselves against evil-doers and oppressive governments. Why?

Gun control can be as crazy as outright banning all firearms, but it can also be as simple as not allowing civilians to own armor-piercing bullets or anti-tank guns, or enforcing rules that prohibit those with a history of severe mental disorder from buying guns. So why is it that people cannot seem to be able to talk about gun control at all? Why does it seem to be an either-or thing, where you either want the freedom to own an insane arsenal without any restrictions or you want all guns to be melted down and turned into playground equipment?

I'm not pushing any opinion of gun control here. I'm just asking why dialogue shuts down whenever the magic phrase "gun control" is mentioned. Personally, I'm in the middle, believing that most people should be allowed to own guns but that no one needs machine guns or heavier weaponry, and I think most gun control laws fit that criteria, meant to avoid excess without prohibiting freedom, but that sort of stuff is rarely mentioned. It's always "Ban all guns!" or "From my cold, dead hands!" And I don't get it. You'd still be able to have your shotgun and handgun and rifle; just don't think about getting a bazooka. Is that so bad?

I don't mean to sound like this is some kind of attack against your belief's ,but what do "you" need to have Guns for??,I live in Australia,we here are forbidden to have Guns unless we live on a Farm and can show real proof as to why we need one.

0

Five_Tailed_Fox

Cottontown, Tennessee

#4

Apr 10, 2012 @ 01:07:09

@jonnythan Said

Simple: because criminals ignore gun control laws. Criminals mostly own their guns illegally. Gun control laws only serve to disarm law-abiding citizens while having zero real effect on criminals.

That's why.

I won't say that gun control doesn't affect criminals, but not taking any sort of gun laws into consideration because criminals will ignore them doesn't help anybody. Besides, we have laws restricting drugs such as cocaine and heroin, despite the fact that criminals still use them.

Gun control, done in an appropriate way, is meant to protect citizens, not hurt them, or that's the way I've always understood it. Stricter gun laws would (ideally) keep a person with mental problems from being able to purchase a gun and then go home and shoot his family.

I've heard a number of stories where a person was able to get a gun, despite history of mental illness and criminal activity, and then use it to do something horrible. And the worst part of it is that more laws aren't even needed to prevent that sort of thing; you're supposed to have to wait a few days to get a gun, while the store does a background check and ensures that you don't have a history that would bar you from owning a firearm. The laws that require that are already in place, but people disregard them. Part of gun control seems to be enforcing laws that are already on the books. Why are those laws being broken in the first place? How is a person that owns a legitimate gun shop any different from a person that illegally sells guns out of his truck, if they both sell guns to strangers, without knowing if the people are ex-cons or schizophrenic or otherwise potentially dangerous?

0

jonnythan

Bringer of rad mirth

Deleted

Here and there,

#5

Apr 10, 2012 @ 01:09:52

What do drugs have to do with anything? You can't use cocaine to defend yourself from a criminal. There's no amendment in the Bill of Rights guaranteeing your right to keep and bear heroin.

People with certain diagnosed mental problems already can't buy firearms. If by "gun control" you mean "tweak the regulations that control whether mentally ill people can buy guns" then I'm on board.

But that's not what people are talking about when they talk about gun control.

Legitimate gun dealers are required to do background checks and they are legally responsible for certain aspects of their business and sales history. People who sell illegal firearms out the back of a truck are not.

0

Edited: April 10, 2012 @ 01:10

Five_Tailed_Fox

Cottontown, Tennessee

#6

Apr 10, 2012 @ 01:10:24

@Demented Said

I don't mean to sound like this is some kind of attack against your belief's ,but what do "you" need to have Guns for??,I live in Australia,we here are forbidden to have Guns unless we live on a Farm and can show real proof as to why we need one.

I personally don't need a gun, nor do I even know how to use one, so I may not be the right person to talk about it, but a lot of people in America want them for safety. The idea is that if someone breaks into your home, you can protect yourself and your family if you own a gun. Also, gun ownership is a part of American culture. Many people own guns simply for decoration, target practice, a hobby, a collection, that sort of thing. There are also a great number of people who hunt, both for sport and for food.

0

jonnythan

Bringer of rad mirth

Deleted

Here and there,

#7

Apr 10, 2012 @ 01:12:07

@Demented Said

I don't mean to sound like this is some kind of attack against your belief's ,but what do "you" need to have Guns for??,I live in Australia,we here are forbidden to have Guns unless we live on a Farm and can show real proof as to why we need one.

America and Australia are two very different countries with very different histories and very different cultures.

0

vekta

,

#8

Apr 10, 2012 @ 01:17:35

@Demented Said

I don't mean to sound like this is some kind of attack against your belief's ,but what do "you" need to have Guns for??,I live in Australia,we here are forbidden to have Guns unless we live on a Farm and can show real proof as to why we need one.

Why do "you" need to wear a jacket in cold weather? Why do you carry a cell phone or keep a box of band-aids in the bathroom cabinet? Why do you keep tools? Why do you own kitchen knives?

It's not about "needing". It's about being prepared. It's about having the tools available to satisfy another need. If your government has taken responsibility for your personal safety and the safety of your family and can be held responsible by law if they fail to do so then I applaud your country. I doubt very much though that you can sue your government or law enforcement agency if you were to be robbed, assaulted or injured.

Lets face it, it's not humanly possible for the government to guarantee your personal safety and that of your family as well as everyone else's. Since they cannot be everywhere at once and protect you 24/7 it's only prudent to prepare for a situation where you may have to defend yourself. A firearm is an excellent tool for this since it levels the field. For explain...lets say you're 5'2 and 120 lbs...and someone that is 6'6" 230 lbs decides they want to attack you. Pound for pound this guy is going to destroy you.( Think boxer weight divisions...size matters)

And finally....refer back to what Jonnythan said...

1

Edited: April 10, 2012 @ 01:18

Five_Tailed_Fox

Cottontown, Tennessee

#9

Apr 10, 2012 @ 01:18:30

@jonnythan Said

What do drugs have to do with anything? You can't use cocaine to defend yourself from a criminal. There's no amendment in the Bill of Rights guaranteeing your right to keep and bear heroin.

You said that gun control isn't discussed (and implied that it wasn't important) because criminals ignore gun control laws. My retort was that your logic was wrong; if gun control is pointless because criminals will still use guns, then drug laws are pointless because criminals will still use drugs.

As for the amendment, it states that people can "bear arms." It doesn't say that it's okay for citizens to own nuclear weapons. It's a very broad and unclear amendment. Wanting to ban certain types of firearms, but not all, doesn't go against the amendment.

@jonnythan Said

People with certain diagnosed mental problems already can't buy firearms. If by "gun control" you mean "tweak the regulations that control whether mentally ill people can buy guns" then I'm on board.

But that's not what people are talking about when they talk about gun control.

Part of my point was that, despite the laws currently in place, people with certain diagnosed mental problems can still purchase guns, and in stores. Part of the aim of gun control is to enforce the laws that are already in place, so that that cannot happen.

In your opinion, what are people talking about when they talk about gun control? It seems that you and I have two different ideas of what it is (which seems to be a large part of the problem in this country, that it means two different things to two different people).

0

vekta

,

#10

Apr 10, 2012 @ 01:23:10

@Five_Tailed_Fox Said

You said that gun control isn't discussed (and implied that it wasn't important) because criminals ignore gun control laws. My retort was that your logic was wrong; if gun control is pointless because criminals will still use guns, then drug laws are pointless because criminals will still use drugs.

As for the amendment, it states that people can "bear arms." It doesn't say that it's okay for citizens to own nuclear weapons. It's a very broad and unclear amendment. Wanting to ban certain types of firearms, but not all, doesn't go against the amendment.

Part of my point was that, despite the laws currently in place, people with certain diagnosed mental problems can still purchase guns, and in stores. Part of the aim of gun control is to enforce the laws that are already in place, so that that cannot happen.

In your opinion, what are people talking about when they talk about gun control? It seems that you and I have two different ideas of what it is (which seems to be a large part of the problem in this country, that it means two different things to two different people).

Well...drug laws have been pretty pointless. The drug wars have been a disaster for American policy makers. It's the Vietnam that no one talks about.

0

jonnythan

Bringer of rad mirth

Deleted

Here and there,

#11

Apr 10, 2012 @ 01:23:47

@Five_Tailed_Fox Said

You said that gun control isn't discussed (and implied that it wasn't important) because criminals ignore gun control laws. My retort was that your logic was wrong; if gun control is pointless because criminals will still use guns, then drug laws are pointless because criminals will still use drugs.

Your retort is nonsensical. No one has the right to possess cocaine and heroin. My logic is not wrong - you're attempting to misuse another issue entirely as a sort of analogy, but it's an invalid analogy.

@Five_Tailed_Fox Said

As for the amendment, it states that people can "bear arms." It doesn't say that it's okay for citizens to own nuclear weapons. It's a very broad and unclear amendment. Wanting to ban certain types of firearms, but not all, doesn't go against the amendment.

Who said anything about nuclear weapons?

Look. You asked why people feel the way they do about gun control laws. I provided you with the answer. The answer is that gun control laws limit the ability of law-abiding citizens to defend themselves with firearms while not affecting criminals. Done, end of story.

@Five_Tailed_Fox Said

In your opinion, what are people talking about when they talk about gun control? It seems that you and I have two different ideas of what it is (which seems to be a large part of the problem in this country, that it means two different things to two different people).

They are talking about making it harder to legally buy guns, harder to legally own guns, harder to legally carry guns, and harder to legally use guns. No one is opposed to tweaking already-existing laws that prevent criminals and mentally ill people from owning guns. The thing that people are against is making it harder for regular, law-abiding and healthy citizens to legally buy, possess, and use firearms.

0

boxerdc

Deleted

,

#12

Apr 10, 2012 @ 01:26:14

@jonnythan Said

People with certain diagnosed mental problems already can't buy firearms. If by "gun control" you mean "tweak the regulations that control whether mentally ill people can buy guns" then I'm on board.

Legitimate gun dealers are required to do background checks and they are legally responsible for certain aspects of their business and sales history. People who sell illegal firearms out the back of a truck are not.

Gun laws are set by states.. So what you're saying might be true in the state that you live in, but it's not true in others..

Maryland has pretty strict gun laws, I have to wait 3 days, they have to perform a background check, and can't buy more than one gun a week.

Virginia, four miles to the west does not have these restrictions. I could walk into a shop, buy a gun and walk out with it no questions asked.

What we really need is for states to standardize the laws.

1

jonnythan

Bringer of rad mirth

Deleted

Here and there,

#13

Apr 10, 2012 @ 01:28:21

@boxerdc Said

Gun laws are set by states.. So what you're saying might be true in the state that you live in, but it's not true in others..

Maryland has pretty strict gun laws, I have to wait 3 days, they have to perform a background check, and can't buy more than one gun a week.

Virginia, four miles to the west does not have these restrictions. I could walk into a shop, buy a gun and walk out with it no questions asked.

What we really need is for states to standardize the laws.

Doesn't the Brady Bill make it a federal requirement to do a background check?

0

boxerdc

Deleted

,

#14

Apr 10, 2012 @ 01:32:53

@jonnythan Said

Doesn't the Brady Bill make it a federal requirement to do a background check?

Yes.. In Virginia, that means that I show them my Drivers License and they make sure that the picture and my face match. They're also supposed to make sure that I'm not drunk or crazy, and apparently they feel that the kids at Walmart are experts on alcohol use and mental health.

0

jonnythan

Bringer of rad mirth

Deleted

Here and there,

#15

Apr 10, 2012 @ 01:35:10

@boxerdc Said

Yes.. In Virginia, that means that I show them my Drivers License and they make sure that the picture and my face match. They're also supposed to make sure that I'm not drunk or crazy, and apparently they feel that the kids at Walmart are experts on alcohol use and mental health.

The background check requirement is for a federal NICS background check. Unless I'm missing something, it's a straight up federal requirement and there's no way around it.

0

Similar Topics
	Forum	Topic	Last Post	Replies	Views
	Sociology	Gun Control	Thu May 05, 2011 @ 01:20	146	14633
	Politics	Gun control	Sat Jul 05, 2008 @ 19:43	743	26503
	Politics	gun control at it's best.	Sat Feb 02, 2008 @ 21:09	73	2767
	Politics	Guns Out Of Control In Gun-Control Britain	Sat Aug 25, 2007 @ 01:14	2	832
	Politics	Gun control	Sun Oct 23, 2005 @ 08:10	33	1857

Politics