![]() |
Re: Guns
Originally Posted by iaink
(Post 11290727)
Again, how is this different in any way from the freedom of idiots and morons to be allowed to drive cars.......
You should not legislate away peoples freedoms because of the actions of a small minority who are already legislated against. Having the right to wander around with a couple of guns and a crossbow over your shoulders isn't normal. Should he be free to do it so long as he doesn't use them? After all, why penalise him and deny him that right because of a small minority ;) |
Re: Guns
Originally Posted by iaink
(Post 11290727)
Again, how is this different in any way from the freedom of idiots and morons to be allowed to drive cars, or smoke, or drink alcohol or do any of the potentially life threatening things people do?
You should not legislate away peoples freedoms because of the actions of a small minority who are already legislated against. Who is keeping their eye on gun owners? Nobody, until something tragic happens. Again, why can't you see the bigger picture? Why is it in the general publics best interest for you or anyone else to own a gun? Surely public safety trumps your gun right? |
Re: Guns
Originally Posted by iaink
(Post 11290727)
You should not legislate away peoples freedoms because of the actions of a small minority who are already legislated against.
|
Re: Guns
Originally Posted by Eddmac
(Post 11290822)
iain, i'd give up if i were you, it doesnt matter how many times you explain it or how much sense you make, you won't change their minds. Save yourself the stress.
|
Re: Guns
I'm assuming you want to stop stupid people (or maybe criminals too?) getting guns?
guess what, even if you banned guns outright, the only people that would be prevented from getting them would be the law-abiding people that aren't an issue in the first place, that's the whole point. for example, are certain drugs illegal and banned? yes! does that stop them being available? No! |
Re: Guns
Originally Posted by Eddmac
(Post 11290838)
I'm assuming you want to stop stupid people (or maybe criminals too?) getting guns?
guess what, even if you banned guns outright, the only people that would be prevented from getting them would be the law-abiding people that aren't an issue in the first place, that's the whole point. for example, are certain drugs illegal and banned? yes! does that stop them being available? No! I'm sorry but you only have to look at UK vs Canada statistics to see that more guns = more gun deaths. It's not rocket science. The UK has twice the population of Canada & only a tiny fraction of gun related deaths, so your argument that it would make no difference holds no water when the only difference between the countries is easy gun access. |
Re: Guns
Originally Posted by confused_uk
(Post 11290830)
Ok then explain to me how the existing legislation stops stupid people getting guns, I'm listening.
How would you define that in legislation? The trouble with Iains arguments are that through logic we can set one rule for all comparable things in life, therefore until cars/smoking & drinking is outright banned you can't ban guns or you cant touch guns until you touch these issues first cause they kill more people. You can make comparisons all you want but it doesn't make it a good comparison. |
Re: Guns
Originally Posted by ArthurBrit
(Post 11290863)
The trouble with your statement is that stupidity is an opinion, I have IQ scores in the 140 range and I failed high school, so by one measure I am incredibly smart and by another measure I am incredibly stupid.
How would you define that in legislation? The trouble with Iains arguments are that through logic we can set one rule for all comparable things in life, therefore until cars/smoking & drinking is outright banned you can't ban guns or you cant touch guns until you touch these issues first cause they kill more people. You can make comparisons all you want but it doesn't make it a good comparison. |
Re: Guns
Originally Posted by Almost Canadian
(Post 11290879)
Are you proposing a ban on knives too? If not, why not, as your arguments could apply to them too?
|
Re: Guns
Originally Posted by confused_uk
(Post 11290870)
That is my point, there's no way of knowing who is a responsible person & who isn't, so there's a lot of people who shouldn't have one that do.
The gun to the american people is a symbol of independence from their government you take their gun away and the american people view there government as a dictatorship. This isn't the only use or reason for guns but it is a major social obstacle when it comes to the legislation and right of access to guns in America. |
Re: Guns
Originally Posted by confused_uk
(Post 11290811)
Smoking has been addressed with banning it in public, so smokers only harm themselves, same with drinkers (unless they get in a car, which is illegal for them to do). So not much of an argument there. Cars are a bit of a necessity to get people from A to B particularly somewhere as vast as Canada where public transport is pretty naff. Besides drivers are pretty closely monitored patrol cars/cameras etc that if they are continuously moronic they will get themselves banned.
Who is keeping their eye on gun owners? Nobody, until something tragic happens. Again, why can't you see the bigger picture? Why is it in the general publics best interest for you or anyone else to own a gun? Surely public safety trumps your gun right?
Originally Posted by confused_uk
(Post 11290870)
That is my point, there's no way of knowing who is a responsible person & who isn't, so there's a lot of people who shouldn't have one that do.
|
Re: Guns
Originally Posted by Almost Canadian
(Post 11290885)
Are you proposing a ban on knives too? If not, why not, as your arguments could apply equally to them?
|
Re: Guns
Originally Posted by Oakvillian
(Post 11290891)
That's weird. Your ninja-edit now makes it look as though I replied to your post before you posted it. We're in danger of wandering into the omniscient-being thread ;)
|
Re: Guns
Originally Posted by Almost Canadian
(Post 11290885)
Are you proposing a ban on knives too? If not, why not, as your arguments could apply equally to them?
|
Re: Guns
Originally Posted by Oakvillian
(Post 11290882)
Don't be silly - you can't slice a tomato or spread butter on your toast with a gun.
|
| All times are GMT -12. The time now is 9:17 pm. |
Powered by vBulletin: ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.