The Student Room Group
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>

This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

Should guns be legal in the UK?

Scroll to see replies

Albertros
Someone mentioned the 2nd amendment.

Funnily enough the 2nd amendment reads the 'A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.'

a ‘well regulated militia’?!? that does not imply private gun ownership is a right. Security of the state - does this not imply that guns may only be used to protect the state. A robber is not threat to the state.


Note the comma before "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms."

"A well regulated militia" in this context means a voluntary group of private citizens, not a state army or police force.

If you read any of the views of the founding fathers it is pretty clear that they espoused the virtues of private gun-ownership.
Bagration
What does that have to do with anything, or are you just angry that you didn't know the US uses its law enforcement to break and enter people's property?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruby_Ridge US law enforcement shoots and kills innocent children in a raid.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waco_Siege More FBI tyranny


Strangely enough even UK police have been known to break into property to seize drugs...How else would they?

Surely the incidents of accidental killing (such as the one you refer to) would grow dramatically if everyone was allowed a gun.
957 Country Bumpkin
I'm sorry. Cannabis News? Get out.
Also, I think it is perfectly reasonable for a police force to use 'force' in a drug bust.
The Supreme Court 'disagrees' because it is Stare Decisis Convention and it is 5-4 Conservative.
Force?

You grow cannabis in your home for your personal consumption and for the consumption of people who want it, and then the DEA busts in with submachine guns and battering rams and hauls you off to prison? And you don't call this tyrannical?

It's (not)refreshing to know that you believe as long as someone is doing something you disagree with it's alright for the Government to use deadly force against them.
957 Country Bumpkin
Strangely enough even UK police have been known to break into property to seize drugs...How else would they?
Well, you denied the whitehouse is sending its operatives into people's homes... personally, I'm suggesting that they don't, in every instance the State has tested the waters of its power by attacking and persecuting unwanted minorities in society. Then it turns on everyone else.

957 Country Bumpkin
Surely the incidents of accidental killing (such as the one you refer to) would grow dramatically if everyone was allowed a gun.
How? These accidental killings were perpetrated by the Government against people defending their property. The solution isn't that the people are disarmed, it's that the State STOPS KILLING ITS OWN PEOPLE.
Bagration
Force?

You grow cannabis in your home for your personal consumption and for the consumption of people who want it, and then the DEA busts in with submachine guns and battering rams and hauls you off to prison? And you don't call this tyrannical?

It's (not)refreshing to know that you believe as long as someone is doing something you disagree with it's alright for the Government to use deadly force against them.


Last time I checked Cannabis was illegal; and so law enforcement is needed to stop it. Just point out to me where I am wrong.
Svenjamin
If I wanted to defend myself against a tyrannical government I'm sure I would care more about getting some bullet proof armour before getting a few guns. But then again, a well trained army with much better equipment (not to mention tanks, jets and helicopters) vs a few hicks with shotguns isn't going to be much of a battle.


I guess you haven't been following the news much recently - a ragtag bunch of citizens in Iraq and Afghanistan with ancient weapons have been able to give the most advanced armies this world has ever seen a pretty tough time...

You can take the bulletproof armour, I'll take the gun. I think I've got a better chance of surviving.
Schleigg
The only time you would legally be allowed to use a gun to defend your home in this country would be if a) Your intruder has a gun AND b) Poses a direct threat to your life.

The likelihood of a) is waaaay down there with frogs on the moon and you are only allowed to use proportional and necessary force anyway, so a baseball bat would be fine in any case....
.45 ACP will stop this man. Will your fists?
You want a gun.

I want an F14 to defend my home from attack :smile:
957 Country Bumpkin
Last time I checked Cannabis was illegal; and so law enforcement is needed to stop it. Just point out to me where I am wrong.


You're wrong because you think everything the state does is right.
957 Country Bumpkin
Last time I checked Cannabis was illegal; and so law enforcement is needed to stop it. Just point out to me where I am wrong.
Your thinking is flawed and shows blind adherence to whatever the State says.

How about the sentence "Last time I checked breeding rabbits was illegal; and so law enforcement is needed to stop it." Does that justify DEA agents breaking in to your house with guns?

The State uses its force against minorities, i.e. narcotic consumers and producers, because nobody cares about them. It can get away with it.
'When cannons are outlawed, only outlaws will have cannons'
Bagration
Well, you denied the whitehouse is sending its operatives into people's homes... personally, I'm suggesting that they don't, in every instance the State has tested the waters of its power by attacking and persecuting unwanted minorities in society. Then it turns on everyone else.

How? These accidental killings were perpetrated by the Government against people defending their property. The solution isn't that the people are disarmed, it's that the State STOPS KILLING ITS OWN PEOPLE.


You are really quite paranoid- the US government does not go about trying to kill it's citizens.
There a huge number of incidences of accidental deaths due to the ability of everyone to own a gun in the US.
On a side note I would be interested to know if you have a gun.
Reply 92
Avatar for Schleigg
Schleigg
18
Bagration
.45 ACP will stop this man. Will your fists?


.22 rimfire would also stop him. A baseball bat to the back of the head would be just as effective.
Reply 93
Avatar for taheki
taheki
13
Guns should be legalised so we can shoot the people who already have guns. When the people who use legalised guns turn on society it won't matter because we have guns.

If guns become a problem it won't matter because we can make bigger guns to destroy those guns.

When guns become too big we can use little guns to shoot people's hands to stop them from using guns. For example:
Reply 94
Avatar for gyyy2807
gyyy2807
14
No, because if they're, I won't be able to go to college and come out alive again.
Bagration
Your thinking is flawed and shows blind adherence to whatever the State says.

How about the sentence "Last time I checked breeding rabbits was illegal; and so law enforcement is needed to stop it." Does that justify DEA agents breaking in to your house with guns?

The State uses its force against minorities, i.e. narcotic consumers and producers, because nobody cares about them. It can get away with it.

That is the most laughable example I have ever heard- there is not the merest possible comparison; as drugs are illegal.
Blind adherence to the State? I am very sceptical of US government but I doubt the gov goes round shooting people for fun.
957 Country Bumpkin
You are really quite paranoid- the US government does not go about trying to kill it's citizens.
If I am paranoid then you are naive; but anyway, at least paranoia results in safety. The same cannot be said for naivety and blind adherence.

957 Country Bumpkin
There a huge number of incidences of accidental deaths due to the ability of everyone to own a gun in the US.
http://www.tincher.to/deaths.htm

824 a year in 1999.

As opposed to 2 million plus defensive gun uses.

957 Country Bumpkin
On a side note I would be interested to know if you have a gun.
I have firearms experience (more than the average UK citizen) and am looking into obtaining a firearm (post university). If I could have one now, I would already.
957 Country Bumpkin
That is the most laughable example I have ever heard- there is not the merest possible comparison; as drugs are illegal.
Blind adherence to the State? I am very sceptical of US government but I doubt the gov goes round shooting people for fun.
Wow, you're missing the point again.

IF BREEDING RABBITS WAS MADE ILLEGAL, does this justify using extreme force in stopping pepole from breeding rabbits?

You are accepting that the law is good because it is the law, and then coming to the even worse conclusion that because it is the law then its enforcement is justified.
Schleigg
.22 rimfire would also stop him. A baseball bat to the back of the head would be just as effective.
Well, if you have a .22 rimfire firearm, good on you.

Perhaps it would be, but if he had a baseball as well, I think it would be different. A firearm is an equalizer; one wheelchair bound man with a gun is the same as one extremely physically fit skinhead with a gun.
Those statistics are twisted to suit your case. Allowing free gun rights automatically results in more unintended deaths. This would include those such as accidental discharge, flaring arguements resulting in a shooting, drunk people indiscriminately wielding weapons etc, not to mention mental unstable people going on massacres

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you