Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Unpopular opinion - I'm pro gun; try to convince me why I shouldn't be. Watch

    Online

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by anonymous_1947)
    Maybe we need them from a threat from a tyrannical government and given this current political climate, that doesn't sound too far-fetched.

    Level of training? If you have ever purchased a gun, you would know the regulations that you would have to undergo to get your hands on one.
    So when the tanks are rolling down the street and the gunships are circling overhead, you're going to start plinking at them with your .38 special?

    And in the USA, because guns are legal they're so widespread that the regulations are almost impossible to uphold. When you have multiple guns in every house, and they're changing hands at car-boot sales, on craigslist etc, the regulations mean nothing. Even buying a gun in a registered store only requires a background check. No evidence of suitable training is required.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dheorl)
    So when the tanks are rolling down the street and the gunships are circling overhead, you're going to start plinking at them with your .38 special?

    And in the USA, because guns are legal they're so widespread that the regulations are almost impossible to uphold. When you have multiple guns in every house, and they're changing hands at car-boot sales, on craigslist etc, the regulations mean nothing. Even buying a gun in a registered store only requires a background check. No evidence of suitable training is required.
    In order to get a concealed carry permit you must show that you have taken, and passed an appropriate training course, which, in my case lasted 3 days. "because guns are legal, they are so widespread that the regulations are almost impossible to uphold". No more "impossible to uphold" that those involving drunk driving or stolen cars. If you are caught here DUI, you end up in jail, charged with a felony. IF you are caught here with a firearm, and you are a previously convicted felon, you are charged with the felony of possessing a weapon as a convicted felon, and end up in jail. With the Criminal Protective Service, the sentence you would draw in the Uk for killing someone (LIFE!!!) - which amounts to about 6 years, is considerably less stringent to what you would draw here, as a convicted felon in possession of a firearm. Being in 'constructive possession' of a firearm, means having access to a vehicle or building that contains a firearm. It does not have to be "yours". If you are found in such a position, and there are NO other criminal circumstances - i.e. you were not attempting to rob someone, or committing a burglary when apprehended, your minimum sentence could be as little as 2 to 10 years. NONE of this would be 'bargained away' as is done in the Uk [50% off at sentencing]. Generally, you serve the 'whole enchilada'. If you were apprehended committing a crime (burglary, robbery, etc), your sentence could be 4 to 10 times the minimum, depending upon circumstances and your previous record. Cheers.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by anonymous_1947)
    It is rather sad to see that most liberals portray pro-gun activists as heartless thugs who don't care about the lives of people in any country. That couldn't be further away from the truth; no matter what side of the political spectrum you are, I think we all care about the lives of innocent people. But I feel that the left are more ill-informed on the issue.

    Stricter gun control WILL NOT help. Prove to me otherwise.

    (Let's keep this debate civil).
    you americans think you'll be superman if a situation occurs where you think youll need to use your gun-in reality a bunch of obese people shooting in hopes of doing something
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    People who live in the UK and are pro-gun are another breed of stupidity. Same with commies living in the UK.

    You take for granted our strict gun laws because you don't understand what it's done to society.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    You're more likely to get shot if you carry a gun.

    (Original post by anonymous_1947)
    It is rather sad to see that most liberals portray pro-gun activists as heartless thugs who don't care about the lives of people in any country.
    It's not the heart that is lacking.

    That couldn't be further away from the truth; no matter what side of the political spectrum you are, I think we all care about the lives of innocent people. But I feel that the left are more ill-informed on the issue.
    Countries with stricter gun control tend to have fewer gun-related deaths.

    Stricter gun control WILL NOT help. Prove to me otherwise.
    You are making a claim. What is your evidence?
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by anonymous_1947)
    Maybe we need them from a threat from a tyrannical government and given this current political climate, that doesn't sound too far-fetched.
    Trump has the NRA on his side. He was careful to appeal to as many nutter groups as possible, as they're more likely to vote.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by anonymous_1947)
    But wouldn't you agree that guns act as an effective deterrence when in a problematic situation?
    Having a gun in a 'problematic' situation will just serve to get you shot IMO. How exactly are the Police meant to know who is a danger?

    Yes in the USA for example, there is a huge problem in regards to this issue. Approximately 56% of suicides in the USA is carried out by a firearm. However as tragic as it may be, if one wants to commit suicide, unfortunately, they will inevitably find other ways to take their own life.
    Some are reversible, if the person is found in time. Those inflicted by firearms typically aren't.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rabbit2)
    Since it is common knowledge that most home residents are armed, the burglars go elsewhere, and either burgle businesses at night (when, presumably they are unoccupied), or indulge in other forms of 'non-contact' crime: car theft, larceny, other things. The incidence of 'hot burglaries' - those performed when the premises is occupied, is MUCH higher in the Uk. because of this. According to the Independent [Uk newspaper], the Burglary rate for the Uk is 1,157.7 per 100k, whilst the US is 714.4. This is nearly double. The robbery rate is 188.7 per 100k in the Uk, and 146.4 in the US.
    Do you care more about robberies or deaths?
    Online

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rabbit2)
    In order to get a concealed carry permit you must show that you have taken, and passed an appropriate training course, which, in my case lasted 3 days. "because guns are legal, they are so widespread that the regulations are almost impossible to uphold". No more "impossible to uphold" that those involving drunk driving or stolen cars. If you are caught here DUI, you end up in jail, charged with a felony. IF you are caught here with a firearm, and you are a previously convicted felon, you are charged with the felony of possessing a weapon as a convicted felon, and end up in jail. With the Criminal Protective Service, the sentence you would draw in the Uk for killing someone (LIFE!!!) - which amounts to about 6 years, is considerably less stringent to what you would draw here, as a convicted felon in possession of a firearm. Being in 'constructive possession' of a firearm, means having access to a vehicle or building that contains a firearm. It does not have to be "yours". If you are found in such a position, and there are NO other criminal circumstances - i.e. you were not attempting to rob someone, or committing a burglary when apprehended, your minimum sentence could be as little as 2 to 10 years. NONE of this would be 'bargained away' as is done in the Uk [50% off at sentencing]. Generally, you serve the 'whole enchilada'. If you were apprehended committing a crime (burglary, robbery, etc), your sentence could be 4 to 10 times the minimum, depending upon circumstances and your previous record. Cheers.
    Well that was a wall of text and a half. I can stop you right at the start though, nowhere did I mention anything about concealed carry and nowhere did I mention about sentencing, merely about how easy it is for anyone to acquire a gun in the USA.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by the bear)
    http://edition.cnn.com/2017/06/19/he...udy/index.html

    do you really think that 1300 children's lives is a price worth paying to support a 1791 amendment to a 1787 document, written when home firearms were typically muskets with a range of 100 yards ?
    We live in a tiny island nation where it's reasonably easy to secure our borders and where everything is so closely bunched together the police can arrive at the scene of any crime within an acceptable time frame. In the USA they have a leaky southern border and even with Trump's hypothetical wall, it will not prevent the flow of firearms just as it won't prevent the flow of people or the flow of drugs. Whilst I agree there is very little reason for Brits to own guns, the belief that a ban on guns could prevent their flow or the corresponding crime associated therewith is completely delusional and shows an entirely Eurocentric understanding of the world.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RogerOxon)
    You're more likely to get shot if you carry a gun.


    It's not the heart that is lacking.


    Countries with stricter gun control tend to have fewer gun-related deaths.


    You are making a claim. What is your evidence?
    You are right to an extent in terms of gun-related deaths. However I've experienced first-hand the full extent of violent crimes in the UK. Have you seen the knife rate over here per capita compared to the USA? Why can't we get to the root of the problem instead of having stricter gun control. People who commit these terrible atrocities in regards to mass shootings tend to either been impacted by mental illness, or have submitted to some toxic ideology, for e.g. Radical Islam.

    People who tend to commit these atrocities are already criminals anyway, so criminalising the use of guns in the way that America does now won't make much of a difference at all. Though I might concede that stricter background checks are needed.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by itsfantanoooo)
    People who live in the UK and are pro-gun are another breed of stupidity. Same with commies living in the UK.

    You take for granted our strict gun laws because you don't understand what it's done to society.
    Would you like to back up your point with your empirical, irrefutable evidence that you obviously do possess? Or are you going to resort to name-calling like all individuals do when they are losing.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by anonymous_1947)
    You are right to an extent in terms of gun-related deaths. However I've experienced first-hand the full extent of violent crimes in the UK. Have you seen the knife rate over here per capita compared to the USA? Why can't we get to the root of the problem instead of having stricter gun control. People who commit these terrible atrocities in regards to mass shootings tend to either been impacted by mental illness, or have submitted to some toxic ideology, for e.g. Radical Islam.

    People who tend to commit these atrocities are already criminals anyway, so criminalising the use of guns in the way that America does now won't make much of a difference at all. Though I might concede that stricter background checks are needed.
    A gun is more dangerous than a knife. A semi-automatic weapon is off the scale. The US has a homicide rate about five times that of the UK.

    Introducing gun control has worked in other countries, e.g. Australia.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RogerOxon)
    Having a gun in a 'problematic' situation will just serve to get you shot IMO. How exactly are the Police meant to know who is a danger?


    Some are reversible, if the person is found in time. Those inflicted by firearms typically aren't.
    Completely agree with the suicide point. So why not spend more money on America's failing mental health system instead of revoking the rights of hundreds of millions of Americans, the vast majority of them I might add being law abiding citizens.

    And the whole problematic situation issue, the police will have a pretty good idea of who would be in danger; being in the developed world with one of the most advanced police forces in the world.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by angrypoliceman)
    you americans think you'll be superman if a situation occurs where you think youll need to use your gun-in reality a bunch of obese people shooting in hopes of doing something
    Just to clarify, I live in the UK. But nice try anyway. I don't make pre conceived ideas about a whole country. Where are you from btw?
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    UK has had 1 mass shooting in the past 20 years. America has had 273+ mass shootings this year.
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    People talk about how many crimes are linked to guns but they don't know how many crimes have been prevented by guns

    Criminals in US are pro gun control because if enforced it would lead to general disarmament among the law abiding population leaving them defenceless against criminals who obviously wouldn't care about turning their guns in.

    UK is different to the US though. Point is gun control in the US wouldn't work like people think.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by anonymous_1947)
    Completely agree with the suicide point. So why not spend more money on America's failing mental health system instead of revoking the rights of hundreds of millions of Americans, the vast majority of them I might add being law abiding citizens.
    The health system is broken here (I live in California), but that's orthogonal to the gun debate.

    It should not be a right to own a firearm. Their sole aim is to kill.

    And the whole problematic situation issue, the police will have a pretty good idea of who would be in danger; being in the developed world with one of the most advanced police forces in the world.
    The Police here tend to shoot (to kill) first and ask questions later, especially when they perceive danger to themselves.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by anonymous_1947)
    But wouldn't you agree that guns act as an effective deterrence when in a problematic situation?

    You talk about suicides? Yes in the USA for example, there is a huge problem in regards to this issue. Approximately 56% of suicides in the USA is carried out by a firearm. However as tragic as it may be, if one wants to commit suicide, unfortunately, they will inevitably find other ways to take their own life.

    Furthermore, only 9% of firearms owned there is because of the threat of burglary or threat, and not to sound rather impertinent, but so what?
    Sometimes guns are an effective deterrent. Other times, they are used on their owners, or escalate a conflict or crime so that the criminal has to use lethal force or get shot.

    I talk about suicides, and also accidental shootings. But let's focus on suicides for the moment. Committing suicide with a gun is quick, easy, and horribly reliable - practically everyone who attempts suicide with a firearm succeeds. Other methods of suicide are much slower to perform, giving the person more time to figure out if they really want to kill themselves, and also less likely to actually kill the person. It is certainly not the case that everyone who has a 30-second suicidal urge will eventually kill themselves if they don't immediately have the means to.

    I'm not sure what your argument is with your last sentence.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dheorl)
    Well that was a wall of text and a half. I can stop you right at the start though, nowhere did I mention anything about concealed carry and nowhere did I mention about sentencing, merely about how easy it is for anyone to acquire a gun in the USA.
    I have lived in 14 countries. In each of them it was just as easy as here to acquire a weapon. You buy them down in an alley, usually from the same people that you buy your illegal drugs from. Nobody with an ounce of intelligence would think that drug dealers, and those doing 'drive by's' would got to a gun shop, and fill out paperwork to buy a weapon legally. They're already convicted felons. Just filling out the paperwork [with the intent to buy a weapon] is ANOTHER felony, and would land them back in jail. Why in the world would they do that/??

    One of me mates here in the cybercafe' is from Honduras. He has told me that in his country, if you see a car travelling on the road after dark, it is 99.95 likely that at least the driver has a handgun. It's almost as likely that one or more passengers has one too. He says that the incidence of road robberies is fairly low as a result - as nobody wants to be shot trying to rob an armed motorist. A gal from Mexico here, has told me nearly the same thing. Now, i don't think that 90% of the cars on the road here [D.C. area] at night have an armed driver. It might be 40%, but i don't think higher than that. The problem is, here, having a weapon in the car is considered 'carrying concealed', if it is accessible to the driver. If they pull a traffic stop, and find that, you are convicted of carrying concealed without a permit. That is usually a felony, and THEN you CANNOT get a permit. For that reason, people with a problem - a gail with an abusive BF or Ex, normally go get a permit, so they can carry legally. I don't know what the situation is in Honduras or Mexico. Next time i see one of them, i'll ask.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Will you be richer or poorer than your parents?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.