Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

Why do people oppose gun laws? watch

    • #1
    • Thread Starter
    #1

    I don't understand it. If people have less access to weapons, there is going to be fewer attacks with that weapon. Austrailia before their ban had high gun attack rates, but they have dropped dramatically afterward. It shouldn't be this easy to buy something that could kill so many.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Anonymous)
    I don't understand it. If people have less access to weapons, there is going to be fewer attacks with that weapon. Austrailia before their ban had high gun attack rates, but they have dropped dramatically afterward. It shouldn't be this easy to buy something that could kill so many.
    I think people oppose current gun laws for the reasons you stated? 🤔
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    because guns don't kill people people do! and we should tackle mental health instead! sajkdasjkdabvw
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by num.7)
    because guns don't kill people people do! and we should tackle mental health instead! sajkdasjkdabvw
    Surely we should be most concerned with the death toll first and reduce that by removing the means. Of course mental health should be dealt with but if they don't have the guns, they can't use the guns to kill.
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chichaldo)
    Surely we should be most concerned with the death toll first and reduce that by removing the means. Of course mental health should be dealt with but if they don't have the guns, they can't use the guns to kill.
    i wasn't serious. i was taking the mickey out of people, who oppose gun laws. i should have been more clear.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by num.7)
    i wasn't serious. i was taking the mickey out of people, who oppose gun laws. i should have been more clear.
    Tbf I did think you might have been from the sakjiusgavejsuav
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    • #1
    • Thread Starter
    #1

    (Original post by Chichaldo)
    I think people oppose current gun laws for the reasons you stated? 🤔
    I don't think I made my clear but I mean why do people oppose more gun control.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Anonymous)
    I don't think I made my clear but I mean why do people oppose more gun control.
    Becuz muh freedom.
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Anonymous)
    I don't think I made my clear but I mean why do people oppose more gun control.
    Your passage was clear, title contradicted it a bit. Not my views but many use guns for sport, hunting, farming(?), this notion of protection and ability to fight if called upon, 'safety' against hijackers or robberies.
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    They care more about their enjoyment of guns than the lives of innocent people. It really is that simple.
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    • Section Leader
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Section Leader
    (Original post by Anonymous)
    I don't understand it. If people have less access to weapons, there is going to be fewer attacks with that weapon. Austrailia before their ban had high gun attack rates, but they have dropped dramatically afterward. It shouldn't be this easy to buy something that could kill so many.
    Moved this to Debate and Current Affairs (D&CA)

    Wasn’t sure quite where it best fits, society or international, as it’s not UK politics? shadowdweller MrDystopia⠀
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Put yourself in the position of someone living in the United States - a society saturated with firearms - where your perception is that criminals are generally armed.

    Your perception will be that if your legal firearms are removed, you will become figurative cattle to any criminal who will be completely unaffected by a ban on firearms.

    Also, put yourself in the mentality of someone who is wedded to the idea of the Constitution. The 2nd Amendment is there to protect people from tyranny. This may seem bizarre to us - but they don't see it like that. It seems circular to us, but the sort of oppression they fear would be something like the Federal government moving to take people's weapons away - and they have these weapons for that very reason. The larger rationale (which I think has some merit) would be that if they would remove one Constitutional Freedom, there is nothing preventing them removing others.

    Assume for a second that all legal firearms were removed. There would probably still be school massacres - although sure, there would probably be fewer - but every single day the news would be saturated with reports of murder, home invasion, rape and so on and the implication would be that people were left defenceless. A society can't tolerate that kind of constant barrage of bad news. It would be like getting rid of speed limits or making all drugs legal here- regardless of the long term, the short and medium term would be intolerable and political suicide.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cat_mac)
    They care more about their enjoyment of guns than the lives of innocent people. It really is that simple.
    What you're doing here is making no attempt to understand the situation. This is just Jimmy Kimmel type emotional ranting with no practical suggestion.
    Online

    15
    ReputationRep:
    WHat the hell is your argument here I’m so confused
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Anonymous)
    I don't understand it. If people have less access to weapons, there is going to be fewer attacks with that weapon. Austrailia before their ban had high gun attack rates, but they have dropped dramatically afterward. It shouldn't be this easy to buy something that could kill so many.
    The Australian gun "ban" was a spectacular failure. Only a small number of firearms were handed in.

    The gun homicide rate was falling in pretty much all developed nations. The gun homicide rate in the US fell twice as fast as the rate in Australia. I'm not suggesting there is causation between gun homicide and gun bans - but certainly the idea that the Australian gun "ban" worked is extremely questionable.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    It's either because they don't understand how statistics work or they generally think that guns are fun, or both.

    Guns are machines of destruction, no matter what way you try to spin it.

    The statistical likelihood of some nutcase obtaining a gun would decrease dramatically if guns are made illegal, and forcefully removed. That's not to say you'll get them all but you'll get most, if you do it right (the Aussies didn't). In the US, you can pretty much walk into Walmart and buy a gun, as long as you have a licence (in most states).

    'Guns don't kill people, people do' - is a line that sounds smart but isn't.
    At the end of the day, yes an attacker can still kill people with a knife. However can you kill twenty people in less than 5 minutes with a knife? Very much doubt it. The London Bridge attackers used both a van and knives. Death toll: 8 with many assailants. Recent Florida School shooting: 17, one nutcase

    London was still absolutely terrible. I think it's wrong to compare death tolls however in the interests of guns vs knives, knives are likely to be less fatal.

    The thing that republicans don't like to report are the many school shootings that go unreported by the wider media:
    http://time.com/5159039/florida-scho...ting-parkland/

    The UK would descend into chaos if Guns were allowed. England would have US-style school shootings and N.I could have more sectarian violence than it has already.

    Absolutely no way.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chichaldo)
    Surely we should be most concerned with the death toll first and reduce that by removing the means. Of course mental health should be dealt with but if they don't have the guns, they can't use the guns to kill.
    Surely our experience of the last couple of years in this country is that mass killing does not require legal firearms. You can kill just as many defenceless people with a van or a kitchen knife.

    Islamic terrorists have murdered scores of people in this country with vehicles, and scores of people in continental Europe with illegal firearms. Legally held weapons would appear to be irrelevant.

    If terrorists simply adapt to laws preventing them from legally obtaining firearms - why would anyone believe that a potential school shooter wouldn't simply do the same?

    Restriction of certain types of firearms might be desirable, but it is not solving the problem that is being asked.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by _NMcC_)
    It's either because they don't understand how statistics work or they generally think that guns are fun, or both.

    Guns are machines of destruction, no matter what way you try to spin it.

    The statistical likelihood of some nutcase obtaining a gun would decrease dramatically if guns are made illegal, and forcefully removed. That's not to say you'll get them all but you'll get most, if you do it right (the Aussies didn't). In the US, you can pretty much walk into Walmart and buy a gun, as long as you have a licence (in most states).

    'Guns don't kill people, people do' - is a line that sounds smart but isn't.
    At the end of the day, yes an attacker can still kill people with a knife. However can you kill twenty people in less than 5 minutes with a knife? Very much doubt it. The London Bridge attackers used both a van and knives. Death tool: 8 with many assailants. Recent Florida School shooting: 17, one nutcase

    London was still absolutely terrible. I think it's wrong to compare death tolls however in the interests of guns vs knives, knives are likely to be less fatal.

    The thing that republicans don't like to report are the many school shootings that go unreported by the wider media:
    http://time.com/5159039/florida-scho...ting-parkland/

    The UK would descend into chaos if Guns were allowed. England would have US school shootings and N.I could have more sectarian violence than it has already.

    Absolutely no way.
    The scenarios are too terrible to contemplate. If a school shooter is forced to use different tactics, who is to say how lethal they would become? Lock themselves in a classroom with 30 6 year olds and a knife? Drive a van through a sportsday? Set fire to a school? You don't know. You're assuming that murderers are not capable of adaptation.

    All this also assumes that a person with such intent would not simply obtain an illegal firearm.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by _NMcC_)
    It's either because they don't understand how statistics work or they generally think that guns are fun, or both.

    Guns are machines of destruction, no matter what way you try to spin it.

    The statistical likelihood of some nutcase obtaining a gun would decrease dramatically if guns are made illegal, and forcefully removed. That's not to say you'll get them all but you'll get most, if you do it right (the Aussies didn't). In the US, you can pretty much walk into Walmart and buy a gun, as long as you have a licence (in most states).

    'Guns don't kill people, people do' - is a line that sounds smart but isn't.
    At the end of the day, yes an attacker can still kill people with a knife. However can you kill twenty people in less than 5 minutes with a knife? Very much doubt it. The London Bridge attackers used both a van and knives. Death toll: 8 with many assailants. Recent Florida School shooting: 17, one nutcase

    London was still absolutely terrible. I think it's wrong to compare death tolls however in the interests of guns vs knives, knives are likely to be less fatal.

    The thing that republicans don't like to report are the many school shootings that go unreported by the wider media:
    http://time.com/5159039/florida-scho...ting-parkland/

    The UK would descend into chaos if Guns were allowed. England would have US-style school shootings and N.I could have more sectarian violence than it has already.

    Absolutely no way.
    We do have guns.
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Because they believe that its a fundamental right.

    Dont take any of the pro gun clowns here seriously. All evidence shows that stricter gun laws=less gun homicides and, in some parts of America, less violent crime. their argument? "who cares about gun homicide". morons.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the proposed ban on plastic straws and cotton buds?
Useful resources

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

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