swgohome.com

Alright, I'm starting this topic out of pure interest. Keep it clean and mature. No insults or trolling.

My views? First, let's establish that I am Republican leaning libertarian. I do not believe the government has a right to control what we do with our lives, nor should they regulate economic activity or promote foreign intervention unless the nation is a direct threat to our security. So, you'd think I'd be against gun control, right? Well, although I do favor a small government, I do believe our government has a very sole purpose: protect citizens from physical harm. With that belief is where I justify my support for bureaucratic departments such as the FDA and, of course, pro-gun control laws. Yes, citizens have a right to bear arms, but the government has an inherent duty to make sure those arms do not sacrifice the safety of others. It seems a bit paradoxical, since some of you will argue that loose gun control with in fact keeps us safer since we can defend ourselves. I'd argue otherwise. It seems to me that a majority of people who want guns want to defend themselves against criminals with guns. Wouldn't you say though that stricter gun control would prevent many of those villainous people from obtaining guns in the first place? One who is not in a right state of mind surely wouldn't be able to gain access to fire arms easily under a well-regulated system. Yes, there will be those people who find ways around the law, but the loss of insane people buying guns legally won't be proportional to the gain of insane people buying them on the black market. Let's say hypothetically that under a new system with stricter regulation, 9 out of every 10 people with bad intentions who could have bought a gun under the old system could no longer do so. Then only 3 of those 9 go on to buy their guns illegally. That's still 6 people who will not become an endangerment to society.

I admit I know little about using a firearm, therefore I'm not too sure how regulation could be reformed. However, if somebody like James Holmes can access all of his equipment legally, I believe some change is in order.

Well I learnt via the newspaper that Holmes pruchased most his arsenal from a Store called Gunbulk.com or something like that. This store is used by Army platoons before they go to the front and privately owned security agencies. Also, His order, Quoted by the owner of the supplier "The order didn't stand out" Because 1st is was only 306$, and 2nd, because this peticular supplies gets thousands of orders everyday. After the incident, The Goverment officials learnt that amazingly Holmes had stockpiled 6 crates of ammunition in 4 months. Thats over 8000 rounds.

In my opion here. The goverment needs to controll our guns and the distribte of them. Look we even got kids taking guns to school to kill there bullies and teachers. We need to crack down on this hole gun thing.

Sorry Samonuh, I'm breaking the rules here. Dutch please don't enter this discussion you are stupid and immature and it's so damn obvious you don't know what the hell you're talking about. Seriously.

(Swgo)Dutch wrote:In my opion here. The goverment needs to controll our guns and the distribte of them. Look we even got kids taking guns to school to kill there bullies and teachers. We need to crack down on this hole gun thing.

if guns are outlawed then the only people who would have them would be criminalls.

And even if we could take ALL guns away, people would just kill each other with knives. Cause that is flawed human nature.

As much as gun control laws have 'tried' to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, it's virtually impossible to do so. Guns can be bought on the streets of big cities, our 'in the hills' with the right connections, no er what laws you put in place. People with financial problems sell their guns (or use them against others) to acquire money. Hell, even our own Justice Department is providing guns to criminals...aka 'Fast and Furious'. Look at gangs. They feel empowered by guns, and know where to get them. The gang populations are getting worse, financial times are getting worse, and the world itself seems to be headed toward chaos. Militias exist, and I feel that they will grow even more now than ever. I'm all for the Militia, in that they may very well be our last line of defense if our Country is ever attacked and overrun. They were our first line of defense when the British attacked the colonies during the Revolutionary War...as an example.

We are starting down a path of desperate times, and people will do desperate things to survive, to protect their possessions or their very lives (That theater shooting is an example). We are at the point that it would be impossible to get guns off the streets or out of peoples homes. And, personally, I feel every law abiding citizen has a right to defend themselves. A concealed carry law for all law-abiding, medically stable, non-felons of appropriate age, in my opinion, should be allowed. I know, it could cause discourse, but a felon, a would-be killer, or gang member may think twice before attacking someone.

WD-40 wrote: A concealed carry law for all law-abiding, medically stable, non-felons of appropriate age, in my opinion, should be allowed.

I agree very much with this statement, but it seems to me that our current system allows people outside those conditions to purchase firearms. How do we fix that?

mrjamwin wrote:Sorry Samonuh, I'm breaking the rules here. Dutch please don't enter this discussion you are stupid and immature and it's so damn obvious you don't know what the hell you're talking about. Seriously.

Look just stop. Sure i am immature and all but i know alot when it comes to guns .