But that is why people go for bigger government, it "provides" more. And the reality is that bigger government totally fails in providing better security, but the population doesn't realize that; yet that same population calls for more laws, just like you are doing. Laws that only end up affect law abiding citizen.

Frankly Dave, go back to the point that I mentioned about the cities where the citizens take the majority of the responsibility for their own self defense, a situation that you would call "anarchistic"; and you will find that crime is VERY low. Quite the opposite of anarchistic. Folks like you (I don't intend that as a bad thing) assume that higher gun ownership automatically declines into a situation where anarchy is the norm, but the norm is VERY FAR from that. The reality is that the situation is FAR more safe and crime is far lower because criminals aren't going to come into such a community and commit a crime. The law abiding citizens aren't going to chew each other up and become criminals just because they own firearms.

Which leads to another assumption that folks such as yourself make... You seem to have the attitude that gun owners are criminals, and that if allowed to own firearms, then surely that segment of society will decline into anarchy. But again, time after time, the examples stand that show more guns equal less crime, in the hands of typical, average law abiding citizens.

 

Not true!
That guy coming in your door with a gun is going to kill you. That doesn't happened in a law abiding community because the guy never shows up in your community in the first place.

Guns prevent FAR more crimes from happening than they are used in the commission of a crime. Our own Justice Department stats show that people use firearms in the act of self defense, than guns are used for crime.

Again, this comes back to the point that FAR more crimes are individually committed with cars, knives, sticks, fists, feet, etc than firearms. Why do you have no out cry against those items?

Thus far, no solid, rational reason has been presented which justifies the notion of de-barring a free man, not convicted of a felony, the best possible means of self defense.

 

As Ted Nugent would say, my argument is the Second Amendment. Period. It's one of the many things that make the United States the greatest country on earth and sets us apart from socialist nations like Sweden.

This douche fails to see where I called you a name.

 

"I don't like repeat offenders. I like dead offenders."

- Ted Nugent

 

I never said that people gun owners are criminals, I never said that guns will lead to anarchy. Frankly, I get upset being labeled as being against guns like that. I am not.
Anarchy: a utopian society of individuals who enjoy complete freedom without government
That's anarchy. I am not saying guns will lead to anarchy, I am saying that leaving the security and well-being of the population to just the population is a step in that direction. Anarchy as the political ideal doesn't imply crime.
I really can't see how it can be a bad idea for the government to prevent crime and arrest criminals?
This doesn't need to be done by a big government. Ever been to Monaco?
I think you misinterpreted what I said. I'm not saying that we need more laws and a big government.
But you can't expect people for themselves undo social injustice or poverty, things that will lead to more crime in the future. It's not about making laws, it's about other changes in society, which will ultimately affect the secondary factors to crime.

To fight crime in a long run, you need a government. To scare off people, you just need a shotgun.

 

Oh, I'm by no means for a weapons ban. But I still think that fewer guns in circulation (whether a guns for toys, guns for rep, guns for hossfly program or whatever is being used). The availability of guns is the most dexterous thing when it comes to assaults on bouncers. This includes knives as well.

 

I think that education and training are the answer. Not gun bans.

A favorite statistic quoted by gun control advocates is that if you own a gun you are 50% more likely to be killed with a gun.

This would indicate that either you are being out-gunned or unarmed assailants are gaining access to your gun and killing you with it.

If gun owners were trained and educated on how to properly use, store and handle their weapons, this would not be the case.

A person who owns a gun but does not know how to handle it or who is not prepared to use it in self-defense can be as dangerous as a crook with a gun.

I am all for education and training before handing weapons over to the uninitiated. But not bans of any type.

 

I agree with you Dana. You won't ever get rid of high crime rates by arming yourself. Again, education and social actions in the affected areas have been proven effective.
Same with guns, the proper use and limitations must be taught.

 

Again bro, simply not true.
Community's that are known to have a high level of gun ownership (we're talking legal here) also have the lowest crime rates. Area's with the most intense layers of gun control legislation are the ones with the highest crime rates.

No one is questioning the need for training at all. It is a good idea to know what you're doing with anything.

As for the other posts, I simply used the words that you chose to use my friend. "Anarchtic", etc. I know you weren't advocating anarchy, the point I was trying to make was that just because people own firearms and rely more upon themselves for their own safety; you do not see a move towards an anarchtic society. And you're own statements seemed to intimate that in your own opinion criminal behavior seemed to come with high levels of gun ownership. I know you do not mean to imply that, but sadly, that is the attitude that many take towards gun owners unfortunately.

 

I understand where you are coming from but personally I believe it's in our nature to destroy ourselves. Basic human instinct is fight or flight, I choose to fight. Humanity cannot be tamed, and unless you give everyone a full frontal lobotomy I doubt it will hinder the expressive hatred that fuels violence of any kind. Utopias can never exist, which is why we need to protect ourselves from....well...ourselves.