Gun control in america - flip you, liberatarians.

[Virtual Fighter]

http://www.comedycentral.com/mp/play.jhtml?reposid=/multimedia/tds/helms/helms_7101.html&setplayer=real_media

This came out on comedy central again yesturday in reply to Flordia's insane messure to allow anyone who feels threatened to be able to shoot their gun.

Here are Florida's standereds of gun use:

State Requirements
Rifles and Shotguns

* Permit to purchase rifles and shotguns? No.

* Registration of rifles and shotguns? No.

* Licensing of owners of rifles and shotguns? No.

* Permit to carry rifles and shotguns? No


Handguns

* Permit to purchase handgun? No

* Registration of handguns? No.

* Licensing of owners of handguns? No.

* Permit to carry handguns? No, unless concealed.


Other Requirements

* Is there a State waiting period? Yes - 3 days for handguns

* Is there a FBI *NICS check for firearm transactions? Yes and a state check system.

* Permit to carry a concealed weapon required? Yes.

* Record of sale: No

This is utterly insane. I can litterally buy a gun and shoot someone and get away with it.

What the hell is this world coming to? We need to ban guns from America indefenatly.

[mastaq]

We shouldn't have to ban guns. People should be allowed to keep guns in their homes. But there should be a thorough backround check done prior. There should also be legislation passed for the whole US about purchasing a gun. You should have to be 21 to carry a gun. In most states as far as I know this is the case.

[Dark_Paladin_X]

Up here (being Canada). We have a law (not sure if it's a law or not, need to check). But if we have a gun, it can't leave our house, unless we're going to a firing range or something. Even if we are, we HAVE to get a permit saying we're taking it out of our house, the time, where we're gonna go, and how long we're gonna have the gun out of the house. If we're caught without a permit, you can get fined or even imprisionment, depending on how severe.

Canada is strict man. which is (in a way) a good thing.

[~Mastermax~]

i still want canadas healthcare...

in kansas there is a backround check which takes 3 to 6 days, depending on there backround. but they are changing the law so that you can walk out of the shop with the gun the day you pay for it, wtf?

[Angel-Eyes]

This is utterly insane. I can litterally buy a gun and shoot someone and get away with it.

What the hell is this world coming to? We need to ban guns from America indefenatly.
ok there is a HUUUUUGE difference among buying a gun, shooting sombody with a gun, and especially getting away with it.


you're right, the laws in florida are quite light when it comes to buying a gun, that should be changed.

ok now im gonna give 2 scenarios:

(gun laws as they are)
Im pissed at a guy, I want to kill him, I go buy a gun and kill him.....and will probably get caught eventually.



(changed gun laws so its hard to get a gun)
Im pissed at a guy, I want to kill him, I try to buy a gun but I cant get it, so I borrow from a friend/smuggle/steal/make a gun and then I go kill the guy......and will probably get caught eventually.


enforced gun laws will not reduce the rate of murder, because if you want to kill sombody, you wont let some stupid laws get into your way, because obviously you're not letting the "dont kill people" law get into your way.

enforced gun laws will actually increase the theft rate because people cant buy the guns they want.


We need to ban guns from America indefenatly.
come to a street corner up here in michigan and preach that all day....youwill probably be shot, why?
because almost everyone up here goes hunting (like nobody is at school on opening day)

and its not just MI

[Virtual Fighter]

We shouldn't have to ban guns. People should be allowed to keep guns in their homes. But there should be a thorough backround check done prior. There should also be legislation passed for the whole US about purchasing a gun. You should have to be 21 to carry a gun. In most states as far as I know this is the case.


I don't know what would be the point of owning a gun unless it's protection against someone WITH a gun like a robber, but if we eliminate guns there will be no need for protection.

Yeah, going to the shooting range is fun, but mroe times than none those guns arn't pointed at targets but live people.


(changed gun laws so its hard to get a gun)
Im pissed at a guy, I want to kill him, I try to buy a gun but I cant get it, so I borrow from a friend/smuggle/steal/make a gun and then I go kill the guy......and will probably get caught eventually.


enforced gun laws will not reduce the rate of murder, because if you want to kill sombody, you wont let some stupid laws get into your way, because obviously you're not letting the "dont kill people" law get into your way.

Just deleting the problem as a whole this time will work.

Guns are used for 3 things:

1) Shooting people
2) Shooting targets or signs in shooting ranges
3) shooting animals.

Out of these three only one doesn't involve killing something. Out of these three, the most popular activity in a urban enviornment is killing a person.

enforced gun laws will actually increase the theft rate because people cant buy the guns they want.

No, it will decrease the theaft rate because now people won't have guns to rob liquer stores with, guns to rob banks with, guns to shoot out with the police, guns to steal anything you want.

Deleting guns from america's identity will only have a posetive effect. If we don't have guns at all, (I'm not talking about increasing the srutenty of buying a gun, even though that would help. I'm tlaking doing away with them entirely.) we don't have your situtation becaus there will be no guns to steal.

There was an incident in North Hollywood 8 years ago when two armed men with AK-47s shot and wounded 16 police men, while trying to rob a bank of america.

The weapons they had at the time were legally available.

Later, they were banned bypresident clinton so no more high powered weapons can be sold and no more of these situations can happen.

Just recently, persident bush let the law expire and AK-47s can nowbe bought and sold.

Is he fliping insane? Did he not learn anything from the last time?

come to a street corner up here in michigan and preach that all day....youwill probably be shot, why?
because almost everyone up here goes hunting (like nobody is at school on opening day)

and its not just MI

Thanks for making everyone stereotype americans in your image, by the way.

That's retarded. They're gonna shoot me why? To prove me right?
flip michigan and flip anyother hick state.

[~Mastermax~]

there's nothing wrong with assualt rifles, all they are different for is to imtimidate more. give a few years and the M16 will be legal because the military will have a new standard weapon.

[Elena]

I don't know what would be the point of owning a gun unless it's protection against someone WITH a gun like a robber, but if we eliminate guns there will be no need for protection.
Uh no...hello guns are not the only weapons robbers can use. There are knifes...and such. If you were to eliminate guns there is nothing stopping a person who really wants a gun to go into the black market and getting one....

Yeah, going to the shooting range is fun, but mroe times than none those guns arn't pointed at targets but live people.

Proof that.

Just deleting the problem as a whole this time will work.

Proof this too...

Deleting guns from america's identity will only have a posetive effect. If we don't have guns at all, (I'm not talking about increasing the srutenty of buying a gun, even though that would help. I'm tlaking doing away with them entirely.) we don't have your situtation becaus there will be no guns to steal.

Wow, you delete all guns from America. Even police officers? Wouldn't that weaken our protection as a whole...now what if Iraqis and all the other people who hate America hear of this?

Ok, maybe just maybe you meant the general public. But what is stopping a police officer from going rouge...and reselling them to the public.

That's retarded. They're gonna shoot me why? To prove me right?
flip michigan and flip anyother hick state.

Duh, Bush is retarded. But to ask all of America to give up their guns at the moment is insane. People like to be able to have their protection..even though it might be that same gun that kills them. To ban all guns to me is personally crazy. I believe there should be stricter laws but not ban it entirely. Do you know what kind of civil war that will cause?

[dominicankid098]

Oh god..

You are not allowed to buy a gun unless you got a permit for it. My uncle just graduated in the Police Academy at Broward Community College which is located in Davie, Florida (just a bit north of Miami). I went up there for his graduation and I had asked him about this new law. He told me people are overexaggerating this new law. You would have to still go through a series of hell to not end up arrested.

A long term investigation, polygraph testing, background and criminal tests/checks, family background checks, etc etc, would take place. Basically, they would even investigate your neighborhood, your friends, your friend's friends, and the whole nine yards.

Seriously, if you didn't have a permit but yet you shot somebody for defending yourself (and the gun is yours), you are still going to jail for possesion of weapon. And possesion is 3 years.




Florida's Main Law

"10-20-LIFE"

-Mandates a minimum 10 year prison term for certain felonies, or attempted felonies in which the offender possesses a firearm or destructive device
-Mandates a minimum 20 year prison term when the firearm is discharged
-Mandates a minimum 25 years to LIFE if someone is injured or killed
-Mandates a minimum 3 year prison term for possession of a firearm.
-Mandates that the minimum prison term is to be served consecutively to any other term of imprisonment imposed


And if you want to sign a petition about this new law, just goto this site:

http://www.bradycampaign.org/legislation/state/viewstate.php?st=fl



Edited By dominicankid098 on 1116107645

[Angel-Eyes]

taking guns away from people who use them to break the law is a bad idea....they'll start smuggling them in from other countries.

people will never stop using guns to kill/rob/everything else against the law, and if you take guns away, well there just isnt anything available to replace it.....the gun is the best invention around for these lawbreakers to use

[Virtual Fighter]

Uh no...hello guns are not the only weapons robbers can use. There are knifes...and such. If you were to eliminate guns there is nothing stopping a person who really wants a gun to go into the black market and getting one....

I would much rather have some theif stab me than have a bullet go through my head.

The availability of fire arms is going up as are the death rates.

" Crime and mortality statistics are often used in the gun control debate. The number of homicides committed annually with a firearm by persons in the 14- to 24-year-old age group increased by 173% from 1985 to 1993, and then decreased by 47% from 1993 to 1999. Firearm fatalities from all causes and for all age groups decreased by 22%. For juveniles, they de-creased by 40%, from 1993 to 1998."

What's the only solution? Deleting guns.

Proof that.

*Prove

"self protection, 32 percent of firearms
owners, or 21,000,000 individuals; followed by target shooting, 13
percent or 8,500,000;

See? "Protection" is greater than target shooting.

Prove this too...

That's an assertion, which mean it's a statment which I intend to prove through the course of the debate. That's what i'm trying to prove, it's not a fact I claim.

How about you try to DISPROVE IT?

My assertion is common sense. If jimmy shot timmy, what should you do to prevent this from happening again? Get rid of the gun.

Don't put it on a top shelf, don't make timmy pay 50% more, just get rid of it and it's the guarenteed way to get rid of the problem.

Deleting guns from america's identity will only have a posetive effect. If we don't have guns at all, (I'm not talking about increasing the srutenty of buying a gun, even though that would help. I'm tlaking doing away with them entirely.) we don't have your situtation becaus there will be no guns to steal.

Wow, you delete all guns from America. Even police officers? Wouldn't that weaken our protection as a whole...now what if Iraqis and all the other people who hate America hear of this?

Ok, maybe just maybe you meant the general public. But what is stopping a police officer from going rouge...and reselling them to the public.

Are you kidding me? Wtf are "iraqis" gonna do? Are they gonna buy a boat and go all the flip over here?

No. That's a dumb theory. I could go on and on explaining how dumb it is, but just take my word for it.

And I did mean to the general public, even though we can do without police shooting us all the time. But, "a cop going rouge" is also a farfetched idea.

But what is stopping someone from buying a nuclear bomb and blowing us all up?

What's stopping the sky from falling?

What's stopping any bad thing from happening ever?

We can'tlive in fear all the time. We know guns are causing problems, why not take them away? We're scared of one small situtation from possibly happening at one point in time? Oh please.


Duh, Bush is retarded. But to ask all of America to give up their guns at the moment is insane. People like to be able to have their protection.

Gun Violence - Young Lives Cut Short

In 1998, more than 10 children and teenagers, ages 19 and under, were killed with guns everyday.[10]

In 1998, gunshot wounds were the second leading cause of injury death for men and women 10-24 years of age - second only to motor vehicle crashes.[11]

In 1998, firearm homicide was the leading cause of death for black males ages 15-34.[12]

From 1993 through 1997, an average of 1,409 children and teenagers took their own lives with guns each year.[13]

Each year during 1993 through 1997, an average of 1,621 murderers who had not reached their 18th birthdays took someone's life with a gun.[14]



Oh yeah, we feel VERY protected.

To ban all guns to me is personally crazy.

I know that it would not be so crazy to ME. It wasn't someone trying to protect themselves which shot my next door neighbor, it was a robber that shot her because she didn't give up the money fast enough.

These arn't miraculous objects that make the world a better place, these objects make MY world and the world of urban life alike a living fliping hell.


"In 1999, there were only 154 justifiable homicides by private citizens in the United States.[9]"

JUSTIFIABLE. As in "He tried to break into my house."

Now, compare that to the 31,000 who die from gun related deaths every year.

That's 0.004% who have sucessfully "protected" themselves.

I believe there should be stricter laws but not ban it entirely. Do you know what kind of civil war that will cause?

Oh yeah, what'll we be fighting with, sticks and stones?

================================================== =============================================

You are not allowed to buy a gun unless you got a permit for it. My uncle just graduated in the Police Academy at Broward Community College which is located in Davie, Florida (just a bit north of Miami). I went up there for his graduation and I had asked him about this new law. He told me people are overexaggerating this new law. You would have to still go through a series of hell to not end up arrested.

Hey, I don't live in florida, I'm only speeking from what I read.

"MIAMI -- It is either a Wild West revival, a return to the days of "shoot first and ask questions later," or a triumph for the "Castle Doctrine" -- the notion that enemies invade personal space at their peril."

It's also known as the "shoot first, don't even ask questions later" law. (JK)

If I had this permit you spoke of, that means if somone is like, coming at me, it doesn't matter if they're a long lost friend and want to hug me, I can theoretically shoot them and won't get fined or imprisoned, right?

A long term investigation, polygraph testing, background and criminal tests/checks, family background checks, etc etc, would take place. Basically, they would even investigate your neighborhood, your friends, your friend's friends, and the whole nine yards.

Seriously, if you didn't have a permit but yet you shot somebody for defending yourself (and the gun is yours), you are still going to jail for possesion of weapon. And possesion is 3 years.

Okay, but still, I can shoot somoene if they come at me, right? Just as long as I don't have a criminal record and have this permit?

Sweet, this will totally reduce crimes.

*rolls eyes*


Florida's Main Law

"10-20-LIFE"

-Mandates a minimum 10 year prison term for certain felonies, or attempted felonies in which the offender possesses a firearm or destructive device
-Mandates a minimum 20 year prison term when the firearm is discharged
-Mandates a minimum 25 years to LIFE if someone is injured or killed
-Mandates a minimum 3 year prison term for possession of a firearm.
-Mandates that the minimum prison term is to be served consecutively to any other term of imprisonment imposed


And if you want to sign a petition about this new law, just goto this site:

http://www.bradycampaign.org/legislation/state/viewstate.php?st=fl

But that obnly works if you don't fit the "He came at me, I felt threatened, I shot him, nuff said" law.

I also found this which is another peice of evidence to florida's fliped up law system:

Is there a one-handgun-per-month limit on gun sales?
No

Assault Weapons
Are there limitations on assault weapons and magazines?
No

Ballistic Fingerprinting
Must handguns be ballistic fingerprinted prior to sale?
No

CCW Limits
May police limit carrying concealed handguns?
No

Child-Safety Locks
Must locking devices be sold with guns?
No

Gun Manufacturer Accountability
Do cities have authority to hold gun makers legally liable?
No

Gun Show Checks
Are background checks required at gun shows?
Partial

License or Permit to Purchase
Is a license/permit required to buy handguns?
No

Local Gun Laws - Preemption
May cities enact laws stronger than the state's?
Partial

Record Keeping
May police maintain gun sale records?
No

Registration
Are all guns registered with law enforcement?
No

Safety Standards
Are there consumer safety standards on guns?
No

Safety Training
Is safety training required for handgun buyers?
No

Saturday Night Specials
Are there limitations on 'junk' handguns?
No

Secondary Sales
Are background checks required on 'private' gun sales?
Partial



God bless florda and the Bush brothers.

==================================================


taking guns away from people who use them to break the law is a bad idea....they'll start smuggling them in from other countries.

That's a bleak guess on what MIGHT happen. We have no evidence of this happening already, as all types of guns are already accesable to the public.

Let's take a page out of Elenas's book:

Proof it.

people will never stop using guns to kill/rob/everything else against the law, and if you take guns away, well there just isnt anything available to replace it.....the gun is the best invention around for these lawbreakers to use

"In 1996, handguns were used to murder 2 people in New Zealand, 15 in Japan, 30 in Great Britain, 106 in Canada and 9,390 in the United States.[8]"

If other countries have done it so well, why can't we?

Because we fear one another?

Because we have a bleak interpretation fo what will happen if we do?

Becuase we're afriad of ourselves?

[Necro2k2]

You'd be a moron to take away guns. Laws don't stop everything, what kind of idiotic world you living in Miguel? Do your laws stop people from buying weed and other illegal things? Don't think so. Your living in a fantasy world now you have to wake up. Humans will kill this world, no matter how much you want it to change.

[Angel-Eyes]

Gun Violence - Young Lives Cut Short
if you're against guns kiling young lives, then why on earth are you not appalled by doctors aborting babies....

thats just a personal question^, nothing to do with this debate



nowback to topic:


We can'tlive in fear all the time.

you are the one who is afraid mr. VF.......you are afraid of being shot

[Virtual Fighter]

if you're against guns kiling young lives, then why on earth are you not appalled by doctors aborting babies....

thats just a personal question^, nothing to do with this debate

If you want guns so much and want them to "protect you" against the 31,000 who die anually, which is a pretty greusom thing to be affermative for, why are you FOR abortion?

And plus, you're painting things as black and white. This is not a black nor white situtation and neigther is the Abortion situtation. Quit it.


you are the one who is afraid mr. VF.......you are afraid of being shot

Yeah, I fliping am afriad of being shot, because where I live you're more likley to die of a gun shot than of any other death. My neighbor was killed by a gun and the people who owned this house before us was killed by a gun.

Is it effecting me? fliping right it is.

[Angel-Eyes]

Is it effecting me? fliping right it is.
I know several people who have died in car accidents.....therefore I have a slight fear of dying in one.


ban cars!

[Virtual Fighter]

That's just retarded. There's a posetive effect in using a car. There is no posetive effect in owning a gun. 99.996% of gun deaths are accidental or pruposeful and not protected by law.

What good comes out of a gun?

[Angel-Eyes]

hunting
yes you can use a bow and arrow, but a gun is more efficent

cars
yes you can use a horse and buggy, but a car is more efficent (as in faster efficent, dont want to start an environmental debate)

[Virtual Fighter]

hunting
yes you can use a bow and arrow, but a gun is more efficent

Are we living in hunter-gatherer times that we need to hunt out food? No, we don't. We're living in the post industrialized world and there is a ready source of food in and urban, sub-urban and rural area.

Hunting is for game, for show. It's not a necessity unless you're stranded in the woods, in which case, why on earth is it you haev a gun?

Even if there is a population of people in the united states that needs hunting to survive, WHICH THERE ISN'T, does that justify the 31,000 who die each year?

If I invent a new toy which kills 30% of the surounding populice in a one mile viciinity, should it be legal just because I enjoy it?

No, we need to balance the scale. In this case, guns are a problem, not a good thing.


cars
yes you can use a horse and buggy, but a car is more efficent (as in faster efficent, dont want to start an environmental debate)

Who cares? what does this have to do with the debate? Quit nit picking single phraises in my posts and attack my argument, not cars. (?)

[Angel-Eyes]

Hunting is for game, for show. It's not a necessity unless you're stranded in the woods, in which case, why on earth is it you haev a gun?
baseball bats are used to kill people, yet we do not ban baseball



btw I will pick all the nits that I want

[Elena]

I would much rather have some theif stab me than have a bullet go through my head.

Uh, I would prefer neither, but atleast if they didn't ban guns I would have a chance of shooting the person dead before they shot/stabbed me.

*Prove

"self protection, 32 percent of firearms
owners, or 21,000,000 individuals; followed by target shooting, 13
percent or 8,500,000;

See? "Protection" is greater than target shooting.
Yeah, prove oopsies.
And you said more times then none these guns were used towards others then target practice. Protection doesn't necessarily mean towards others. Protection could be an animal. And "towards others" doesn't necessarily mean protection it could mean revenge.

That's an assertion, which mean it's a statment which I intend to prove through the course of the debate. That's what i'm trying to prove, it's not a fact I claim.

How about you try to DISPROVE IT?

My assertion is common sense. If jimmy shot timmy, what should you do to prevent this from happening again? Get rid of the gun.

Don't put it on a top shelf, don't make timmy pay 50% more, just get rid of it and it's the guarenteed way to get rid of the problem.

Deleting guns from america's identity will only have a posetive effect. If we don't have guns at all, (I'm not talking about increasing the scrutiny of buying a gun, even though that would help. I'm tlaking doing away with them entirely.) we don't have your situtation becaus there will be no guns to steal.

Well, I believe it's a bad assertion to say that if we delete guns from America it will work this time. Like Nerco said they tried to ban drugs and such from America but don't you still here about people smuggling drugs from Columbia, Mexico and Cuba. Laws rarely stop people from getting what they want to get and for you to ask that all guns to be banned is really stupid because what if this law were to go through and everyone were to get rid of their guns but the bad people. Now, what would protect those good people without guns from those bad people with guns.

Are you kidding me? Wtf are "iraqis" gonna do? Are they gonna buy a boat and go all the flip over here?
I said and all the other countries that hate the USA. And that's a lot. Let's replace Iraq with N. Korea. Is that a better example for you? N. Korea may not be very big but when teamed with Japan or even China what's stoping them from invading the US. China is one friggin 3rd of the world population. And N. Korea and Japan have the technology to blow us up. Not to mention Japan has been building subs since their contract from wwII is almost up. Don't even tell me something like "China would never harm us." N. Korea has China wrapped around it's little finger and if they wanted to team up with N. Korea they would especially if forced.

Oh yeah, what'll we be fighting with, sticks and stones?
1. What makes you think people will give up all their guns?
2. What makes you think people will stop making homemade guns as they do homemade bombs?
3. What makes you think that people won't buy guns illegally?

Don't put it on a top shelf, don't make timmy pay 50% more, just get rid of it and it's the guarenteed way to get rid of the problem.

Ok, let's get even more specific with the probelm at hand. Ok, you get rid of guns...what's stoping kinds from still watching shows like RAW and attempting the moves. So because this is killing people also would you get rid of wrestling? How about football? I hear lots of people die from that and when kids attempt the tackles people also die. And oh no Timmy witnesses a Ninja show. Timmy decides to take a bucher knife and attempt the throwing knifes move. Ok sure banning guns may lower the death rate by a lot but what is stopping kids from modeling after another bad violent behavior such as the knife throwing act. Kids will always model themselves after another person. It's what they do. It is up to the parent to teach them not to touch this and to keep the gun away from the child and have a gun lock on it at all times. To do this Bush should pass a law like Clinton wanted to give a gun lock with each gun sale. I don't think we should ban guns but maybe make it more strict to get one.

That's a bleak guess on what MIGHT happen. We have no evidence of this happening already, as all types of guns are already accesable to the public.

Let's take a page out of Elenas's book:

Proof it.
Hehe...you said Elenas's...
No problemo. Did we not try to ban drugs? And you still see people doing/selling drugs?
Don't you see people still smoking under 18 and drinking under 21? How about making it illegal to even jaywalk but don't you still see people doing it? Ok, so you see people will usually still do something regardless of a law. In fact, sometimes it gets even worst if you do try to ban something because of the high of doing something you know your not suppose to be doing...if you know what I mean. What's even worst is that it's in the freakin' consitution. If you actually ban guns people will really loose hope in the goverment. Which again is why I said the government should make it harder to get a gun. Because as Americans we are somewhat spoiled and to try to take something completely out of the consitution no matter how good the cause is nearly impossible. It was tried once before the NRA stood against it and won.

If other countries have done it so well, why can't we?
Because they never had the thing to begin with. To start without something is easier than to try to take away something that has been with us fro more than century. And damn right we fear each other.



Edited By Elena on 1116129386

[raddaman0628]

Hunting is for game, for show. It's not a necessity unless you're stranded in the woods, in which case, why on earth is it you haev a gun?
baseball bats are used to kill people, yet we do not ban baseball



btw I will pick all the nits that I want
I don't want to start a debate with u, but I don't think a killer gets a bat and starts going house to house to whack people in thier house. If they ban baseball, y not ban all sports and have everyone having kids and them not having fun kicking a ball or throwing a football. Kids would just play video-games, not having anything to go out and play with, and with all the junk food kids may die at heart attacks and diabetes at a very young age. They say it takes skill to use a bow and arrow anyway, so it would be more fun and challenging. I also tihnk I saw in pbs that horses can actually almost reach 55mph and grass can be replanished faster than gas and its free. Probably a horse is actually cheaper than a car. Btw, little girls would scream in joy for their fathers to buy them a horse lol.



Edited By raddaman0628 on 1116130938

[Zpower]

Witout guns.........

1.Suicides.. Theres always that cliff...
2.Homicides... Theres always that Bomb to exlpode or poisonous gas to spray....
3.Genocides... Theres always that Gas Chamber... or as stated that Bomb to explode....
4. Theres always that country that has a huge stock of guns... to supply to a huge line of crimminals waiting to get the upper hand on defenseless people.....
5. Theres always that inventor.... to invent a new way to kill people faster and more efficient than guns could ever do....
.....................

I bet banning guns will only increase the death rate.... No guns no problem... lets just rob this store with bombs and poisonous gas or lets go ninja style and slice some throats... and they thought bullets to the head was bad....

[Virtual Fighter]

Uh, I would prefer neither, but atleast if they didn't ban guns I would have a chance of shooting the person dead before they shot/stabbed me.

I've given the evidence. 0.004% of gun realted deaths are because of a justifiable pretection.

So really, how many people are being protected? Slim to none.

Guns are not protecting us, they're killing 31,000 a year.

Yeah, prove oopsies.
And you said more times then none these guns were used towards others then target practice. Protection doesn't necessarily mean towards others. Protection could be an animal. And "towards others" doesn't

necessarily mean protection it could mean revenge.

ANIMALS?

How many tigers have clawed at your door, wantign to eat your family. That's right. None.

Give me TEN CASES where a man was attacked by an animal, killed the animal with a gun and lived to tell the tale.

Well, I believe it's a bad assertion to say that if we delete guns from America it will work this time. Like Nerco said they tried to ban drugs and such from America but don't you still here about people smuggling

drugs from Columbia, Mexico and Cuba. Laws rarely stop people from getting what they want to get and for you to ask that all guns to be banned is really stupid because what if this law were to go through and

everyone were to get rid of their guns but the bad people. Now, what would protect those good people without guns from those bad people with guns.

Pfftt.. you justify the 31,000 people to "If we get rid of them... bad stuff will happen?"

Laws "rarley" stop things from happening? Give me some facts on drugs and how laws don't prevent them.


Because that's what i've been doing, you're just making up situations.


I said and all the other countries that hate the USA. And that's a lot. Let's replace Iraq with N. Korea. Is that a better example for you? N. Korea may not be very big but when teamed with Japan or even China

what's stoping them from invading the US. China is one friggin 3rd of the world population. And N. Korea and Japan have the technology to blow us up. Not to mention Japan has been building subs since their contract

from wwII is almost up. Don't even tell me something like "China would never harm us." N. Korea has China wrapped around it's little finger and if they wanted to team up with N. Korea they would especially if

forced.

What is this, the red scare?

These people arn't blood thirsty monsters just waiting for the monment we let our gaurd down to get on a boat, go thousands of miles, go to your house, knowck on the door and shoot you. You're a devider, you're

trying to build fear against our fellow man. This isn't the reds versus US, this isn't WWIII.

And all that bullpoop about China trying to kill us, THEY OUTLAWED GUNS IN CHINA.

HOW THE flip CAN 1/3 OF THE POPULATION TRY TO KILL US IF THEY HAVE NO GUNS?

1. What makes you think people will give up all their guns?

what makes you pull over?
what makes you take a DUI test?
What makes you give up the weed?
What takes you to jail?

Law enforcement.

We have the papers, we know where these guns are, all we need is to go to those houses, take the guns, say good day, nuff said.

2. What makes you think people will stop making homemade guns as they do homemade bombs?

How many homemade bombs have done any damage in the 230 history of the united states of america?

One.

Timathy Mcveigh's.


Plus, guns are ALOT harder to make than bombs. Give me some toilet paper, an orange and a stick a dinomite and I can make you a bomb.

3. What makes you think that people won't buy guns illegally?

What stops the sky from falllng?

We can build all thse bad senerios, or we can face the facts that 31,000 people are dying each year and only 0.004% are justifyable, and we need to DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.


Ok, let's get even more specific with the probelm at hand. Ok, you get rid of guns...what's stoping kinds from still watching shows like RAW and attempting the moves. So because this is killing people also

would you get rid of wrestling? How about football? I hear lots of people die from that and when kids attempt the tackles people also die. And oh no Timmy witnesses a Ninja show. Timmy decides to take a bucher knife

and attempt the throwing knifes move. Ok sure banning guns may lower the death rate by a lot but what is stopping kids from modeling after another bad violent behavior such as the knife throwing act. Kids will always

model themselves after another person. It's what they do. It is up to the parent to teach them not to touch this and to keep the gun away from the child and have a gun lock on it at all times. To do this Bush should

pass a law like Clinton wanted to give a gun lock with each gun sale. I don't think we should ban guns but maybe make it more strict to get one.

Give me some facts and statistics of "this mane people die from wrestling accidents each year, these many from being a ninja, thse many from playing football", and then well talk.

Because so far, you're waisting my time. I'm researching, finding facts, finding statistics, and you're doing what, making up "what happens if ninjas attack us" theories? Give me a break.

No problemo. Did we not try to ban drugs? And you still see people doing/selling drugs?
Don't you see people still smoking under 18 and drinking under 21?

But you have to admit, millions of pounds of drugs are siezed. I treid to research a percentage but couldn't find anything. but hey, that's more thna you've done.

Let's say 33% of all drugs are siezed.

f this was guns, that means theoretically the death rate would be lowered to 20,000.

If we delete all guns and wait untill the start coming in, the death rate might be somewhere around 5,000. It might grow, but it will never reach more than 20,000.


Because they never had the thing to begin with.

What are you, a racist?

To start without something is easier than to try to take away something that has been with us fro more than century. And damn right we fear each other.

Don't give me that bullpoop. In china, they had guns all over the place.

Remmember the communist revolution? killed millions. Remember WWII? Killed even more.

But after these lawas were put into place, pratically no deaths.

The united states? 31,000 a year.

You can make your "what if?" situtations, but lets see you try to "what if" these facts:

"CHILDREN & GUNS:
A LETHAL COMBINATION

In 2000, more than nine young people aged 19 and under were killed a day in gun homicides, suicides and unintentional shootings in the United States[1]. Many more were wounded. The scourge of gun violence

frequently attacks the most helpless members of our society - our children. Consider these facts...

In 2000, 1,776 children and teenagers were murdered with guns, 1,007 committed suicide with guns, and 193 died in unintentional shootings. A total of 3,042 young people were killed by firearms in the U.S., one

every three hours.[2]
Each year from 1993 to 1997, gun murders were committed by 1,621 killers under the age of 18.[3]
In 2000, 80% of murder victims aged 13 to 19 years old were killed with a firearm.[4]
During 2000, 62% of all murders of those under age 18 in the U.S. involved firearms. In 1986, guns were involved in 38% of such offenses.[5]
Firearms are the second-leading cause of death (after motor vehicle accidents) for young people 19 and under in the U.S.[6]
The rate of firearm death of under 14-years-old is nearly 12 times higher in the U.S. than in 25 other industrialized countries combined.[7]
For every child killed by a gun, four are wounded.[8]
From 1990 to 1998, firearms were responsible for 21% of deaths for Caucasian teens ages 13-19 in the United States, 64% of deaths for African-American teens, 46% of Hispanic teens, 24% of Native

American/Alaska Native teens, and 35% of Asian/Pacific Islander teens.[9]
In a study of inner-city 7-year-olds and their exposure to violence, 75% of them reported hearing gun shots.[10]
"The firearm injury epidemic, due largely to handgun injuries, is 10 times larger than the polio epidemic of the first half of this century."[11]

ence put a terrible burden on health service providers and governments. When indirect costs of gun violence - loss of productivity, mental health treatment and rehabilitation, legal and judicial costs - are figured in, gun

violence costs the US over $100 billion annually.

Medical Costs
In a recent study, the average costs for treating gunshot wounds were:

- $22,400 each for unintentional shootings
- $18,400 each for gun-assault injuries
- $ 5,400 each for suicides.

Over the course of these victims' lives, medical treatment will amount to $1.9 billion.[1]

Other Indirect Costs
Along with direct medical costs, gun violence involves loss of productivity, mental health care, emergency transport, and insurance administration. A 1997 study estimated direct and indirect medical costs at:

- $2.8 million per firearms fatality
- $249,000 per hospitalization for gunshot wounds
- $ 73,000 per emergency room visit and release for gunshot wounds.[2]

With the cost of health skyrocketing, these costs are far higher today.

The Los Angeles Times found in a 1994 shooting of a teenage victim who survived as a paraplegic that medical care, disability payments, rehabilitation, police and trial costs amounted to $1,091,768.[3] The

Washington Post [4] and U.S. News and World Report [5] have both found total costs in similar cases to exceed $1 million.

The Annual Bill To The Nation Annual costs of gun violence in the US have been estimated at between $100 billion [6] and $126 billion.[7]

Costs only for young people under the age of 24 have reached $41 billion.[8]

Who Pays?
Most victims of gun violence are uninsured and the public pays!

- Of $4 billion in medical costs in 1995, the public paid about 85 percent.[9]
- Of victims hospitalized for gunshot wounds in California in 1996, 81 percent were uninsured.[10]

What Can Be Done? Gun violence is aided and abetted by a gun industry that refuses to manufacture safer weapons, markets its product irresponsibly, and knowingly distributes and sells its products to illegal

traffickers and potential criminals. In response, 33 cities and counties have brought suits against the industry to compel gun industry reform and reduce the costs to taxpayers of gun violence.[11] Many victims are also

turning to courts of law to recover damages for gun industry negligence in marketing, distribution and product design.

Surveys show that the public is even willing to pay more in taxes to reduce gun violence. When asked whether they would pay $200 more a year in taxes for programs to reduce gun violence, 64 percent of the

respondents said they would.[12]

Hey, look at that! It costs america money, too!

Wow, it kills people AND makes the country go broke.

But nooo... a tiger might go to your house.


========================================

Witout guns.........

1.Suicides.. Theres always that cliff...

So? I don't care if people want to kill themselves, let them. They're not harming me.

2.Homicides... Theres always that Bomb to exlpode or poisonous gas to spray....

# of poisonous "gasses" let out in america:

0.

Number of gombs:

1.

If we get these types of number, we have nothing to worry about.

3.Genocides... Theres always that Gas Chamber... or as stated that Bomb to explode....

Has there been a genocide in america? No.

4. Theres always that country that has a huge stock of guns... to supply to a huge line of crimminals waiting to get the upper hand on defenseless people.....

Yeah, what country is that?

Because america has mroe death by guns than ever country combined.

5. Theres always that inventor.... to invent a new way to kill people faster and more efficient than guns could ever do....

-_-

And banning guns won't stop it, but NOt banning guns won't eigther. The only difference is 31,000 less deaths a year untill then.

[Zpower]

You have very good points ......would gun bans have stopped the Columbine shooting.... Red Lake... and others.... Most likely yes, so we can weigh this out and say yes gun bans would save lives. Though What about 9/11 yah we ban guns off of airplanes... but look what happen the plane still got hijacked.. so theres always other killing scenarios possible... But yes you are correct... banning guns will decrease death tolls.

[~Mastermax~]

guns don't kill people, the idiot behind the trigger kills people

[Angel-Eyes]

guns don't kill people, the idiot behind the trigger kills people
yes



and if you ban guns, then you have to ban everything that can kill a person (i.e knives/rocks/2x4/chains/cans/everything.......

[Virtual Fighter]

Again, you guys arn't looking at the facts. 31,000 dead a year and we need to do something.

Give me the statistics of how many people are stabbed per year, are hit by a rock(?), chains, cans, and then we'll stack them up against the 31,000 a year and then we need to prioritize.

[Angel-Eyes]

well once you eliminate guns.....the list will just shift up one and people would use the 2nd hightest weapon to kill people

[Virtual Fighter]

Which is a knife, right? It's much harder to kill someone with a knife than it is with a gun.

I can shoot a guy from a mile away with a gun, I have to be at point blank range to stabb someone.

And plus, even if they all turn to knives, the obviouse handy cap will lower the death rate and we will still save lives.

[Angel-Eyes]

Which is a knife, right? It's much harder to kill someone with a knife than it is with a gun.

I can shoot a guy from a mile away with a gun, I have to be at point blank range to stabb someone.

And plus, even if they all turn to knives, the obviouse handy cap will lower the death rate and we will still save lives.
well if eliminating guns means everything that uses gunpowder to shoot a projectile, then cannons are out.

but after gunpowder powered weapons, I would say a crossbow.

[Virtual Fighter]

-_-

Once again you're ignoring the facts. 31,000 dead a year, 0.004% justified. Guns are not doing anytihng but bad and if we take thema way we will have a better tommarow and you have not done anything to prove your point except make up wacky examples of "But then we cant defend outselves against the aliens!" and the like.

[~Mastermax~]

wow kester- is really thinking outside the box...

[Angel-Eyes]

I beleive that if you want to kill a person, then you will kill them no matter what it takes......even if it means resorting to harpoons



Edited By kester- on 1116201564

[Virtual Fighter]

It's not like all the 31,000 dead a year are intentionall. A percentage of those are accidental and a LARGE percent of those are by children.

"A gun kept in the home is 22 times more likely to be used in an unintentional shooting (4 times), a criminal assault or homicide (7 times), or an attempted or completed suicide (11 times) than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense.[2]

22 times more likley. That's a huge fliping number.

Guns are killing our neighbors, they're killing ourselves and they're killing our children... unintionally.

[Angel-Eyes]

touche

[Elena]

I've given the evidence. 0.004% of gun realted deaths are because of a justifiable pretection.

So really, how many people are being protected? Slim to none.

Guns are not protecting us, they're killing 31,000 a year.

Guns are NOT killing. People with guns are killing people. A gun does not pull it's own trigger a real life person does that. So maybe we should just kill everyone. That should solve all of our issues.

Ok, so you say that we should take away guns because it will prevent deaths. You may be right but when Great Britain and Australia banned guns and attempted to take all of them up. The criminals kept their guns and crime rate increased dramatically.

Pfftt.. you justify the 31,000 people to "If we get rid of them... bad stuff will happen?"

Laws "rarley" stop things from happening? Give me some facts on drugs and how laws don't prevent them.


Because that's what i've been doing, you're just making up situations.

No actually I haven't been making up things. You act like the world is a perfect place to be and laws can prevent everything. But the facts are laws really don't prevent somethings. It is illegal to burn music from online which is what you said you did in a former topic and that didn't stop you from burning the music now did it? It is also illegal to drink while driving. But uh when the last time you heard of no one dying on Christmas from an intoxicated driver?

Oh and vehicle accidents are the leading reason for deaths. So should we get rid of cars also? Hmm, how about water? I mean I hear about people drowning all the time. In fact, auto accidents and falls kill 25 times more people in the U.S. each year than airplane crashes and firearms accidents. Accidental drowning alone kills far more people than airplane crashes and firearms accidents combined.

What is this, the red scare?

These people arn't blood thirsty monsters just waiting for the monment we let our gaurd down to get on a boat, go thousands of miles, go to your house, knowck on the door and shoot you. You're a devider, you're

trying to build fear against our fellow man. This isn't the reds versus US, this isn't WWIII.

And all that bullpoop about China trying to kill us, THEY OUTLAWED GUNS IN CHINA.

HOW THE flip CAN 1/3 OF THE POPULATION TRY TO KILL US IF THEY HAVE NO GUNS?


Now, if you had read my response correctly I said what if N. Korea teamed up with China or Japan. N. Korea and Japan have the technology to destroy us and China has the population to destory us.

what makes you pull over?
what makes you take a DUI test?
What makes you give up the weed?
What takes you to jail?

Law enforcement.

We have the papers, we know where these guns are, all we need is to go to those houses, take the guns, say good day, nuff said.
Like I said earlier. Austrilia and Great Britain tried to do it and the criminals still kept their guns.

Again here you are in your little fruitopia of a world. Not all people will do something just because someone says do it. No matter if it's the law or whatever. We're suppose to follow laws but we don't. VF you don't even follow laws. Oh and if someone really wanted to keep their gun they could hide it. I don't care how much you say police can protect us and can do a search warrent but a really determined person can and will find a way to keep their gun.

How many homemade bombs have done any damage in the 230 history of the united states of america?

One.

Timathy Mcveigh's.


Plus, guns are ALOT harder to make than bombs. Give me some toilet paper, an orange and a stick a dinomite and I can make you a bomb.

Uh no. You're only look at the guy who killed many people. But haven't you heard of those people making homemade bombs and sending them to indvidual people. Sure, they didn't get that much publicity because they only killed a person or whatever but there are people out there who do things like that.

Oh and homemade guns are not hard to make. I found some directions ONLINE on how to make a homegun. All i needed was a pipe cap, a pipe, a rubberband, a nail, some wire and tape. It even had nice little pictures to guide me step by step.

What stops the sky from falllng?

We can build all thse bad senerios, or we can face the facts that 31,000 people are dying each year and only 0.004% are justifyable, and we need to DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.

The sky doesn't fall because of the atmosphere. It's proven...didn't you pay attention in Biology.

Ok, 42,116 people die because of car accidents. OH NO, time to get rid of cars too and 20,000 people die because of the common flu too. Deary me...What to do? What to do? Well according to you we should get rid of those. Hmm, I wonder how you can rid of the flu?
If you get rid of guns people will just find other way to harm people. Or they might find another weapon to use. Crossbows shoot pretty far and they don't even require gunpower. Hmm, how about a redwood slugger....

What are you, a racist?
Whoa, that was out of the ordinary...what does that have to do with anything... :eh:

But you have to admit, millions of pounds of drugs are siezed. I treid to research a percentage but couldn't find anything. but hey, that's more thna you've done.

Let's say 33% of all drugs are siezed.

f this was guns, that means theoretically the death rate would be lowered to 20,000.

If we delete all guns and wait untill the start coming in, the death rate might be somewhere around 5,000. It might grow, but it will never reach more than 20,000.

But you see we can't just have 33% of guns seized. What if the people left with the guns are the people who mean to do harm towards others. What will protect the others when those harmful people try to harm them...

[gieandfer]

but u need to carry a gun. who knows who can be stalkin u...o_0

[Virtual Fighter]

Guns are NOT killing. People with guns are killing people. A gun does not pull it's own trigger a real life person does that. So maybe we should just kill everyone. That should solve all of our issues.

That's retarded. I've already stated before that not all deaths are on purpose and that a percentage of the deaths are accidental and a large percenatage of those are by CHILDREN.

Kill everyone? You're thinking like a gun owner.

And again, you're making wild farfetched senerios. Face the facts. 31,000 and the numbers keep growing and we need to DO SOMETHING.


Ok, so you say that we should take away guns because it will prevent deaths. You may be right but when Great Britain and Australia banned guns and attempted to take all of them up. The criminals kept their

guns and crime rate increased dramatically.

1) Prove it.

2) No, it didn't.

April 28th, 2003, marked the 7th anniversary of the Port Arthur Massacre, Australia's most devastating gun tragedy, in which a disturbed man went on a killing spree that left 35 dead and 19 injured. The massacre

catalyzed a demand for comprehensive gun control. By 1997, Australia's States and Territories had passed the most significant gun law reforms in their history, including a ban on semi-automatic rifles and pump-action

shotguns; registration of all firearms and licensing of all shooters; and safe storage requirements for guns and ammunition.[1]

To persuade gun-owners to turn in their semi-automatic long guns, the Australian government established a buyback program, funded by the Federal Government and administered by the States and Territories.

Reimbursements were generous; the program eventually cost over $320 million Australian dollars and resulted in over 643,000 guns being turned in.[2] Per capita, the Australian buyback was massive, equivalent to

an estimated 40 million guns in the US.[3]

Has anything changed in Australia since the new laws went into effect? Between 1987 and 1996, 100 Australians were killed in mass killings of four or more people. Since the new laws went into effect, there has not

been a single massacre. Moreover, in Australia, homicides committed with firearms have been declining - slowly before the Port Arthur Massacre, more sharply since - from 28 percent of all homicides in 1989-90 to

16 percent in 2001.[4] While the 1996 gun laws did not initiate the decline in firearm homicides, they appear to have accelerated it.

Along with the declining use of firearms in homicide, Australia has seen a decline in the use of firearms in armed robberies. From 1993 to 2001, the proportion of robberies committed with a firearm dropped from 16 to

6 percent.[5]

Suicide rates using a firearm show a sharp drop from 1979-98 with rates continuing to drop after 1996 [6] and firearm-related accidental injuries in Australia are also declining.[7] Public health experts see these declines

as related to tighter controls over who may obtain a gun, stricter requirements for training and safe storage, and longer waiting periods for obtaining gun licenses.

See? You'er wrong again.

Where do you get your information? Do you make it up, or read i from NRA.com?


Quote
Pfftt.. you justify the 31,000 people to "If we get rid of them... bad stuff will happen?"
Laws "rarley" stop things from happening? Give me some facts on drugs and how laws don't prevent them.
Because that's what i've been doing, you're just making up situations.


No actually I haven't been making up things. You act like the world is a perfect place to be and laws can prevent everything.

No, laws can't prevent everything but as we see with our friends in Austrailia, they DID comply, and it DID lower the death rates.

It might have not lowered them all, but if it cuts deaths from 16% to 6, DO IT.

Even if we only save 1,000 lives, that's still 1,000 lives we saved.

But the facts are laws really don't prevent somethings. It is illegal to burn music from online which is what you said you did in a former topic and that didn't stop you from burning the music now did it? It is also

illegal to drink while driving. But uh when the last time you heard of no one dying on Christmas from an intoxicated driver?

Who are you, johnny cocran? Using the Chubaka manuever?

Listen. We're not talking about drugs, we're not talking about music, we're not talking about christmas. We're talking about guns.

What do we know about guns?

1) 31,000 people die each year from gun deaths.
2) only 0.004% are justifiable.
3) It's costing the american citizensbetween $100 billion and $126 billion a year to pay for the police to do the investigations and for the hospitals to care for the wounded.

What do you have to counter act the hard proven facts?

Nothing.

Oh and vehicle accidents are the leading reason for deaths. So should we get rid of cars also? Hmm, how about water? I mean I hear about people drowning all the time. In fact, auto accidents and falls kill 25

times more people in the U.S. each year than airplane crashes and firearms accidents. Accidental drowning alone kills far more people than airplane crashes and firearms accidents combined.

Again, the chubaka defence. we're not tlaking about planes, we're not talking about cares, we're not talking about water. We're not talking about any of the farfetched ideas you're proposed, we're talking the facts. We're

talking to ban guns.

I've given the facts.

3 main facts right here:
1) 31,000 people die each year from gun deaths.
2) only 0.004% are justifiable.
3) It's costing the american citizensbetween $100 billion and $126 billion a year to pay for the police to do the investigations and for the hospitals to care for the wounded.

You have provided no counteraction against these claims and are litterally pulling arguments out of your ass as you go along. (not to seem vulger =/)


Now, if you had read my response correctly I said what if N. Korea teamed up with China or Japan. N. Korea and Japan have the technology to destroy us and China has the population to destory us.

-_-'

This isn't a godzilla movie. This is real life. Get your head out of the clouds and face the facts. You're waisint my time if you're gonna be making up the nexts james bond mvie.

Like I said earlier. Austrilia and Great Britain tried to do it and the criminals still kept their guns.

I already proved you wrong on that, and I urge you, try to prove me wrong, not just make situations up.


Uh no. You're only look at the guy who killed many people. But haven't you heard of those people making homemade bombs and sending them to indvidual people. Sure, they didn't get that much publicity

because they only killed a person or whatever but there are people out there who do things like that.

Which people? GIVE ME EVIDENCE, DAMNIT! DO YOUR HOMEWORK! FIND RESEARCH!

I really feel this is a one sided debate! I'm waisint my tmie trying to get all these facts if you just resort to "that one guy".

Oh and homemade guns are not hard to make. I found some directions ONLINE on how to make a homegun. All i needed was a pipe cap, a pipe, a rubberband, a nail, some wire and tape. It even had nice little

pictures to guide me step by step.

Post the link here.

Ok, 42,116 people die because of car accidents.

"90 percent of Americans say they usually drive"

90% of americans who are able to drive, drive.
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/Traffic/story?id=485098&page=1

There are currently 99,324,126 (July 2005 est.) 15-64 year olds in america.

That means an estimated 88,391,713 drive.

If we find the percentage of those who drive to those who have died in an automotible death, the number is 0.01%

0.01% of those who drive die in a driving accident.

Now, Currently, an estimated 39% of households have a gun, while 24% have a handgun.

There are approximately 65 million handguns.in the united states.

Now, 32,000/62,000,0000 = 4.61.

4.61% of hand guns will end up killing someone.
That means for every 20 hand guns you see, one of those will take a person's life away.

Now, compare that to the 0.001% we see for cars.
Cars are not a problem.

And we're not even talking about cars! Cars are a good thing! they have many, many advantages in owning a car

You tell me ONE thing about guns that can justify the 31,000 deaths a year and 62,000 wounded each year.

(since "For every firearm fatality in the United States, there are two non-fatal firearm injuries.[7]")
.
OH NO, time to get rid of cars too and 20,000 people die because of the common flu too.

"Each year, about 130,000 people go to a hospital with the flu, and 20,000 people die because of the flu and complications."

Now, 130,000 get the flew.

But compare that to the estimated 65,000,000 handguns in the united states.

Now, if only 130,000 get infected with the flew, that means "About 10% to 20% of Americans get the flu each year."

Now, 10% and 20,000 die from it, that measn 85% of the people who get it survive.

Compare that to the 66% of people who get SHOT who survive and the 33% of people who die after being shot.

The flu has a vacine. The only vacine to not get shot is to not have a gun or be around a gun.


Deary me...What to do? What to do? Well according to you we should get rid

of those. Hmm, I wonder how you can rid of the flu?
If you get rid of guns people will just find other way to harm people. Or they might find another weapon to use. Crossbows shoot pretty far and they don't even require gunpower. Hmm, how about a redwood slugger....

Don't give me sarcasm. The only time you can resort to sarcasm is when you're doing astounding and can risk it. You havn't.


But you see we can't just have 33% of guns seized. What if the people left with the guns are the people who mean to do harm towards others. What will protect the others when those harmful people try to harm them...

What if, what if, what if. Is that all you say? Really, i'm getting tired of doing the reserach to come back to "what if".

We already saw what happened in Autstralia, it was successful.

You can't give me these "what ifs" if I arleady have a working example of what would happen.


You can make all the "what if"s you want, but you can't deny the facts.

[Elena]

Well, then I seem to wasting your time...Why don't I just walk away?

Let me take a page out of YOUR book and....just lock this this topic...but since I can't lock this topic I'll just walk away.

-http://www.armedandsecure.org/debate.shtml (http://www.armedandsecure.org/debate.shtml)

-http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin....anning) (http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=93008)

-http://www.haciendapub.com/gunpage....anning) (http://www.haciendapub.com/gunpage2.html)

-http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1440764.stm (British Banning) (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1440764.stm)

I would post the homemade gun website but we might have some crazy people on here. I don't really care if you read the links or not or not because I'm not really gonna be responding but there you have it. Australia and Britain banned guns and never the less crimes went up. And since "we" should do something about it why don't YOU write the government with your ideas.

One more thing I would like for you to answer. Why the hell did you ask if I was racist...that seems to be the question you ask anytime I debate you.

And I would like to state that you came off as an ass when you said you didn't care about suicidal people. Just wait until one of those suicidal people becomes or already is your friend.

[MEGA_DRACOS_XRL]

ok i think they should ban cuz in my hood u see a 10 yrs older holdin a gun. im very scared of them.

[Virtual Fighter]

Well, then I seem to wasting your time...Why don't I just walk away?

Let me take a page out of YOUR book and....just lock this this topic...but since I can't lock this topic I'll just walk away.

I've never locked any debate topic EVER except the RIAA debate, when jeo and I both decided we've got better things to do than debate each other... since we were so well matched.

-http://www.armedandsecure.org/debate.shtml

-http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin....anning)

-http://www.haciendapub.com/gunpage....anning)

-http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1440764.stm (British Banning)

You resort to randomly posting links to do your bidding instead of thinking of how to use the information yourself? That's pretty low. I mean to just blindly post links instead of giving them intelectual thought and actually debating, why I have no reason to bother.

I would post the homemade gun website but we might have some crazy people on here. I don't really care if you read the links or not or not because I'm not really gonna be responding but there you have it. Australia and Britain banned guns and never the less crimes went up.

So, instead of debating, you're gonna close your head and say "ur wrong n im righ nuff sed"? Again, that's low. I expected something better.

You don't want to give this as much effort as I do, find. Don't. Just remember than the nex ttime you jump into one of these kinds of topics.

And since "we" should do something about it why don't YOU write the government with your ideas.

How did I not see this coming?

This happens every single debate when I've outdebated someone. They end up saying "Well you're not gonna accomplish anything by arguing with people over the internet." when the simle hypocritical fact was that THEY ARE DOING THE SAME. This is just they're and your little sneaky plan to get out of an already heated debate.

You don't want to face the facts and you refuse to do on with the debate. What do you do? You make a catchy phrase and breifly exit.

One more thing I would like for you to answer. Why the hell did you ask if I was racist...that seems to be the question you ask anytime I debate you.

Remember this?

"Because they never had the thing to begin with."

You're basically saying "They don't have guns because they're still fighting with sticks and spears! LOL!!11". That's racist.

And I would like to state that you came off as an ass when you said you didn't care about suicidal people. Just wait until one of those suicidal people becomes or already is your friend.

Oh yeah, elena. And YOU are a great humanitarian. Caring about these forgotten, troubled people. Let's ignore the other 27,000 who die of gun violence every year. The children, the grown ups and the innocent bystandereds.

But oh yeah... I'm a bad human because I don't agree with suicide.

Sue me.

[alamgir]

Yeah guns should be banned? Guns aren't the only weapons out there but i'd rather be confronted by a robber armed with a knife than a gun, that way i'll be able to run without getting shot if i get the chance. Here in England i've rarely seen police officers with guns let alone regular people and the crime rate is a lot less than in America.

[Warmor]

Well um...I was going to give a warning out to Necro2k2, but it looks like he was taken care of :biggrin:
So...continue your debat, and I don't want to see any racist comments, AT ALL. Show some respect, and all will be fine.

[Elena]

Ok, let me clear this up. You seem to have misunderstood me. When I said...
Because they never had the thing to begin with.
I was talking about the freedom as us Americans do. China has always been a pretty much obedient country so it would be easier for them to give up the guns because they never really knew freedom as us Americans did. That was not a racist comment.

How did I not see this coming?

This happens every single debate when I've outdebated someone. They end up saying "Well you're not gonna accomplish anything by arguing with people over the internet." when the simle hypocritical fact was that THEY ARE DOING THE SAME. This is just they're and your little sneaky plan to get out of an already heated debate.

You don't want to face the facts and you refuse to do on with the debate. What do you do? You make a catchy phrase and breifly exit.
Actually I said that because you kept saying "we need to do something about it." I was just saying that since you keep saying "we" then why don't you start doing something about it.

So, instead of debating, you're gonna close your head and say "ur wrong n im righ nuff sed"? Again, that's low. I expected something better.
What do you want me to say, huh? "VF I wuv you. You rule. I should feel horrible that I ever tried to debate you. Please forgive me."
I never said that I was right nor did I say you were wrong. But I will say I give up. I came in this debate unprepared.
So there are you happy? Sorry I wasted your beloved time...although I never held a gun up to you head and said respond or I'll kill you. :D

[Virtual Fighter]

I was talking about the freedom as us Americans do. China has always been a pretty much obedient country so it would be easier for them to give up the guns because they never really knew freedom as us Americans did. That was not a racist comment.

Okay,t hat clears up one country, what can you say for the other 7 I mentioned.


Actually I said that because you kept saying "we need to do something about it." I was just saying that since you keep saying "we" then why don't you start doing something about it.

Yeah. You and everyone else who tells me to "write a letter to NBC" or "get off your ass and protest if you care so much" or "go boycott microsoft" or "protest against sony" or whatever else I'm debate at the current monmeny always ends with the opposition giving one last fail attempt at not proving their point, but smoting me.

I wonder how life would be if everything was like that.

"Pizza again? This school only give pizza."

"GODDAMNIT DEN QUIT COMPLAYNING N GO DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT!"!!

-_-


What do you want me to say, huh? "VF I wuv you. You rule. I should feel horrible that I ever tried to debate you. Please forgive me."
I never said that I was right nor did I say you were wrong. But I will say I give up. I came in this debate unprepared.

I enjoy a good debate.

What I don't like is spending alot of my time debating while the other side is just letting things go by and not really trying. That's why I like debating with Joe. The only problem is I end up speding 3 hours writing my posts just so I can make it so fail proof that he only has around 5000 words to say in responce.

So there are you happy? Sorry I wasted your beloved time...although I never held a gun up to you head and said respond or I'll kill you. :D

I never held up a gun and said "debate unprepared. start to suck then quit."

i'm righ ur wrong nuff sed.

tWell um...I was going to give a warning out to Necro2k2, but it looks like he was taken care of :biggrin:
So...continue your debat, and I don't want to see any racist comments, AT ALL. Show some respect, and all will be fine.


The system works.

[InvaderX]

my school should get a Gun control

[Elena]

Okay, that clears up one country, what can you say for the other 7 I mentioned.
Uh, how was I racist towards other contries? I was only talking about China when I said that...What are you talking about?

i'm righ ur wrong nuff sed.
Yeah, ok sure whatever you say... :laugh:

And it was your choice of words when you said "we need to do something about this" maybe if you hadn't of said "we" I wouldn't of said d. You could of said the government needs to do something about it...

And I'm confused...what did Necro do?

[Virtual Fighter]

It's a long story.

[Elena]

I'm sick and I can barely move...I have time and nothing to do...or you can make it short.

[InvaderX]

good one

[Warmor]

And I'm confused...what did Necro do?
Virtual Fighter does not owe any explaination. Necro2k2 would flame and make racist comments, and now he is banned and no longer welcome. Soon you may have open access to information like this, please be patient. Thank you for your understanding.

[Virtual Fighter]

Oh, and warmor, how come there's no "no racism" rule on the rules list?

c_c

[Warmor]

Oh, and warmor, how come there's no "no racism" rule on the rules list?

c_c
You would think that was a "given", but I guess it falls under the No Flaming/Spamming rule...but I suppose we can add that detail in there.