GBAtemp Debate Club: Gun Control

TotalInsanity4 · Oct 10, 2015

Yes, I know that this topic WAS brought up in last week's debate, but I do believe there's still more discussion to be had, particularly from international members

This week's topic:

Do you believe that any citizen should have easy access to a firearm? Why or why not?

Full text and history of Amendment II: http://civilliberty.about.com/od/guncontrol/p/2nd_amendment.htm
Statistics showing why to restrict gun ownership: http://www.vox.com/2015/8/24/9183525/gun-violence-statistics
Statistics showing why restrictions may not matter: http://zachmortensen.net/2013/01/10/gun-control-four-must-see-graphs/
http://lostallhope.com/suicide-methods/firearms/reliability
http://www.cheaperthandirt.com/CategoryListing.aspx?catid=1612

The rules are simple: Every week I will be posting a new topic for all of GBAtemp to debate on in a free-for-all style. There are no winners or losers, the sole purpose of these debates are to learn other's views about important issues. For each topic, I will be posting a list of resources to help you with your debates that may be added to upon request. After a week has passed, I will ask a moderator to close the thread so that a new topic may be created. I will also accept PMs of topics, as my understanding of controversial topics only extends to the US, I'd love to get some international issues in here too

Remember to keep it civil, take people's views into consideration, and above all, HAVE FUN!

Note: As the creator of the debate, I am going to try to remain non-partisan and only comment on this thread if I feel as though something someone has said needs clarification. All political views on my part for this debate and all moving forward are being chucked out the window. HOWEVER, if the debate is going slowly, I may from time-to-time assume the role of the side that most needs help.
I will participate in the polls, though, because polls are fun

Week 1: Presidential Candidates

Demifiend · Oct 10, 2015

I think that they should be censored, but of course, eliminating guns in a country that produces and exports guns, and also sell them like they were hot cakes obviously it's not gonna happen anytime soon, when you look objectively at guns, you can't avoid to see that they produce a lot of money, for any kind of people, so for the US, eliminating guns would be the equal of eliminating cigarettes, but in a major scale.

Even deaths by guns can be a way to win money, for one point of another, sadly, that's the reality the people of that country are living, the main risk of having guns everywhere is that any guy, who is over 18 and has a licensee, can buy any kind of gun with bullets included, it can be something really big or small, so basically, anyone who has a gun, and has a basic knowledge in how to shoot one, can kill you in less than a second.

The argument that people always brought when it comes to this is "But Guns don't kill People, People kill guns", that's the weakest argument i ever heard on any kind of discussion, of course you can kill anyone with any other weapon, such as a Knife, a Metal object (in most cases), etc. But just tell me what is the quickest and most secure way to kill someone?, i think the answer is evident.

And what about the people who says "I killed someone in "self defense" and because of that, i ask for an innocent charge", i totally understand that if a thief goes into your house, you would be in panic, probably in terror, but killing him/her?, that's just wrong, once a human starts the killing they will have the urge to do it again, and that's how a possible maniac is born, remember how in the news most of the deaths are caused by a psychopath who kills kids in school, people in offices,etc.

I say, if you're gonna have guns allowed in your country, please have a way to forcefully put everyone in therapy before acquiring one, because if not, only more shit will happen, it saddens me to see the death of someone who just wanted a happy life, but it couldn't experience that because a random maniac from the street kills him/her, and it just shows how sick can be people with a gun.

I'm not the kind who is saying "Everyone who has a gun is a psycho maniac", but just having a gun can potentially turn you into a killer, no matter how sane you are, and even if you aren't using it, your son/daughter can also take that and use it for "revenge" in a school, and just more tragic things happen.

Not that i'm saying that neither cases will happen commonly, but i think my point was proven, once you have a gun, limitless things can happen, and 100% horrible things are only the cases, because someone will be hurt like it or not.

FAST6191 · Oct 10, 2015

It is a fairly popular routine among comedians and I find many of them amusing. Three of my favourites

For the most part my reply will probably look mainly as the US.

Guns are great fun if you like games of physics, and many do. The question is what else might there be to offset people that do not care to handle their weapons properly (be they criminals, people that would try to top themselves, people that would allow people that should not have access for whatever reason to have access, those that might sell them on to help continue the nastiness that is presently happening in Mexico....) and what could be done to lessen potential impacts of misuse (clip/magazine size restrictions, nature of automation, round power, capabilities that some might dub cosmetic, mandating any issued carry permits also carry first aid, on carry permits how does open and hidden vary) as well as potentially preventing it in the first place (if it turns out crazy people commit enough to bother with then try to figure out a way to prevent crazies from having weapons sort of thing, mandating training, more extended waiting periods, need for extensive licenses, harsher penalties for misuse...). If that might extend to far tighter controls than presently exist.

My favourite are when people think they could use their little handgun or shotgun to do a solo room clearance of a non contained building, without armour, without training/practice*, without flashbangs, without medics on standby and possibly in a less than stellar state of mind. About the only advantage such a person might have is knowledge of the layout but as most people can not tell me exactly how many steps they have (the only people that can are those that painted, carpeted or otherwise built on them) or are blind then that counts for not a lot.

*everybody I ever met that was expected to be able to do this with any level of skill drilled it multiple times a week when they were not deployed or on holiday as well as having had extensive training in the concept before they even got to that stage.

Other popular reasons

It is in the second amendment.... which was written some time ago in a rather different world.

I need to be able to take out the government if they go nuts. Your rifle is very shiny but drones and tanks are shinier.

I need to be able to protect myself in the event of an invasion... http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/we-a...e-whole-world-could-conquer-the-united-states

Hunting. One of the better justifications. There are various restricted things that I could get but will have to demonstrate a clear and present use for, even beyond "I am not a liability and think it would be cool".

Self defence. Mainly I will refer back to the training thing and expand it to wonder how many could pull the trigger and ultimately live with the consequences. I do also have to wonder if the number of clean self defence cases is enough to offset the downsides -- much rule making is a compromise over such things.

If only ~~cows have guns~~ criminals have guns then I need to be able to defend myself. Popular things have been banned before, the usual trick is harsh penalties (see what happens in various places if you paint a real weapon to look like a toy one) but there are extra things that can be done.

The negatives are at an acceptable level for me. Fair enough. Much of the rest of the world looks on with eyebrows raised though. Similarly similar levels of gun ownership/availability play out differently elsewhere -- might US culture not be able to handle its guns?

Whether I would go so far as to support an outright ban, or restrictions similar to those of the UK or Australia remains to be seen. The present US setup does seem insanely lax though.

Zerousen · Oct 10, 2015

I think everyone has a right to defend themselves, but somebody who wants to have a gun must be deemed as able to and responsible enough to own one. It should be a lot harder to get a gun, and I agree that there should be background/psychological checks. There should also be certain laws that help make sure that people who are deemed not able to or should not own a firearm do not get a hold of one. There was a kid from one of the high schools in my district last year who shot himself. He was a minor, and he had obtained the gun from another person who was under the age of 21, which the the age requirement to purchase a gun here in Texas (unless you are an active member of the military over the age of 18). Now, if this kid really wanted to kill himself, he could have done so in other ways, but this was the only event that was relevant to me regarding a reason to restrict guns.

For example, let's say that this kid got the gun from his father, because he was not able to keep it in a secure place that is out of his child's reach. If that was the case, then the father of this kid (who was arrested and considered responsible for the other kid's death) would have to have a rather severe consequence for not being responsible enough around a minor, such as a fee or having his privilege to own firearms taken away for a period of time, until he is able to reapply for a new one. I feel like this would help deter these events from happening. Now this doesn't mean that someone under the age of 21 can not use a gun, for recreation such as hunting or going to a shooting range, but ease of access would be further limited to prevent and could help prevent many tragedies.

Maybe there are already laws like this in place, as I am not particularly knowledgeable when it comes to laws and restrictions like this. However, according to the sheer number of students at my school who like to brag and seem to all have access to a firearm in one way or another, I think it is rather worrying.

TotalInsanity4 · Oct 11, 2015

So is there a point where the right to defend yourself ever outweighs the need for gun purchase restrictions?

Reiten · Oct 11, 2015

Zerousen said:
If that was the case, then the father of this kid (who was arrested and considered responsible for the other kid's death) would have to have a rather severe consequence for not being responsible enough around a minor, such as a fee or having his privilege to own firearms taken away for a period of time, until he is able to reapply for a new one.

So your saying that this guy should have a right to reclaim his privilege to own a gun? He has shown that he doesn't have the ability to securely manage his firearms and his inability has resulted in a death. I might agree with you if it had ended with an injury that didn't have any permanent consequences, but not in such a case.

About the topic in general. I don't really see why there is a need for a normal citizen to have firearms(unless your hunting or doing some kind of activity that requires a gun). But that's just the opinion of me who has grown up in a country where it's normal that citizens don't have guns. I'd probably think differently if i'd be living in a country where robbers and thugs had fairly easy access to guns.

And even if the more strict laws for gun control are passed it would take decades to get the situation in the USA under control, given the sheer number of firearms in circulation.

Hungry Friend · Oct 11, 2015

The only problem I have with things like universal background checks is that would also prevent people who have been, say, arrested for weed a long time ago from owning guns forever provided it was enough for it to be a felony. I don't even own a gun but I think everyone has the right to own one for self defense so overall I'm almost completely anti gun control and lean pretty far right on this issue.

FAST6191 · Oct 12, 2015

Hmm, an offhand comment a few years back sparked a massive debate and here we are struggling to get to 10 posts. Could it be that we have all made good points that are unable to be refuted?

Oh and I suppose I had better end with a video

and because censorship is no fun

TotalInsanity4 · Oct 13, 2015

For the sake of jump-starting conversation, I'm gonna take on the role of someone who supports Second Amendment rights

There is most definitely a need for any legal citizen to get guns. There is rampant crime in the US rivaling many other countries of equal development and law abiding citizens need a way to defend themselves. On top of that many people like to use them for recreation, like deer hunting.

The Catboy · Oct 13, 2015

We need some form of mental screening and firearms training, treat guns like we do cares. You need to have basic training, you need to take a few tests, you need a deep background check, then every couple of years do it all over again. It won't prevent all problems, but it will help prevent most.
Also there is no need for the average civilian to have military grade weapons. Something for home defense and hunting, fine. But if you need something military grade for either of those, you need to move to a safer location.

TotalInsanity4 · Oct 13, 2015

But how about people who have minor mental illnesses, like depression or anxiety, but are still capable of safely handling firearms? And if someone feels like they need to secure their home in the case of a government invasion, why stop them, especially if they don't feel any inclination to shoot up a public place?

Hungry Friend · Oct 13, 2015

Psychiatry is hardly a precise profession and something like mental screenings sound like they would encourage HUGE amounts of corruption/exclude specific people the government doesn't like. I think your intent is pure but that would be an awful mess imo.

TotalInsanity4 · Oct 15, 2015

Question: Someone breaks into your home with unknown intent. It appears as though they may be armed, but you don't know for sure. What would you use to take them out? A gun, taser, or blunt object? Or would you hide and hope they don't find you?

The_Meistro · Oct 15, 2015

I know Key and Peele did something over this lol i just cant remember what...

vayanui8 · Oct 15, 2015

I like guns. I think alot of the people against them have never really used one before. I think it becomes alot less of something to be afraid of once you understand it. As a whole I think that we should uphold our rights to carry arms, and it should be accessible to most people. However, there are things we need to do to prevent issues as well. Military firearms shouldn't be in distribution for one, and I don't believe they legally are. The one thing that is an issue is mental stability checks. People with mental issues shouldnt be able to get them. It doesnt really matter what it is even, because even things like autism or depression can set someone off. The real issue I see there is how we can fairly determine if someone has a mental illness. I could see this law being abused quite a bit and management could either over or under test people for personal gain. We also shouldn't distribute weapons to people with past criminal offenses. This could potentially be only for things where firearms could be involved, such as theft, but whether this could apply to things like possession of drugs is a whole other matter.

Haloman800 · Oct 15, 2015

Before commenting in this thread, please watch the following 47 second video:

FAST6191 · Oct 15, 2015

TotalInsanity4 said:
Question: Someone breaks into your home with unknown intent. It appears as though they may be armed, but you don't know for sure. What would you use to take them out? A gun, taser, or blunt object? Or would you hide and hope they don't find you?

Do you want to take them out? I can not say I have killed anybody before but I have hurt people quite badly and it is not a pleasant thing. To that end you would probably want to instead ensure an exit. Beyond that in the case of room clearance/urban/close quarters there is a rather large difference between a .22 pistol and a full length rifle firing relatively high power rounds that is hard to raise/keep raised and will probably go through the wall if I fired it rather than need a small spot filled in and painted over...

"military weapons"
What are they when they are at home? That would seem even more fraught with difficulty to define than assault rifles.

"47 second video"
If we are linking funny videos again

Haloman800 · Oct 15, 2015

FAST6191 said:
Do you want to take them out? I can not say I have killed anybody before but I have hurt people quite badly and it is not a pleasant thing. To that end you would probably want to instead ensure an exit. Beyond that in the case of room clearance/urban/close quarters there is a rather large difference between a .22 pistol and a full length rifle firing relatively high power rounds that is hard to raise/keep raised and will probably go through the wall if I fired it rather than need a small spot filled in and painted over...

"military weapons"
What are they when they are at home? That would seem even more fraught with difficulty to define than assault rifles.

"47 second video"
If we are linking funny videos again

It's not a funny video, it refutes gun grabbers arguments in under a minute. I'd like to see if you're able to refute it.
Here's a gun control flow chart for you :^)

Reiten · Oct 15, 2015

The chart only really works if you assume that you need to defend your life from someone who has a gun(which in case of good firearms control will probably not be the case in most situations). If we assume that the opponents don't have any firearms there are better and more risk-free(no chance of the opponent getting your weapon) ways to defend yourself(self-defense techniques or martial arts).

Hungry Friend · Oct 15, 2015

vayanui8 said:
I like guns. I think alot of the people against them have never really used one before. I think it becomes alot less of something to be afraid of once you understand it. As a whole I think that we should uphold our rights to carry arms, and it should be accessible to most people. However, there are things we need to do to prevent issues as well. Military firearms shouldn't be in distribution for one, and I don't believe they legally are. The one thing that is an issue is mental stability checks. People with mental issues shouldnt be able to get them. It doesnt really matter what it is even, because even things like autism or depression can set someone off. The real issue I see there is how we can fairly determine if someone has a mental illness. I could see this law being abused quite a bit and management could either over or under test people for personal gain. We also shouldn't distribute weapons to people with past criminal offenses. This could potentially be only for things where firearms could be involved, such as theft, but whether this could apply to things like possession of drugs is a whole other matter.

This post and the opinions within only apply to the US although the stuff about psychiatry could be applied elsewhere.

Psychiatry is loaded with so many drug dealers and just generally incompetent idiots who don't know what they're doing that I can't support mental health screenings; everyone is fucked in the head in one way or another anyway. Even if a test was invented that could 100% detect whether someone is a sociopath, I would still think it would give the government far too much power. Today, there are so many misdiagnoses and the science of psychology and psychiatry are still in their infancy so while I think your intent is pure, I believe such screenings would do much more harm than good and would prevent a lot of perfectly decent people from having the right to defend themselves.

Do you simply deny the right to own guns to anyone with even a slight temper or anyone who is even a little eccentric? Also cops shouldn't be allowed to use guns that aren't available to the general public, and they sure as shit shouldn't be using tanks or other expensive military equipment.

Add to that the fact that we have a blatantly corrupt government that is bought and paid for by a few billionaires and I just can't support such things in good conscience.

TotalInsanity4 said:
Question: Someone breaks into your home with unknown intent. It appears as though they may be armed, but you don't know for sure. What would you use to take them out? A gun, taser, or blunt object? Or would you hide and hope they don't find you?

Shooting them would be a last resort. If I think I can disable the thief without killing or seriously injuring them I'd probably choke them unconscious or something, but if I think my life is in real, serious danger I would shoot to kill.

EDIT: This post has been edited/added to several times, btw

GBAtemp Debate Club: Gun Control

Should access to guns be restricted? (2 responses allowed)

Yes; there is no need for the average civilian to own a weapon as lethal as a firearm

Yes; but only through background and psycological checks

Yes; but not non-automatic handguns

No; people should be free to purchase what they want

No; Amendment II protects our right to gun ownership (USA only)

No; just actually enforce laws we already have

(Other not listed, please specify in thread)

GBAtemp Supreme Overlord

The bored one

Techromancer

【=◈︿◈=】

GBAtemp Supreme Overlord

Well-Known Member

It was my destiny to be here; in the box.

Techromancer

GBAtemp Supreme Overlord

GBAtemp Official Catboy™: Boywife

GBAtemp Supreme Overlord

It was my destiny to be here; in the box.

GBAtemp Supreme Overlord

GBATemp's "Official" Hank Hill

Well-Known Member

a real gril

Techromancer

a real gril

Well-Known Member

It was my destiny to be here; in the box.

Similar threads

Popular threads in this forum