California state senator's reaction to NRA anti-video game claims.

[McHaggis]

There are other, less lethal methods of protection.

Such as?

Uh, pepper spray, tasers and stun guns are less lethal. Take your pick. Rubber bullets are less lethal (though still require the use of a gun). Sometimes something as simple as a house alarm or a neighbourhood watch scheme can be a deterrent. In my opinion, weapons designed not to kill should be allowed. But way to ignore my request for a real argument against banning guns.

 

[Hanafuda]

Uh, pepper spray, tasers and stun guns are less lethal. Take your pick. Rubber bullets are less lethal (though still require the use of a gun). Sometimes something as simple as a house alarm or a neighbourhood watch scheme can be a deterrent. In my opinion, weapons designed not to kill should be allowed. But way to ignore my request for a real argument against banning guns.

I haven't ignored anything. All of your 'less than lethal' methods have their place in law enforcement where control of a crowd or an individual in custody is the objective, but for self defense they aren't much use against a .357 magnum or a 12 gauge shotgun. That's why the police have guns, and it's why I insist on having one as well. The bad guys will have guns, whether they are banned or not. If you think otherwise, then you are not familiar with the level of "don't give a fuck" the majority of the criminal class in the USA have achieved.

 

[McHaggis]

I haven't ignored anything. All of your 'less than lethal' methods have their place in law enforcement where control of a crowd or an individual in custody is the objective, but for self defense they aren't much use against a .357 magnum or a 12 gauge shotgun. That's why the police have guns, and it's why I insist on having one as well. The bad guys will have guns, whether they are banned or not. If you think otherwise, then you are not familiar with the level of "don't give a fuck" the majority of the criminal class in the USA have achieved.

Nope, I don't think otherwise. I agree, bad guys will always get guns. Bad people have guns in this country: London has its own fair share of gang crime at the moment. But knowing that other people have guns doesn't make me think I should have one too. I don't see how that will make any situation any better. If someone broke into my home with a gun to steal all my stuff, I'd gladly help them carry all my belongings to their getaway vehicle. That's what insurance is for, right? I don't see how using a gun myself would make that situation better.

If you shot someone with a taser (note that tasers are classified as weapons of torture in many countries, however), there's a pretty good chance they wouldn't shoot you with that .357 magnum or 12 gauge shotgun. If you're not going to shoot them first then I don't see how having live ammunition would make a difference. Not being a hero... that's another pretty good self defence technique.

It might be worth noting that I have real life experience here, too. My dad is pro gun, he owns 2 (licensed) 12-bore shotguns and has been shooting for sport most of his life. He keeps his shotguns under his bed and, when I was younger, we were broken into 3 times (each time it was people we knew, people that had previously been in the house as guests). None of those times did my father feel it necessary to shoot the intruders, not even in self-defence when one of them swung a chair at his head.

 

[Minox]

The solutions to guns is not "more guns".

 

[Santee]

well if that how YOUR country works fine dont come here saying guns are not needed

This is a fourm where we express opinions he has every right to express his as much as you do. Also since Puerto Rico is only a U.S. territory and quite idependent, I could say that you have no say in the matter.

 

[Kayot]

I've always believed in nuclear deterrents. The key to stop violence is to make the price so unbelievably high that only the insane would try. Instead of a very few well armed security forces (usually surrounding rich people), arm everyone. The balance of power shifts in favor of the law abiding force. I've never cared about 'gun-free' zones. Since I have no intention of illegal activity I usually carry my gun anyway. If the sign says no concealed carry, I wear it in the open. If it's gun free, I conceal. I figure if I ever end up using a gun in a gun free zone I'll slip out after doing a civic duty that everyone else was unable to do. I have no intentions of being a hero, especially since the liberal news would focus on my illegal carry rather than the low/no number of deaths and the shooter(s) who's going to need a walking cane/wheelchair/coffin. If I die, at least I tried to change my world for the better. Heroes die because there aren't any heroes to save them. Add two teachers and a principal.

Things are the way they are because they couldn't be any other way. The past is nothing but a memory, and the future is nothing but speculation.

 

[nukeboy95]

 

[KingVamp]

Could more gun laws make it harder for criminals to get guns?

Let's look at countries with stricter gun laws.

Anyway...