the discussion so far from the thread London Riots

I can't help but notice that in all of these cases the act was done by a single gunman who was planning to die. So I doubt the gunmen would have shied away from their acts because they expected armed resistance.

________________

Although I agree that their train of thought is a bit off I still say that guns should be legal, because otherwise only the criminals, AKA the people who are gonna shoot people, will have guns. So makignt hem illegal wouldn't really help.

I'd say that while the gunmen may not be deterred by armed resistance, their sprees would definitely not be allowed to continue for more than a few minutes. This, compared to several recent shootings which have lasted up to an hour. When a gunman is given an hour to run around before cops arrive, we end up with mass casualties instead of an initial few.

We had a shooting at a mall in my city a couple years back. The casualties could have been much, much higher than they were, but an off-duty cop just happened to be eating lunch in the food court, where the shooting began. He was able to take the guy down quickly, since the gunman can't keep track of every person around him. He was pretty much a sitting duck.

That one gun saved dozens, if not hundreds of lives.

It doesn't matter, people who uses firearms (on somebody) is already expecting that they will get arrested or die. So even if firearms are illegal, people who really hates (enough to kill) someone will not hesitate to just buy an gun from some black-market..

________________
D'oh!

this whole illegalization shit just brings more money to the bad guys-- tho its not like they're illegal just hard to get legally

Yes, because the dangerus people running around in this world hurting others arent dangerous enuf as they are we need to put guns in thir hans to.

________________
"The oldest and strongest emotion of mankind is fear, and the oldest and strongest kind of fear is fear of the unknown"

Firearms are for killing.

What they also have in common is that they are Gun-Free Zones, the UK being a Gun-Free Zone on a national scale (except criminals).

Those individuals who shot up those places knew that people there were unarmed and the same principle applies to the UK as a whole, the criminals / mob know that the vast majority of people are unarmed and are thus seen as wallets-with-legs / punch bags / etc.

We talking about a country that won't even allow its citizens to reinforce their shed windows with wire mesh for protection and tells them to walk into another room while a burglar ransacks their house instead of telling them to defend their property.

________________
Well, the weather's looking bad. It's bad here, bad there - bad everywhere. Nasty alien creatures raining down from the skies, devouring all life on this planet. And what does that mean to you, you ask? It means you're mine. You're all mine! - Prince (aka Death) from Lexx

im both for and against it
i understand that guns dont kill people,people kill people
but im not sure if completely legalising them will solve anything
look at what gun legalisation did to jamaica for example
when guns were restricted ,crime rate dropped
where i live guns are illegal...not completely though
you can still have a shotgun if you get a license(and its really hard to get one)..i think this is a much better solution
I just don't want people to get shot
this is one of the few issues I don't feel strongly one way or another about

EDIT:ive thought more about this...and my final answer is NO they shouldnt be legal
instead of worrying about home invasions,i could get better locks or put up cameras around the house
instead of worrying about being kidnapped i could just carry a taser or pepper spray to protect myself
instead of worrying about random shootings at malls they could just get metal detectors at the entrance which everyone has to go through and hire atleast 2 armed security men at the door

there are millions of ways to protect ourselves which dont involve killing or shooting at all

Last edited by sarah-eats-cupcakes at 10:09 am, Aug 9 2011

so youd rather be killed than defend yourself?



yeah some even use them to bring meat home tho mostly as hobby-- i mean hunting

You forget the other side of the coin though...sure we could probably protect ourselves better against criminals and the like, but it'll be harder to identify who has malicious intent on using said weapons until it's too late since everyone's carrying them. Also with everyone having a weapon most muggers would just kill their victims before mugging them than just mugging them for fear of retaliation. Same with any other crime that should result in no casualties.

Not to mention hot headed people. Simple arguments can turn into shootouts on the street and could get bystanders involved. Then there are the drunks/bar brawls...imagine the chaos that will bring when everyone's got a gun. Instead of just two people getting hurt by punching each others lights out, the chances of casualties increases dramatically.

Last edited by blakraven66 at 10:00 am, Aug 9 2011

there are many methods of doing it aside from killing tho it depends on a person-- still, that person must be mental if he wastes those expensive bullets on a victim which could be killed by some swings of a bat
you mean those dangerous districts? i agree
and even if they legalize firearms i doubt evryone would be rich enough to afford them especially a drunkard whod better buy more booze than guns


Last edited by chopstick at 10:04 am, Aug 9 2011

Huh?

Firearms are like drugs, you can't stop people from getting them who want them.

Even if you could, you've established the people who do horrible things with guns are crazy and suicidal, which means if they didn't have guns they'd kill people with bombs. which get more people who have nothing to do with their rage.

Furthermore Guns serve their uses for animal control. people who live in alaska got moose problems, a moose can wreck your dogsled team if you don't have a shotgun or rifle.

I think guns should be very accurate, or close range and easy to use, like shotguns and rifles.

Rapid fire guns like assault rifles and Sub machine guns seem to be a bad idea.

Beyond that, On the plus side, having a population where a % of them own guns, for self protection, increases the risk a person runs doing criminal activities. which saves more lives than it loses.

particularly shotguns. Yeah shotguns are pretty good. how could you be against shotguns? and rifles?

Just having a gun wont save you life when you get shoot by some idot who shudent have hade one to begin with.

________________
"The oldest and strongest emotion of mankind is fear, and the oldest and strongest kind of fear is fear of the unknown"

lol bad ass imagination you have, such explosives aren't exactly legal as well haha killing with fireworks could be possible tho
yeah, nowdays everyone loves shotguns especially 12 year old brats who plays too much fps



yeah, but theres more of a chance that youd stay alive and by having a gun doesnt mean you need to kill the other person just injury is enough-- to distract the villain, unarm him and be a hero