Mothers, are you sure your children's father should have a gun?

Do we really want to keep cars legal?

Many people die in car accidents, not just the car owners.

causing trouble are we?

In fact they've become safer and they continue to be safer. Not so with guns. Their only purpose is a weapon. There is no push to make them safer so that their purpose is no longer to kill. In fact, it is the opposite. When there is effort to effect change in design, it is usually to make it more efficient as a killing machine. You cannot compare cars to guns.

Unlike automobiles, guns are designed for one purpose: to kill. They may be used for other purposes, but their main function is to be used as weapons -- both offensively, and defensively.

Thousands of deaths are prevented because of licensing, road rules, law enforcement, etc.

If we had even half of that for gun owners/operators, it would go a long way.

Until we start treating gun ownership as a privilege that can be taken away instead of a right that people will abuse just because they can, we're just sitting ducks.

Last edited Mon Feb 3, 2014, 09:10 PM - Edit history (1)

"Until we start treating gun ownership as a privilege that can be taken away instead of a right that people will abuse just because they can, we're just sitting ducks." is the wedge issue that prevents reasonable gun owners from voting for gun control measures.

Gun ownership is a Constitutional Right, and only becomes a "privilege" when that Right is abused or the owner becomes a danger to him or herself, or others.

Like all enumerated Constitutional Rights, the Second Amendment is subject to reasonable restrictions and regulation, and the SCOTUS has affirmed that more than once. The NRA has consistently fought against ANY form of sensible gun control for years, and has repeated the lie about "Democrats are coming for your guns" so often that many otherwise sensible gun owners believe it.

The NRA is funded by ALEC (which wrote most of the relaxed and obscene SYG and CCW laws) and the Koch Brothers in the interest of promoting profits for gun manufacturers and sellers. These right-wing organizations have absolutely no interest in stemming the flow of illegal guns to criminals and the mentally challenged as long as the profits flow.

And that is the battle that responsible Americans for gun control are fighting: right-wing greed, and NRA lies and half-truths.

gun ownership is a constitutional right. And like all other constitutional rights, they only become a privledge when the constitution is ammended.

Just because person A abuses his 1st ammendment free speach rights doesn't mean laws can be passed to restrict person Bs 1st ammendment rights.

to incite a riot, he/she can be locked up with a loss of most rights. Free speech, like all other rights, only applies in the public venue under well established restrictions, and not on private property.

Likewise, Second Amendment rights are lost when applicable law is violated, and they do not apply on private property (where they become a privilege). All Rights have restrictions, and can be lost when applicable laws are violated.

sure.

Guns are used for a variety of purposes and the vast majority of shooting that occurs on an annual basis in this country does not occur while the gun is being used as a weapon, aimed at a living creature.

I stated that guns are *designed* as weapons, and are meant to be lethal, but *may* be used for other purposes. Automobiles are *designed* as devices for transportation, but may be used (however rarely) as weapons.

The design purpose of any weapon is to kill or wound, whether offensively, or defensively.

Firearms are designed to launch a small projectile(s) at high speed. The purpose for launching said projectiles varies. Sometimes the purpose is to kill or wound, mostly it's not. For every projectile that is launched with the intent to kill or wound, there are probably 100 launched for the purpose of punching a hole in a paper target or a tin can or a clay pigeon. Unless you are claiming that shooting at inanimate objects fits the purpose of "killing or wounding", your definition is inaccurate.

Knives can also be used as a weapon but more frequently are used to cut up a pork chop or whittle a stick, is their "design purpose" to kill or wound, also?

Guns are specifically designed as weapons. YMMV...

sometimes even using targets that resemble humans including Obama, Trayvon Martin, etc. Very little target shooting is totally detached from preparing/training to shoot people.

I have no doubt what you are saying is factually true, but certainly misleading. I shot skeet for over a decade on a regular basis and I the over & under barrel set I purchased for the task is poorly suited for any other task, including hunting. But how many people buy guns for no other reason than to shoot at targets? Certainly it's only a small subset of what's out there. A deer hunter might go through one or two boxes of ammo at the range sighting in his rifle, but once he actually goes hunting he's only going to expend one or two rounds for the intended task (unless you count the ones he used taking the heads off squirrels at his feeder). Someone who buys a gun for self defense may never fire a round specifically for its intended purpose, but goes through several boxes of ammo at the range maintaining proficiency.

If guns weren't designed to kill things, there would be a helluva lot less of them. That's why people buy them.

whose smart and talented teenage son blew his brains out with his dad's gun, would not agree. And that's where the problem lies...denial.

anyways, someone who want to take is own life can do it in so much other ways: hanging, having a mix of medicices and alcohol, jump from a bridge and so on....

Meanwhile, I think the real problem with the free selling of gun in US is that it increses the risks of mass murders. Of course, in yur country you Constitution povides to every citizen the right to defend himself. I even will confess that that right is not permitted here in France, and sometimes, I would have whished got this right when a perverse followed me to my door ( I reported to the police, but all they said was " Why are you going home so late ( at around 9pm!!!!!))

suicide, but with hanging, overdoses, jumping, etc. often people are unable to go through with the attempt, or the attempt is unsuccessful due to medical intervention. Suicide by gun, however, is almost always successful, and fatal.

or a road rage equalizer, the average CCW holder usually will turn the gun against themselves before they live out any gun hero dream.

suicide with a weapon. I believe having these guns around the house would lead to more suicides.

That should solve that problem.

But that was in the benighted past.

suicide free zones would be helpful.

But let's admit it... these kinds of thread are all about building a case for not permitting gun ownership.

For our own good, ya know....

I suppose that would include doctor assisted suicide but somehow that seems acceptable.

Anyway. Oblique attempts at putting forth gun control arguments without making any substantive contribution towards a solution are worthless. It's a simplistic invitation for a dog pile.

Seems to me that killing people who want to live is a much bigger concern than people who want to die granting their own wish.

Who are we to tell them they can't? It's none of YOUR business if someone wants to die. It's their body, their life, their death, their CHOICE. I find this to be the weakest of all anti gun arguments.