Break ins happen all the time. Just because some people are afraid of guns just existing does not mean there's anything wrong with law abiding citizens having them for defense. There's absolutely no reason I shouldn't have a gun as long as I don't use it to shoot people.

There's certainly a balance that can be found between having a right to own guns and not. Doing extensive background checks should be good enough.

I don't see how it's good to live in a society where the government has access to guns and the populace doesn't. I can understand gun control, but wanting guns banned just weakens the populace so they're easier to control.

The analogy for me is more like if slavery was abolished like murder is now, but in the 1800s in this culture people still illegally owned slaves and the police didn't have the resources to stop them. So what do you do? Slave ownership is already illegal with massive consequences if you do it and they don't care. You can't create another law to stop it. The anti-gun argument is like banning chains so they can't lock up the slaves. I don't think that stops them. They'll find a way to get those chains illegally, use rope, etc. In fact most of the chains they use were already bought illegally so nobody would suspect they have slaves so the new chain law makes no difference to them. The anti-chain groups are saying that chains are illegal in Europe and there's no slaves there so it must work.

That's misguided though. The so called "law abiding ones" would be the first to give them up, if it actually happened.

The only explanation people have is the Amendment. How many have actually defended themselves? It is a sadly underdeveloped law that has been mishandled over the years, and one that will not change because it will cause so much damage overall. I have no problem with people owning guns for said purposes, but it's not the world it was. One bullet is enough, you don't need 48 guns. America is a place where 100s of people won't storm your home. Limits and bans are the only way to move forward. You take away the Amendment, you will have all out war, even though that's the honest solution.

You're right zwackerm, because the government has access to them, the populace should all be allowed to have a nuke in their backyard too.

The fact that this guy is striving to be a teacher mystifies me. God help you! and get arrested early in your career. And if you don't please keep your morals out of it and just be a teacher.

This is the ultimate rebuttal to the whole "I want to protect myself against my government" fantasy scenario. I can't believe people continually argue against gun control using that line of reasoning.

I said I wasn't opposed to gun control. Just a gun ban.

Ya, either way, that same line of reasoning comes up over and over again. It's 2017 - if a modern US-sized government (for some wild reason) wanted to control its citizens through force, guns owned by citizens aren't going to stand in its way with the kinds of tools it has at its disposal.

Brazil is an example of a country with strict gun laws yet leads the world in murders and it's gone up since they put in the law. Same goes for some other countries like Mexico and Venezuela. They are considering loosening the gun laws so citizens can protect themselves more.

Never not relevant:

http://www.theonion.com/article/no-way- ... y-ha-57086

I do not believe that is comparable at all. Brazil is a developing nation with high bribery rates and dirty police. The US of A is APPARENTLY a fully developed nation capable of managing such an imposition.

There's no reason the rest of the developed world can get by without easy access to guns and we can't.

Physical slavery has evolved into economic slavery - if citizens really wanted to abolish slavery, they would take ownership of the banks and corporations.


You're right! Even though it was already linked in the 5th post in this thread, it remains never not relevant.

I am still a tremendous driver sat over the legal limit of alcohol. So many, I would suspect.

However, I don't bitch because I know that plenty are not. And its for the greater good to have the minority removed.

Should we ban all cars to prevent drunk driving deaths?

Yeah Shack, and if mass shootings were accidents, I'd agree with your sarcastic take.

The guy's brother is like Joss Whedon on steroids. What a weirdo. This whole thing is bizarre.

The argument that cars, knives, golf clubs, a glass bottle, or whatever, have to be considered when discussing gun control/bans is simply ignorant. It's not even an excuse, let alone a "reasoning". It's a whiny, "but Mom!" childish response.

I saw this unfortunate guy in a video yesterday attempting to "defend" gun rights by using this argument. He began by shooting a target ~50 feet away with a gun, and then proceeded to commit the same "act of violence" with a golf club (now an assault club)... except, you know, it taking way more time to reach the target, and assuming said target couldn't run away, fight back, or grab the club itself.

Except she never said she was happy about it, nor did I. I'm not happy about it.

Saying you're not sympathetic to victims of a mass shooting is still not a nice thing to say, and by saying that you know you're going to cause even more of a divide. Happy or not, it's generally not a nice quality to behold.

He actually reminds me of Chris Elliott in There's Something About Mary

Either these people are brainwashed by the NRA propaganda or they are the ones spreading cowshirt.

Guns are inherently designed to kill or hurt the targets. Cars, knives, golf clubs, glass bottles are not. Guns are lethal, fast, long-range weapons that give the targets little time to respond within multiple shots. And bullets travel by themselves after trigger without human help. I can't say the same about the others.

Some Conservatives rather resort to conspiracy theories than believe that law protecting the purchase of military grade weapons is anything dangerous.

The country is unlikely to nuke its populace as it would lay waste to the state itself, but as liberals point out constantly, its police shoot unarmed black people all the time. So if I have it right, we don't need guns because the state would never harm us but also the state kills unarmed black people and Trump is Hitler. OK then.