Conceled carried GUN OK???

[UchihaKira]

I have a question for you. Where would you get a gun if they were illegal?

There are tons of illegal ways to get guns just so you know(ex:mexico). Im not a criminal so I couldnt tell you exactly but criminals dont go buy guns at the store.

 

[The Necromancer]

There are tons of illegal ways to get guns just so you know(ex:mexico). Im not a criminal so I couldnt tell you exactly but criminals dont go buy guns at the store.

So being a criminal automatically gives you this knowledge? Does this not logically mean that crime will be reduced significantly due to the fact that the knowledge is limited to a minority and those looking for a gun who are not already criminals will not have this knowledge?

Or do you believe you are of a lower average intelligence than common citizens?

95% of criminals are average, every day common citizens, not drug runners in a cartel.

 

[Sir Blades]

But you also have to take in to consideration that the "normal" person might snap or become that "ill intentioned criminal" specially those with a short temper. Yeah lets give out guns like candy, that fixes things.

 

[lilzay2kay]

if guns were to randomly be made illegally now, how easy would it be for people who already have guns (illegally) to hide them basically anywhere?

 

[Senju Bean]

Can't even answer a question. That either means,

A. You're illiterate and don't deserve to be listened to,
B. You're blinded by your own bias and unable to see reason in other sides which means you don't deserve to be listened to or,
C. You're not smart enough to understand basic concepts and queries presented to you, which means you don't deserve to be listened to.

Which is it?

I do apologize, you see, it is new years and I am quite intoxicated, so I cannot catch all the posts. I know where you are getting at. Sure it may be more difficult to optiain a gun than say weed, but still serious criminals would get them. From illegal dealers obviously, shit, its just like obtaining drugs, from illegal dealers.

But still, man, you have a moral obligation to protect your self, do you not agree???

 

[UchihaKira]

So being a criminal automatically gives you this knowledge? Does this not logically mean that crime will be reduced significantly due to the fact that the knowledge is limited to a minority and those looking for a gun who are not already criminals will not have this knowledge?

Or do you believe you are of a lower average intelligence than common citizens?

Oh no I actually agree with that point (even though youre unneccessarily being a huge douche about it). Not ALL criminals will be able to get guns and, at least for a while, it WILL be harder to obtain one for some criminals. If they were illegal however, this would change after some time. Just like drugs, there will be a profit in gaining and selling them illegally. So the few that can obtain them will take advantage of this and make them more readily available to those who cannot. Fighting a war against guns is exactly like fighting a war against drugs. Its impossible to win.

Imo gun laws should be made much more strict. More thorough background checks etc. Taking them away altogether however solves a very small part of the problem and creates different problems.

 

[Aya San]

Watching OP not being able to answer NecroMancer is surprisingly frustrating

 

[Senju Bean]

But you also have to take in to consideration that the "normal" person might snap or become that "ill intentioned criminal" specially those with a short temper. Yeah lets give out guns like candy, that fixes things.

Now, what would you say if you got attack by a criminal and you didn't have a gun? Who would you blame?

I know what you mean, but that is a minor risk.

 

[Senju Bean]

watching op not being able to answer necromancer is surprisingly frustrating

but i did didn't i? Perhaps you can take a logic class. I go a few steps beyond, I don't have to connect all the dots, thats up to you guys.

 

[The Necromancer]

I do apologize, you see, it is new years and I am quite intoxicated, so I cannot catch all the posts. I know where you are getting at. Sure it may be more difficult to optiain a gun than say weed, but still serious criminals would get them. From illegal dealers obviously, shit, its just like obtaining drugs, from illegal dealers.

But still, man, you have a moral obligation to protect your self, do you not agree???

I'm asking you personally. Were you to decide you were going to murder someone for banging your girlfriend tomorrow, where would you get the gun should they be illegal? If you don't know, that means 80+ percent of the population wouldn't know either, thus limiting crime.

 

[j1388686]

There are tons of illegal ways to get guns just so you know(ex:mexico). Im not a criminal so I couldnt tell you exactly but criminals dont go buy guns at the store.

This precisely.

I have a question for you. Where would you get a gun if they were illegal?

Are you honestly that ignorant to think that people couldn't get their hands on a gun if they wanted to?

Matter of fact, I'll give you a better example.
Prohibition of alcohol. It was then illegal to purchase, consume, distribute and produce alcohol. What did that accomplish? Rise in black market smuggling of alcohol. Seriously don't think that if the second amendment were appealed, people would bend over and take it up the **? I seriously have my money on a revolution if the second amendment is repealed.

I also think America has an ulterior motive for their attempts to disarm the nation. They probably want a militarized police state and the less guns = less resistance.

Guns being illegal wouldn't necessarily mean it would be impossible to get your hands on a gun. Marijuana is illegal but I know at least 50 people within a 10 mile radius of me I could buy it off of.

 

[The Necromancer]

Oh no I actually agree with that point (even though youre unneccessarily being a huge douche about it). Not ALL criminals will be able to get guns and, at least for a while, it WILL be harder to obtain one for some criminals. If they were illegal however, this would change after some time. Just like drugs, there will be a profit in gaining and selling them illegally. So the few that can obtain them will take advantage of this and make them more readily available to those who cannot. Fighting a war against guns is exactly like fighting a war against drugs. Its impossible to win.

Imo gun laws should be made much more strict. More thorough background checks etc. Taking them away altogether however solves a very small part of the problem and creates different problems.

Didn't think I was being a douche. I was assuming you were above average in the intelligence department, meaning a large majority of citizens would not be able to obtain one. Even if they were illegal, they would only be as readily available illegally as Heroine or Cocaine, which is certainly wouldn't know how to obtain either.

What I'm saying is Gun bans would make them as common as Cocaine or Heroine which only a relatively small percentage of people can obtain.

This precisely. Are you honestly that ignorant to think that people couldn't get their hands on a gun if they wanted to?

Matter of fact, I'll give you a better example.
Prohibition of alcohol. It was then illegal to purchase, consume, distribute and produce alcohol. What did that accomplish? Rise in black market smuggling of alcohol. Seriously don't think that if the second amendment were appealed, people would bend over and take it up the **? I seriously have my money on a revolution if the second amendment is repealed.

I also think America has an ulterior motive for their attempts to disarm the nation. They probably want a militarized police state and the less guns = less resistance.

Guns being illegal wouldn't necessarily mean it would be impossible to get your hands on a gun. Marijuana is illegal but I know at least 50 people within a 10 mile radius of me I could buy it off of.

Right. Because making a gun is as easy as letting yeast ferment in a barrel... :|

 

[Senju Bean]

So being a criminal automatically gives you this knowledge? Does this not logically mean that crime will be reduced significantly due to the fact that the knowledge is limited to a minority and those looking for a gun who are not already criminals will not have this knowledge?

Or do you believe you are of a lower average intelligence than common citizens?

95% of criminals are average, every day common citizens, not drug runners in a cartel.

Reducing crime?????? Are you failing to get what I am getting at??? I am saying that every individual has a absolute right to protect themselves from harm, be it with a gun or whatever. I just so happens that a gun would do the job best. Remember, this is an absolute right.

I am sorry, but Utilitarism doesn't work logically.

 

[Sir Blades]

Now, what would you say if you got attack by a criminal and you didn't have a gun? Who would you blame?

I know what you mean, but that is a minor risk.

I dont live in such place, but lets say i do get attacked, it would be up to fate or my skills if i survive or not. But i would obviously blame the criminal, i had nothing to do with the individual nor did i provoke such act upon myself . Therefore i wouldn't blame myself if that is what you want to hear from me.

 

[The Necromancer]

Reducing crime?????? Are you failing to get what I am getting at??? I am saying that every individual has a absolute right to protect themselves from harm, be it with a gun or whatever. I just so happens that a gun would do the job best. Remember, this is an absolute right.

This is the attitude of the cold war. Nuclear Deterrents don't work. Protection or not, this right gives everyone the right to the ability to murder and rob people at will.

Even if owning a gun protects you from one mugger, it also allowed 10 muggers to be born due to easy access.

 

[j1388686]

Didn't think I was being a douche. I was assuming you were above average in the intelligence department, meaning a large majority of citizens would not be able to obtain one. Even if they were illegal, they would only be as readily available illegally as Heroine or Cocaine, which is certainly wouldn't know how to obtain either.

What I'm saying is Gun bans would make them as common as Cocaine or Heroine which only a relatively small percentage of people can obtain.



Right. Because making a gun is as easy as letting yeast ferment in a barrel... :|

I guess you are forgetting about the several hundred thousand people who own multiple guns out there right now. Both registered and otherwise. It would just increase the price of a firearm, they would still be readily available to anyone who wanted one. Let alone, traveling to another country to buy one. I hear you can buy an AK-47 (which is a horrible gun anyway) in Africa for 25$. How hard would it be to smuggle guns in? People can smuggle hundreds of tons of illegal narcotics into the US each year without being caught, I'm pretty sure that it can be done with weapons as well.

 

[UchihaKira]

Didn't think I was being a douche. I was assuming you were above average in the intelligence department, meaning a large majority of citizens would not be able to obtain one. Even if they were illegal, they would only be as readily available illegally as Heroine or Cocaine, which is certainly wouldn't know how to obtain either.

What I'm saying is Gun bans would make them as common as Cocaine or Heroine which only a relatively small percentage of people can obtain.



Right. Because making a gun is as easy as letting yeast ferment in a barrel... :|

Im not sure where youre from, but heroin and cocaine are easily obtained in the US, just like most drugs. Sure there are those who cannot find them, but if someone wanted them bad enough it wouldnt be as difficult as youre making it out to be. The fact is if making drugs illegal doesnt solve the drug problem then making guns illegal wont solve the gun problem.

I seem to agree with what you believe should be accomplished by it, but the fact is it wont be. If making guns illegal would solve the problem I would be all for it, but it just wont. Taking guns away from the few "spur of the moment" killers isnt worth disarming all of the innocent victims of gun abuse. In the end there will be more bad than good caused.

 

[Sir Blades]

Reducing crime?????? Are you failing to get what I am getting at??? I am saying that every individual has a absolute right to protect themselves from harm, be it with a gun or whatever. I just so happens that a gun would do the job best. Remember, this is an absolute right.

I am sorry, but Utilitarism doesn't work logically.

That sounds good on paper, but people dont think like that. Yes we have a right to protect ourselves, but there is a difference between being cautious and being paranoid. And taking extreme measures is ridiculous. I wouldn't carry a gun PERIOD.

 

[The Necromancer]

I guess you are forgetting about the several hundred thousand people who own multiple guns out there right now. Both registered and otherwise. It would just increase the price of a firearm, they would still be readily available to anyone who wanted one. Let alone, traveling to another country to buy one. I hear you can buy an AK-47 (which is a horrible gun anyway) in Africa for 25$. How hard would it be to smuggle guns in? People can smuggle hundreds of tons of illegal narcotics into the US each year without being caught, I'm pretty sure that it can be done with weapons as well.

Yes it can. But can 90+ percent of people access these weapons? No. I couldn't get my hands on a gram of cocaine if I wanted to. That alone deters me from doing hard drugs. Do the more serious people still find their way? Sure. But only the top 10% of most dedicated people.

The ease of accessing these illegal substances open the gates for their abuse. You wouldn't put a nuke out in walmart and trust people to use it responsibly.

Im not sure where youre from, but heroin and cocaine are easily obtained in the US, just like most drugs. Sure there are those who cannot find them, but if someone wanted them bad enough it wouldnt be as difficult as youre making it out to be. The fact is if making drugs illegal doesnt solve the drug problem then making guns illegal wont solve the gun problem.

I seem to agree with what you believe should be accomplished by it, but the fact is it wont be. If making guns illegal would solve the problem I would be all for it, but it just wont. Taking guns away from the few "spur of the moment" killers isnt worth disarming all of the innocent victims of gun abuse. In the end there will be more bad than good caused.

Go out tomorrow, buy some cocaine, send me a picture and then I'll believe you. What? You don't want to because it's illegal? Hmm....

This is all from a guy who is planning on getting his concealed carry permit in a few months. I just hate the 2nd Amendment riders (much like minato fans) not because of the character, but because of the fans.

My favorite part? They ride the second amendment as it allows them the opportunity to revolt should the need arise due to the government's oppression, and yet they do not use it now just as they believe their rights are being oppressed. I don't understand that.

 

[j1388686]

Didn't think I was being a douche. I was assuming you were above average in the intelligence department, meaning a large majority of citizens would not be able to obtain one. Even if they were illegal, they would only be as readily available illegally as Heroine or Cocaine, which is certainly wouldn't know how to obtain either.

What I'm saying is Gun bans would make them as common as Cocaine or Heroine which only a relatively small percentage of people can obtain.



Right. Because making a gun is as easy as letting yeast ferment in a barrel... :|

Well it would take a bit more technology and expertise, but I wasn't commenting on the yeast part, I didn't even notice it to be honest. Just your assumptions on how hard it would be to obtain one... or MAKE one for that matter.

You must be registered for see links