Member List
Calendar
F.A.Q.
Search
Log Out
Pokemon Forum - Pokemon Elite 2000  
 

Go Back   Pokemon Forum - Pokemon Elite 2000 » Other Boards » Discussion

Discussion This is for discussion about current events (news), issues, politics, and any other topics of serious discussion. For more casual talk, go to the Other Chat board. Proper sentences, spelling, and grammar is especially strict in this board.


Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #16  
Old 06-09-2009, 01:10 PM
Ah Beng I the Pikabeng's Avatar
Ah Beng I the Pikabeng Offline
Elite Trainer (Level 4)
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: What's a "location"?
Posts: 4,065
Default Re: Right to bear arms

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Celebi View Post
Orly? Because England has banned guns (and most weapons), and they have a huge crime rate involving weapons. Go figure.
And not banning them makes things better? I think not. And for the common people in Singapore, just firing a gun is punishable by death. It's much stricter here than in England, mind you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Celebi View Post
Here's the deal. If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns. Most guns used to commit violent crime are bought illegally anyways. Banning guns will only take them away from the people that should have them. Punishing those that did no wrong is not the right way to deal with guns. Instead, we need to crack down on people selling guns illegally.
Which is easier if you simply ban guns, so you can be sure that whatever guns found in the hands of most people are illegal.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shen View Post
Singapore is also a hell of a lot smaller than the U.S., with less people to do crime, less areas, etc.
We're talking about the crime rate here, not the number of crimes done. >_>

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shen View Post
Just because you wouldn't allow civilians to have guns doesn't mean that those criminal minds wouldn't get guns on their own and shoot everything up if whatever crime they commit calls for it. Also, crimes have been actually prevented by civilians with guns, whether they be the cashier, or some random guy who has a gun permit, sees a crime in progress, and holds the fort until the police get there. Guns have saved about as much as they have killed.
Actually, much more, if you add it up. Such happenings are not as common, as many people on seeing such crimes freeze up and don't know what to do, and even end up killed by the criminal. Besides, the criminal also has a gun, and chances are before you get the gun out and shoot, you'll be shot yourself.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shen View Post
Sure it does, when a knife/sword/some-kind-of-blade/etc.-wielding maniac goes after innocent bystanders for murder/homicide/etc. The point being that getting rid of guns in the hands of civilians will only change the world little for the better, and more than likely for the worse. Because as rust said, criminals would still get guns, since they get them illegally now anyways, and we'd be able to defend ourselves less if they have guns and we do not.
First, tackle the root of the problem: clamp down on outlaws with guns. The getting rid of guns from civilians can be done sometime during the clampdown.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nyurgh View Post
Lol, my friend always says that we should "go back to medievel times" and use stuff like swords, maces, bow and arrows, etc. Hell, we'd see it coming right?

Honestly, even if we outlaw guns, it won't matter. Aren't Cocaine, Speed, Marijuana illegal in the U.S? But people still die of drug overdose, do they not? If anything, banning guns will make things just as bad. That's the way our screwed-up world works, and nothing can change that.
Unlike drugs, you don't actually die from firing the gun too much (that is, before you get caught) (unless you shoot yourself, but that's usually for those who want to die anyway). You might get carpal tunnel syndrome (or some other problem with your hands and/or wrists), but that's all. And most people don't actually get addicted to firing guns.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Akai Shizuku View Post
By "get rid of guns" I meant making them completely disappear. But that can't happen. So...yeah. We're not exactly on opposite sides, here.
That I know. Even in Singapore, there's still the occasional criminal using guns. But there are very few such cases here... Good thing we started early. :3
__________________
What's a "signature"?

Last edited by Ah Beng I the Pikabeng; 06-09-2009 at 01:15 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 06-09-2009, 03:29 PM
skiboydoggy's Avatar
skiboydoggy Offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Exploding Robots
Posts: 3,706
Send a message via AIM to skiboydoggy
Default Re: Right to bear arms

The right for civilians to bear arms is overrated, if you ask me, and many people agree that the right to bear arms could just as easily mean the right to defend oneself with arms whenever arms are needed, ergo when America is being invaded. As opposed to the Japanese constitution, which states that Japan shall not bear arms against another nation under any circumstances. They don't have an army.

More important than guns however, is the people's attitudes. Canada allows arms, and there are more guns than there are people, last I checked. Their gun violence rates as a tiny, tiny fraction of what's going on in the USA. Why? Some people say it's because the USA has had a far more violent history, and thus violence has been wired far harder into the brains of the American people, I'm not sure, but that's the important thing.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 06-09-2009, 04:47 PM
Kenny_C.002's Avatar
Kenny_C.002 Offline
/人◕ ‿‿ ◕人\
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Hina <3
Posts: 12,268
Send a message via AIM to Kenny_C.002
Default Re: Right to bear arms

Quote:
Originally Posted by skiboydoggy View Post
The right for civilians to bear arms is overrated, if you ask me, and many people agree that the right to bear arms could just as easily mean the right to defend oneself with arms whenever arms are needed, ergo when America is being invaded. As opposed to the Japanese constitution, which states that Japan shall not bear arms against another nation under any circumstances. They don't have an army.

More important than guns however, is the people's attitudes. Canada allows arms, and there are more guns than there are people, last I checked. Their gun violence rates as a tiny, tiny fraction of what's going on in the USA. Why? Some people say it's because the USA has had a far more violent history, and thus violence has been wired far harder into the brains of the American people, I'm not sure, but that's the important thing.
The interpretation you gave to that statement is likely what the original statement meant to be, in my opinion. I doubt that there is any proof of one way or another by now, though.

Canada has a heavily restricted access to guns, going even as far as registering said guns with licenses for a few years. People had to go through many checks and balances before actually getting a gun, which is unlike the US, where guns are easily bought. That is, gun control works. I actually recall pulling up statistics where the number of gun homicides in Canada decreased as gun control went into effect as well.

I find the ability to carry guns to be overrated anyways. I would be afraid of myself should I have a gun. I'd think twice about going around in public as well. The fact that there is a huge psychological barrier for some with regards to guns should never be understated.

Also, one of the main reasons given is self-defense, though it would be hard to defend oneself when the criminal has the element of surprise. Perhaps without guns the criminal may not have shot first before robbing, but with guns it would be more likely for them to shoot then rob.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 06-09-2009, 05:42 PM
Blood Red Lucario's Avatar
Blood Red Lucario Offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Aboard Starship Enterprise
Posts: 473
Send a message via AIM to Blood Red Lucario Send a message via Yahoo to Blood Red Lucario
Default Re: Right to bear arms

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nyurgh View Post
I agreed with you up until here. That is just the sorriest of excuses a kid can give that people actually buy into. I've caught myself using that excuse. You mean to tell me that if anybody under 18 shoots some white/black/hispanic/Does it really matter? person, it's the parents' fault? By that logic, I can push this kid down the stairs, tell people "My dad didn't teach me how dangerous stairs are" and get off scoff free. Some of these things are common sense. I see a gun, it goes bang, don't touch it. Don't they do that whole safety seminar starting in what? Second Grade? I remember hearing those stories and seeing those pictures of what guns do, I didn't touch one until I was thirteen. No offense to anybody, but after seeing a picture of a dude with a frickin' hole in his head and seeing what put that hole in his head, and still put your hands on that, that's gotta be the dumbest thing you can do. So yeah, take into consideration the fact that most schools have some form of Gun Safety. In fact, I think in some places, it's a certified law. Even if the parents don't tell a kid that guns are bad, the schools have to. It doesn't have to be anything complicated, just say this "Guns kill people. If you see a gun, don't use it. If you shoot anybody, you will go to jail and get a human tetanus shot from some guy named Leslie." That pretty much drills it into a kid's head that guns kill people, and that makes the trigger feel like it's one thousand pounds. Stupid, INCREDIBLY pissed off, or under the influence(but that's a different story), the excuse doesn't matter, they pick up a gun, in some way or another they heard that guns kill people, they ignore that and kill someone, they go to jail. It has nothing to do with the parents.

Ok, I'm done rambling.
Well yes I know it is common sense to know guns go bang and man fall down but then again parents try to hide theirs from their kids which makes kids curious of how bad it really is. My dad showed me his gun when I was eight years old, so if I ever find myself rummaging through his closet and stumble on one of his I know what it is. Its as they say curiosity killed the cat but in this case curiosity killed little Timmy down the street.

Like if you had a jar of money put it on a high shelf and told the child not to touch it without telling them what it is they have a curious instinct to see what it is when you aren't around. But I'm being too general here there are few people with enough common sense where I live to know that guns don't get shot unless you want to protect yourself or you're hunting.
__________________

Absol Hatches: 27 Level 100: 312

All credit goes to Knightblazer
URPG
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 06-09-2009, 11:07 PM
Akai Shizuku's Avatar
Akai Shizuku Offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Somewhere, beyond the sea...
Posts: 3,301
Default Re: Right to bear arms

My opinion, very simple:

Guns are bad, because they're way too easy to use and abuse. However, they're here, so we've got to deal with that. Criminals will get their hands on guns whether they're legal or not. Therefore, outlawing firearms only brings innocent law-abiding citizens into...troublesome situations. Yeah, kids die from guns. That's because noobs leave them lying around loaded with the freakin' safety off. Jeeze. If you're going to own a gun, fine. Just put it in a safe place where kids can't get at them and keep the safety on until otherwise is necessary.
__________________
BLACK FC: 3912 1708 6632
PEARL FC: 1936 4860 9224

"Strong Pokémon. Weak Pokémon. That is only the selfish perception of people. Truly skilled Trainers should try to win with the Pokémon they love best." -Karen
~I support Leading Light Communism~
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 06-10-2009, 12:46 AM
Professor Geoffrey's Avatar
Professor Geoffrey Offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: My laboratory.
Posts: 6,512
Send a message via AIM to Professor Geoffrey
Default Re: Right to bear arms

I'm a heavy supporter of the right to bear arms, and I will see about joining the NRA once I'm of age. They're pretty much the prime reason why we still have that amendment.

What's the phrase going around these days? "Guns don't kill people, people kill people?"

Sure. Guns have a high potential for abuse. But they can be used for defense. If you make guns illegal, you are not only taking away a right many, many men died for to give to us, you are also putting the lives of many people in danger. What if a person somehow manages to hide a gun, or obtains it another way, and breaks into someone's house? There is such a thing as bringing a knife to a gunfight when it comes to a robbery, and a gun is the only way to equal a gun, unless you're in an all-out bulletproofed outfit and have a knife or some other weapon. Chances of the nation getting those? Slim to none.
__________________
❒ SINGLE ❒ TAKEN ✔ LAPRAS RIDER
The Professor of Pokémon Elite 2000.

Last edited by Professor Geoffrey; 06-10-2009 at 12:50 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 06-10-2009, 12:58 AM
Akai Shizuku's Avatar
Akai Shizuku Offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Somewhere, beyond the sea...
Posts: 3,301
Default Re: Right to bear arms

I'm an anarchist, so there are few things I think we shouldn't be allowed to have/use anyway.
__________________
BLACK FC: 3912 1708 6632
PEARL FC: 1936 4860 9224

"Strong Pokémon. Weak Pokémon. That is only the selfish perception of people. Truly skilled Trainers should try to win with the Pokémon they love best." -Karen
~I support Leading Light Communism~
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 06-10-2009, 01:50 AM
FireflyK's Avatar
FireflyK Offline
Five by Five
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Under your bed
Posts: 4,290
Send a message via AIM to FireflyK
Default Re: Right to bear arms

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ah Beng I the Pikabeng View Post
Singapore has one of the world's lowest crime rates. And it bans the use of guns. Go figure.

So, no guns please. Only makes things worse.
Israel also has a very low (violent) crime rate, and due to the military drafting, nearly everyone over the age of 18 owns a gun. Including machine guns. (And they get sufficient training before getting their hands on a gun, not to mention training to be calm in stressful situations, make snap judgements, etc.. Instead of banning guns, maybe we should just make everyone take a sufficient safety course before owning them, to weed out those who are too stupid to be allowed.)

I haven't kept up on the latest crime stats, which I'm looking for... But as of 2002:
Reported homicide rates. The figures are X homicides per million inhabitants.

(1.) Slovenia 0.7
(2.) Austria 0.9
(3.) Sweden 1.8
(4.) Switzerland 2.3
(5.) Israel 2.3
(6.) Hong Kong 2.4
(7.) Norway 2.5
(8.) Ireland 2.8
(9.) Finland 3.7
(10.) Singapore 4.3

Israel has a LOWER rate of crime than Singapore. Almost HALF the rate. And this rate? Includes suicide bombings, just plain bombings, and the few honor killings, etc. Without those, the violent crime rate is very, very low. Probably because no one wants to go and, say, break into houses when the odds are about 85% that the homeowner has a machine gun and will rip you a new one.

So, yes, in some cases, no guns might work almost as well as arming everyone. Almost. However, even if this less-efficient way were to be considered, americans are unlikely to give up their guns, and in fact, many know how to home make guns. This means only the non-criminals would be disarmed. That's generally a bad, bad idea.

There could be strict sentences for people who carry guns of course, but why should we move towards authoritarianism when it's not needed? The singapore method, after all, is more controlling, less efficient as seen above with stopping homicide, AND involves all sorts of extremely strict rules on, well, everything. Until 2004, it was illegal to bring in or buy gum in Singapore, and a teenager who did something foolish like create a little grafitti could be caned. Many crimes have the death penalty, which is WHY Singapore's crime rate is low- commit a crime? You're killed so you can't commit another.

"The chief executioner, Darshan Singh, said that he has executed more than 850 people during his service from 1959 using the phrase: "I am going to send you to a better place than this. God bless you." This included 18 people on one day, using three ropes at a time. Singh also said that he has hanged 7 people within 90 minutes."

Do we really want America to turn into a nanny state? One that gives the death penalty for things that singapore does- Such as firing a gun for any reason (including in self defense, since guns are not allowed), and 'trafficking drugs'. So, y'know, instead of imprisoning a few college kids who give pot to their friends, if the US followed the Singaporean model, we'd be putting them to death. That does not sound very productive. And if a total ban on guns is going to work, we'd need a motivation for citizens to comply, and to work towards the mindset of obeying the laws more/getting used to stricter laws...
Why would this be considered a good choice, especially when there's clearly a better alternative? Inform and arm the people, it works better than disarming them... Especially in countries with a free media.

While people can argue that there are non-lethal self defense weapons, a gun gives the advantage to people most likely to be attacked- the eldery, petite women, etc. It's not fair to expect them to 'make do' against stronger attackers with other weapons. Also, keep in mind that someone on PCP, or even just angry, can totally ignore mace and keep fighting, it'll just make them angrier.

Are there accidents? Yes. Which is sad, but parents need to instruct their kids on what to do if they find a gun, and they need to be responsible and keep the guns where kids won't get at them. A lot of 'accidents' with young kids are very suspicious, too- ie it's not really clear if they accidentally got their hands on a gun and had the coordination/strength to pull a weighted trigger, or if they were shot intentionally by someone else who then used the excuse that 'the kid found the gun and accidentaly shot himself'.

On that note, we already know that criminals break the law and traffic illegal things. So, essentially, the question is whether citizens should have guns or not. And since the bad guys will? I think everyone else should, too, to even the odds. England still has issues with criminals having guns, or even when they don't, if the good people don't, it's easier for someone with a simple knife to cause a lot of damage. People need to have the right to defend themselves.
__________________

My hands have yet to build a village, have yet to find water in the barren desert, have yet to plant a flower, and I have yet to find the path that leads me... I have not loved enough, but the wind and the sun are still on my face.



I have yet to sow green fields, yet to raise a city, yet to plant a grapevine on each chalky hill... There is so much to build and so much to be, and my love is just beginning.

Last edited by FireflyK; 06-10-2009 at 01:57 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 06-10-2009, 04:16 AM
OrexxerO's Avatar
OrexxerO Offline
Master Trainer
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 383
Default Re: Right to bear arms

As others have mentioned. To outlaw guns in the U.S. would be a huge mistake and a fiasco.

Do you know how long it would take to confiscate them all from every LEGALLY owned one in the U.S.....also do you know how many problems it would take to round them all up from the people who don't want to give them up and what kind of violence that would illicit?

And last time I checked, when the U.S. banned Alcohol there were only more problems caused in this nation, not less. Which is why the ban was repealed.


And criminals obtain guns illegaly usually anyways, so why ban them? Sure Singapore has a lower crime rate then the U.S. but its not only because of a gun ban. Its also because in Singapore their laws are also much harsher in penalty then U.S. laws. Such as being cained for vandalization.


If there were more "pain is promised" for breaking laws in the U.S. im sure we would have a much lower crime rate too, but you have the people who say "we must understand criminals and be nice to them and maybe they will be nice back!" that keep laws like that from even going into effect.


And also, as others have mentioned, the U.S. is much larger then a country like Singapore. It would be like pulling eye teeth out of a donkey to try and recover every single gun if they were banned. And it would cause more problems then solve.



Same arguement with Socialism tbqh. People argue that a nation like Denmark is the "happiest in the world"...its also like 4 times smaller then Texas, which is only one state in the U.S. So government ran programs are much smaller, thus more efficient. Government ran programs in the U.S. tend to be very big and bloated/inefficient. I rather not see our Medical program for giving people help look something like the DMV. "number A1, please report to medical pod C, number A1."


Quote:
England still has issues with criminals having guns, or even when they don't, if the good people don't, it's easier for someone with a simple knife to cause a lot of damage. People need to have the right to defend themselves
Not only that, I remember watching a show where a fugitive in the U.S. went to England. And some British cops pulled the guy over and asked to see his passport and such. HE was there illegaly so he pulled out the gun he had and shot both the cops dead....they didn't have weapons on them to retaliate anyways. Then the next thing they showed was all the British police with automatic rifles after that =P.


Quote:
Actually, much more, if you add it up. Such happenings are not as common, as many people on seeing such crimes freeze up and don't know what to do, and even end up killed by the criminal. Besides, the criminal also has a gun, and chances are before you get the gun out and shoot, you'll be shot yourself.
Just on the news last year, a Pizza man was delivering to a apartement complex when a man with a gun stepped out and tried to rob him. He had a pistol. The Pizza guy had a concealed pistol in the small of his back. He managed to pull that out and shoot at the would-be robber. He missed him, but that was enough and the robber took off pissing his pants because he thought just the fear of him having the gun would be enough to have the guy give him what he had on him. So in that case your actually wrong.
__________________

Last edited by OrexxerO; 06-10-2009 at 04:20 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 06-10-2009, 04:18 AM
Akai Shizuku's Avatar
Akai Shizuku Offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Somewhere, beyond the sea...
Posts: 3,301
Default Re: Right to bear arms

Got a problem with socialism, comrade?
__________________
BLACK FC: 3912 1708 6632
PEARL FC: 1936 4860 9224

"Strong Pokémon. Weak Pokémon. That is only the selfish perception of people. Truly skilled Trainers should try to win with the Pokémon they love best." -Karen
~I support Leading Light Communism~
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 06-10-2009, 04:25 AM
OrexxerO's Avatar
OrexxerO Offline
Master Trainer
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 383
Default Re: Right to bear arms

Its just the truth. I don't despise socialism but it doesn't work well with a government thats big and bloated and also inefficient. And a "once size fits all" mentality doesn't work well with a large nation such as the U.S.

I can see it working in a nation like Denmark, which is very small and probably much easier for government programs to provide for. Not the case for the U.S., much bigger population, and 50 states all with different laws on the state and local levels. And that would also contribute to problems with a universal Federal gun ban in the U.S. A "blanket ban" won't work, because I bet you some states, like Texas, Arizona perhaps, and others would cite local laws and state laws, so that its legal in the respective states outside of Federal jurisdiction.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 06-10-2009, 04:27 AM
Akai Shizuku's Avatar
Akai Shizuku Offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Somewhere, beyond the sea...
Posts: 3,301
Default Re: Right to bear arms

Quote:
Originally Posted by OrexxerO View Post
Its just the truth. I don't despise socialism but it doesn't work well with a government thats big and bloated and also inefficient. And a "once size fits all" mentality doesn't work well with a large nation such as the U.S.

I can see it working in a nation like Denmark, which is very small and probably much easier for government programs to provide for. Not the case for the U.S., much bigger population, and 50 states all with different laws on the state and local levels. And that would also contribute to problems with a universal Federal gun ban in the U.S. A "blanket ban" won't work, because I bet you some states, like Texas, Arizona perhaps, and others would cite local laws and state laws, so that its legal in the respective states outside of Federal jurisdiction.
Because children starving in the slums is so much better.
__________________
BLACK FC: 3912 1708 6632
PEARL FC: 1936 4860 9224

"Strong Pokémon. Weak Pokémon. That is only the selfish perception of people. Truly skilled Trainers should try to win with the Pokémon they love best." -Karen
~I support Leading Light Communism~
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 06-10-2009, 04:44 AM
OrexxerO's Avatar
OrexxerO Offline
Master Trainer
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 383
Default Re: Right to bear arms

Ok. Socialism may save kids starving in the slums with government programs but then it could kill others by not giving them medical care they need because government bureaucrats think they know better then doctors. Most people with rare illness from Britain and Canada come to the U.S. because the socialized medicine in those nations won't provide for them, or if they will it takes too long and they could be dead by the time the system finally turns to them.

My point being, its not a fix all system, and it never will be, even if people hope it will be.

And thats only one point. But anyways this thread isn't on socialism. I was just making a comparison.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 06-10-2009, 04:51 AM
Akai Shizuku's Avatar
Akai Shizuku Offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Somewhere, beyond the sea...
Posts: 3,301
Default Re: Right to bear arms

It's still better than capitalism.

I do agree about the guns, though.
__________________
BLACK FC: 3912 1708 6632
PEARL FC: 1936 4860 9224

"Strong Pokémon. Weak Pokémon. That is only the selfish perception of people. Truly skilled Trainers should try to win with the Pokémon they love best." -Karen
~I support Leading Light Communism~
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 06-10-2009, 04:56 AM
OrexxerO's Avatar
OrexxerO Offline
Master Trainer
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 383
Default Re: Right to bear arms

Quote:
It's still better than capitalism.
At least capitalism, while its a dog-eat-dog system, teaches people who are willing, how to fight for themselves, and how to provide for themselves, not others to provide for them. And if that other isn't there to provide for them, I wonder what happens. Some may endup learning how to provide for themselves better then the provider, while others will suffer very much for it.


Places that were controlled by the USSR for example, Poland, are still suffering from what a social system did to their nation. They got used to the government providing for their needs, then the USSR dissolved, and now several parts of Poland are very poor and full of very depressing and debilitated cities because the people as a whole didn't know how to provide for themselves or get their economy going, since they relied on the government for all of that.
__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:13 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Style Design: AlienSector.com