Poll: Do you support the right to bear arms?
Yes
No
Keep Hunting Rifles Only
Pistols but not AR(s) + 3
Assualt Rifles + 3 & 4
[Show Results]
Note: This is a public poll, other users will be able to see what you voted for.
Atheists; Gun Rights Acknowledgement
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
14-08-2012, 11:42 PM
RE: Atheists; Gun Rights Acknowledgement
(13-08-2012 04:03 PM)Red Celt Wrote:  Just to clarify... as a liberal, the idea of banning anything is nauseating to me. People should be allowed to do whatever they want to do... so long as it harms nobody else. Of course, there are individuals who are perfectly competent at using guns, and are very little danger to themselves, let alone to others... but the bigger picture (as evidenced by the statistics) is that America has a problem due to a lack of proper controls.

I'm trying my best to withdraw from the argument (believe it or not) because I am well aware that some people will just never accept that there is an argument for the greater good, that necessitates greater controls than currently exist. The greatest annoyance is when some Americans give (what they consider good) reasons for the status quo... stated as if the USA somehow has a society that is so totally different to the rest of the civilised world.

Point out the errors in one of their defence points and they'll switch to one of the others... which (mainly) consist of:-

Self defence (against criminals)
Self defence (against the government)
Hunting
Vermin control

Guns are meant to kill things. If you are a farmer and killing things makes the difference between success and failure... then you are justified in the use of a gun. If you are in an urban setting, one of the "costs" of having lots of neighbours is that your actions allow for their well-being. In that setting, vermin control should be done by professionals.

Hunting... is a sport, for entertainment purposes. If it makes the difference between a broken society and a tiny minority enjoying a sport... it is arguable that there are grounds to limit hunting (possibly to extinction) for the greater good. At the very least, rifles (and only rifles) will make the country safer.

Self defence... take all of the guns out of society and that is no longer a necessity. Removing them all isn't an easy task, and I won't pretend that it is... but with amnesties for hand-ins and severe penalties for illegal ownership... over time, the USA will be a safer place to live. The extremities of criminal society will still have guns, but they'll primarily be used against other criminals.

I'm not suggesting that this is a course towards a gun-free Utopia. It will, however, be a course towards a safer country.

As a footnote, I have a lot of American family members. A cousin once suggested that I move there. There are 3 reasons why I couldn't live in America:-

Religion
Healthcare
Guns

LOL. Never mind that we have the absolute best healthcare in the world.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-08-2012, 11:48 PM
RE: Atheists; Gun Rights Acknowledgement
^ wut? Not sure if serious (and only plausible because I've actually heard people argue that point...), but we only have the "best healthcare" if you happen to be Mitt Romney wealthy. Otherwise, we've got people using the ER as their primary care physician (and not paying at all, passing the cost on to those of us that *do* pay) because they can't afford healthcare. Then we've got shit like lifetime limits (companies will stop paying for your bills once they hit a set limit), pre-existing conditions preventing people from getting coverage, out of state/network bills not covered by insurance, some medications not covered, etc. It's only great if you're rich (and heartless) or you are one of the guys profiting off of it...

Better without God, and happier too.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Azaraith's post
15-08-2012, 12:57 AM
RE: Atheists; Gun Rights Acknowledgement
(14-08-2012 11:48 PM)Azaraith Wrote:  ^ wut? Not sure if serious (and only plausible because I've actually heard people argue that point...), but we only have the "best healthcare" if you happen to be Mitt Romney wealthy. Otherwise, we've got people using the ER as their primary care physician (and not paying at all, passing the cost on to those of us that *do* pay) because they can't afford healthcare. Then we've got shit like lifetime limits (companies will stop paying for your bills once they hit a set limit), pre-existing conditions preventing people from getting coverage, out of state/network bills not covered by insurance, some medications not covered, etc. It's only great if you're rich (and heartless) or you are one of the guys profiting off of it...

I am absolutely serious. Our quality of healthcare is the best in the world and is easily accessed by the majority of our citizens. It is an absolute lie to say that you have to be super rich our profit from the system to benefit from it. Sure we have some issues and gaps that need filled but tiu get what you pay for and I am perfectly happy with the healthcare I receive and I am none of the above people you claim you have to be to get good healthcare.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-08-2012, 05:01 AM
RE: Atheists; Gun Rights Acknowledgement
(14-08-2012 11:42 PM)tnt4philly Wrote:  
(13-08-2012 04:03 PM)Red Celt Wrote:  Religion
Healthcare
Guns

LOL. Never mind that we have the absolute best healthcare in the world.

Congratulations on missing that point, entirely. It isn't the best in the world if it isn't available to all.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Red Celt's post
15-08-2012, 05:08 AM
RE: Atheists; Gun Rights Acknowledgement
(15-08-2012 12:57 AM)tnt4philly Wrote:  I am absolutely serious. Our quality of healthcare is the best in the world and is easily accessed by the majority of our citizens.

World Health Organization ranking of health systems. Well, if the "best in the world" equates to 37th, then yes, you're not even slightly wrong... or deluded. Absolutely.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-08-2012, 07:04 AM
RE: Atheists; Gun Rights Acknowledgement
(15-08-2012 05:08 AM)Red Celt Wrote:  
(15-08-2012 12:57 AM)tnt4philly Wrote:  I am absolutely serious. Our quality of healthcare is the best in the world and is easily accessed by the majority of our citizens.

World Health Organization ranking of health systems. Well, if the "best in the world" equates to 37th, then yes, you're not even slightly wrong... or deluded. Absolutely.

Are we talking about health care or health care systems? Big difference.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-08-2012, 07:12 AM
RE: Atheists; Gun Rights Acknowledgement
(14-08-2012 11:14 PM)Azaraith Wrote:  You need to fix your poll... Shouldn't be multi-select, as I've voted for all of them for shits & giggles.

I'm in favor of stricter gun controls, though I'm realistic in that banning them won't happen and wouldn't solve the problem. Education, registration, etc would help a lot and wouldn't impose on anyone that has a legitimate reason to own one. If getting educated and registering it is too much of a bother (or you're paranoid enough about registration that you don't like it), guns aren't something I think you are mature enough to own.

Education would help, but it wouldn't be enough - we also would need better background checks and perhaps an interview process (one time) for gun purchases. Kinda to keep idiots like Walt Wawra, the Michigan cop scared of Canadians, from getting guns.

Dontcha think maybe we should prevent him from being a cop? Dodgy

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-08-2012, 07:15 AM
RE: Atheists; Gun Rights Acknowledgement
(14-08-2012 08:20 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  
(14-08-2012 04:50 PM)Erxomai Wrote:  Bottom line to the silly naysayers:
It's the same issue as those who don't care if Obama was born in Kenya.
You're not going to change the US Constitution. (Not saying you can't try).

The Second Amendment was not written to give people the right to keep guns for hunting and for home protection. It was written by folks who had just served in a grassroots militia that had defeated a tyrannical power.

The right to bear arms is a warning to any mother fuckers who want to take away our freedoms. (Looking at you, Patriot Act supporters).

The silly naysayers will whine that there weren't automatic weapons in 1789. No, but the 2nd Amendment makes no limitations on how many or what kinds of guns for a reason. They knew there's a difference between a bow and arrow and a musket with a bayonet, and they knew the difference between a blunderbuss and a pistol.

I don't own a gun because I cannot convince myself I'll never eat the barrel, but I am in full support of the right to own whatever personal gun you like. Controls have a place when it comes to limiting someone like Chas owning a Howitzer, but if we ever need to overthrow a tyrant, I don't want to hear you whiners say no one should have had an assault rifle in their attic.

A person can buy an old howitzer in the U.S. you know? You can buy a howitzer, rpg, semi-auto shotgun, etc. They are listed as "destructive devices" and do require more restrict background checks and check offs to purchase legally. They have to be registered when getting these weapons; that goes along with them proving some reason to have such a weapon that will go along with promoting public safety.

Why is those laws not being attacked if there ought to be no restrictions on guns/arms. If those laws are perfectly acceptable, what would be harmful to add automatic/semi-automatic weapons to just require more extensive background checks and reasonable purchase checks?

The second amendment was also purposely given to the people because the hopeful plan was to not have a standing Army during non-waring times. The Bill of Rights in general as well as that amendment are to protect people from the Government first and foremost, but every rule is without a sole reason.

The arguments are generally about where to draw the lines; only truly crazy people want no restrictions whatsoever, and only unrealistic people want a total ban.

I and others have given good reasons for personal gun ownership that have not been responded to by the anti-gunners. No one here has called for no restrictions.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-08-2012, 07:15 AM
RE: Atheists; Gun Rights Acknowledgement
(15-08-2012 07:12 AM)Chas Wrote:  Dontcha think maybe we should prevent him from being a cop? Dodgy

That's a given... He should be fired and then his guns removed...

Better without God, and happier too.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-08-2012, 07:18 AM
RE: Atheists; Gun Rights Acknowledgement
(15-08-2012 07:04 AM)Chas Wrote:  Are we talking about health care or health care systems? Big difference.

For the patient, you can't separate the two. And, in the list I provided that drew the response... I was on about the patient's experience.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: