Gun Policy

[WISD0MTREE]

She would have been unable to kill him without a full-auto uzi in her hands.

 

Anyways, a 9 year old can shoot a Uzi but it is illegal for me to own a fully functional Abrams? I just want one, that's it. And maybe a Bradley as well. A F-22 would be nice too. Also a Predator Drone. I can't have any of those but that child is allowed to kill someone? Where's the justice?

http://www.outdoorlife.com/blogs/survivalist/2013/07/tactical-knives-19-great-fixed-blade-knives-self-defense

 

Also, it was an accident. Why don't we ban decommissioned military vehicles (Humvees) when someone has an accident? Those were meant to kill. Also, knives, crossbows, swords, axes, and so on. 

 

I say, every american knows himself that their gun laws are plain stupid, and utterly outdated.

But everyone of them is afraid to tell that others, they might think they are "unpatriotic".

 

Yes.. a knife is a murdering tool too.. even a pencil can be one.

But through centuries of shooting homicides, their nerves are fragil and they are angst-ridden, so no one will let go off their weapons

and they are fast at shooting if they hear sth at night in the kitchen, like their wife getting sth to drink.

Or the police officers who first shoot, then talk. 

It's not sth to be changed by laws alone, the whole american society, and their way to think has to change.

You aren't an American. How would you know? Pic of passport with America stamp, plz. 

 

A knife was meant to kill, like guns. 

 

The thinking of ISIS has to change. Al-Qaeda. Mentally ill guys here. Try to change ISIS's beliefs. I'll sit right here on my air conditioned couch watching your beheadment. 

 

1. Americans shouldn't talk about privacy of information to other countrys

2. With all our rules, germany isn't really all that liberal, we're social(ists), conservative, and ecofriendly, and unlike the US economical efficient.    (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balance_of_trade)

3. Yes, talk about foreigners in an international forum

4. Of course you are against those laws... you wouldn't get one by at least §§ 5,6 and 8.

5. Founding fathers? That was around 1776,  even we Germans removed laws 'just' 70 years old...  , and what, they realized governments suck..     before or after they created a government?

6. Defending my power to kill? Am i living in Gaza or Berlin-Kreuzberg? wtf..

 

If you want to handle weapons, just join police, army or play paintball.

Why the hell is a German talking about guns being bad? WWII, if the Jews were armed, then Germany would have a rebellion. Then they might have not been able to take on the rest of Europe. 

 

1. Yes, fellow Americans. Please stop talking about privacy until the NSA goes home. 

2. With all our people, we aren't all gun nuts. (See California)

3. Agreed

4. ?

5. Alright, great idea. EVERYONE, VOTE TO FORCE RELIGION!!!!!!!!!!! GOD WILL LIKE IT!!!!!!!!!!!

6. Begin the scenario 

Someone is inside your house at night. You don't know what they have. Do you

  a) Charge him with a TV remote

  Get out of your house and let him take what he wants. [Devastating for poor people without much]

  c) Other

[Ayayay]

6. Begin the scenario 

Someone is inside your house at night. You don't know what they have. Do you

  a) Charge him with a TV remote

  Get out of your house and let him take what he wants. [Devastating for poor people without much]

  c) Other

You call the cops like you are supposed to. You think if you have a gun and you shoot him you can throw his body in a dumpster? Edited September 4, 2014 by underlordgc

[Sailor Jerry]

5. Founding fathers? That was around 1776,  even we Germans removed laws 'just' 70 years old...  , and what, they realized governments suck..     before or after they created a government?

 

Not to get to far off topic here, but some of your laws from 70 years ago probably weren't the greatest of laws I'd imagine.

[Fox Fire]

You call the cops like you are supposed to. You think if you have a gun and you shoot him you can throw his body in a dumpster?

You can just call the cops to come pick up the body.

[Ren]

In fact, mental health is a total joke. Half the people I know suffer from some diagnosis that's just total BS. You can't really understand the mental state of anyone other than yourself (most of the time, not even then) and you certainly can't do it by seeing said person once every three months to engage in minor chit chat.

Psycologists are a joke. My doctor is a cool guy, but as someone with a mental health issue, I can also assure you that he doesn't know anything about my mentality and never will.

 

Are you saying mental health isn't a problem??!

 

 

This attitude is is exactly why we continue to have many of the problems that plague this country. Many people have mental health issues and refuse help because of this way of thinking and the stigma this culture attaches to MH. No one is saying that having diagnosis would prevent you from owning a firearm, but an MH screen is absolutely necessary and should be mandatory. Believe it or not, we are blind to most of our issues. When we've only lived one life, we have nothing to compare our current thoughts and emotions to. What might seem normal to you might be a red flag to a therapist. A mental health expert spends years studying the various illnesses and draws from decades of research. Owning a firearm comes with a lot of responsibilities, and there needs to be a system in place that can identify people who might use their weapons on others or themselves. If you are diagnosed with something, but continue to seek help and manage the symptoms, there is no reason why you couldn't own a firearm.

 

Please, if you have a psychologist/ therapist/ psychiatrist, talk to them! Their job is to offer an objective perspective on your life and to look out for your well being. It is the most liberating thing to dump the load on your mind onto someone who will neither judge you nor tell a soul your secrets.

[Ren]

Not to get to far off topic here, but some of your laws from 70 years ago probably weren't the greatest of laws I'd imagine.

 

Perhaps some of our laws from 230 years ago aren't the greatest laws? Times change, cultures change, the law needs to adapt.

[Fox Fire]

Are you saying mental health isn't a problem??!

 

 

This attitude is is exactly why we continue to have many of the problems that plague this country. Many people have mental health issues and refuse help because of this way of thinking and the stigma this culture attaches to MH. No one is saying that having diagnosis would prevent you from owning a firearm, but an MH screen is absolutely necessary and should be mandatory. Believe it or not, we are blind to most of our issues. When we've only lived one life, we have nothing to compare our current thoughts and emotions to. What might seem normal to you might be a red flag to a therapist. A mental health expert spends years studying the various illnesses and draws from decades of research. Owning a firearm comes with a lot of responsibilities, and there needs to be a system in place that can identify people who might use their weapons on others or themselves. If you are diagnosed with something, but continue to seek help and manage the symptoms, there is no reason why you couldn't own a firearm.

 

Please, if you have a psychologist/ therapist/ psychiatrist, talk to them! Their job is to offer an objective perspective on your life and to look out for your well being. It is the most liberating thing to dump the load on your mind onto someone who will neither judge you nor tell a soul your secrets.

I'd much rather talk to a good friend.

Because like I said, no body can truly understand another's mentality. I don't believe mental illness can be diagnosed in most cases because you then have to differentiate between personality and problem.

IE: what part of your mentality is illness and what part is personality? Is there even a difference? How do you confirm it?

[Sailor Jerry]

Perhaps some of our laws from 230 years ago aren't the greatest laws? Times change, cultures change, the law needs to adapt.

That may be true, but who are the ones who get to decide which ones get changed and which ones don't?

[Solomon]

That may be true, but who are the ones who get to decide which ones get changed and which ones don't?

The who part is easy. It's the democratically elected representatives in your country's systems of government. For the which part, I recommend looking at the progress made by other developed countries. Economically and scientifically, the USA is a world leader but it lags behind in its social development.

[Sailor Jerry]

The who part is easy. It's the democratically elected representatives in your country's systems of government. For the which part, I recommend looking at the progress made by other developed countries. Economically and scientifically, the USA is a world leader but it lags behind in its social development.

Ok, you got me on the elected officials.....but who is to say we lag behind in our social development. Just because other countries have done certain things for awhile doesn't mean we all should be doing it. Some of us here think the majority of our laws are just fine and don't need to be changed just to suit the minority of people or those from other countries. Being a 20 year U.S. navy retiree, I've visited over 20 different countries in Europe, Asia and the Middle East and was exposed to those countries laws and customs (albeit for only short periods of time). Some laws were pretty cool and wished we could adopt over here in the U.S., but some other made you think.....WTF were these people thinking when they made that law! At the end of the day however, I taught to respect those laws and realized that those laws are what make everyone a little different from each other which is a good thing.....diversity. So hearing folks that are not from the U.S. telling us we behind socially or that our laws are old and need to be brought up to modern times.....I say worry about the laws in your own county first, leave our laws to us.

[Solomon]

So hearing folks that are not from the U.S. telling us we behind socially or that our laws are old and need to be brought up to modern times.....I say worry about the laws in your own county first, leave our laws to us.

I lived and worked in the US for six years. That doesn't make me an expert but it gives me a viewpoint from which to compare. As I said above, there are both positives and negatives about US society. Certainly, if someone came to my country (I live in Portugal) and suggested improvements or solutions to problems, I wouldn't tell them to worry about the laws in their own country first.

[WISD0MTREE]

You call the cops like you are supposed to. You think if you have a gun and you shoot him you can throw his body in a dumpster?

Where did I say that you throw the body in a dumpster? I'd imagine you would still have to go to court to make sure you didn't kidnap the guy and shoot him in your house or something like that. Alright, let's continue this scenario. You sit there IN THE HOUSE and call the cops. 

1. You can get stabbed 

2. You can get beat up

3. He is an arsonist and you lose everything in your house 

And so on. 

 

For the few comments above, 

 

Finally, Mexico? 

http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/mexico

http://reason.com/blog/2012/12/11/mexico-as-an-example-that-tighter-gun-co

Tons of guns. We ban them, they bring them back over here. 

-Illegals Crossing- 

http://www.usimmigrationsupport.org/illegal-immigration-from-mexico.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_immigration_to_the_United_States

What is stopping them from bringing guns across? Even a child could bring something across, dump it in a drop spot, then get stopped by CBP/ICE and go through that process. 

[Sailor Jerry]

I lived and worked in the US for six years. That doesn't make me an expert but it gives me a viewpoint from which to compare. As I said above, there are both positives and negatives about US society. Certainly, if someone came to my country (I live in Portugal) and suggested improvements or solutions to problems, I wouldn't tell them to worry about the laws in their own country first.

Like I'm trying to say who gets to say/decide what needs "improvements or a solution"? A large portion of folks in the U.S. like their guns and the laws just the way they are and think

nothing is wrong with them.....are those folks wrong?

[Solomon]

Like I'm trying to say who gets to say/decide what needs "improvements or a solution"? A large portion of folks in the U.S. like their guns and the laws just the way they are and think

nothing is wrong with them.....are those folks wrong?

If you'd never seen sanitation systems, you'd think there was nothing wrong with sewage in the streets.

[WISD0MTREE]

If you'd never seen sanitation systems, you'd think there was nothing wrong with sewage in the streets.

*cough cough* Umm, Mexico has guns banned. [sarcasm]I like how that works. [/sarcasm]

[Solomon]

*cough cough* Umm, Mexico has guns banned. [sarcasm]I like how that works. [/sarcasm]

Not true. Mexico allows its citizens to own low caliber firearms for hunting and self protection, but only after applicants have been vetted by the Ministry of Defense. The system is by no means perfect but it's more tightly regulated than those of its immediate northern and southern neighbors. Both former and current presidents Calderon and Peña Nieto have appealed for the US to do more about limiting the flow of firearms from the US into Mexico.

[Fox Fire]

Not true. Mexico allows its citizens to own low caliber firearms for hunting and self protection, but only after applicants have been vetted by the Ministry of Defense. The system is by no means perfect but it's more tightly regulated than those of its immediate northern and southern neighbors. Both former and current presidents Calderon and Peña Nieto have appealed for the US to do more about limiting the flow of firearms from the US into Mexico.

Umm.... In America, we don't have citizens taking over towns with machine guns to fight off cartels.

But you do in Mexico.

Some gun regulation.

Edited September 7, 2014 by GloFish

[Fox Fire]

*cough cough* Umm, Mexico has guns banned. [sarcasm]I like how that works. [/sarcasm]

They aren't banned, but not many can actually get through the process of legally owning one.

On the other hand, I'm sure the vast majority of Mexican gun owners are owning illegally.

[WISD0MTREE]

They aren't banned, but not many can actually get through the process of legally owning one.

On the other hand, I'm sure the vast majority of Mexican gun owners are owning illegally.

Ok, you can get up to, what? A .38? Yeah, tons of guns. 

 

And there is only one Oklahoma Football Mexican gun shop. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=105848207

But, this does serve a great lesson that we need secure borders. http://www.laht.com/article.asp?CategoryId=14091&ArticleId=390473

Vote Mexico for worst country! Hey, anyone want free guns from the Mexican State Police? http://www.borderlandbeat.com/2010/09/state-police-arsenal-raided-in.html 

 

 

Umm.... In America, we don't have citizens taking over towns with machine guns to fight off cartels.

Bit you do in Mexico.

Some gun regulation.

We are about to. 

http://conservativetribune.com/militia-to-defend-border/

[Fox Fire]

Want free guns from ATF?

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATF_gunwalking_scandal

 

But seriously, that whole thing had "intentional" written all over it. Their excuses are absurd to me.

[Karl Marx]

A number of criteria must be met before a firearms ownership license is issued:

• age of majority (18 years) (§ 4 WaffG)
• trustworthiness (§ 5 WaffG)
• personal adequacy (§ 6 WaffG)
• expert knowledge (§ 7 WaffG) and
• necessity (§ 8 WaffG)

 

And for all, who already have guns, they should be proofed again if they pass those criterias.

 

While these are good requirements in of themselves, I would not trust the state to evaluate people along these lines.

What if someone wanted a gun for recreational purposes and was denied because the state determined that they didn't truly need one? I don't think our legislators would hesitate to deny Communists the right to bear arms due to trustworthiness. It's also vulnerable to racial profiling.

 

Let me guess. We're going to have to take your weapons from your cold dead hands. 

 

Yeah, so what? Not everyone who feels that way is some melodramatic Tea Partier.

 

1. Americans shouldn't talk about privacy of information to other countrys

 

Just because the NSA spies on other nations doesn't mean that every American does. Most of us are thoroughly upset about what has happened and are more distrusting of our government than we have been in a while. Your point would only be valid if it were directed at a member of our government.

 

You call the cops like you are supposed to. You think if you have a gun and you shoot him you can throw his body in a dumpster?

 

You mean only call the cops? And then just sit there? I know people who would be dead if they had done that.

[WISD0MTREE]

Want free guns from ATF?

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATF_gunwalking_scandal

 

But seriously, that whole thing had "intentional" written all over it. Their excuses are absurd to me.

Wasn't the ATF responsible for killing that unarmed wife at Ruby Ridge and kids in the Waco Siege? Just wondering. I'm not actually using this as debate material.