Why use guns for killing

Post Reply New Topic

Guns generally pose the least risk to the owner. You're holding in your hand a high-explosive fueled directed energy weapon driving a projectile. The energy is directed away from the shooter, and their may be a mechanism designed to handle recoil or the shooter can learn to compensate for it. Normal operation poses little risk to the user, other than burns, possible minor injury from recoil, and possible hearing loss. Firearms and ammunition are designed and manufactured in such a way to minimize danger for anyone other than whoever happens to be on the business end of the barrel.

Bombs can't be purchased at your local Walmart. Just making them poses considerable risk. Bomb precursors are monitored when they are purchased, and only certain people can buy them. All you need are basic farm chemicals, a trigger, and a detonator. It's more difficult to procure those items when they require a license.

Guns are easier and safer to carry, which means they are easier to trade underground. You may or may not need a license to purchase and carry a firearm, or even register them, and my home state of Mississippi is well known for lax gun laws, so gun runners are common in the Delta region between New Orleans and Memphis. There is a good chance your gun-carrying gang member in Chicago has a weapon that passed through the Delta.

Criminals aren't going to be all that concerned for obeying laws, so availability of guns and bomb materials will just depend on who wants them bad enough. It's going to be easier to get a reliable fully automatic assault rifle than it is to find a crazy enough person to manufacture and sell bombs.

There is also the fact that bombs are one-use-only. You really have to be a man on a mission to use one. Guns can be reused for as long as ammo and maintenance hold up.

Given that the Aurora shooter didn't have a plan for escape, a bomb would have better suited his purpose...maybe even a suicide bomb. Looks to me like he just wanted the media attention for whatever depraved purpose was going through his mind that day. It is truly an awful thing that happened. I hope he gets the death sentence.

Actually, I think that argument holds water in America. There are too many guns, a black market would probably have some success. You have deep rooted cultural issues that will take a long time to fix.

Shootings are much rarer over here because we have proper gun control. If a policeman saw that my dad had a gun on the back seat of his car, he'd pull him over and ask to see a license at the very least. You can't just get hold of a gun. There are far fewer shootings and accidents involving guns (10 people die due to gun crime per 100,000 in the US every year, compared to 0.43 in England and Wales- Scotland has 0.58 and is deemed to have a problem!)

Ironically Americans only get so hung up on the "right to bear arms" because it's a vestigial law from when much of America was part of the Empire- we've since removed it from our law!

Actually, I think that argument holds water in America. There are too many guns, a black market would probably have some success. You have deep rooted cultural issues that will take a long time to fix.

Shootings are much rarer over here because we have proper gun control

Ironically Americans only get so hung up on the "right to bear arms" because it's a vestigial law from when much of America was part of the Empire- we've since removed it from our law!

It's not something that needs "fixed" and yes, there are cultural values that keep things in place. When Obama took office in Jan 09 the gun shops couldn't keep anything in stock they were selling so fast. Even reloading components (powder, projectiles, cases, primers) from online sources dried up or were rationed in some cases. I know several people that were not gun people before then and they bought a few guns and cases (500 or 1000 rounds each) of ammo. Shooting rannges including the one I use got real croused all the sudden. This was all just in case Obama tried successfuly to push the gun control agenda through.



You'd have the same crime rate over there even if gun ownership was compulsory.



Don't hold your breath waiting for that to change.

The only thing gun control in the US has ever accomplished is to disarm the innocent (or cause them to leave them at home) and give the predators of society a fertile hunting ground.

You can't go on with these insane levels of gun crime.

You can;t keep letting children die in accidents.

The same crime rate? I doubt it. We'd just see a shift away from knife crime (which is as prevalent as in the US) and towards gun crime. Gun crime is worse than knife crime. Also, there are less serious knife related accidents (equivalent to what you'd get in a fight, rather than cutting yourself chopping carrots) than serious gun accidents, and you don't get incidents like the cinema one with a knife.

The "guns protect us from people with guns" argument is stupid.

If you didn't think like that, then guns wouldn't be so prevalent and you wouldn't have so much crime.

Here we get back to the risk element mentioned above:
If a cop had reason to look in my vehicle and saw an AR15 laying on the back seat it probably would't get a second look unless there was reason to believe I was up to something. He might even ask what brand it is and maybe tell me about his.
A bomb, on the other hand, is going to mean a trip to jail.

Gun = So what?
Bomb = TERRORIST!! !! !!

Precisely. There is no disagreement that control on explosive IS effective. The freedom of action of a bomber is severely limited BECAUSE there is no legal bomb ownership and every action involving explosive are treated as criminal unless proven otherwise. Bombing IS very rare in the US.

Even you admit that it is the widespread presence of legal guns that gives illegal* guns places to hide. Why guns should not be regulated to the same level of bombs or poison gas? Gun owners are no more innocent than farmers or mine owners.

* Illegal guns is a very board term. That includes legal guns that are stolen or illegally transferred, guns built from surplus parts. These won't exist without legal guns to begin with. Moreover, where do the bullets come from? How can our Mr. Bad Guy practice his shooting skill?

p.s. In Switzerland while ownership of assault rifles is common using it is illegal - there is no legal way to obtain bullets for them. Likewise if I understand Wiki correctly one cannot carry a gun in the public just for 'self defense', and the gun must not be loaded. So the Switzerland example holds no water.

Precisely. There is no disagreement that control on explosive IS effective. The freedom of action of a bomber is severely limited BECAUSE there is no legal bomb ownership and every action involving explosive are treated as criminal unless proven otherwise. Bombing IS very rare in the US.

Even you admit that it is the widespread presence of legal guns that gives illegal* guns places to hide. Why guns should not be regulated to the same level of bombs or poison gas? Gun owners are no more innocent than farmers or mine owners.

Illegal guns is a very board term. That includes legal guns that are stolen or illegally transferred, guns built from surplus parts. These won't exist without legal guns to begin with. Moreover, where do the bullets come from? How can our Mr. Bad Guy practice his shooting skill?

p.s. In Switzerland while ownership of assault rifles is common using it is illegal - there is no legal way to obtain bullets for them. Likewise if I understand Wiki correctly one cannot carry a gun in the public just for 'self defense', and the gun must not be loaded. So the Switzerland example holds no water.

A gun ban would drive up the prices and put them in the same class (illegal) as bombs. Difference is that bombs are easier to fabricate at home. Explosives can be made. I've known a few people that have made black powder from scratch and according to them it worked just fine. How do you think the early settlers got their gun powder, from DuPont?

You apparently have no clue as to how many guns are already in the hands of the public not to mention literally trainloads of ammo and magazines. Making them illegal does not make then go away it just drives the value of them UP.

Gun laws are not as lax in Switzerland as some would like to believe. The fact is, though, that damn near every male of military age and some females have in their possession an StG-90 assault rifle with ammo so the populace is well armed none-the-less.
Ammunition is available on the civilian market and is issued to military personnel for practice and competition.

Up until October 2007, a specified personal retention quantity of government-issued personal ammunition (50 rounds 5.56 mm / 48 rounds 9mm) was issued as well, which was sealed and inspected regularly to ensure that no unauthorized use had taken place.[4] The ammunition was intended for use while traveling to the army barracks in case of invasion.

In October 2007, the Swiss Federal Council decided that the distribution of ammunition to soldiers shall stop and that all previously issued ammo shall be returned. By March 2011, more than 99% of the ammo has been received. Only special rapid deployment units and the military police still have ammunition stored at home today.

PS: There has never been a gun control thread here where anyone from the anti-gun side has come to the table with a valid argument and it looks like you won't be the first.

We like to assume that the gun owner is innocent (like 99.9% of us are) until proven guilty.

PS: There has never been a gun control thread here where anyone from the anti-gun side has come to the table with a valid argument and it looks like you won't be the first.

We like to assume that the gun owner is innocent (like 99.9% of us are) until proven guilty.

What do you think would have happened to this woman and her baby if she didn't have a gun to protect herself?

A pepper spray would probably be enough to stop the intruder. A Molotov cocktail would be more interesting.

Go ahead. Even you admit how difficult and and dangerous the operation is.


And less criminal and wanna-be active shooters can afford them. How much a kilo of TNT and a working detonator cost again?


From Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politi ... witzerland

Fail.


Exactly what valid argument pro gun people bring to the table? We are Americans (TM) and we like it.