I love it. The final is considerably faster than the Betas or Alphas. My biggest (and probably only) complaint at this point is that, due to the new stupid Volume Controls, I can't unmute the output for Line-In or Mic inputs on my computer. This is important because I use that input for when I play video games using my Xbox360 connected to my monitor.
I agree with the LFD, ubuntu 9.10 has a lot going for it, but not being able to change the login screen really annoys me. This is usually the first thing I do, just to make my computer feel like my computer, instead of feeling like any computer. it's the reason I use linux - because it lets me do whatever I want whenever I want. I know there's workarounds to getting it to look like you want it, but why make it so difficult / why change it in the first place?
first of all you idiots are talking about we need our guns because in case of attempted "government overthrow" well police brutalities happen every day so why are they not being used evidentially thats just an excuse
second of all if your not pro choice don't talk about rights if you dont agree with all of them and the funny thing is babies are killed more by guns than abortion but you want to outlaw abortion? when its done in a professsional way versus blood bath
and lastly the FBI report 1% pecent of gun crime are justfiable out of 70%!!!
If you don't want personal liberty and don't have the stomach for protecting yourself move to Great Britain- leave us here to fend for ourselves- we will be fine thank you!
Nope never ban handguns!!! Why do you think the US has never been invaded? Think about that for a sec. Nuff said!
Czechbikr - 14 years ago
The move to ban handguns is the beginning of all gun control. It is not about guns or crime but rather about power. Many governments must have the power to absolutely control their populations: think China, North Korea and other totalitarian governments now, and Nazi Germany and the USSR in recent history. The 2nd Amendment in the USA was as much to allow citizens to protect themselves from wild animals and crime, but also against the government. If curbs are allowed on the 2nd Amendment, then the others will follow in short order.
Well I dont think so that all hand guns should be banned folks.
Richard Klaus - 14 years ago
Kind of turned into an interesting discussion here. Let me say first, I support a persons right to defend themselves. OK having said that.
The handgun genie is out of the bottle . If any government roundup of handguns is attempted it wont work. Sure some people will turn in their firearms, but don't think for a second that gang members and drug dealers will be standing in that line.
What you will manage to do, is create for the bad guys, a free fire zone. They will know that the chances of any home owner being able to respond in kind to an invasion will be about ZERO.
The other problem that no government can address. With my limited mechanical skills, I could go out to my shop and make a usable single shot handgun in a few hours. Give me a week with the small milling machine, and lathe, and I'll have you a Revolver, or Semi-Auto.
Anybody with a basic machine shop can build most anything, so a total gun ban, just isn't going to happen.
Best you can hope for at this point is full education in gun safety. At least then you don't have people hurting themselves because they don't know any better.
Yes, in a perfect world we wouldn't have guns, bad people, and tofu would taste just like pizza. We don't live in a perfect world, Deal With It.
Mark - 14 years ago
Two points:
(1) It is now extremely unlikely that handguns will ever be banned in the US since the Supreme Court has stated that we have a constitutional right to own them. This precedent is so clear that even the most mealy-mouthed liberal justices would be hard pressed to overturn it; furthermore constitutional amendments to abrogate the 2nd and rule that the 9th does not protect a natural right to keep and bear arms are highly unlikely to pass due to absence of popular support.
(2) The National Academy of Sciences and the CDC have done extensive studies of the relationship between guns and violent crime and found NO EVIDENCE that gun ownerhip leads to any increase, nor that any kind of gun control has any effect.
gunlovingirl - 14 years ago
Why don't we just hand the guns to the bad gys, who WILL still be able to get their hands on them to commit crimes. I think the more logical idea is allowing citizens to defend themselves from these scumbags.
I guarantee if shit hit the fan tomorrow, half of you saying ban handguns would be knocking at the door of your gun owning neighbors for help.
America was founded by people who owned guns. America was built by people who own guns. America is defended by people who own guns.
Lets cut the crap, ok. How about we ban all things deemed dangerous by someone else.......cars, pools, large breed dogs (oh wait, that's already being done in some states), fatty foods, kitchen knives, cigarettes (oops my bad, that's already being done too). See where I'm going with this? Lots of things are dangerous in the hands of an irresponsible person. But those of us that are responsible shouldn't be held accountable because of some jackoff who can't put down his phone long enough to not text while driving. Or his brother who shows off with a loaded pistol after he's had 14 beers. Idiots are everywhere, and they don't all carry guns when they hurt or kill someone else.
John Landry - 14 years ago
You foriegners are a bunch of pussies. Take away a man/woman's RIGHT to defend themselves and their families and this great land becomes another third world hell hole like the one millions are leaving in droves. Crime can't be stopped with laws, criminals DON'T care.
William Munny - 14 years ago
No. Criminals would love for handguns to be banned, because it ensures that mostly everyone will be unarmed. The thing most people don't realize is that gun control does not curtail the criminal market. It doesn't make it harder for criminals to obtain guns at all. They aren't obtaining them at stores and gun shows, like the anti-gun politicians want you to think. The small timers get them from all-too-trusting friends or relatives, who don't understand the law, or don't know how to say no. The hardcore ones buy them from black market vendors, and that supply generally comes from overseas. What we need are stricter punishments for those who blatantly violate the law, and in order to eliminate ignorance, we need to spell out the law in big, bold letters for everyone to see. Gun control only serves to disarm law abiding citizens.
big papi - 14 years ago
take all the guns and send them off into space.... then we can fight like real men with swords and shields....
SPARTA
CG - 14 years ago
If you don't think hand guns should be allowed to be owned by the law abiding public citizenry, then move to another country! I'm sick of people trying to deliberately misinterpret the US Constitution, which protects their very rights to live free in this country. If you don't agree with the Bill of Rights, the 1st 10 amendments of our constitution then get out! That includes the 2nd amendment!
I carry a gun for self defense and sport shooting. If you don't like it, too bad. Stop attempting to dictate policy that interferes with my right to self defense. I
Todd - 14 years ago
For those that want to ban guns. You do realize the only people you will be taking them away from are the law abiding citizens... right? Criminals don't follow the laws now. That's why they are criminals. What makes you think by banning guns, the criminals will all of a sudden get rid of them?
For those that say handguns are just for killing. Please take a look around and see that it's a sport. An Olympic sport at that. Thousands of people enjoy pistol shooting as a sport and a hobby.
Ban guns, what's next? Banning cars that go faster than the speed limit? No use for those. Anything that goes faster is meant to break the law. People are dying everyday in car accidents caused by speed. Is it the cars fault? or the person driving it.
Use some common sense. Just because you don't like it, means it should be banned. What do you do, that I may not like. Should it be banned?
DaGroaner - 14 years ago
What a bunch of whiny little sheep. "Handguns are scary". Criminals love pathetic little pansies like you hysterical anti-gun mopes. The fact that you losers are too cowardly to defend yourselves doesn't give you the right to prevent others from defending themselves. Now go cower in fear and STFU.
Kraig - 14 years ago
No one cares what is done in the UK or Europe as a whole. In case you forgot, America began when we decided to flee the tyranny imposed by socialist hippies in Europe. UK? Thanks but no thanks.....
Matt - 14 years ago
No, England should be banned.
Jim - 14 years ago
Yes handguns are banned in the UK, so did that stop violence? If so, why do they now want to ban knives with pointy ends and swap out pint glasses for plastic ones? Getting rid of handguns will just ensure that soccer moms and senior citizens cannot be on equal footing with criminals. As far as disgruntled employees, most companies have a no weapons policy, assuring that no nutcase would ever meet armed resistance. The last time I checked, it was still illegal to someone, and apparently that hasn't stopped any criminals yet. I doubt handgun control would do anything more than give criminals an edge.
Clay - 14 years ago
To the citizens of countries where firearms ownership is banned or severely restricted:
What is it like to live in a society where the government doesn't trust its citizens to be constitutionally armed? (And recognized as a God-given right instead of a privilege granted by the State)
Would you like to have the constitutional right to keep and bear arms for any reason like citizens of the United States?
Skans - 14 years ago
All handguns should be legal and available for ownership by all US Citizens as are hammers or screw drivers. I also believe that US Citizens should be permitted to own machine guns and any other type of firearm that our Military can use, in addition to firearms for sporting and hunting purposes.
I don't care what folks in England. They are Socialists. They are nanny-state fools that think that their police and army will protect them from meatheads, thuggs, criminals, maffia, other tyranical nations and their own nanny-state government. They are idiots, fools, lemmings and dopes. Germany smashed their island to ruins in WWII and it will most certainly happen again. Maybe 1000 years from now, the remaining inhabitants of the island formerly known as England, UK, etc. will have the sense to pass a "2nd Amendment" similar or better than the one the US has.
If we could somehow "uninvent" firearms, and assuming that no other equally effective tools were invented in their place, the world *might* be a better place.
But that is and can only ever be a philosophical exploration.
Firearms have been invented, and that cannot be undone. They are actually extremely simple mechanical devices, meaning that even if we could do the impossible and gather up every firearm ever made and melt them all down, anybody with just a little bit of machining or metalworking knowledge could design and build a functional and effective firearm in their basement with spare time.
Whenever a shooting occurs, people have a reactionary and irrational response claiming that "if only we had effective gun control, this madman could never have even gotten a gun in the first place, and these senseless murders could never have occured".
It's unfortunately not that simple. Many people, despite concrete evidence proving it as fact, are incapable of realizing that more guns does not equal more crime, and that less guns does not equal less crime.
Food for thought:
Every single US state that has in the past 20 years relaxed restrictions on gun ownership and concealed carry by honest, law-abiding citizens has seen their violent crime rates decrease.
Every single US state that has in the past 20 years passed increased restrictions on gun ownership by honest, law-abiding citizens has seen their violent crime rates increase.
Every mass shooting in recent history has occurred in "gun-free zones". But obviously, the only people who followed these restrictions are the honest and law-abiding folks. Gun-free zones did nothing to prevent someone with ill intention -- because of mental illness, the desire to seek revenge on supposed wrongs, or any other reason -- from bringing a gun into these supposed "save havens" and murdering scores of innocent people.
When honest, law-abiding citizens who have received training on the safe and proper use of firearms are allowed to carry concealed firearms, it makes criminals think twice before preying on innocent victims. When a criminal does not know whether or not their target has an effective means of stopping them, it is more difficult for them to commit violent and horrible crimes.
Many citizens have received more extensive training with firearms, and practice more often to retain their skills using firearms safely, than what most law enforcement officers. Police officers receive minimal instruction and training on using firearms, and generally only fire their weapons once a year during "requalification" (which is rather scarily easy to pass). Yet few people question their ability to use firearms effectively and safely.
Why should honest and law-abiding citizens who are more heavily trained than most police officers, and practice regularly to maintain their marksmanship, not be allowed to own and carry firearms?
Why do we allow and trust politicians who have never even held a firearm to craft "reasonable gun control legislation" when they know absolutely nothing about what they are legislating?
The bottom line is this: every human has the undeniable right to defend his or her own life when it is threatened. Firearms are tools that have been proven to be effective for self-defense. Limiting the ownership or carrying of firearms by law-abiding citizens is to refuse honest people of the basic right to self-defense.
How can anyone honestly believe that doing so is in any way a good idea?
Tom - 14 years ago
Gun Control = OSHA for criminals.
Keep your hands off my gun rights OR ELSE!!!!!!!!!!!
Tom - 14 years ago
What part of "Shall Not Be Infringed" do you not understand?
Steven, your country has TWICE disarmed its citizens, once before WWII and recently in the past decade. Do you Brits not learn from history that removing the ability for peaceable people to defend themselves places the entire country at risk?
Don't come knocking on our doors asking for guns when your country falls prey to outside forces, or inside forces for that matter. We bailed you out once, don't count on it happening again.
My right to own a gun does not come from my government......DO YOU GET THAT? I'll repeat it just so it LOUD AND CLEAR: MY RIGHT TO OWN A GUN...ANY GUN, DOES NOT COME FROM MY GOVERNMENT and therefore they do not have the authority to diminids that right in any way.
When guns are outlawed, I'll become an outlaw. If government knows whats good for them, they'll drop the subject PERMANENTLY.
Jeff Tatarin - 14 years ago
As a gun owner, I understand the responsibility of safe gun practices. However, it is to my disappointment many use guns for evil and to inflict pain and harm to innocent people. Unfortunately this issue can't be solved by banning guns because generally speaking any law that regulates firearm ownership only handicaps legal gun owners and does nothing to solve the problem of malicious firearm use. Reason being: if guns are banned, legal citizens like me can't buy them but criminals will look for different avenues to acquire them, such as theft or illegal smuggling from outside foreign sources.
The concept of reducing firearm ownership would actually fuel a criminals interest to acquire such weapons as less people are able to take proper measures to defend themselves.
Surely everyone would agree that if guns were never invented there would be no gun violence or crimes. However that is not the case and will never be the case. The only way to fight fire with fire at this point is to do whatever necessary to restrict the gun purchasing abilities of criminals and to educate and properly train legal citizens of safe and responsible gun ownership and usage.
In my opinion, no politician can do a worse injustice to Man Kind than to deny the ability of an honest law abiding citizen to protect himself/family.
Jack S. - 14 years ago
Wow, there are some dumb comments on here. If you ban guns, only criminals will have them . . . criminals, by definition, ignore laws. If a criminal is willing to use a gun in a crime, he's willing to kill with it, and if he's willing to murder (typical sentence 15 years to life/death penalty) what incentive does he have to obey a lesser law with a lighter sentence (typical firearms law violation sentence 5 years)?
Arguments discussing increased potential for suicide, accidents with kids, etc are mindless arguments for a nanny state mentality. I'm sorry, but I don't think we should legislate our every action in life to account for the lowest common denominator human being in society. Suicidal folks can always find a numerous alternative ways to kill themselves . . . heck, the internet has websites and newsgroups devoted to studying and promoting the effectiveness of different means (alt.suicide.holiday). If you can't be responsible parent, maybe it's best if you don't pollute the gene pool with offspring.
No study has shown a gun control leading to a drop in crime. In fact, most studies show a correlation between stronger gun control laws and an increase in crime rates and, conversely, a increased gun ownership and legalizing of concealed carrying of guns with a decrease in violent crime. For a study on the latter, google for info on the drop in Florida's violent crime rate (rapes, muggings, murders, robbery, etc) when it made it easier to legally carry a concealed firearm.
Here's a controversial one to stir the pot: Studies have shown that, per capita, black people commit a disproportionate percentage of all violent crime. Thus, theoretically, fewer black people would lead to less violent crime.
Maybe we should go ahead and ban cell phones because people get killed because of others driving with them? Give me a break and stop trying to take away liberty and the people's right to keep and bear arms.
JoseyWales - 14 years ago
I'm surprised nobody has mentioned the fact that handguns are used in the Olympic games. Plus countless colleges and univerisities across America have pistol/rifle targetshooting teams. The statement: "the only use for a handgun is to kill" posted here by several people is simply incorrect.
Yale has a pistol team (they use real handguns and real bullets).
MIT has a rifle team.
Oh and to the ignoramus that thinks "Hand guns are typically not used in hunting animals" you are flat out wrong.
So many uninformed people here.
Bill - 14 years ago
Firearms are protected under the 2nd Amendment. Period. Supreme Court already upheld that for DC. Besides, they are prolific in our country. I am a legal gun owner, and have been for 20 years. I will be DAMNED if they force me to give up my firearms-they need to work on prosecuting and COMMITTING criminals first-the government fails to protect their people, the people should keep the right to protect themselves. Lets face it-criminals could give a crap about the law-making handguns illegal doesnt do anything to prevent them from getting them-look at FBI statistics for handgun violence in the DC area-their ban didnt do crap. Why disarm those of us legally allowed to carry it? Why not keep those who commit crimes with firearms in jail? I understand I am using logic here, and that largely escapes most politicians, but how many people are killed with cars each year? And we license 16 year olds....got after the CRIMINAL, not the TOOL.
Clay - 14 years ago
So who is going to ban handguns? Washington DC tried and the US Supreme Court in the Heller Decision struck the law down as unconstitutional. Maybe a city or state should pass a law against freedom of speech. Why wouldn't that be legal, according to the nitwits and "journalists" who display an inordinate fear of personal responsibility for self defense?
There's a legal way to ban firearms in the US; pass a constitutional amendment. We could then pass another constitutional amendment banning freedom of speech. That's exactly the direction the Leftist intend to go, so it's logical their first step is to outlaw firearms.
The US Founding Fathers knew what they were doing and only the most foolish or stupid of our citizens would support giving up constitutional rights in favor of an overbearing, oppressive State.
Steve - 14 years ago
After a quick scan of these comments, I noticed something. All of the anti-gun comments included no statistics, cited sources, etc, but a fair number of the pro-gun comments did. Doesn't that tell you something?
Rob - 14 years ago
We tried outlawing alcohol once.
Result:
Birth of organized crime
Civil rebellion
More violence (gang warfare)
The Kennedy's
Government corruption
So yeah, banning handguns sounds like a real winner.
Jared - 14 years ago
Stephen: do us a favor, and stay there in Britain, where the murder rate has gone up and up after you banned handguns.
HK45Mark23 - 14 years ago
Let us ban all criminals!!! How about making criminals illegal!!!
Wally - 14 years ago
I think the Jews might have liked to have the freedom of handgun ownership back when they were being herded-up.
Think about this for a second, for every car you see in the USA, there is a gun. The estimate of guns in the USA is about the same as the amount of cars.
Trying to ban them would be silly. They don't go bad, they're here forever.
BulgarWheat - 14 years ago
America was founded by armed people. Being armed has saved my life on more than a few occasions, in the military and out of the military.
To trust a government, any government with the safety of myself and my family is insane.
You go your way, I'll go mine.
david a. - 14 years ago
Sigh...so many ill informed comments.
1. HANDGUNS MAKE IT EASIER TO KILL PEOPLE. If you are murdered, would your dying thought be, "Well, at least they had to work hard for it?" Irrelevant. But if you must know, the past ten years in the U.S., about 8,500 a year are killed with handguns vs. about 5,500 killed without a firearm. (U.S. Bureau of Justice) [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ushomicidesbyweapon.svg[/url]
That's still a lot of non-gun murders.
2. HANDGUNS ARE ONLY USED TO KILL PEOPLE.
While about 8,500 a year are murdered with handguns in the U.S., Defensive Gun Uses annually in the U.S. range from 700,000 to 2.5 million, depending on who you ask. [url]http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcdguse.html[/url]. Guns seem to defend MANY more people than they kill.
3. MORE GUNS EQUAL MORE MURDERS.
Since 2001, gun ownership has risen Yet since 1994, U.S. homicide rates dropped significantly. [url]http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/hmrt.htm#counts[/url]
4. MORE GUNS EQUAL MORE SUICIDES.
Simply wrong.
[url]http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcgvintl.html[/url]
5. IF PEOPLE HAVE GUNS ON THEM, EVERY ARGUMENT WILL END IN A GUNFIGHT.
From 1993 to 2006, the number of states with easy access to concealed carry permits increased from 17 to 39.
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rtc.gif[/url]
[url]http://www.nraila.org/images/rtcmaplg.jpg[/url]
As noted, the number of homicides reduced in the same periodIf you ban guns, we will simply revert to the old way, which is that larger men will have the advantage of force over smaller men, younger men over older men, healthy men over infirm men, a group of men over a single man, and, of course a man will have an advantage against women.
IF YOU REALLY WANT TO REDUCE MURDERS make violent criminals serve their sentences. Every month in the U.S. we hear of a horrific tragedy caused by a felon with a firearm. Which do you prefer, violent criminals released early into your neighborhood as long as YOUR ability to own firearms is restricted, or all your law-abiding neighbors free to own guns, but the criminals locked up?
John - 14 years ago
No, firearms are not the cause of crime in my country(America). One should not compare two countries and note a difference in gun laws and crime rate and then proceed to imply that one caused the other. Correlation simply does not equal causation. Instead of comparing two countries, with MANY variables, why don't we compare states in the US with restrictive gun laws and those without? For example, California, New York, DC and Detroit have strict gun laws. If you do the research, you will see that they have some of the highest crime rates in the US. As a matter of fact, Detroit and DC were considered the "murder capitals". Now, states with fewer gun laws certainly aren't immune from crime, but this hardly bolsters the argument for more restrictive gun laws. Strict gun laws seem to have little effect or a negative effect on crime rate in the US. John Stossel also has some great videos about gun control on youtube.com. One could also visit guncite.com to read some pro-2A arguments. Penn & Teller have done a video on gun control for their show "B.S."(didn't want to spell it out here), but it's not a serious show.
So what about the UK before and after strict laws? Do they work so well there that we should seek to copy them in the US despite the fact that they are against the constitution? Lets see:
I could search more, and I have read more than those pages, but It isn't worth my time. Suffice it to say that gun control has little positive effect on the crime rate of any jurisdiction. People are scared of the power that guns give a person, which is understandable and no one should be forced to own a gun. However, stating that I should give up my right to self defense because you are scared of guns is taking it a bit far. I'm not even going to get into the whole "assault weapon" debacle. Just know that by voting "yes" in this poll, you are doing nothing to stop crime and are only limiting the rights of those who will follow the law. It's merely feel-good legislation to win votes for politicians. Want to save lives? Stop needless wars and give to charity. Hell, there are many things that are more effective than gun laws in that regard. If you must deal with guns, promote gun safety education, that's something both sides agree with.
klmw12 - 14 years ago
You people who talk about knives have no clue. I could walk up to you and quite easily kill you with a knife before you even knew what happened.
People only die from getting hit by stray bullets because the shooter doesn't know what they are doing. Gun fights happen at very short distances, usually within a few feet. EVERYONE should own a handgun or two and learn how to use them! You must train train train!
ebeck - 14 years ago
For the last 30 years in America the number of guns per capita has risen every year.
Every year the crime rate per capita has fallen, our FBI has statistics to support this statement. That includes major crimes of murder, rape, assult and even thief.
The anti-gunners don't know what to do with these facts, it flys in the face of their "un-reason" and "un-logic".
The U.K. and Europe had\has laws that pushed people to the shores of North America, we here understand that government intervention is not something we need at great depth, that giving freedoms (like gun ownership) comes with the price of the occassional whacko blasting out an office. More people are killed by cigarettes and cars (and not combined) than by guns here. Maybe the rest of the ostrich-head-stuck-in-the-sand-socialistic-world should ban those first in their countries and afterwards come talk to me about my gun ownership.
God gave you the gift of life, that gift should not be given up easily. I believe God expects me to struggle to survive, part of that is defending my right to live if attacked and protecting those who are innocent and weaker than I. That's why I have a concealed carry permit.
fearless - 14 years ago
The only thing Brits need to know about Americans and guns is that Americans with guns have either been kicking their arses, or Americans with guns have been saving their arses.
DStinson - 14 years ago
If we give up our firearms as law abiding citizens of the USA, the only people with firearms will be the same criminals that have them now illegally, and the terrorist that would love nothing less than for us all to die. Turning the balance of power to them.
Let’s not forget giving the Government the total power, which would make us as helpless as Englands general public. We haven’t forgotten the lessons the British taught us now have we?
"Let the English roll over and die like sheep, because while you are reading this your enemy is training."
Airborne Infantryman - 14 years ago
Here's food for thought-
Your enjoying a nice evening at home with your wife, when you hear glass break in your back room. You have you wife call 911 while you investigate- no use; phone lines been cut. You go to investigate, and are met by two men with guns You and your wife are rounded up, and one man proceeds to ransack the house, while the other then proceeds to beat you to the floor, then rape your wife in front of you, only to put a bullet in her head after he's done. The other comes in, and ends your life.
Would you like to have had a handgun to defend your family? I sure as heck you, which is why I do. There are 3 types of people in this world- The Wolf (Criminals), The Sheep Dog (Protectors), and Sheep (Common People). Someone has to watch over the flock. I fall under the Sheep Dog category.
Think long and hard about something like this; because you may just find yourself being stabbed to death, rather than shot. Criminals will kill you any way they can.
dave - 14 years ago
No handguns should not be banned. In fact every legal citizen should be required to have one and carry it. You've got to be living in koolaid land if you think eliminating them will cause crime to go down. Crime will increase as it has here in my city. Criminals will always be armed and as society is coddled more and more you will only see more people entitled to take what they want and if you or your family gets in the way so be it.
Our founding fathers had the foresight to put the 2 amendment in our Bill of Rights. The reason was they knew what it was to live in in a sociaty where the Goverment will run over the people. If you aren't aware of it we are being run over by our current leadership.
Rights are taken each day from the legal law abiding and given to those that are illegal and those that seek to do us harm. Releasing cirminals from prison who go on to only do more crime, enabled by what they have learned during their short time incarceration. When seconds count I don't want to wait 20 minites for police to respond. We have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Happiness includes protecting ones family and life. Now....go back to your koolaid and cower in corner when someone realizes you are unarmed and they want what you have.
Soundguy - 14 years ago
Pandora's box everyone. If guns had never existed it might be simple to never introduce them. The world would be much the same... just a gun free one. Something else would have taken their place. In this world, where guns exist and will never go away, knowing how to use them properly and when not to use them is a really good skill to have. It should always be your personal choice... and always mine. I vote NO to gun bans.
David - 14 years ago
WHAT IF THEY DID BAN HANDGUNS... YOU THINK KNIVES WOULD BE BETTER YOU KNOW HOW BAD THAT WOULD FUCKING HURT YOU WOULD BE SUFFERING INSTEAD OF BEING KILLED BEFORE YOU KNEW WITH A GUN, WITH A KNIFE YOU WOULD NOT ONLY KNOW YOU WERE PROBABLY GOING TO DIE BUT YOU WOULD SUFFER UNTIL YOU DID DIE AND THATS SUPPOSE TO BE BETTER? AT LEAST IF SOMEONE DID KILL I RATHER NOT KNOWN IT
CARS KILL PEOPLE MAYBE WE SHOULD GO BACK TO HORSES SINCE EVERYONE WANTS TO GO BACK TO SWORDS AND SHIELDS
david - 14 years ago
Goverment governs best which governs least
Gary - 14 years ago
Hell no! Do not ban our hand guns. My feeling ? I want every law abiding individual that has been properly trained to be allowed to carry a loaded weapon.The bastard that just blew the four law officers away was'nt suppose to have a weapon was he? Maybe if some of the other people in the coffee shop had their weapon they could have helped..Maybe one ore more of the officers could be with us. Yes there are all kinds of what if's but the overall matter is ..we need a way to defend ourself. The law cannot be there untill after the fact.
Elena - 14 years ago
I just do not at all see the "need" of guns. They make living more dangerous, and for "protection" if there were no guns, all we'd really need would be knives. Guns make it so you can attack, and even kill much quicker, easier and from further distances. With knives, you have more time to react and they would have to actually get up close and personal, so if somebody was murdered by being stabbed, there'd be no question on if it were an accident, unlike with guns and the "stray bullets" killing innocent people that just happened to be in the way.Honestly, I don't think we need them unless zombies were to attack.
PLATFORM
1. As Independents, we seek liberty; in which all individuals are sovereign over their own lives and no one is forced to sacrifice his or her values for the benefit of others.
2. We believe that respect for individual rights is the essential precondition for a free and prosperous world, and that only through freedom can peace and prosperity be realized.
3. We hold that all individuals have the right to exercise sole dominion over their own lives, and have the right to live in whatever manner they choose, so long as they do not forcibly interfere with the equal right of others to live in whatever manner they choose.
4. Individuals should be free to make choices for themselves and to accept responsibility for the consequences of the choices they make. No individual, group, or government may initiate force against any other individual, group, or government. Our support of an individual's right to make choices in life does not mean that we necessarily approve or disapprove of those choices.
5. We support full freedom of expression and oppose government censorship, regulation or control of communications media and technology. We favor the freedom to engage in or abstain from any religious activities that do not violate the rights of others. We oppose government actions which either aid or attack any religion.
6. Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the rights of individuals by government.
7. Recognizing that abortion is a sensitive issue, we believe that government should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for their conscientious consideration.
8. Government exists to protect the rights of every individual including life, liberty and property. We assert the common-law right of juries to judge not only the facts but also the justice of the law.
9. We affirm the right to keep and bear arms, and oppose the prosecution of individuals for exercising their rights of self-defense. We oppose all laws at any level of government requiring registration of, or restricting, the ownership, manufacture, or transfer or sale of firearms or ammunition.
10. The only proper role of government in the economic realm is to protect property rights, adjudicate disputes, and provide a legal framework in which voluntary trade is protected. All efforts by government to redistribute wealth, or to control or manage trade, are improper in a free society.
11. Property rights are entitled to the same protection as all other human rights. The owners of property have the full right to control, use, dispose of, or in any manner enjoy, their property without interference, until and unless the exercise of their control infringes the valid rights of others.
12. We support a clean and healthy environment and sensible use of our natural resources. Private landowners and conservation groups have a vested interest in maintaining natural resources. Free markets and property rights stimulate the technological innovations and behavioral changes required to protect our environment and ecosystems. We realize that our planet's climate is constantly changing, but environmental advocates and social pressure are the most effective means of changing public behavior.
13. All persons are entitled to keep the fruits of their labor. We call for the repeal of the income tax, the abolishment of the Internal Revenue Service and all federal programs and services not required under the U.S. Constitution. We oppose any legal requirements forcing employers to serve as tax collectors. Government should not incur debt, which burdens future generations without their consent. We support the passage of a "Balanced Budget Amendment" to the U.S. Constitution, provided that the budget is balanced exclusively by cutting expenditures, and not by raising taxes.
14. We support the right of free persons to associate or not associate in lab
i think that guns should be used for safety and not for
any other reason
Stephen - 14 years ago
I've grown up with guns all my life, too. My parents have taught me how to use them, but also taught me that they are not toys. Even if they do ban handguns, criminals will still have them (and use them). Why should we not be able to defend ourselves against someone that has something that we're not allowed to have? Even if we did ban all handguns, disarm everyone (which wouldn't be possible), and stop manufacturing handguns, people would go back to using swords and shields. Handguns should not be banned. So just chill out, all of you tree-hugging freaks.
William Richison - 14 years ago
If some scum bag breaks into my house at 1:00 AM or so, with a gun , knife or crowbar, should I blow his ass away with my 38 automatic, hollow points, or let him blow mine ass away.
I have had a hand gun,(and shot gun) for nearly 20 yeas and never fired or carried out of my house except in my motor home.
But don't break into my house you scumbags, cause I do know how to fire--
As long as guns are made, they somehow will be available. the problem with gun trouble, becomes cultural on a small to big scale. neighbourhood,regional,state wide,country or continent. As a people we should never encourage or promote the use of a gun on any human being,unless ultimately in self defence. in threat for your life or a life of an innocent. not shooting someone over money,drugs,oil,sex,or you thought they where armed but it ended up being a mobile phone or a comb. no way. Using a gun on another human should be a very questionable offence, regardless of who you are. not on these gun things at humans.
Lou - 14 years ago
The reason the vote is so close is because we have allowed the wussies in the U.K. to vote. They have allowed their Crown/government to disarm them. They are now a people who cannot defend themselves against a tyranny.
Banning handguns? Limeys. Check this out. If you do your homework and do it right, you will realize that most gun crimes in the U.S. happen where the gun laws are strictest. Don't believe me? Google it and find out. Look at Australia. Ask them what happened when all their guns were taken away. The breaking and entering skyrocketed to an all time high!
Come to AZ and the crooks here think twice about breaking into homes. Even the Katrina victims that came here thought twice about committing a crime. In Houston, they devastated that city with crime. Here, no go. Why? Because some American, with his constitutional given powers, was ready to defend his property, family and any innocent bystander.
You don't want handguns in Great Britain? Fine, don't. But don't try to impose you libearl ideology on us. No wonder the Germans almost kicked your asses. You are all a bunch of pussies. Grow a set.
Ben - 14 years ago
WHEN GUNS ARE OUTLAWED
ONLY OUTLAWS WILL HAVE GUNS !!
Jeff - 14 years ago
I can kill with a ball point pen, for christs sake! A gun is just a little more efficient.
wtf-notmine - 14 years ago
Oh, I see, nothing but criminals with THEIR guns. What a rosy picture that is!
I'll keep mine thank you.
michael - 14 years ago
no they shouldnt be banned is yal crazie
Amir - 14 years ago
hand pump hay dabi ja, chewgam hay jabi ja.... acha hands gun chalai jaaaaa..........
Once something is legal it is almost impossible to ban it, at least in a timely manner.
It would be easier to move for banning of guns (in general all weapons) possession outside of your home.
In your premises you can do whatever you like, but when in a public place only authorised people should be allowed to be in possession of a weapon. If you take your weapon out, it is likely to be for only one thing and that is not protection.
Me Me - 14 years ago
guns just make it eazy i went to jail for using a KNIFE so you want to ban them
george - 14 years ago
If you don't want personal liberty and don't have the stomach for protecting yourself move to Great Britain- leave us here to fend for ourselves- we will be fine thank you!
Suman - The UK has already been controlled by the government. You can't defend yourself from tyrant leaders who want nothing but to rule you. I have a few UK friends that have moved here and they enjoy their right to use guns. They go out and practice shooting often. They aren't thugs but citizens who want to protect their family and friends from harm from other intruders that might break into their home or threaten their family. In your situation, you would just have to witness a criminal (who illegal obtained a gun) murder your entire family while you are helpless at stopping the bloodshed. I believe it's Switzerland that requires mandatory gun ownership. They have lower crimes than some of the bigger countries. Either way, like others have said, guns don't kill people, people do and helping society would have a better long-term impact then banning guns.
Jess C. - Schools ban guns and are no gun zones. To counter your argument, when a shooting spree happens, no one at the school has a gun to actually shoot the killer from causing more mayhem. More lives could of been saved then lost. Perhaps you need to look at the sickness in society because anything can become a weapon if used from a sick/crazy individual. After all, students don't have a very great role model when the government spends hundreds of billions of dollars to build robotic machines that kill people and then eat their remains to power themselves. That many could of worked on improving the social structure and integrity of the people over building machines to kill other people the government doesn't like.
There is no reason that regular citizens should be able to walk the streets with a gun. You want to hunt, fine. But don't let these kids walk the halls of a school and kill innocent kids. I understand that if someone else had a gun, they could have shot the murderer, but if no one had a gun, no one would have to die.
L M - 14 years ago
Everyone should have the responsibility to have a firearm to protect bothe themself and their loved ones. Do not depend on the government for that. The states and countries that do not allow people to own firearmes have higher crime rates
Burglaries occur in the afternoon in the US because they know most people are not home, in Britain they occur in the evening when they the occupants are home because they know most occupants do not have a firearm(s) for their protection. I'll take the good old USA and keep my firearms and do my own protecting.
star - 14 years ago
I really think you shouldn't ban guns well i think if u have full experience of how to use it then you should keep it but if u don't then i guess ..all im saying is you know how to use keep u dont loose my grandpa has a gun under his pillow 4 protection key word protection so dont ban it
Ayla - 14 years ago
Gun control simply disarms the crooks potential victims, making crime a safer occupation, and hence one that can be indulged in more widely by more crooks.
If you are going to look at the record, studies have already shown that allowing law-abiding citizens to own and carry concealed weapons tends to produce less violence, NOT more.
Killings seldom start where someone else is known in advance to be carrying a gun.
Have you ever heard of one of these supposedly "senseless" killers opening fire on a gathering of members of the National Rifle Association? They always seem to have better sense than to do that.
When people ask emotionally, "How can we stop these things?" the most straightforward answer is to ask:
How was it in fact stopped? It was stopped, like most shooting sprees, by the arrival on the scene of other people with guns.
diamond - 14 years ago
handguns should always be legal
URKiddinMee - 14 years ago
It's no damned wonder you Limey's are letting your country be over run by a bunch of lunatic ragheads judging from the pathetic comments on this page. You are all wussies and you'd be speaking German today if it weren't for the US.
Handguns should not be banned in the united states. Owning them is a right that has been given to us by our founding fathers. in sthe Second Amendment it says. "The right of the people to own and bear arms shall not be infringed."
Herb Gay - 14 years ago
I have not seen a hand gun by it's self kill anyone, if you want to ban something banned the the person using it. our laws would handle this problem if the judges would keep these people in jail, the Alutian Islands Have abandon bases that would provide these sicko's with a new home for life.
Corine - 14 years ago
I grew up with guns in the house. My parents taught us respect for a weapon...not just guns. Respect and knowledge. We were also taught that using your words and if necessary, your hands could resolve most conflict. Oh...I forgot we live in a society of cowards that hide behind the gun.
kijaro - 15 years ago
most of people are stupid morons. it's too dangerous to legalize hand guns.
and even person is not a stupid moron he can make a mistake...
unrecoverable mistake.
You bet I have a gun that I keep in my bedroom.(I have no children) I also have mace in my purse.
Cheryl - 15 years ago
I wouldn't be hear if I didn't have my gun as it saved me from some very bad things over the years and I will not be without my 38.
Kaycee - 15 years ago
Bobby, good post and I concur for the most part. The last sentence in "meaning" could be debated but the logic is relevant.
I am astounded at the closeness of the vote. Handguns should not be banned. We don't need more government governing our lives.
Suman - 15 years ago
I live in Britain where handguns are illegal. I can think of no reason, no reason at all, that handguns should be made legal.
In the case of the United States no matter how many lives having a gun may save I can only wonder how many more would be saved if there were no guns.
I realise that guns don't kill people, people kill people. But, and it's a big but, guns make it a lot easier to kill people.
03454765276
Bob D. - 15 years ago
I don't believe all guns should be banned. There are thousands upon thousands of responsible folks whom own them. I am not one of those. It seems that certain types of guns and certain types of people do the most damage.
I often wonder if people understand this question and if they do and their answer is no hand-guns should NOT be banned than; they are basically saying they agree with shooting and murdering other people.
Facts:
1. Hand guns are typically not used in hunting animals, only people!
2. Hand guns are usually found in law abiding citizen's homes by the criminal element during a robbery/break 'n enter.
3. The use of hand guns kills innocent by-standers more often than a knife or a baseball bat!
4. Those contemplating suicide will more than likely succeed if a hand gun is available at home- no intervention will save them once they pull the trigger, unlike an overdose or cutting the wrists which is not always so fatal.
5. A hand-gun in the home raises the risk of your own children dying from a gun shot substantially compared to those who don't have one.
6. A hand-gun can be more easily concealed unlike a long rifle which has not been modified.
I do not believe in banning rifles that are used for hunting, but hand-guns were created for one purpose and one purpose only...
to kill human beings.
WHAT!?OF COURSE HAND GUNS MUST BE BANNED,MUCH PEOPLE DIE BECAUSE OF PISTOLS OR SOME HAND GUNS!!!!!!!!
Sondra - 15 years ago
The problem with banning handguns is that they will still be out there, being sold illegally (as they are now) and only criminals and law enforcement agents will have access to them. I personally don't own a handgun, but I would like to buy one to keep in my home for personal protection. I hate guns; if I could change the world, I would make them non-existant for everybody, but I can't. It is unrealistic to expect banning handguns to reduce crime rates or increase the safety of American citizens- or people anywhere, for that matter. At least if they are legal, people have to apply for them and they are registered so if a crime is committed with one, it can be traced back to its owner. Instead of banning guns, they should ban bullets! Or make bullets that only knock a person out rather than kill them. They have bullets that can be maneuvered after they are shot from the gun- work on the problem from that end.
Im a card holding NRA member who owns a HK with night sights with 3 clips that would be illegal under the previous Clinton gun ban. I dont hunt, nor do I fight for the right to hunt. I fight for the right as the founders intended, and that is the right to aggressively with deadly force remove our Government should it become tyranical replacing it with a Government chosen by the Majority. It is also to fight with our Government against foreign tyranical or invading forces.
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state; The right to keep and bare arms shall not be infringed.
"A well regulated"
meaning
Trained militarily, and well disciplined, necessary to be an effective fighting force.
"militia"
that is armed citizens with their own personal weapons for the purpose of policing and or military. The National Gaurd is
"being necessary to the Security of a free state; The right to keep"
meaning
own personal Firearms.
"and bear"
meaning
the Right to carry firearms on your person
"arms"
Term for Firearms usually used in relation to war, or self defence as in when one is "armed"
"Shall not be infringed."
meaning
Government may not make any law or take any action that would limit your right to arm yourself, as it would give the government too much control over the people, where an Majority of armed population would have no reason to fear the power of the government.
Handguns should NOT be banned.
In case of Zombie outbreak.
Argument over.
Richard Klaus - 15 years ago
Jonoo: I don't think anybody was saying the rime rate in the U.K. is higher than in the U.S., but rather that it has increased over your previous rate.
To compare "apples to apples", the home invasion rate in Australia has skyrocketed since the guns where gathered up in that country. In the U.S., New York City, Washington D.C., Chicago, and L.A. have some of the most restrictive gun rules, and since putting them into effect have been rewarded with out of control crime rates. Finally look at the U.S. news. You will notice that most mass shootings occur in "Gun Free" zones, or "Victim Rich" zones.
Stephen - if that's the case, then please explain why violent crime rates *drop* in cities that mandate gun ownership?
Yes, they make it easier. However, somebody who's determined to kill can turn anything into a weapon. Hell, I could turn my laptop bag - my soft-case, empty laptop bag - into a lethal weapon (just strangle somebody with the strap).
Taking weapons from law-abiding citizens only serves to empower thugs. It may discourage a few people from crimes of passion, but even that is debatable (I'm having an argument with my wife in the living room. I decide to kill her. Do I walk past the kitchen full of sharp implements for the gun, or stab the hypothetical 'bitch?')
Moreover, it doesn't just empower the criminal thugs. Rule #1 of a dictatorship: Disarm the populace. When you're the only one with the ability and will to fight, you can take over the world with a butter knife.
Luciano - 15 years ago
People say that if handguns are banned only criminal will have then and people will not have any way to protect thenselves, but i think people are wrong, a big part of the crimes caused by guns are from normal people that got angry whith something, or sons of high class people that are drunk...
sorry if there are any english mistakes :p my english are in progress
I live in the US and firmly believe we have the right to have firearms including handguns. I also support that there should be laws to keep track of these guns and training in use and safety also. Along with proper safe keeping with in ones home. More work needs to be done to keep illegal guns out of the hands of criminals.
Jonoo - 15 years ago
OK....but here in the UK we don't have disgruntled ex-employees coming back into the office with assault rifles and taking out their old colleagues......and I would dispute that our crime rate is higher in the UK than the US....guns do kill people and so do knives...even sticks kill, you just have to work harder.
Maryellen - 15 years ago
True- Ban the handguns and only the beasts will have them.
very good wonderful
pues la de big bang de las que salen ahi pero nada como Heroes !
But the booting time has increased quite a lot...but I dont mind that since rest of the functionalities are almost perfect.
I love it. The final is considerably faster than the Betas or Alphas. My biggest (and probably only) complaint at this point is that, due to the new stupid Volume Controls, I can't unmute the output for Line-In or Mic inputs on my computer. This is important because I use that input for when I play video games using my Xbox360 connected to my monitor.
I agree with the LFD, ubuntu 9.10 has a lot going for it, but not being able to change the login screen really annoys me. This is usually the first thing I do, just to make my computer feel like my computer, instead of feeling like any computer. it's the reason I use linux - because it lets me do whatever I want whenever I want. I know there's workarounds to getting it to look like you want it, but why make it so difficult / why change it in the first place?
first of all you idiots are talking about we need our guns because in case of attempted "government overthrow" well police brutalities happen every day so why are they not being used evidentially thats just an excuse
second of all if your not pro choice don't talk about rights if you dont agree with all of them and the funny thing is babies are killed more by guns than abortion but you want to outlaw abortion? when its done in a professsional way versus blood bath
and lastly the FBI report 1% pecent of gun crime are justfiable out of 70%!!!
guns do not kill people, people kill people and by the way if they ban handguns they can pry it from my cold dead hand
If you don't want personal liberty and don't have the stomach for protecting yourself move to Great Britain- leave us here to fend for ourselves- we will be fine thank you!
Nope never ban handguns!!! Why do you think the US has never been invaded? Think about that for a sec. Nuff said!
The move to ban handguns is the beginning of all gun control. It is not about guns or crime but rather about power. Many governments must have the power to absolutely control their populations: think China, North Korea and other totalitarian governments now, and Nazi Germany and the USSR in recent history. The 2nd Amendment in the USA was as much to allow citizens to protect themselves from wild animals and crime, but also against the government. If curbs are allowed on the 2nd Amendment, then the others will follow in short order.
Well I dont think so that all hand guns should be banned folks.
Kind of turned into an interesting discussion here. Let me say first, I support a persons right to defend themselves. OK having said that.
The handgun genie is out of the bottle . If any government roundup of handguns is attempted it wont work. Sure some people will turn in their firearms, but don't think for a second that gang members and drug dealers will be standing in that line.
What you will manage to do, is create for the bad guys, a free fire zone. They will know that the chances of any home owner being able to respond in kind to an invasion will be about ZERO.
The other problem that no government can address. With my limited mechanical skills, I could go out to my shop and make a usable single shot handgun in a few hours. Give me a week with the small milling machine, and lathe, and I'll have you a Revolver, or Semi-Auto.
Anybody with a basic machine shop can build most anything, so a total gun ban, just isn't going to happen.
Best you can hope for at this point is full education in gun safety. At least then you don't have people hurting themselves because they don't know any better.
Yes, in a perfect world we wouldn't have guns, bad people, and tofu would taste just like pizza. We don't live in a perfect world, Deal With It.
Two points:
(1) It is now extremely unlikely that handguns will ever be banned in the US since the Supreme Court has stated that we have a constitutional right to own them. This precedent is so clear that even the most mealy-mouthed liberal justices would be hard pressed to overturn it; furthermore constitutional amendments to abrogate the 2nd and rule that the 9th does not protect a natural right to keep and bear arms are highly unlikely to pass due to absence of popular support.
(2) The National Academy of Sciences and the CDC have done extensive studies of the relationship between guns and violent crime and found NO EVIDENCE that gun ownerhip leads to any increase, nor that any kind of gun control has any effect.
Why don't we just hand the guns to the bad gys, who WILL still be able to get their hands on them to commit crimes. I think the more logical idea is allowing citizens to defend themselves from these scumbags.
I guarantee if shit hit the fan tomorrow, half of you saying ban handguns would be knocking at the door of your gun owning neighbors for help.
America was founded by people who owned guns. America was built by people who own guns. America is defended by people who own guns.
Lets cut the crap, ok. How about we ban all things deemed dangerous by someone else.......cars, pools, large breed dogs (oh wait, that's already being done in some states), fatty foods, kitchen knives, cigarettes (oops my bad, that's already being done too). See where I'm going with this? Lots of things are dangerous in the hands of an irresponsible person. But those of us that are responsible shouldn't be held accountable because of some jackoff who can't put down his phone long enough to not text while driving. Or his brother who shows off with a loaded pistol after he's had 14 beers. Idiots are everywhere, and they don't all carry guns when they hurt or kill someone else.
You foriegners are a bunch of pussies. Take away a man/woman's RIGHT to defend themselves and their families and this great land becomes another third world hell hole like the one millions are leaving in droves. Crime can't be stopped with laws, criminals DON'T care.
No. Criminals would love for handguns to be banned, because it ensures that mostly everyone will be unarmed. The thing most people don't realize is that gun control does not curtail the criminal market. It doesn't make it harder for criminals to obtain guns at all. They aren't obtaining them at stores and gun shows, like the anti-gun politicians want you to think. The small timers get them from all-too-trusting friends or relatives, who don't understand the law, or don't know how to say no. The hardcore ones buy them from black market vendors, and that supply generally comes from overseas. What we need are stricter punishments for those who blatantly violate the law, and in order to eliminate ignorance, we need to spell out the law in big, bold letters for everyone to see. Gun control only serves to disarm law abiding citizens.
take all the guns and send them off into space.... then we can fight like real men with swords and shields....
SPARTA
If you don't think hand guns should be allowed to be owned by the law abiding public citizenry, then move to another country! I'm sick of people trying to deliberately misinterpret the US Constitution, which protects their very rights to live free in this country. If you don't agree with the Bill of Rights, the 1st 10 amendments of our constitution then get out! That includes the 2nd amendment!
I carry a gun for self defense and sport shooting. If you don't like it, too bad. Stop attempting to dictate policy that interferes with my right to self defense. I
For those that want to ban guns. You do realize the only people you will be taking them away from are the law abiding citizens... right? Criminals don't follow the laws now. That's why they are criminals. What makes you think by banning guns, the criminals will all of a sudden get rid of them?
For those that say handguns are just for killing. Please take a look around and see that it's a sport. An Olympic sport at that. Thousands of people enjoy pistol shooting as a sport and a hobby.
Ban guns, what's next? Banning cars that go faster than the speed limit? No use for those. Anything that goes faster is meant to break the law. People are dying everyday in car accidents caused by speed. Is it the cars fault? or the person driving it.
Use some common sense. Just because you don't like it, means it should be banned. What do you do, that I may not like. Should it be banned?
What a bunch of whiny little sheep. "Handguns are scary". Criminals love pathetic little pansies like you hysterical anti-gun mopes. The fact that you losers are too cowardly to defend yourselves doesn't give you the right to prevent others from defending themselves. Now go cower in fear and STFU.
No one cares what is done in the UK or Europe as a whole. In case you forgot, America began when we decided to flee the tyranny imposed by socialist hippies in Europe. UK? Thanks but no thanks.....
No, England should be banned.
Yes handguns are banned in the UK, so did that stop violence? If so, why do they now want to ban knives with pointy ends and swap out pint glasses for plastic ones? Getting rid of handguns will just ensure that soccer moms and senior citizens cannot be on equal footing with criminals. As far as disgruntled employees, most companies have a no weapons policy, assuring that no nutcase would ever meet armed resistance. The last time I checked, it was still illegal to someone, and apparently that hasn't stopped any criminals yet. I doubt handgun control would do anything more than give criminals an edge.
To the citizens of countries where firearms ownership is banned or severely restricted:
What is it like to live in a society where the government doesn't trust its citizens to be constitutionally armed? (And recognized as a God-given right instead of a privilege granted by the State)
Would you like to have the constitutional right to keep and bear arms for any reason like citizens of the United States?
All handguns should be legal and available for ownership by all US Citizens as are hammers or screw drivers. I also believe that US Citizens should be permitted to own machine guns and any other type of firearm that our Military can use, in addition to firearms for sporting and hunting purposes.
I don't care what folks in England. They are Socialists. They are nanny-state fools that think that their police and army will protect them from meatheads, thuggs, criminals, maffia, other tyranical nations and their own nanny-state government. They are idiots, fools, lemmings and dopes. Germany smashed their island to ruins in WWII and it will most certainly happen again. Maybe 1000 years from now, the remaining inhabitants of the island formerly known as England, UK, etc. will have the sense to pass a "2nd Amendment" similar or better than the one the US has.
If we could somehow "uninvent" firearms, and assuming that no other equally effective tools were invented in their place, the world *might* be a better place.
But that is and can only ever be a philosophical exploration.
Firearms have been invented, and that cannot be undone. They are actually extremely simple mechanical devices, meaning that even if we could do the impossible and gather up every firearm ever made and melt them all down, anybody with just a little bit of machining or metalworking knowledge could design and build a functional and effective firearm in their basement with spare time.
Whenever a shooting occurs, people have a reactionary and irrational response claiming that "if only we had effective gun control, this madman could never have even gotten a gun in the first place, and these senseless murders could never have occured".
It's unfortunately not that simple. Many people, despite concrete evidence proving it as fact, are incapable of realizing that more guns does not equal more crime, and that less guns does not equal less crime.
Food for thought:
Every single US state that has in the past 20 years relaxed restrictions on gun ownership and concealed carry by honest, law-abiding citizens has seen their violent crime rates decrease.
Every single US state that has in the past 20 years passed increased restrictions on gun ownership by honest, law-abiding citizens has seen their violent crime rates increase.
Every mass shooting in recent history has occurred in "gun-free zones". But obviously, the only people who followed these restrictions are the honest and law-abiding folks. Gun-free zones did nothing to prevent someone with ill intention -- because of mental illness, the desire to seek revenge on supposed wrongs, or any other reason -- from bringing a gun into these supposed "save havens" and murdering scores of innocent people.
When honest, law-abiding citizens who have received training on the safe and proper use of firearms are allowed to carry concealed firearms, it makes criminals think twice before preying on innocent victims. When a criminal does not know whether or not their target has an effective means of stopping them, it is more difficult for them to commit violent and horrible crimes.
Many citizens have received more extensive training with firearms, and practice more often to retain their skills using firearms safely, than what most law enforcement officers. Police officers receive minimal instruction and training on using firearms, and generally only fire their weapons once a year during "requalification" (which is rather scarily easy to pass). Yet few people question their ability to use firearms effectively and safely.
Why should honest and law-abiding citizens who are more heavily trained than most police officers, and practice regularly to maintain their marksmanship, not be allowed to own and carry firearms?
Why do we allow and trust politicians who have never even held a firearm to craft "reasonable gun control legislation" when they know absolutely nothing about what they are legislating?
The bottom line is this: every human has the undeniable right to defend his or her own life when it is threatened. Firearms are tools that have been proven to be effective for self-defense. Limiting the ownership or carrying of firearms by law-abiding citizens is to refuse honest people of the basic right to self-defense.
How can anyone honestly believe that doing so is in any way a good idea?
Gun Control = OSHA for criminals.
Keep your hands off my gun rights OR ELSE!!!!!!!!!!!
What part of "Shall Not Be Infringed" do you not understand?
Steven, your country has TWICE disarmed its citizens, once before WWII and recently in the past decade. Do you Brits not learn from history that removing the ability for peaceable people to defend themselves places the entire country at risk?
Don't come knocking on our doors asking for guns when your country falls prey to outside forces, or inside forces for that matter. We bailed you out once, don't count on it happening again.
My right to own a gun does not come from my government......DO YOU GET THAT? I'll repeat it just so it LOUD AND CLEAR: MY RIGHT TO OWN A GUN...ANY GUN, DOES NOT COME FROM MY GOVERNMENT and therefore they do not have the authority to diminids that right in any way.
When guns are outlawed, I'll become an outlaw. If government knows whats good for them, they'll drop the subject PERMANENTLY.
As a gun owner, I understand the responsibility of safe gun practices. However, it is to my disappointment many use guns for evil and to inflict pain and harm to innocent people. Unfortunately this issue can't be solved by banning guns because generally speaking any law that regulates firearm ownership only handicaps legal gun owners and does nothing to solve the problem of malicious firearm use. Reason being: if guns are banned, legal citizens like me can't buy them but criminals will look for different avenues to acquire them, such as theft or illegal smuggling from outside foreign sources.
The concept of reducing firearm ownership would actually fuel a criminals interest to acquire such weapons as less people are able to take proper measures to defend themselves.
Surely everyone would agree that if guns were never invented there would be no gun violence or crimes. However that is not the case and will never be the case. The only way to fight fire with fire at this point is to do whatever necessary to restrict the gun purchasing abilities of criminals and to educate and properly train legal citizens of safe and responsible gun ownership and usage.
In my opinion, no politician can do a worse injustice to Man Kind than to deny the ability of an honest law abiding citizen to protect himself/family.
Wow, there are some dumb comments on here. If you ban guns, only criminals will have them . . . criminals, by definition, ignore laws. If a criminal is willing to use a gun in a crime, he's willing to kill with it, and if he's willing to murder (typical sentence 15 years to life/death penalty) what incentive does he have to obey a lesser law with a lighter sentence (typical firearms law violation sentence 5 years)?
Arguments discussing increased potential for suicide, accidents with kids, etc are mindless arguments for a nanny state mentality. I'm sorry, but I don't think we should legislate our every action in life to account for the lowest common denominator human being in society. Suicidal folks can always find a numerous alternative ways to kill themselves . . . heck, the internet has websites and newsgroups devoted to studying and promoting the effectiveness of different means (alt.suicide.holiday). If you can't be responsible parent, maybe it's best if you don't pollute the gene pool with offspring.
No study has shown a gun control leading to a drop in crime. In fact, most studies show a correlation between stronger gun control laws and an increase in crime rates and, conversely, a increased gun ownership and legalizing of concealed carrying of guns with a decrease in violent crime. For a study on the latter, google for info on the drop in Florida's violent crime rate (rapes, muggings, murders, robbery, etc) when it made it easier to legally carry a concealed firearm.
Here's a controversial one to stir the pot: Studies have shown that, per capita, black people commit a disproportionate percentage of all violent crime. Thus, theoretically, fewer black people would lead to less violent crime.
Maybe we should go ahead and ban cell phones because people get killed because of others driving with them? Give me a break and stop trying to take away liberty and the people's right to keep and bear arms.
I'm surprised nobody has mentioned the fact that handguns are used in the Olympic games. Plus countless colleges and univerisities across America have pistol/rifle targetshooting teams. The statement: "the only use for a handgun is to kill" posted here by several people is simply incorrect.
Yale has a pistol team (they use real handguns and real bullets).
MIT has a rifle team.
Oh and to the ignoramus that thinks "Hand guns are typically not used in hunting animals" you are flat out wrong.
So many uninformed people here.
Firearms are protected under the 2nd Amendment. Period. Supreme Court already upheld that for DC. Besides, they are prolific in our country. I am a legal gun owner, and have been for 20 years. I will be DAMNED if they force me to give up my firearms-they need to work on prosecuting and COMMITTING criminals first-the government fails to protect their people, the people should keep the right to protect themselves. Lets face it-criminals could give a crap about the law-making handguns illegal doesnt do anything to prevent them from getting them-look at FBI statistics for handgun violence in the DC area-their ban didnt do crap. Why disarm those of us legally allowed to carry it? Why not keep those who commit crimes with firearms in jail? I understand I am using logic here, and that largely escapes most politicians, but how many people are killed with cars each year? And we license 16 year olds....got after the CRIMINAL, not the TOOL.
So who is going to ban handguns? Washington DC tried and the US Supreme Court in the Heller Decision struck the law down as unconstitutional. Maybe a city or state should pass a law against freedom of speech. Why wouldn't that be legal, according to the nitwits and "journalists" who display an inordinate fear of personal responsibility for self defense?
There's a legal way to ban firearms in the US; pass a constitutional amendment. We could then pass another constitutional amendment banning freedom of speech. That's exactly the direction the Leftist intend to go, so it's logical their first step is to outlaw firearms.
The US Founding Fathers knew what they were doing and only the most foolish or stupid of our citizens would support giving up constitutional rights in favor of an overbearing, oppressive State.
After a quick scan of these comments, I noticed something. All of the anti-gun comments included no statistics, cited sources, etc, but a fair number of the pro-gun comments did. Doesn't that tell you something?
We tried outlawing alcohol once.
Result:
Birth of organized crime
Civil rebellion
More violence (gang warfare)
The Kennedy's
Government corruption
So yeah, banning handguns sounds like a real winner.
Stephen: do us a favor, and stay there in Britain, where the murder rate has gone up and up after you banned handguns.
Let us ban all criminals!!! How about making criminals illegal!!!
I think the Jews might have liked to have the freedom of handgun ownership back when they were being herded-up.
Think about this for a second, for every car you see in the USA, there is a gun. The estimate of guns in the USA is about the same as the amount of cars.
Trying to ban them would be silly. They don't go bad, they're here forever.
America was founded by armed people. Being armed has saved my life on more than a few occasions, in the military and out of the military.
To trust a government, any government with the safety of myself and my family is insane.
You go your way, I'll go mine.
Sigh...so many ill informed comments.
1. HANDGUNS MAKE IT EASIER TO KILL PEOPLE. If you are murdered, would your dying thought be, "Well, at least they had to work hard for it?" Irrelevant. But if you must know, the past ten years in the U.S., about 8,500 a year are killed with handguns vs. about 5,500 killed without a firearm. (U.S. Bureau of Justice) [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ushomicidesbyweapon.svg[/url]
That's still a lot of non-gun murders.
2. HANDGUNS ARE ONLY USED TO KILL PEOPLE.
While about 8,500 a year are murdered with handguns in the U.S., Defensive Gun Uses annually in the U.S. range from 700,000 to 2.5 million, depending on who you ask. [url]http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcdguse.html[/url]. Guns seem to defend MANY more people than they kill.
3. MORE GUNS EQUAL MORE MURDERS.
Since 2001, gun ownership has risen Yet since 1994, U.S. homicide rates dropped significantly. [url]http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/hmrt.htm#counts[/url]
4. MORE GUNS EQUAL MORE SUICIDES.
Simply wrong.
[url]http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcgvintl.html[/url]
5. IF PEOPLE HAVE GUNS ON THEM, EVERY ARGUMENT WILL END IN A GUNFIGHT.
From 1993 to 2006, the number of states with easy access to concealed carry permits increased from 17 to 39.
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rtc.gif[/url]
[url]http://www.nraila.org/images/rtcmaplg.jpg[/url]
As noted, the number of homicides reduced in the same periodIf you ban guns, we will simply revert to the old way, which is that larger men will have the advantage of force over smaller men, younger men over older men, healthy men over infirm men, a group of men over a single man, and, of course a man will have an advantage against women.
IF YOU REALLY WANT TO REDUCE MURDERS make violent criminals serve their sentences. Every month in the U.S. we hear of a horrific tragedy caused by a felon with a firearm. Which do you prefer, violent criminals released early into your neighborhood as long as YOUR ability to own firearms is restricted, or all your law-abiding neighbors free to own guns, but the criminals locked up?
No, firearms are not the cause of crime in my country(America). One should not compare two countries and note a difference in gun laws and crime rate and then proceed to imply that one caused the other. Correlation simply does not equal causation. Instead of comparing two countries, with MANY variables, why don't we compare states in the US with restrictive gun laws and those without? For example, California, New York, DC and Detroit have strict gun laws. If you do the research, you will see that they have some of the highest crime rates in the US. As a matter of fact, Detroit and DC were considered the "murder capitals". Now, states with fewer gun laws certainly aren't immune from crime, but this hardly bolsters the argument for more restrictive gun laws. Strict gun laws seem to have little effect or a negative effect on crime rate in the US. John Stossel also has some great videos about gun control on youtube.com. One could also visit guncite.com to read some pro-2A arguments. Penn & Teller have done a video on gun control for their show "B.S."(didn't want to spell it out here), but it's not a serious show.
So what about the UK before and after strict laws? Do they work so well there that we should seek to copy them in the US despite the fact that they are against the constitution? Lets see:
http://reason.com/archives/2002/11/01/gun-controls-twisted-outcome
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk/1440764.stm
I could search more, and I have read more than those pages, but It isn't worth my time. Suffice it to say that gun control has little positive effect on the crime rate of any jurisdiction. People are scared of the power that guns give a person, which is understandable and no one should be forced to own a gun. However, stating that I should give up my right to self defense because you are scared of guns is taking it a bit far. I'm not even going to get into the whole "assault weapon" debacle. Just know that by voting "yes" in this poll, you are doing nothing to stop crime and are only limiting the rights of those who will follow the law. It's merely feel-good legislation to win votes for politicians. Want to save lives? Stop needless wars and give to charity. Hell, there are many things that are more effective than gun laws in that regard. If you must deal with guns, promote gun safety education, that's something both sides agree with.
You people who talk about knives have no clue. I could walk up to you and quite easily kill you with a knife before you even knew what happened.
People only die from getting hit by stray bullets because the shooter doesn't know what they are doing. Gun fights happen at very short distances, usually within a few feet. EVERYONE should own a handgun or two and learn how to use them! You must train train train!
For the last 30 years in America the number of guns per capita has risen every year.
Every year the crime rate per capita has fallen, our FBI has statistics to support this statement. That includes major crimes of murder, rape, assult and even thief.
The anti-gunners don't know what to do with these facts, it flys in the face of their "un-reason" and "un-logic".
The U.K. and Europe had\has laws that pushed people to the shores of North America, we here understand that government intervention is not something we need at great depth, that giving freedoms (like gun ownership) comes with the price of the occassional whacko blasting out an office. More people are killed by cigarettes and cars (and not combined) than by guns here. Maybe the rest of the ostrich-head-stuck-in-the-sand-socialistic-world should ban those first in their countries and afterwards come talk to me about my gun ownership.
God gave you the gift of life, that gift should not be given up easily. I believe God expects me to struggle to survive, part of that is defending my right to live if attacked and protecting those who are innocent and weaker than I. That's why I have a concealed carry permit.
The only thing Brits need to know about Americans and guns is that Americans with guns have either been kicking their arses, or Americans with guns have been saving their arses.
If we give up our firearms as law abiding citizens of the USA, the only people with firearms will be the same criminals that have them now illegally, and the terrorist that would love nothing less than for us all to die. Turning the balance of power to them.
Let’s not forget giving the Government the total power, which would make us as helpless as Englands general public. We haven’t forgotten the lessons the British taught us now have we?
"Let the English roll over and die like sheep, because while you are reading this your enemy is training."
Here's food for thought-
Your enjoying a nice evening at home with your wife, when you hear glass break in your back room. You have you wife call 911 while you investigate- no use; phone lines been cut. You go to investigate, and are met by two men with guns You and your wife are rounded up, and one man proceeds to ransack the house, while the other then proceeds to beat you to the floor, then rape your wife in front of you, only to put a bullet in her head after he's done. The other comes in, and ends your life.
Would you like to have had a handgun to defend your family? I sure as heck you, which is why I do. There are 3 types of people in this world- The Wolf (Criminals), The Sheep Dog (Protectors), and Sheep (Common People). Someone has to watch over the flock. I fall under the Sheep Dog category.
Think long and hard about something like this; because you may just find yourself being stabbed to death, rather than shot. Criminals will kill you any way they can.
No handguns should not be banned. In fact every legal citizen should be required to have one and carry it. You've got to be living in koolaid land if you think eliminating them will cause crime to go down. Crime will increase as it has here in my city. Criminals will always be armed and as society is coddled more and more you will only see more people entitled to take what they want and if you or your family gets in the way so be it.
Our founding fathers had the foresight to put the 2 amendment in our Bill of Rights. The reason was they knew what it was to live in in a sociaty where the Goverment will run over the people. If you aren't aware of it we are being run over by our current leadership.
Rights are taken each day from the legal law abiding and given to those that are illegal and those that seek to do us harm. Releasing cirminals from prison who go on to only do more crime, enabled by what they have learned during their short time incarceration. When seconds count I don't want to wait 20 minites for police to respond. We have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Happiness includes protecting ones family and life. Now....go back to your koolaid and cower in corner when someone realizes you are unarmed and they want what you have.
Pandora's box everyone. If guns had never existed it might be simple to never introduce them. The world would be much the same... just a gun free one. Something else would have taken their place. In this world, where guns exist and will never go away, knowing how to use them properly and when not to use them is a really good skill to have. It should always be your personal choice... and always mine. I vote NO to gun bans.
WHAT IF THEY DID BAN HANDGUNS... YOU THINK KNIVES WOULD BE BETTER YOU KNOW HOW BAD THAT WOULD FUCKING HURT YOU WOULD BE SUFFERING INSTEAD OF BEING KILLED BEFORE YOU KNEW WITH A GUN, WITH A KNIFE YOU WOULD NOT ONLY KNOW YOU WERE PROBABLY GOING TO DIE BUT YOU WOULD SUFFER UNTIL YOU DID DIE AND THATS SUPPOSE TO BE BETTER? AT LEAST IF SOMEONE DID KILL I RATHER NOT KNOWN IT
CARS KILL PEOPLE MAYBE WE SHOULD GO BACK TO HORSES SINCE EVERYONE WANTS TO GO BACK TO SWORDS AND SHIELDS
Goverment governs best which governs least
Hell no! Do not ban our hand guns. My feeling ? I want every law abiding individual that has been properly trained to be allowed to carry a loaded weapon.The bastard that just blew the four law officers away was'nt suppose to have a weapon was he? Maybe if some of the other people in the coffee shop had their weapon they could have helped..Maybe one ore more of the officers could be with us. Yes there are all kinds of what if's but the overall matter is ..we need a way to defend ourself. The law cannot be there untill after the fact.
I just do not at all see the "need" of guns. They make living more dangerous, and for "protection" if there were no guns, all we'd really need would be knives. Guns make it so you can attack, and even kill much quicker, easier and from further distances. With knives, you have more time to react and they would have to actually get up close and personal, so if somebody was murdered by being stabbed, there'd be no question on if it were an accident, unlike with guns and the "stray bullets" killing innocent people that just happened to be in the way.Honestly, I don't think we need them unless zombies were to attack.
www.independent.us.com
PLATFORM
1. As Independents, we seek liberty; in which all individuals are sovereign over their own lives and no one is forced to sacrifice his or her values for the benefit of others.
2. We believe that respect for individual rights is the essential precondition for a free and prosperous world, and that only through freedom can peace and prosperity be realized.
3. We hold that all individuals have the right to exercise sole dominion over their own lives, and have the right to live in whatever manner they choose, so long as they do not forcibly interfere with the equal right of others to live in whatever manner they choose.
4. Individuals should be free to make choices for themselves and to accept responsibility for the consequences of the choices they make. No individual, group, or government may initiate force against any other individual, group, or government. Our support of an individual's right to make choices in life does not mean that we necessarily approve or disapprove of those choices.
5. We support full freedom of expression and oppose government censorship, regulation or control of communications media and technology. We favor the freedom to engage in or abstain from any religious activities that do not violate the rights of others. We oppose government actions which either aid or attack any religion.
6. Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the rights of individuals by government.
7. Recognizing that abortion is a sensitive issue, we believe that government should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for their conscientious consideration.
8. Government exists to protect the rights of every individual including life, liberty and property. We assert the common-law right of juries to judge not only the facts but also the justice of the law.
9. We affirm the right to keep and bear arms, and oppose the prosecution of individuals for exercising their rights of self-defense. We oppose all laws at any level of government requiring registration of, or restricting, the ownership, manufacture, or transfer or sale of firearms or ammunition.
10. The only proper role of government in the economic realm is to protect property rights, adjudicate disputes, and provide a legal framework in which voluntary trade is protected. All efforts by government to redistribute wealth, or to control or manage trade, are improper in a free society.
11. Property rights are entitled to the same protection as all other human rights. The owners of property have the full right to control, use, dispose of, or in any manner enjoy, their property without interference, until and unless the exercise of their control infringes the valid rights of others.
12. We support a clean and healthy environment and sensible use of our natural resources. Private landowners and conservation groups have a vested interest in maintaining natural resources. Free markets and property rights stimulate the technological innovations and behavioral changes required to protect our environment and ecosystems. We realize that our planet's climate is constantly changing, but environmental advocates and social pressure are the most effective means of changing public behavior.
13. All persons are entitled to keep the fruits of their labor. We call for the repeal of the income tax, the abolishment of the Internal Revenue Service and all federal programs and services not required under the U.S. Constitution. We oppose any legal requirements forcing employers to serve as tax collectors. Government should not incur debt, which burdens future generations without their consent. We support the passage of a "Balanced Budget Amendment" to the U.S. Constitution, provided that the budget is balanced exclusively by cutting expenditures, and not by raising taxes.
14. We support the right of free persons to associate or not associate in lab
i think that guns should be used for safety and not for
any other reason
I've grown up with guns all my life, too. My parents have taught me how to use them, but also taught me that they are not toys. Even if they do ban handguns, criminals will still have them (and use them). Why should we not be able to defend ourselves against someone that has something that we're not allowed to have? Even if we did ban all handguns, disarm everyone (which wouldn't be possible), and stop manufacturing handguns, people would go back to using swords and shields. Handguns should not be banned. So just chill out, all of you tree-hugging freaks.
If some scum bag breaks into my house at 1:00 AM or so, with a gun , knife or crowbar, should I blow his ass away with my 38 automatic, hollow points, or let him blow mine ass away.
I have had a hand gun,(and shot gun) for nearly 20 yeas and never fired or carried out of my house except in my motor home.
But don't break into my house you scumbags, cause I do know how to fire--
As long as guns are made, they somehow will be available. the problem with gun trouble, becomes cultural on a small to big scale. neighbourhood,regional,state wide,country or continent. As a people we should never encourage or promote the use of a gun on any human being,unless ultimately in self defence. in threat for your life or a life of an innocent. not shooting someone over money,drugs,oil,sex,or you thought they where armed but it ended up being a mobile phone or a comb. no way. Using a gun on another human should be a very questionable offence, regardless of who you are. not on these gun things at humans.
The reason the vote is so close is because we have allowed the wussies in the U.K. to vote. They have allowed their Crown/government to disarm them. They are now a people who cannot defend themselves against a tyranny.
Banning handguns? Limeys. Check this out. If you do your homework and do it right, you will realize that most gun crimes in the U.S. happen where the gun laws are strictest. Don't believe me? Google it and find out. Look at Australia. Ask them what happened when all their guns were taken away. The breaking and entering skyrocketed to an all time high!
Come to AZ and the crooks here think twice about breaking into homes. Even the Katrina victims that came here thought twice about committing a crime. In Houston, they devastated that city with crime. Here, no go. Why? Because some American, with his constitutional given powers, was ready to defend his property, family and any innocent bystander.
You don't want handguns in Great Britain? Fine, don't. But don't try to impose you libearl ideology on us. No wonder the Germans almost kicked your asses. You are all a bunch of pussies. Grow a set.
WHEN GUNS ARE OUTLAWED
ONLY OUTLAWS WILL HAVE GUNS !!
I can kill with a ball point pen, for christs sake! A gun is just a little more efficient.
Oh, I see, nothing but criminals with THEIR guns. What a rosy picture that is!
I'll keep mine thank you.
no they shouldnt be banned is yal crazie
hand pump hay dabi ja, chewgam hay jabi ja.... acha hands gun chalai jaaaaa..........
Love is like War.Start to easy, stop to hard, but i don't belive in love
i think hand guns should be ban because if some one else have they can kill u
Once something is legal it is almost impossible to ban it, at least in a timely manner.
It would be easier to move for banning of guns (in general all weapons) possession outside of your home.
In your premises you can do whatever you like, but when in a public place only authorised people should be allowed to be in possession of a weapon. If you take your weapon out, it is likely to be for only one thing and that is not protection.
guns just make it eazy i went to jail for using a KNIFE so you want to ban them
If you don't want personal liberty and don't have the stomach for protecting yourself move to Great Britain- leave us here to fend for ourselves- we will be fine thank you!
Suman - The UK has already been controlled by the government. You can't defend yourself from tyrant leaders who want nothing but to rule you. I have a few UK friends that have moved here and they enjoy their right to use guns. They go out and practice shooting often. They aren't thugs but citizens who want to protect their family and friends from harm from other intruders that might break into their home or threaten their family. In your situation, you would just have to witness a criminal (who illegal obtained a gun) murder your entire family while you are helpless at stopping the bloodshed. I believe it's Switzerland that requires mandatory gun ownership. They have lower crimes than some of the bigger countries. Either way, like others have said, guns don't kill people, people do and helping society would have a better long-term impact then banning guns.
Jess C. - Schools ban guns and are no gun zones. To counter your argument, when a shooting spree happens, no one at the school has a gun to actually shoot the killer from causing more mayhem. More lives could of been saved then lost. Perhaps you need to look at the sickness in society because anything can become a weapon if used from a sick/crazy individual. After all, students don't have a very great role model when the government spends hundreds of billions of dollars to build robotic machines that kill people and then eat their remains to power themselves. That many could of worked on improving the social structure and integrity of the people over building machines to kill other people the government doesn't like.
There is no reason that regular citizens should be able to walk the streets with a gun. You want to hunt, fine. But don't let these kids walk the halls of a school and kill innocent kids. I understand that if someone else had a gun, they could have shot the murderer, but if no one had a gun, no one would have to die.
Everyone should have the responsibility to have a firearm to protect bothe themself and their loved ones. Do not depend on the government for that. The states and countries that do not allow people to own firearmes have higher crime rates
Burglaries occur in the afternoon in the US because they know most people are not home, in Britain they occur in the evening when they the occupants are home because they know most occupants do not have a firearm(s) for their protection. I'll take the good old USA and keep my firearms and do my own protecting.
I really think you shouldn't ban guns well i think if u have full experience of how to use it then you should keep it but if u don't then i guess ..all im saying is you know how to use keep u dont loose my grandpa has a gun under his pillow 4 protection key word protection so dont ban it
Gun control simply disarms the crooks potential victims, making crime a safer occupation, and hence one that can be indulged in more widely by more crooks.
If you are going to look at the record, studies have already shown that allowing law-abiding citizens to own and carry concealed weapons tends to produce less violence, NOT more.
Killings seldom start where someone else is known in advance to be carrying a gun.
Have you ever heard of one of these supposedly "senseless" killers opening fire on a gathering of members of the National Rifle Association? They always seem to have better sense than to do that.
When people ask emotionally, "How can we stop these things?" the most straightforward answer is to ask:
How was it in fact stopped? It was stopped, like most shooting sprees, by the arrival on the scene of other people with guns.
handguns should always be legal
It's no damned wonder you Limey's are letting your country be over run by a bunch of lunatic ragheads judging from the pathetic comments on this page. You are all wussies and you'd be speaking German today if it weren't for the US.
Handguns should not be banned in the united states. Owning them is a right that has been given to us by our founding fathers. in sthe Second Amendment it says. "The right of the people to own and bear arms shall not be infringed."
I have not seen a hand gun by it's self kill anyone, if you want to ban something banned the the person using it. our laws would handle this problem if the judges would keep these people in jail, the Alutian Islands Have abandon bases that would provide these sicko's with a new home for life.
I grew up with guns in the house. My parents taught us respect for a weapon...not just guns. Respect and knowledge. We were also taught that using your words and if necessary, your hands could resolve most conflict. Oh...I forgot we live in a society of cowards that hide behind the gun.
most of people are stupid morons. it's too dangerous to legalize hand guns.
and even person is not a stupid moron he can make a mistake...
unrecoverable mistake.
a hand gun could ruin a mothers 18 years of day and knight struggle to gift a doctor or police officer to a certain society.
ana paula tomo no merda
You bet I have a gun that I keep in my bedroom.(I have no children) I also have mace in my purse.
I wouldn't be hear if I didn't have my gun as it saved me from some very bad things over the years and I will not be without my 38.
Bobby, good post and I concur for the most part. The last sentence in "meaning" could be debated but the logic is relevant.
I am astounded at the closeness of the vote. Handguns should not be banned. We don't need more government governing our lives.
I live in Britain where handguns are illegal. I can think of no reason, no reason at all, that handguns should be made legal.
In the case of the United States no matter how many lives having a gun may save I can only wonder how many more would be saved if there were no guns.
I realise that guns don't kill people, people kill people. But, and it's a big but, guns make it a lot easier to kill people.
03454765276
I don't believe all guns should be banned. There are thousands upon thousands of responsible folks whom own them. I am not one of those. It seems that certain types of guns and certain types of people do the most damage.
I often wonder if people understand this question and if they do and their answer is no hand-guns should NOT be banned than; they are basically saying they agree with shooting and murdering other people.
Facts:
1. Hand guns are typically not used in hunting animals, only people!
2. Hand guns are usually found in law abiding citizen's homes by the criminal element during a robbery/break 'n enter.
3. The use of hand guns kills innocent by-standers more often than a knife or a baseball bat!
4. Those contemplating suicide will more than likely succeed if a hand gun is available at home- no intervention will save them once they pull the trigger, unlike an overdose or cutting the wrists which is not always so fatal.
5. A hand-gun in the home raises the risk of your own children dying from a gun shot substantially compared to those who don't have one.
6. A hand-gun can be more easily concealed unlike a long rifle which has not been modified.
I do not believe in banning rifles that are used for hunting, but hand-guns were created for one purpose and one purpose only...
to kill human beings.
The siege mentality must end.
oi
WHAT!?OF COURSE HAND GUNS MUST BE BANNED,MUCH PEOPLE DIE BECAUSE OF PISTOLS OR SOME HAND GUNS!!!!!!!!
The problem with banning handguns is that they will still be out there, being sold illegally (as they are now) and only criminals and law enforcement agents will have access to them. I personally don't own a handgun, but I would like to buy one to keep in my home for personal protection. I hate guns; if I could change the world, I would make them non-existant for everybody, but I can't. It is unrealistic to expect banning handguns to reduce crime rates or increase the safety of American citizens- or people anywhere, for that matter. At least if they are legal, people have to apply for them and they are registered so if a crime is committed with one, it can be traced back to its owner. Instead of banning guns, they should ban bullets! Or make bullets that only knock a person out rather than kill them. They have bullets that can be maneuvered after they are shot from the gun- work on the problem from that end.
Im a card holding NRA member who owns a HK with night sights with 3 clips that would be illegal under the previous Clinton gun ban. I dont hunt, nor do I fight for the right to hunt. I fight for the right as the founders intended, and that is the right to aggressively with deadly force remove our Government should it become tyranical replacing it with a Government chosen by the Majority. It is also to fight with our Government against foreign tyranical or invading forces.
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state; The right to keep and bare arms shall not be infringed.
"A well regulated"
meaning
Trained militarily, and well disciplined, necessary to be an effective fighting force.
"militia"
that is armed citizens with their own personal weapons for the purpose of policing and or military. The National Gaurd is
"being necessary to the Security of a free state; The right to keep"
meaning
own personal Firearms.
"and bear"
meaning
the Right to carry firearms on your person
"arms"
Term for Firearms usually used in relation to war, or self defence as in when one is "armed"
"Shall not be infringed."
meaning
Government may not make any law or take any action that would limit your right to arm yourself, as it would give the government too much control over the people, where an Majority of armed population would have no reason to fear the power of the government.
Handguns should NOT be banned.
In case of Zombie outbreak.
Argument over.
Jonoo: I don't think anybody was saying the rime rate in the U.K. is higher than in the U.S., but rather that it has increased over your previous rate.
To compare "apples to apples", the home invasion rate in Australia has skyrocketed since the guns where gathered up in that country. In the U.S., New York City, Washington D.C., Chicago, and L.A. have some of the most restrictive gun rules, and since putting them into effect have been rewarded with out of control crime rates. Finally look at the U.S. news. You will notice that most mass shootings occur in "Gun Free" zones, or "Victim Rich" zones.
Stephen - if that's the case, then please explain why violent crime rates *drop* in cities that mandate gun ownership?
Yes, they make it easier. However, somebody who's determined to kill can turn anything into a weapon. Hell, I could turn my laptop bag - my soft-case, empty laptop bag - into a lethal weapon (just strangle somebody with the strap).
Taking weapons from law-abiding citizens only serves to empower thugs. It may discourage a few people from crimes of passion, but even that is debatable (I'm having an argument with my wife in the living room. I decide to kill her. Do I walk past the kitchen full of sharp implements for the gun, or stab the hypothetical 'bitch?')
Moreover, it doesn't just empower the criminal thugs. Rule #1 of a dictatorship: Disarm the populace. When you're the only one with the ability and will to fight, you can take over the world with a butter knife.
People say that if handguns are banned only criminal will have then and people will not have any way to protect thenselves, but i think people are wrong, a big part of the crimes caused by guns are from normal people that got angry whith something, or sons of high class people that are drunk...
sorry if there are any english mistakes :p my english are in progress
I live in the US and firmly believe we have the right to have firearms including handguns. I also support that there should be laws to keep track of these guns and training in use and safety also. Along with proper safe keeping with in ones home. More work needs to be done to keep illegal guns out of the hands of criminals.
OK....but here in the UK we don't have disgruntled ex-employees coming back into the office with assault rifles and taking out their old colleagues......and I would dispute that our crime rate is higher in the UK than the US....guns do kill people and so do knives...even sticks kill, you just have to work harder.
True- Ban the handguns and only the beasts will have them.