HSX Forum

TVStocks, MusicStocks and Life

Reply Topic List All Forums

Ok, I'll try to respond to all of your comments:

Posted by: accountant_4_Jesus (a.k.a ) on Aug 07, 16:11 in response to accountant_4_Jesus' post For those people who were arguing in favour of gun...

@ DMac: Yes, I live in Australia. Homicide rates by firearm have gone down, but violent crime rates in general have kept going upwards. See here.

@ blaze: That's right, and the ones who aren't need some way to defend themselves against those people.

@ Jane: When people give away their right to weapons that can defend themselves, they are giving away some of their freedom. You're basically saying that for all the millions of responsible people in the world, we should lose that right because of one (let's be clear, ONE) nutjob who used that right in a bad way. How is that sensible? The truth of the matter is that every day we are being stripped of freedoms because of one or maybe a few instances where those freedoms were used badly, and that's not right. Your thought patterns eventually lead us to a police state, where no freedoms are allowed whatsoever. What else are they going to deem dangerous and outlaw? It just won't end until there's no freedoms left. I can see where you're coming from, but as Tanker repeatedly said with the whole debate after the Aurora shooting, you can either have freedom or you can have security. More freedom means less security, but more security means less freedom. I would argue that it's better to have freedom than security.

@ elchan: If you can't legislate out all the crazies, then why try? All you're doing by starting to legislate out the crazies is to form a future police state, as you said. Leave things as they are, and let people keep their freedom. We're not responsible for how others use their freedom, so why should our freedom be stripped of certain things because of their mistake? How would you like it if the law banned you from driving your car because your next-door neighbour used theirs to kill someone? How is that fair on you? But that's exactly what you're trying to say in this argument.

For those people who were arguing in favour of gun control laws, take a look at this (hopefully it works): accountant_4_Jesus Aug 07, 00:16

You live in Australia right? Homicide rates by firearm have gone down since their 1996 gun law. {nm} Antibody Aug 07, 10:02

Nutjobs,lunatics and the determined dishonest will always find a way to get weapons {nm} blaze223 Aug 07, 10:12

Everyone's innocent until they commit a crime. That isn't even logical. Jane_Citizen Aug 07, 13:21

That quote is scary. People with strange personality traits can be prevented can be discriminated upon? {nm} elchan Aug 07, 14:19

No, the point is that they can't. So you don't know which person is necessarily going to be the one who (cont) Jane_Citizen Aug 07, 22:51

I'm in the process of getting my FOID Card wroberson Aug 08, 01:45

I believe we need to control what kind of weapons should be so easily accessible. However, I'm not for gun control in general. elchan Aug 07, 14:21

Ok, I'll try to respond to all of your comments: accountant_4_Jesus Aug 07, 16:11

Actually they have laws against some kinds of cars. They don't allow spikes on your wheel hub caps, and battering rams on your bumper. elchan Aug 07, 19:38

I prefer the freedom from being potentially threatened with a gun. Jane_Citizen Aug 07, 20:27

Chicago has very strict laws against handguns. They sound really safe from being potentially threatened with a gun. {nm} Tanker Aug 08, 15:13