Welcome to FinHeaven Fans Forums! We're glad to have you here. Please feel free to browse the forum. We'd like to invite you to join our community; doing so will enable you to view additional forums and post with our other members.



VIP Members don't see these ads. Join VIP Now
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 16 of 16

Thread: gun control laws

  1. -11
    rob19's Avatar
    Soul Rebel

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Mar 2006
    Posts:
    6,827
    vCash:
    3193
    Loc:
    Georgia
    Thanks / No Thanks
    1972 Dolphins Logo
    Quote Originally Posted by Spesh View Post
    Alcohol and guns are a bit different. I would bet that more people drink than own guns, especially assault rifles. Weapons are not something that is consumed and in need of replacing. While the ammunition certainly is, the times you would use up that ammunition would is much lower than the amount of times someone drinks. Banning assault rifles is nothing new, states have successfully done so and i havent heard of any sort of rise in crime related to it. Granted, i havent dug up the stats to say that with any degree of certainty. It would be interesting to see the comparison between states that do ban it and those that dont.

    Even now we ban explosive devices. Why? Because when they are used incorrectly they can cause large amounts of casualties. Even with that ban in place i havent heard of a rise in explosive devices used during criminal activity...despite the fact that they can be easier to acquire than assault rifles.

    I will agree that banning handguns would just lead to an even worse black market. Practically speaking, handguns would be much easier to distribute due to the ease in which one can conceal them. Even with handguns being legal we have difficulty tracking them. I was just posting about Junior Seau's suicide the other day. Despite it happening in May, police still have no earthly idea where or when he acquired the handgun.
    And cant say ive read Tao Te Ching.
    If it's something that an overwhelming percentage of the population is in favor of you won't have many problems prohibiting certain things. However, when there's a big enough demand, the supply will be met, one way or another. If there's a big enough market for handguns & they're outlawed as the above poster suggested, you'll always have people who would be willing to traffic those weapons for the inflated profits that are a direct result of said prohibition.
    Quote Quote  

  2. -12
    emeraldfin's Avatar
    Gary Speed RIP

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    May 2007
    Posts:
    4,776
    vCash:
    0
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by rob19 View Post
    If it's something that an overwhelming percentage of the population is in favor of you won't have many problems prohibiting certain things. However, when there's a big enough demand, the supply will be met, one way or another. If there's a big enough market for handguns & they're outlawed as the above poster suggested, you'll always have people who would be willing to traffic those weapons for the inflated profits that are a direct result of said prohibition.
    I agree with the premise of your argument, but in order to meet anything like the supply needed for black market weapons across the country, weapons production would still need to be at a fairly high level. The only companies I can think of that could meet that supply to produce underground firearms and have the financial clout to do so would be the weapons manufacturing companies.

    So who would be producing the guns for the black market then? The same companies that provide the military with their firearms? the government? the CIA? the military?
    Quote Quote  

  3. -13
    phinfan3411's Avatar
    pofo mofo

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Apr 2007
    Posts:
    2,494
    vCash:
    2705
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by emeraldfin View Post
    I agree with the premise of your argument, but in order to meet anything like the supply needed for black market weapons across the country, weapons production would still need to be at a fairly high level. The only companies I can think of that could meet that supply to produce underground firearms and have the financial clout to do so would be the weapons manufacturing companies.

    So who would be producing the guns for the black market then? The same companies that provide the military with their firearms? the government? the CIA? the military?
    I'm not sure you realize how easy it is to make a firearm, I have watched films about the people in Afganistan (Khyber Pass) that make AK's and other guns IN CAVES, i'm not making this up, they make them in caves.

    I also just watched a pretty funny photo-essay on a guy that made an AK47 out of his shovel, again, not kidding.
    Quote Quote  

  4. -14
    Dolphins9954's Avatar
    Pro Bowler

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Apr 2005
    Posts:
    9,804
    vCash:
    4407
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by MadDog 88 View Post
    Handguns are more readily available and easily concealable making them used more often than assault weapons. Regardless, handguns and assault weapons need to be banned in the U.S. Spare me the protect yourself from the government mantra because that would never happen.
    It's a constitutionally protected right. Your arguement is just as crazy as if I said we should ban all free speech, religion and press too. Banning all guns in the country would literally cause another civil war. The funny thing is you would need a lot of guns and force to enforce your ban.





    "Politics is the Art of Looking for Trouble, Finding it Everywhere, Diagnosing it Incorrectly, and Applying the Wrong Remedies"
    Quote Quote  

  5. -15
    MoFinz's Avatar
    Uwe Von Schamann's Bastard Son

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    May 2002
    Posts:
    3,052
    vCash:
    1016
    Thanks / No Thanks



    Best defense of gun rights actually occured on "All In The Family". Archie is arguing with his daughter Gloria about gun rights, which she is opposed to...


    Yeah....that about sums it up. Does anyone think the KC LB who killed his girlfriend couldnt or wouldnt have killed her with his bare hands if he had not had a gun? And maybe he would have crashed or car or commited suicide by cop when he was caught? Speculate all you want...but guns arent responsible for crime, criminals are. Until you can tell me you can 100% pick out a violent criminal who has no history of violence, maybe you should concern yourself more with your and your families safety than trying to deprive me of my right to keep and bear arms.

    BTW....had a good friend and former co-worker killed Friday night....shot to death in his own home. His kids werent there thank God. But he was very big into gun control. Somebody made him a target, and there was nothing he could do.
    Last edited by MoFinz; 12-03-2012 at 12:22 PM.


    Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life
    Quote Quote  

  6. -16
    NY8123's Avatar
    Sophisticated Redneck

    Status:
    Online
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Jan 2008
    Posts:
    11,001
    vCash:
    4269
    Loc:
    out in the Ding Weeds
    Thanks / No Thanks
    All I have to say to gun control advocates is be careful what you ask for, regardless of your opinions for or against guns in general it is the underlying constitutional freedoms you should be worried about protecting. Guns are no different than words and in fact the case can be made that words are more powerful than guns.

    What are these mad ramblings about you say...........limiting the right to bare arms is no different than limited the right to free speech. People lose track of that, once you coincide your hard fought freedoms it is only a matter of time before more are regulated away. Ban AR-15's, AK's Uzi's etc.....next maybe all semi auto rifles and handguns.

    What if we were banning certain verbal expressions instead of guns? What if we were no longer able to criticize the government or its policies? What if we were no long able to report certain news stories because of American interests? Maybe all words found to be insulating are now regulated out of every day society.

    Limiting freedoms is a fix to the problem only from the point of view that you now have completely removed any other option or solution to the problem from the equation. I am never going to support any movement that limits or regulates a freedom. I just will not coincide my rights to any freedom that was fought for before me or handed down to me. The government should be worried more about the monopolization of the food, drug, media and energy markets in the US. The government should be worried about the farming of jobs to sweat shops to squeeze every nickel possible out of the bottom line. The government should be worried about balancing a budget that is completely out of control.

    The government doesn't need to be worried about American freedoms or the restrictions of those freedoms, that is why we have the American government right now, the restriction of freedoms that were unfairly levied upon us and those who took up arms to fight for their freedoms.
    Hold My Beer and Watch This!
    Quote Quote  

Similar Threads

  1. Nagasaki Mayor Shot today despite strict Gun Control Laws
    By zach13 in forum Political | War Forum
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 04-18-2007, 08:59 AM
  2. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-19-2007, 10:47 AM
  3. Man laws
    By bullseyeguy in forum The Lounge
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 05-20-2006, 01:44 PM
  4. Government out of control with control!
    By FINintheMOON in forum Political | War Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 03-07-2006, 10:01 PM
  5. Two Ty Laws?
    By DolFan31 in forum Miami Dolphins Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-06-2002, 04:17 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •