A quick poll on firearms

[Gendarme]

What is your stance on firearms? I am very curious. I am not making this thread to discuss gun control, as there is already a thread about it here: viewtopic.php?f=315&t=10142

[JakeyBoyTH]

As long as proper care is taken with licensing of firearms, such as the police check we have here in NZ, it should be reasonable.

Firearms within properly educated communities (i.e. not yankee doodle redneck rural texas) is perfectly fine. There is just no reason other than museum and educational use for fully-automatic firearms within a civilian population.

[noissance]

People use guns for sports and recreation, but the purpose of a gun is to kill or damage something. If you have a liscence (after vigorous background checks and other regulations), feel free to have a gun. Just dont point it at random people or shoot them.

[Goodspeed]

Allowed but only in a shooting range

[japanesegeneral]

I wonder why this community is so stubborn? Why do you guys want to ban weapons? Everybody needs a firearm. That is the only way to prevent mass shootings.

USA USA USA!!!

[rsy]

let's replace all the guns nukes and everything with cakes, burritos, cute puppies and big butts

[japanesegeneral]

Weapons dont kill everybody. Obesity does. If i had ro choose i would chosse me some propper guns.

USA USA USA!

[forgrin]

It's important to remember that guns are a tool of the trade for many people in these discussions. Ranchers need them for predator defense, hunters need them, and people who shoot for sport need them. No reason for automatics to be legal here. Maybe it's hometown bias but I think Canada has a relatively decent system; full automatic ban, mandatory licencing with two tiers, one for long guns that's more lax and one that's restricted to range only (pistols + other short barrels). 5 round magazine max for centrefire rifles, 10 for centrefire pistols. There are some weird issues with the Canadian system otherwise but the basis is strong.

[Dolan]

Ban, because civilians shouldn't own warfare devices during peacetime. It's at odds with the purpose of having a police force.

Neither should they be allowed just because some people like to target practice. The risks far outweigh the benefits to allow the general public to own firearms. Yes, the same thing should apply to chemical weapons, acids and so on and so forth. A knife cannot kill 100 people in a crowd, like an automatic gun can. It creates far more insecurity and risks than it prevents.

[lejend]

Most of the academic research on this indicates that guns are used defensively more than criminally, and that crime is caused by factors far more complex than, "gun rights = crime."

Firearms are a godsend. "God made men and Colt made them equal." No matter if you're a 5' 110lb girl fighting against a 6' 220lb criminal, or an innocent civilian fighting against a Commie policeman, all you gotta do is spend one second to take out your pistol, point it at him and fire off a shot or two. Problem solved. What's he gonna do? Not get shredded to bits? In real life there's no nanomachines, son. A few shots and game over. There are no Continue's.

phpBB [video]

phpBB [video]

[forgrin]

Ban, because civilians shouldn't own warfare devices during peacetime. It's at odds with the purpose of having a police force.

Neither should they be allowed just because some people like to target practice. The risks far outweigh the benefits to allow the general public to own firearms. Yes, the same thing should apply to chemical weapons, acids and so on and so forth. A knife cannot kill 100 people in a crowd, like an automatic gun can. It creates far more insecurity and risks than it prevents.

Ok, but what about a hunting or target rifle? A shotgun for hunting birds/shooting clays? There are other guns than assault rifles.

[Ashvin]

Am I back in time? No wait ESOC always has such polls once in every quarter year and/or whenever some major shooting event happens in the US.