Should People Be Allowed to Own Guns?

Have philosophical discussions about politics, law, and government.
Featured Article: Definition of Freedom - What Freedom Means to Me
Post Reply
User avatar
Spiral Out
Site Admin
Posts: 5007
Joined: June 26th, 2012, 10:22 am

Re: Should People Be Allowed to Own Guns?

Post by Spiral Out » May 6th, 2013, 6:28 am

Quotidian wrote:I have a narrow view?
Yes, you have a narrow view. Your view is that the US is destined for one set of circumstances and there is only one solution. And you've determined this from 9,500 miles removed, as a citizen of another country, from a foreign viewpoint, with insufficient and inaccurate information. (No, the news media and your "statistics" are not sufficiently accurate.)

How is that not a narrow view?
Dedicated to the fine art of thinking.

Xris
Posts: 5962
Joined: December 27th, 2010, 11:37 am
Location: Cornwall UK

Re: Should People Be Allowed to Own Guns?

Post by Xris » May 6th, 2013, 7:17 am

So why should any American not be allowed to own a ballistic missile or obtain explosive devices? What weapons should they not have and why?

User avatar
Ascendant606
Posts: 101
Joined: March 9th, 2013, 6:34 am
Location: Overseas

Re: Should People Be Allowed to Own Guns?

Post by Ascendant606 » May 6th, 2013, 7:32 am

Xris wrote:So why should any American not be allowed to own a ballistic missile or obtain explosive devices? What weapons should they not have and why?
Justify owning a ballistic missile or explosive devices. If you can justify it with a resonable answer that is not "to fight an opressive government" or to "start a rebellion", than you can have it.
I know nothing except the fact of my ignorance.

Xris
Posts: 5962
Joined: December 27th, 2010, 11:37 am
Location: Cornwall UK

Re: Should People Be Allowed to Own Guns?

Post by Xris » May 6th, 2013, 7:43 am

Ascendant606 wrote: (Nested quote removed.)


Justify owning a ballistic missile or explosive devices. If you can justify it with a resonable answer that is not "to fight an opressive government" or to "start a rebellion", than you can have it.
I asked a question. I did not propose a scenario that is suitable for your answer. In America now.What weapons should an any American citizen not be allowed to own?

User avatar
Quotidian
Posts: 2681
Joined: August 29th, 2012, 7:47 am
Favorite Philosopher: Nagel
Location: Sydney
Contact:

Re: Should People Be Allowed to Own Guns?

Post by Quotidian » May 6th, 2013, 7:53 am

Spiral Out wrote: (Nested quote removed.)


Yes, you have a narrow view. Your view is that the US is destined for one set of circumstances and there is only one solution. And you've determined this from 9,500 miles removed, as a citizen of another country, from a foreign viewpoint, with insufficient and inaccurate information. (No, the news media and your "statistics" are not sufficiently accurate.)

How is that not a narrow view?
The argument is about ownership of guns. I am arguing that the high rate of gun ownership is directly related to the fact that America has rates of gun death that are orders of magnitude higher than comparable advanced nations. You may choose to argue whether or not this is a good thing, but you can't argue that it is a fact. The only statistics I have quoted in this thread are published by the FBI. They are not 'my statistics' and they are not 'liberal media lies'. They are a count of people killed by weapons.

'Everyone has a right to their own opinions, but not to their own facts'.
'For there are many here among us who think that life is but a joke' ~ Dylan

User avatar
Ascendant606
Posts: 101
Joined: March 9th, 2013, 6:34 am
Location: Overseas

Re: Should People Be Allowed to Own Guns?

Post by Ascendant606 » May 6th, 2013, 8:02 am

Xris wrote: I asked a question. I did not propose a scenario that is suitable for your answer. In America now.What weapons should an any American citizen not be allowed to own?
And I gave an answer. Any wepon that people are able to justify reasonably should be allowed.

I fail to see how my answer is not satisfactory. I can justify owning a pistol. I should be able to own a pistol. I cannot justify owning ballistic missles. I should not own a ballistic missle.
I know nothing except the fact of my ignorance.

User avatar
Spiral Out
Site Admin
Posts: 5007
Joined: June 26th, 2012, 10:22 am

Re: Should People Be Allowed to Own Guns?

Post by Spiral Out » May 6th, 2013, 10:34 am

Xris wrote:So why should any American not be allowed to own a ballistic missile or obtain explosive devices? What weapons should they not have and why?
Let's not get sidetracked from the issue at hand which is gun ownership. You still have not told me why I cannot own an assault rifle but you want me to tell you why I can or cannot own a ballistic missile? I'll start answering your questions when you've answered mine. Deal?
Quotidian wrote:I am arguing that the high rate of gun ownership is directly related to the fact that America has rates of gun death that are orders of magnitude higher than comparable advanced nations.
The people who are committing these crimes are not gun owners. They are thieves and murderers who have stolen those guns, or have otherwise procured them by illegal means. Why are you not providing THAT statistic? The more guns one owns the less likely they are to be involved in a murder, drive-by shooting, home invasion, robbery, etc. How about THAT statistic? The more guns one owns the less they contribute to the "violence using guns" issue. But hey, feel free to ignore what doesn't help your own case.
Quotidian wrote:The only statistics I have quoted in this thread are published by the FBI. They are not 'my statistics' and they are not 'liberal media lies'. They are a count of people killed by weapons.
Statistics are GARBAGE. Those FBI statistics do not reflect the intricacies of the situational circumstances and lack the proper contexts. They are a generalization of only particular aspects of those incidents. The FBI is not interested in the personal perspectives of each incident, nor are they qualified to make such determinations as to the nature and reason even for their own statistical data.

Do you also think that there are too many robberies due to the fact that we have too much paper money floating around on our streets? Should we ban paper money as well? Do you think a cashless society will eliminate theft? Don't you think that the theft will only move to a different medium and method?


Here's my own solution:
Create a complete national registry of all weapons that would detail all of the necessary information of the ownership of those weapons from the specifics of the weapon itself such as mfg, model & serial #s, origin of sale, etc., to the specifics of the owner such as name, DOB, address, legal history, medical records, etc., IN COMBINATION WITH an amendment to the constitution which specifically states that such information can never be used against the weapon owner in any manner and that it will be kept to the highest level of privacy which is only accessible to the one governmental agency who legally and specifically presides over weapons ownership procedures, and that these weapons shall never be forcefully repossessed in any circumstance (other than from those who have been deemed unfit to own such weapons by reasonable and agreed upon standards as accepted by majority vote of the population of legal US citizens) from any legal US citizen who owns such weapons and who owns said weapons as a private individual citizen, and also to include a clause that states that the amendment is to survive any change in the governmental status such as with any reorganization of the federal government into a "North American Union" with Canada and Mexico.

**For those who qualify to own guns based on the accepted standards, there would be no restrictions as to the number or type of guns owned.**

I'm sure there are other fine details to be added but you get my point.

Would anyone have any objections to that sort of structure for gun ownership?
Last edited by Spiral Out on May 6th, 2013, 2:01 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Dedicated to the fine art of thinking.

Xris
Posts: 5962
Joined: December 27th, 2010, 11:37 am
Location: Cornwall UK

Re: Should People Be Allowed to Own Guns?

Post by Xris » May 6th, 2013, 11:59 am

Ascendant606 wrote: (Nested quote removed.)


And I gave an answer. Any wepon that people are able to justify reasonably should be allowed.

I fail to see how my answer is not satisfactory. I can justify owning a pistol. I should be able to own a pistol. I cannot justify owning ballistic missles. I should not own a ballistic missle.
Why not? What justified you owning an assault rifle can also be used to owning a missile or explosive devices.

User avatar
Ascendant606
Posts: 101
Joined: March 9th, 2013, 6:34 am
Location: Overseas

Re: Should People Be Allowed to Own Guns?

Post by Ascendant606 » May 6th, 2013, 5:05 pm

Xris wrote: Why not? What justified you owning an assault rifle can also be used to owning a missile or explosive devices.
I didn't justify owning an assult riffle. I do not need an assult riffle to protect my family when a pistol or other type of gun would work just as fine. A ballistic missile would be "overkill". I think that each state government should ban the types of guns that they rule to be unjustified.
I know nothing except the fact of my ignorance.

Eonblue
Posts: 38
Joined: April 20th, 2013, 3:41 pm

Re: Should People Be Allowed to Own Guns?

Post by Eonblue » May 6th, 2013, 5:13 pm

Quotidian wrote:Well, I favor any government over a self-appointed militia with automatic weapons.
Are not governments made of the same men that would be in a militia? Do you think a militia lacks institutional integrity or organization? The Revolutionary War was won with the sweat of militias. I find it hard to believe you would choose North Korean Faschism or Mussoulinis Italy over a militia made up of you, your neighbors and family.
Quotidian wrote: It's not outside the realm of possibility, although I don't think it will actually happen in the USA.


You don't "think" it could happen?

Do you really feel comfortable with your naivete?

This peaceful future that doesn't require guns you dream of what does it look like? Does it resemble the world we live in now? This explains why are ideas are worlds apart.
Quotidian wrote:If you actually listen to Wayne LaPierre's speeches, his vision of society is truly Distopian
This is not fact. This is your personal perception. Let me preface by saying you may be right about LaPierre and in fact we stand on the same square but this one man does not invalidate the greater ideology of gun rights activists.
Quotidian wrote:He wants armed guards in every school and people with visible and concealed weapons on every street. You think this is what 'civil society' means? I would have thought that a 'civil society' was one where you didn't have to carry a gun for fear that the guy next to you might be.
Like I said ONE mans political posturing does not constitute the entire movement. I really don't understand how you could so easily prescribe to the possibility of this guy vision of the future.

This is why I don't understand.
Quotidian wrote:It's not outside the realm of possibility, although I don't think it will actually happen in the USA.
You ever so easily dismiss with half a hesitation the idea of a government fascist police state but you believe owning guns will lead to fascist police state because of a speech of a man in a group that supports gun rights.

You would leave us weaker my friend. The weak would get weaker. The strong and the criminals would get stronger. The distribution of illegal gun would sky rocket. The market would grow exponentially overnight. I don't have enough time to explain to you how harmful this is for everyone. Regulation does more harm than it does good. The seniors would get victimized by the criminal. The woman would get victimized by the strong. The father could no longer protect his kid. The hunter could no longer provide himself with food. The population could no longer defend itself from invaders. In a hypothetical apocalypse how will the good defend from the hordes of criminals? How will a person find food after the supermarket shutdowns?

The 2nd amendment is fundamental. It not only reinforces democracy but democracy would not stand without it. It is part of the fabric of this country. I'm not nearly as pro-gun as it would seem but I can't imagine a future where we just perpetually allow the government what we can own. Is this really the type of government you want?

Xris
Posts: 5962
Joined: December 27th, 2010, 11:37 am
Location: Cornwall UK

Re: Should People Be Allowed to Own Guns?

Post by Xris » May 7th, 2013, 11:09 am

Ascendant606 wrote: (Nested quote removed.)


I didn't justify owning an assult riffle. I do not need an assult riffle to protect my family when a pistol or other type of gun would work just as fine. A ballistic missile would be "overkill". I think that each state government should ban the types of guns that they rule to be unjustified.

So you agree with gun control? So I will ask all those who support the gun lobby. What weapons would you not allow? Ballistic missiles,explosive devices, tanks,nuclear submarines. If you envisage a civil war, no weapon should be denied the citizen or should they?

User avatar
wanabe
Moderator
Posts: 3388
Joined: November 24th, 2008, 5:12 am
Favorite Philosopher: Gandhi.
Location: UBIQUITY
Contact:

Re: Should People Be Allowed to Own Guns?

Post by wanabe » May 7th, 2013, 5:12 pm

Quotidian, re post # 72:

At one point the US was a militia too. Self defense is not insurrection, I said nothing of that any group would appoint them self to power. I'm glad you trust the government so much though, someone should, but then again you have very different socio-political experience.

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."-Benjamin Franklin

Since you said "any government" though, it seems you wouldn't mind a fascist state that only uses tear gas, flash-bangs, tasers, fire hoses, dogs, Dazer-Lasers and random beatings; so long as they don't have guns. Those things can all kill and maimed too.

I agree that many of the people in the gun lobby are completely crazy, but responsible people should still be allowed to have guns. Explosive munitions are different, it's exponential harder to prevent collateral damage.
Secret To Eternal Life: Live Life To The Fullest, Help All Others To Do So.Meaning of Life Is Choice. Increase choice through direct perception. Golden rule+universality principal+Promote benefits-harm+logical consistency=morality.BeTheChange.

User avatar
Quotidian
Posts: 2681
Joined: August 29th, 2012, 7:47 am
Favorite Philosopher: Nagel
Location: Sydney
Contact:

Re: Should People Be Allowed to Own Guns?

Post by Quotidian » May 8th, 2013, 6:03 am

Wanabe wrote:Since you said "any government" though...
Correction - I should have said, any democratically-elected government. Not, for instance, the North Korean government or some other crazed dictatorship. Any elected government is answerable to the populace, at least in principle, whereas the same may not be said for Wayne LaPierre's 'good guy with a gun'.

I wonder what the founders of the nation meant by 'right to bear arms'. Perhaps the right should be extended to the kind of muzzle-loading muskets that were available at the time. Perhaps they didn't envisage 'arms' to be 'military-grade weapons that can kill or maim tens people in a couple of minutes'.

I think, however, that is probably too subtle a question for the political atmosphere.
Eonblue wrote:You would leave us weaker my friend. The weak would get weaker. The strong and the criminals would get stronger. The distribution of illegal gun would sky rocket.
This is the voice of fear, isn't it? Can't you see this is only fear speaking? Once it takes hold, it spirals, so everyone must have a gun, because of the fear you will be the only one unarmed.

Which president said 'we have nothing to fear but fear itself'?

There's a chart on the Huffington Post about US gun deaths since Newtown. Currently the figure is 2,244.
Last edited by Quotidian on May 8th, 2013, 7:07 am, edited 1 time in total.
'For there are many here among us who think that life is but a joke' ~ Dylan

Xris
Posts: 5962
Joined: December 27th, 2010, 11:37 am
Location: Cornwall UK

Re: Should People Be Allowed to Own Guns?

Post by Xris » May 8th, 2013, 6:35 am

wanabe wrote:Quotidian, re post # 72:

At one point the US was a militia too. Self defense is not insurrection, I said nothing of that any group would appoint them self to power. I'm glad you trust the government so much though, someone should, but then again you have very different socio-political experience.

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."-Benjamin Franklin

Since you said "any government" though, it seems you wouldn't mind a fascist state that only uses tear gas, flash-bangs, tasers, fire hoses, dogs, Dazer-Lasers and random beatings; so long as they don't have guns. Those things can all kill and maimed too.

I agree that many of the people in the gun lobby are completely crazy, but responsible people should still be allowed to have guns. Explosive munitions are different, it's exponential harder to prevent collateral damage.
So you agree with gun control?

Keithprosser3
Posts: 364
Joined: April 15th, 2013, 7:22 am

Re: Should People Be Allowed to Own Guns?

Post by Keithprosser3 » May 8th, 2013, 12:51 pm

I agree that many of the people in the gun lobby are completely crazy, but responsible people should still be allowed to have guns.
Only people who don't want a gun should be allowed to have one.

Post Reply