No Firearms Allowed on these Premisis.

[azrael the reaper_95210]

"Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws."
- Plato  

[Verderbnis]

azrael the reaper

"Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws."
- Plato

Unfortunately, most people tend to be bad in given situations.  

[Starstruck Rainbow]

DvnT

Put it this way:
Your a parent. Your child goes to a public school that has poor security [As in, no metal detectors, no Detective in building] and is 5+ minutes from a local police station. At this school, guns and other firearms are prohibited, even from teachers. I understand not letting minors use the guns. You think "Because it's against the rules, no one will do it."
One day, a shooter breaks in, or a kid brings a gun to school and shoots up the class your child was in. Your child is dead because the teacher was not allowed to bring his gun to school for protection. Even the AUTHORITATIVE FIGURE wasn't allowed to have his gun because he was on school property.
The police show up minutes later --too late to help your child-- and arrest the person who shot.

I'm in a school right now where a situation like this is very likely. So don't tell me that there is no reason for anyone to use fire arms except the authorities.

Well one, I grew up knowing how to shoot, so us "shooters" are responsible, ok well most of us. There are a couple crazies. What you said about how just because it's banned doesn't mean people won't do it, as humans, we tend to want what we can't have. So people want to do a mass shooting thing because they can't. Then you get the people who love the adrenaline rush when they have to run away. So I think it would be better if guns weren't banned so that you did have someone to protect people and get the person in a state where they're not dead, but can't run away or do anything back.  

[Intelife]

Well, not to be dismissive or encouraging of either side, I would simply like to bring up an event related to the school shootings topic: Columbine. Three kids, two of whom did the shooting, got their guns from a dealer. Not their parents, not a store, an illegal arms salesman. Then, they proceeded to take said guns, not even simple pistols, these were automatic weapons, and killed over twenty kids, and injured more. Guess what? Guns weren't permitted legally within fifty yards of the high school at the time, much less behind a desk.

I think that the proposal to allow guns would be turning every cafeteria into another corner store, and even libraries, those quiet places where people read books? yeah, they'd turn into warehouses where you're lucky if the people with guns are nice enough to wait for you to leave the literature.

That would be the pessimistic view, but also a very cruel reality. The problem with the arms laws is that if we eliminated the bans, then the less self-restrictive people would run wild, and others would join them. chaos would insue. this is simply because the laws that are in place tick them off, so if they vanished there would be a celebration annointed in hot metal and possibly blood.

So in other words, it's pointless to lift the gun bans, because it would make the situation worse than it is. However, allowing certain members of staff in different institutions carry firearms is plausible, so long as they have the qualifications to do so.  

[Drunken_Ninja08]

The US second amendment states that US citizens have a right to bear arms to maintain a well regulated militia. Now, some people think that this militia is only for war, but this militia can be use against crime, also. In some places, where there are stricter gun laws, the burglary rate is up 30% at LEAST, including 'hot' burglaries, in which the homeowner is present in the house at the time of the burglary. In the US, however, the 'hot' burglary rate is only at around 15%. Why would burglars in, say, Canada, where there are stricter gun laws, be more willing to enter an occupied home and rob the place than their American cousins? Simple. They are afraid to get shot. Most burglars won't enter a home if they are even uncertain if the homeowner has a gun. Take this as an example. A state (can't think of the name right now) made it mandatory for every household to own a gun. While the burglary rate in the area around the state was up around 30%, the state's burglary rate was down to 8%, all for the simple reason because burglars fear getting shot.  

[ebony etta]

Well, I live in Australia where we have a gun ban nationally. And guess what? Deaths caused by gunfire are dramatically low in comparison to the US.

Therefore, I think gun bans are great. Civilians shouldnt have access to them, because Civilians dont need them.  

[Drunken_Ninja08]

Interesting, cause that's not what I heard from other people who live there. Ok, so deaths caused by firearms may be low, but how about violent crimes, robberies, burglaries, etc. that included a firearm? From what I have heard from people living in Australia, violent crimes that don't result in death that include a firearm are up almost 80% compared to the U.S. And let's say this: you are home alone in your house, you don't have a firearm and a man breaks into your house. Now don't you wish you had a firearm? Sometimes, you don't even have to fire a shot. Just raise the gun and the burglar bolts. With said firearm, you could prevent your possessions from being stolen, from yourself becoming raped/assaulted, and also from the possibility of being killed. Just because you are considered a civilian doesn't mean you can't defend yourself.  

[ebony etta]

So what exactly have you heard from people who live here? Did they tell you that those rare incidences of deaths caused by gunfire, are often by the underworld and other crim's killing each other? Or were they merely having a whinge about how hard it is to get a gun license here?

Guns are hard to come by here buddy - and thats the way it should be.  

[Drunken_Ninja08]

Just because it makes it hard to get guns, doesn't mean that criminals can't get them. A determined criminal can get almost any weapon he or she wants if he or she is determined enough to commit a crime. Just because you banned guns from the law-abiding citizens, doesn't mean that you stop a criminal, who does is not a law-abiding citizen, from getting a firearm.
What I personally have heard is that crime rate has increased dramatically beyond what the US has. Now, because the U.S. has a greater overall population, then it is going to seem as though the U.S. generally has more crime. Naturally, with a greater population, there will be more crime. But, if we get a crime rate percentage per population stat, then you can see how close the crime rate really is. As much as I would like to continue talking about Australia, I would like to return to my home-country. Banning guns of any kind is first and foremost unconstitutional. It would be like having the government regulate religion or the freedom of speech.  

[Charlie Dodo]

I think carrying firearms should be banned almost entirely. We don't need to carry around killing tools in this day and age.  

[Virtus Fierkin]

I am a blackbelt in Shuri Ryu Karate and have had extensive training in MMA and Judo, with a good amount of training in other styles, and I've helped my father in many of his self defense workshops .... 85% of all people who carry a weapon and are attacked have that weapon turned on them. It all boils down to your training and the situation.
As to "should guns be banned," I say no. But we need a better system for them. And people need to be *trained* to use them, something that could be as good as it could be bad.
"Blaming Columbine on guns is like blaming spoons for Rosie O'Donnell being fat."
-Anonymous.
"7  

[Master Azrael Reaper]

I think many people overlook this but one reason i think the founding fathers put that amendment in there is so that if and when our government puts us into a situation like the founding fathers were in, the common people have the ability to somewhat effectivly rise up just like they finally did. Im not saying we SHOULD rise up, im just stating that with the right to bear arms, we CAN if the time comes.  

[the greatest wizard]

while guns are tools of destruction and murder,they have a good side to the situation as well...

Pro:They can kill people who may be innocent and give reason to panic.
Con:They can also save lives with the right person holding the gun.

if i think of more to add i will....  

[Virtus Fierkin]

Master Azrael Reaper

I think many people overlook this but one reason i think the founding fathers put that amendment in there is so that if and when our government puts us into a situation like the founding fathers were in, the common people have the ability to somewhat effectivly rise up just like they finally did. Im not saying we SHOULD rise up, im just stating that with the right to bear arms, we CAN if the time comes.

Actually, guns were given for a very specific reason, and not one that people use them for today... unfortunately, i cannot remember exactly what my Political Science class of last semester said....
Sorry!
"7  

[Drunken_Ninja08]

the greatest wizard

while guns are tools of destruction and murder,they have a good side to the situation as well...

Pro:They can kill people who may be innocent and give reason to panic.
Con:They can also save lives with the right person holding the gun.

if i think of more to add i will....

Erm...you need to switch those around. A pro is a good thing while a con is a bad thing...anyways...

Here is a quote for ya:

"Gun control? It's the best thing you can do for crooks and gangsters," Gravano said. "I want you to have noting. If I'm a bad guy, I'm always gonna have a gun. Safety locks? You will pull the trigger with a lock on, and I'll Pull the trigger. We'll see who wins."
Sammy "the Bull" Gravano, the Mafia turncoat.
Gun Control: A benefit to the bad guys.