Arm the Victim or Take Away the Gun
Arm the Victim
23.9% (54)
23.9% (54)
Ban Guns
75.7% (171)
75.7% (171)
Want to vote? Register now or Sign Up with Facebook
Poll: Arm the Victims or Take Away the Gun?

 Pages 1 2 3 NEXT
 

We all know whats going on in the news lately and everyone here in the US is arguing over banning guns. The arguments that I keep hearing are ban guns so no one can get them or give everyone guns.

What I really want to know is what do you my fellow escapist think?

I personally think that we should allow teachers to have a weapon in the classroom (doesn't necessarily need to be a gun) and have it in their desk or purse. Also if the teacher does want to keep a gun in their classroom they should be required to go through some sort of gun safety course and gun handling course.

If people are worried that the teachers aren't trust worthy then who is?

I think it's wrong to simplify the incredibly complex issue of gun control down to a simple binary choice. I think both options are completely stupid, and completely ignore a lot of the real issues at hand.

ohnoitsabear:
I think it's wrong to simplify the incredibly complex issue of gun control down to a simple binary choice. I think both options are completely stupid, and completely ignore a lot of the real issues at hand.

Thank you for reading my mind and writing what I wanted to say here. I am extremely sleepy, so you wrote it better than I ever could. More concise, too.

So yeah - this is a wrong question to be asking. But have fun, I think it's going to get...warm, soon.

If I had to pick one or the other, it has to be banning guns. Arming everyone with guns is just a stupid, stupid idea.

firelightning1:
We all know whats going on in the news lately and everyone here in the US is arguing over banning guns. The arguments that I keep hearing are ban guns so no one can get them or give everyone guns.

What I really want to know is what do you my fellow escapist think?

I personally think that we should allow teachers to have a weapon in the classroom (doesn't necessarily need to be a gun) and have it in their desk or purse. Also if the teacher does want to keep a gun in their classroom they should be required to go through some sort of gun safety course and gun handling course.

If people are worried that the teachers aren't trust worthy then who is?

Arm a teacher? Oh, just wait and SEE what happens there when the teacher gets fed up with a student (or worse, the student with the teacher). I don't see that working per se.

Still, getting rid of the guns just won't happen. Every time you try and take something big and desired away from a people, they do three things: Ignore it, fight it, or take it underground. Once you acknowledge that it just won't WORK to try and remove guns, you can focus on other options.

I say go a step further, arm the kids.

Give em all little 6 shooters and teach them how to use them.

Sure we might have a few fatalities in the first year but then they would learn they are dangerous and to only be used when someone else pulls a gun on you.

If you arm everyone problem solved :D at least we can have an old fashioned western shoot out now and then.

On a serious note i am truly saddened by what happened and i don't believe more guns is the answer, tighter restrictions and laws are needed, some a form of gun control.

Also the argument 'lol criminals' well take this recent kid as an example he got his gun from his mother not a criminal most of these school shootings tend to be done by social outcasts so i would be highly surprised if they would even approach a 'criminal' to buy a gun let alone know where to find one.

Neither will change anything.

The only way to deal with the problem is to deal with society as a whole. Since society is what is the problem. That and allowing crazies to run free.

TopazFusion:

FalloutJack:
Once you acknowledge that it just won't WORK to try and remove guns, you can focus on other options.

This gets said a lot, but no one ever identifies exactly what these "other options" actually are.

From where I'm standing, the only other option is to 'do nothing'. Which I suppose is the most likely option anyway...

More careful screening process is what I would say. MOST gun-owners are just hunters and hobby-shooters, say. There's a million of them for every ONE nutjob or some other ginormous figure that I can't be bothered to look up. No fair punishing the people who aren't the problem. Arm the people, but try and find out which one's...not all there.

That's a bit of a limited option. Maybe there should be more selections than that....

Yes, because the good response to a nutjob with a gun, is giving a panicked victim a gun as well. That sure as hell won't rack up the death toll any higher.

Out of these 2 options? Ban the guns. Why the hell people are allowed to have guns an America, who AREN'T hunters or people who live on farms, is absolutely beyond me.

I say get rid of the people, then all that's left is just a gun and as the NRA says "guns don't kill people".

Arming everyone is stupid, and banning all guns is impossible even in countries with gun control.

Just keep assault rifles and machine guns out of the general public's hands. A standard six shot revolver is more than enough to protect your home or feel safe on the street. And for God's sake, keep guns out of school!

TopazFusion:
SNIP

No no no, you cite a 'might be'. Since removing the guns is completely impossible, you have no choice but to be more careful. We can't have you crossing off something like that because the crazy person might manage to steal a gun and use it. I might stumble upon an AK-47 tomorrow, but I highly doubt it. I may even know where to find guns and bullets that are not mine, but it does not necessarily mean I will get to them. We work on what's safER first. It's not all about fixing it overnight, because you can't. It's about making people aware and looking more carefully and getting others to be more responsible personally. That is ALWAYS a step in the right direction, as people should just be more responsible about alot of things, personally.

dumbseizure:
Why the hell people are allowed to have guns an America, who AREN'T hunters or people who live on farms, is absolutely beyond me.

I just want to edit in something here because I think I know: Respect for history. This country was defended by common people with guns during the Revolutionary War aside from the actual soldiers. And while there have been plenty of irresponsible times since then, no one has repealed this notion, most likely because of that.

WaitWHAT:
That's a bit of a limited option. Maybe there should be more selections than that....

no, because in the end it all boils down to have guns or not have guns. we already have 20 threads like these, why make another?

FalloutJack:

TopazFusion:
SNIP

No no no, you cite a 'might be'. Since removing the guns is completely impossible, you have no choice but to be more careful. We can't have you crossing off something like that because the crazy person might manage to steal a gun and use it. I might stumble upon an AK-47 tomorrow, but I highly doubt it. I may even know where to find guns and bullets that are not mine, but it does not necessarily mean I will get to them. We work on what's safER first. It's not all about fixing it overnight, because you can't. It's about making people aware and looking more carefully and getting others to be more responsible personally. That is ALWAYS a step in the right direction, as people should just be more responsible about alot of things, personally.

dumbseizure:
Why the hell people are allowed to have guns an America, who AREN'T hunters or people who live on farms, is absolutely beyond me.

I just want to edit in something here because I think I know: Respect for history. This country was defended by common people with guns during the Revolutionary War aside from the actual soldiers. And while there have been plenty of irresponsible times since then, no one has repealed this notion, most likely because of that.

Yes, okay.

Now my question, how many revolutionary wars have American civilians participated in since then? You are honestly saying that, because some many many years ago, civilians fought in a war with soldiers, that at this point in time, with no wars being fought on American soil, they are still allowed to carry said guns?

That sounds absolutely ridiculous.

dumbseizure:
SNIP

I didn't say it was perfect. I said it was a time-honored tradition. There are many traditions in the world you will not approve of. This is one in which it is not feasible to undo.

FalloutJack:

dumbseizure:
SNIP

I didn't say it was perfect. I said it was a time-honored tradition. There are many traditions in the world you will not approve of. This is one in which it is not feasible to undo.

Sorry if that sounded in anyway aggressive or condescending, I didn't mean any attack like that, I am just trying to wrap my head around these reasons.

Leave the country. Because you grew up in one which thinks having a huge weapons industry is a-ok. There's nothing else to it.

dumbseizure:

FalloutJack:

dumbseizure:
SNIP

I didn't say it was perfect. I said it was a time-honored tradition. There are many traditions in the world you will not approve of. This is one in which it is not feasible to undo.

Sorry if that sounded in anyway aggressive or condescending, I didn't mean any attack like that, I am just trying to wrap my head around these reasons.

I didn't take it as such. Just making a point.

TopazFusion:

FalloutJack:
Once you acknowledge that it just won't WORK to try and remove guns, you can focus on other options.

This gets said a lot, but no one ever identifies exactly what these "other options" actually are.

From where I'm standing, the only other option is to 'do nothing'. Which I suppose is the most likely option anyway...

What are you talking about, I been posting this crap for the last couple days.

Fix the prisons. They just turn out worse criminals, and act as spawning pits for nasty prison gangs that can extend their influence.

Fix education, upward mobility. Once people leave poverty, they are less inclined for crime. Cuts off the "infinite bodies" thing gangs have going.

Fix the drugs. Once the drug problems are fixed, gangs would have less money to bypass existing laws.

Dismantle and or weaken the cartels and their influence.

Root out gangs in the military. Guns cant be easily stolen from armories if they don't have someone on the inside.

Gun problems exist because we allow them to exist through ignoring the source. Once we fix the source, gun problems become a non issue.

If we stop empowering crime through all these barriers, everything will fall into place.

Of course America is lazy and this is a lot of work. Not sure why anyone would treat their political party like a fanatical religion but we can all be rational can we?

EDIT: Mental health funding would also go a long way.

Arm the victims because banning guns is no option. Banning guns is just another way of pacifying the population.

ohnoitsabear:
I think it's wrong to simplify the incredibly complex issue of gun control down to a simple binary choice. I think both options are completely stupid, and completely ignore a lot of the real issues at hand.

This. There is also a lot of other problems here besides gun control. Gun control laws are not the only reason these things happen and only people who are strongly anti-guns will say so.
There are a lot of mental health problems that could be addressed(Without just throwing drugs at all the problems), as well as increasing of education.
Also, while we are at it, why don't we hold the media responsible a little bit? They glorify these people, you see their faces plastered up on every news site and news channel for weeks after an incident. They become immortal, no one will ever forget their name. All you do is create a society where if you want to go out in a blaze of glory so you'll be remembered, you need to try and top the last guy so the media will jump all over it.

firelightning1:
I personally think that we should allow teachers to have a weapon in the classroom (doesn't necessarily need to be a gun) and have it in their desk or purse. Also if the teacher does want to keep a gun in their classroom they should be required to go through some sort of gun safety course and gun handling course.

Seriously? Exactly how would that work? I mean, it sounds like the shittiest idea ever because:

- The teacher can be subuded and the gun taken (sure, some teachers are fit, but most? The average highschooler can take em out easily). IE, it gives an easy access to guns for crazy people, and they need to do nothing but subdue an old or feeble teacher.

- The "desk" of every teacher in US would need to be a minisafebox.

- Schools would need to increase drastically their security to prevent the guns from being taken OR teachers would need to carry armed twice a day through school halls.

- Teachers would need to take a psych evaluation every year at least.

- If a crazy dude flips, then what mate? You think the psycho wont wait till the teacher is a couple of steps away and then shoot him first? Or should teachers also wear vests?

- Teachers would need to be at least at US marine shooting level. A psycho is killing students you say? Well, the teacher would be obligated to take action, possibly needing to shot him in a very stressful situation with rooms full of children.

I do not have an answer, but that one seriously sounds bad. As a Mexican I really don't care that much either way, just wish you would sort that cesspool of arm system you have so they wouldn't reach here.

Between these two extremes, I'd have to choose banning the guns.

The teacher, no matter all the gun safety and gun handling courses they'd had, is in all likelihood, going to be freaking out like all hell if something like this happens. And that isn't going to make it any safer. And when these panicked teachers get killed, all you've gone and done is give the killer more guns and ammo to kill with.

SimpleThunda':
Arm the victims because banning guns is no option. Banning guns is just another way of pacifying the population.

Indeed, which is a GOOD thing in my opinion. How many times have guns been used in a BAD way since the initial revolution? And then how many times have they been used in a "GOOD" way, by overthrowing the goverment? I don't see Europeans, Canadians and other western nations being suppresed or whatever because the population is not armed like a disorganized mob like in America.

As a Brit, I really can't understand America's gun culture. It's freaky to me.
However, I seriously doubt that the answer to everybody getting shot all the time is more guns.
I don't think `ban guns` is possible with so many people weirdly attached to their guns, but their definitely needs to be more control.

Neither.
When you ban guns, fucked up people who are planning to shoot somebody WILL find a way to find a gun. Even if they don't they'll kill people with something else.
Banning them is bloody useless.

Give everyone a tranquilizer gun. Problem solved.

Aetherlblade:

SimpleThunda':
Arm the victims because banning guns is no option. Banning guns is just another way of pacifying the population.

Indeed, which is a GOOD thing in my opinion. How many times have guns been used in a BAD way since the initial revolution? And then how many times have they been used in a "GOOD" way, by overthrowing the goverment? I don't see Europeans, Canadians and other western nations being suppresed or whatever because the population is not armed like a disorganized mob like in America.

You don't see, because you are blind.

dumbseizure:
Now my question, how many revolutionary wars have American civilians participated in since then? You are honestly saying that, because some many many years ago, civilians fought in a war with soldiers, that at this point in time, with no wars being fought on American soil, they are still allowed to carry said guns?

That sounds absolutely ridiculous.

Still with a sense of history, it wasn't that long ago we fought the Civil War, either.

Whether you agree or not, it's an interesting lesson in history. Something to think about...

In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

------------------------------

In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

------------------------------

Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.

------------------------------

China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

------------------------------

Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

------------------------------

Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

------------------------------

Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million 'educated' people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

-----------------------------

Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million.

SimpleThunda':

Aetherlblade:

SimpleThunda':
Arm the victims because banning guns is no option. Banning guns is just another way of pacifying the population.

Indeed, which is a GOOD thing in my opinion. How many times have guns been used in a BAD way since the initial revolution? And then how many times have they been used in a "GOOD" way, by overthrowing the goverment? I don't see Europeans, Canadians and other western nations being suppresed or whatever because the population is not armed like a disorganized mob like in America.

You don't see, because you are blind.

Right, that is a great argument you got there..

My problem comes from giving people guns who have no idea what the fuck they are doing with them.

Letting every random Joe own a gun is just about the silliest thing I can think of.

Mavis the Maths teacher pulls out a gun to protect her class. The safest place to stand is directly infront of her. She's never used a gun before and she isn't prepared for the kickback. As soon as she pulls that trigger the bullets will be flying everywhere but the direction she wants them to.

The attacker is safe but the roof is fucked.

Anyone saying to "arm the kids" has obviously never taught in an American school before.

Some of the kids I deal with on a daily basis are vicious, unstable psychopaths, and you want to give them guns so that they can shoot each other to death instead of just ripping each other's hair out and beating each other half to death?

Sound strategy, Einstein!

ohnoitsabear:
I think it's wrong to simplify the incredibly complex issue of gun control down to a simple binary choice. I think both options are completely stupid, and completely ignore a lot of the real issues at hand.

Count me as number 3 to say the word "this"

Yes... Since weapons bring so much peace and prosperity to the US states I can't imagine how more guns would do any harm!

 Pages 1 2 3 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked