Americans feel safer living in armed community

[Jazzy]

Despite the Obama administration’s hopes for gun-control legislation in 2014, a recent survey has found that 7-in-10 Americans would prefer to reside somewhere where residents can have a firearm for self defense, demonstrating that support for more stringent gun laws continues to fade.

Debate statement:

• Living in an armed community, makes it a safer place to live, right?

Discuss.....

 

[Nebulous's iconNebulous]

If there were no guns to begin with, there would be no accidental / intentional shootings to begin with... But taking all the guns away wont stop all violence. Countries that don't allow guns still have lots of homicides and other crimes to deal with everyday.

 

[Bluezone777]

I'd say you are only as safe as you feel you are. If you don't feel safe then nothing will change that and if you do feel safe then nothing you do would change that either.

For some, having a gun in the home gives them the feeling that they are safe but the truth is they are just as unsafe with or without it. Removing a single tool that one could use to kill another won't end the violence. If you want to do that then you need to get to the root cause of what makes one want to kill another and fix that then you will see the violence stop.

 

[DrLeftover]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_-N9_tnWBo

odd.... youtube deleted the original.

Try it now.

 

[Bluezone777]

The video you posted Doc doesn't play. It just gives a generic error message when I attempt to play it.

 

[DrLeftover]

reposted

sorry about that

 

[Evil Teddy Bear of Doom]

Removing the guns from American society at this point will only serve to empower the criminal element that refuses to surrender their weapons.

Who would realistically believe that criminals would hand over their pistols, shotguns, and rifles because they suddenly became illegal?

So with criminals having all the weapons and the knowledge that the populace at large was unarmed, they'd have carte blanche to wreak havoc with little danger to themselves.

Gun control advocates that point to countries where citizens are unarmed conveniently overlook the simple fact that citizens in those countries have always been unarmed. Guns are unheard of in many countries because the sheer cost of importing them are prohibitive for the common citizen, which keeps their societies from becoming as saturated as ours.

Aside from all that, there is no such thing as "gun violence". Guns aren't violent. The person holding the gun is violent. If you want to prevent shooting sprees, get the government to fund mental health clinics and make therapy more socially acceptable and mainstream.

God knows, we could all use a shrink!

 

[Kirito]

Removing the guns from American society at this point will only serve to empower the criminal element that refuses to surrender their weapons.

Who would realistically believe that criminals would hand over their pistols, shotguns, and rifles because they suddenly became illegal?

So with criminals having all the weapons and the knowledge that the populace at large was unarmed, they'd have carte blanche to wreak havoc with little danger to themselves.

Gun control advocates that point to countries where citizens are unarmed conveniently overlook the simple fact that citizens in those countries have always been unarmed. Guns are unheard of in many countries because the sheer cost of importing them are prohibitive for the common citizen, which keeps their societies from becoming as saturated as ours.

I can agree with this partially. I'm kinda undecided.

Coming from a country where, aside from a very small amount hunting rifles, there aren't many guns around I feel very safe going outside. At times, when some drunks were hitting a guy, I didn't feel afraid to step in and calm the situation. This would be very different if every 12 year old could be conceiling a gun. Now I know that mostly just happens in poor gang areas, but let's just say that's the area I live in in my city.

However, if this is already the case, what good could come out of disarming the normal citizens while the criminals remain armed? More crimes of passion committed with baseball bats and knives? =/ I guess accidental shootings would go down a lot...

On the other hand, IF you want to change something you have to start somewhere. You can't really go about disarming criminals if they can just go out and steal it from the next idiot who leaves it in his car.

It's funny though, I'd feel much less safe if I lived in an armed neighbourhood. Just this new year's eve we saw a lot of cops armed with semi-automatic rifles instead of just the handgun and we immediately felt a lot less safe. (not just me, it was even in the papers the next day). So I guess it's also very cultural.

 

[DrLeftover]

Who needs a gun to hurt somebody and be incredibly stupid doing it?

January 9, 2014
HOLLYWOOD (CBS4) — CBS4 News has obtained a series of new and disturbing cell phone videos that show a vicious, unrelenting beating of a Hollywood teenager last November outside a home on McKinley Street.

Hollywood Police say the videos depict Ericka Avery and Patricia Montes relentlessly punching and kicking the victim while telling her that the beating will cease if she has sex with a man named Jayvon Woolfork. Last month prosecutors showed a series of videos in court of the attack from inside the house. These new videos show what occurred before the attack moved inside.

As the videos begin, the victim is on the ground being dragged on the ground and sustaining a series of blows from her attackers. Voices recorded on the videos refer to the victim having been maced. At one point, one of the females is heard asking, “Are you recording again?” before walking over to the victim and forcefully slapping her in the head.

The videos reveal that at least two young men were watching the beating. One of the men is heard saying, “They don’t like this girl.” One of the females responds, “I told you we were gonna f— somebody up.”

http://miami.cbslocal.com/2014/01/09/exclusive-new-videos-released-in-attack-on-hollywood-teen/

 

[Red Herring]

Gun control has always been a tricky subject, from my perspective. Each side of the argument have a very wide variety of legitimate points.

Still, I'm more or less on the anti-gun control side of things. Guns are probably your most viable options of self-defense if you are accosted by criminal elements. Removing guns from the picture won't remove the criminal element who may still acquire their own guns illegally, it'll just remove an option of self-defense against them.

I think of it as something akin to a "Mutually Assured Destruction" policy, although it's a bit different in practice. MAD indeed, but effective. If criminals are willing to be criminals and employ violence, then they should be prepared to meet with resistance and possible death from those not satisfied with simply lying down and taking it.

 

[LegendHidden]

I think having a gun is more safe ... , but you don't want the wrong people to get a gun in their hands

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

Of course you are safer having a gun for self defense to carry with you or in the home. Countless senior citizens and women have saved there own lives where in any other circumstance they would have never been able to fight off the attacker. My wife of nine years wanted me to get rid of all my guns before we got married. I said that will never happen and now the anti gun lady carries a .357.

 

[DrLeftover]

But see, since the criminals are intimidated by lawful citizens being able to defend themselves and their families and friends, as well as their property, Progressives, Liberals and others who believe in coddling the bad guys want to take your weapons away from those who do NOT routinely break the law.

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

When they can actually show police prevent crimes 100% of the time and not be the clean up crew they usually are. Then they might and I say might have a point. But then they would have to prove that governments will never become tyrannical over the people ever again. But then liberals cant prove that now can they since they are the species destroying our personal rights here in the U.S. and across the globe. So its a mixture of one group of liberals who want power. And another group of liberals ignorant to believe society is actually safer without guns. Damn bastards the whole lot of them!

 

[fantanoice]

Gun control advocates that point to countries where citizens are unarmed conveniently overlook the simple fact that citizens in those countries have always been unarmed. Guns are unheard of in many countries because the sheer cost of importing them are prohibitive for the common citizen, which keeps their societies from becoming as saturated as ours.

Incorrect, Australia outlawed guns in the 90s but up until that point they were widely available like they are in the USA.

Removing the guns from American society at this point will only serve to empower the criminal element that refuses to surrender their weapons.

Who would realistically believe that criminals would hand over their pistols, shotguns, and rifles because they suddenly became illegal?

So with criminals having all the weapons and the knowledge that the populace at large was unarmed, they'd have carte blanche to wreak havoc with little danger to themselves.

Guns aren't only involved in violent encounters, they're also involved in suicides and accidents. Outlawing them here in Aus made gun-related suicides and accidents plummet, and it is estimated that it has saved 200 lives each year since the laws were introduced, which to me equates to more than only serving to empower the criminal element that refuses to surrender their weapons.

Though it is worth mentioning that most firearms used in crime are illegal / unlicensed, so the Government wouldn't be able to seize them anyway.

If you want to prevent shooting sprees, get the government to fund mental health clinics and make therapy more socially acceptable and mainstream.

Yes, this, definitely. It doesn't exactly help prevent accidental death, but would do wonders to help prevent things like suicide and crime. I would opt for both this and gun control.

Aside from all that, there is no such thing as "gun violence". Guns aren't violent. The person holding the gun is violent.

You do realise "gun violence" is a term used for violence involving a gun, not for violence initiated by a gun, right?

 

[DrLeftover]

This was an interesting discussion on the matter in 2011

In the days since the shootings in Tucson of Ms. Giffords and 19 other people, there is little hue and cry for tighter gun controls in the state, which has among the most permissive firearm laws in the country. If anything, the debate in Arizona is on whether more citizens should carry weapons, and be ready to use them, to protect public safety. This argument -- "more guns, less crime" -- has encouraged concealed-carry laws in states across the nation in the last decade. Does it make sense?

http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/01/11/more-guns-less-crime

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

Incorrect, Australia outlawed guns in the 90s but up until that point they were widely available like they are in the USA.

I remember when that happened here in the states the NRA campaigned hard using photos and video of Australians turning in there guns. It made me become a life time NRA member.

 

[fantanoice]

Incorrect, Australia outlawed guns in the 90s but up until that point they were widely available like they are in the USA.

I remember when that happened here in the states the NRA campaigned hard using photos and video of Australians turning in there guns. It made me become a life time NRA member.

And look where that's gotten you...

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

Incorrect, Australia outlawed guns in the 90s but up until that point they were widely available like they are in the USA.

I remember when that happened here in the states the NRA campaigned hard using photos and video of Australians turning in there guns. It made me become a life time NRA member.

And look where that's gotten you...

Its done me pretty good since it saved my life. And it makes me feel way better my wife carries concealed. There would be a civil war in this country before Americans marched like beaten people and turned there guns in like a enemy of the state. If government can have guns the people should have them also. Government should have no rights over the people.

 

[Evil Eye]

Government should have no rights over the people.

Then what's the point in having one?