NationStates Jolt Archive

---Post deleted by NationStates Moderators---

---Post deleted by NationStates Moderators---

no way man guns kill too many ppl the fact is u dont need a gun to defend your self and i pity the person that thinks thats the case. ppl now adays are to quick to resort to violence to solve things if ppl used there heads and not there trigger finger things would have better out comes

Link to proposal: http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/page=UN_proposal1/match=BAN%20GUN%20CONTROL

BAN GUN CONTROL

Category: Gun Control; A resolution to tighten or relax gun control laws.
Decision: Relax

Proposed by: Christian Knightsssss


Description: Ban all gun control, let our God given right to own guns be free all over the world!


Voting Ends: Sat Apr 3 2004

Right. Explain to me why all civilians -- militant and violent criminals included -- should be given access to military hardware? I think I'll just hope you either aren't serious or didn't really consider very well the concept of banning "all" gun control.

no way man guns kill too many ppl the fact is u dont need a gun to defend your self and i pity the person that thinks thats the case. ppl now adays are to quick to resort to violence to solve things if ppl used there heads and not there trigger finger things would have better out comes

I wish you the best of luck disarming muggers with the sheer power of political speech.

Wide spread ownership of small arms, will certainly cut down on "home-invasion" crimes.

However, how big a gun is protected? There is a rational basis for excluding WMD's [Nukes, Anthrax, Sarin] from public ownership.

For a murkier comparison, all of these items are dealy due to chemical combustion driving metal through the target.
- Bomb (JDAM, MOAB)
- Artillery (Howitzer)
- LAW & RPG (Javelin, TOW)
- Mortars (various)
- Very heavy Machineguns (MK15 Phalanx, 20 mm Naval)
- Heavy Machinguns (M2 M312, .50 caliber)
- Not so heavy Machineguns (M60, 7.62 mm)
- Personal heavy gun (M21 Sniper, 7.62 mm)
- Personal not so heavy machine gun (M16 light machinegun, MP5 Submachinegun, 5.56 mm)
- Pistols

Black and White decisions are easy. This one is rather grey.

---Post deleted by NationStates Moderators---

Seems like a decision to be made by each nation, ergo no need for a UN resolution that will be shot down by various socialists and dictators. In Psychotropics we already allow most guns to be carried by private citizens... including m-60's and 50 cal. Barret sniper rifles. Only those who have broken laws are forbidden from carrying or using them.

Bishop Heston, Minister of Arms for all Psychotropics

---Post deleted by NationStates Moderators---

Insulting national leaders or political ideologies is not a suggested way to win support for a proposal like this.

Secondly, whose God is guaranteeing the ownership of guns? No Naucist deity ever said anything in favor (or against) gun ownership.

Third, crime is a piss-poor argument in favor of an international proposal against gun control... People in Gethamane don't get robbed. We have very little crime, and even less violent crime. So why would we want our citizens to carry guns around freely?

The only way a citizen in Gethamane gets a gun is if the government issues them one. As of now, I'm not sure how one of our citizens would get a gun if they lacked the funds to purchase one. I suppose they could steal one from another country. Hardly seems worth the expense, to me, as they would be able to commit one crime (maybe) before they were caught.

---Post deleted by NationStates Moderators---

so if you ban guns, like you liberals want, whats stopping a criminal from getting a gun and what would I defend myself with?

Quite frankly, it's idiotic to propose that the only two options on the issue of firearm control are "Ban all guns" and "Allow all guns." Explain to me again why you need antitank weapons and heavy fire suppression weapons to defend yourself from muggers and home invaders? Better yet, why do you, a civilian, need a 105mm tank gun? Considering that much of gun control is aimed at restricting known offenders' access to weapons, would you care to explain why convicted, violent criminals should be given access to all of these weapons?

And, of course, calling people "liberals" who may or may not be so does nothing to settle an argument -- to many people, it will actually give the appearance that you yourself have no argument and must instead rely on what you seem to perceive as epithets.

I object to this foolish bill! What is to stop a child from illegaly purchasing a gun at a gun show? Or a criminal buying a guy on the spot? I believe everyone who is of age and a law abiding citizen should own a gun if they desire one, but give me a break! NO GUN CONTROL... REDICULOUS!