NationStates Jolt Archive

It does exactly what it says on the tin. Tell me what the good things about guns are, instead of whinging about their killing power.

Guns are only made to kill people/things.

People Argue that it gives you the right to protect yourself... however the person attacking you Also has a gun. Result... More people die.

Their killing power is what makes them good. Especially when used against extremists. Also, carrying a gun around adds a boost to my already over-inflated sense of self importance. Far more than booze does.
Furthermore, when I'm drunk and gregarious I have difficulty getting a womans attentions, when I'm armed, I'm the center of their universe!!!

It does exactly what it says on the tin. Tell me what the good things about guns are, instead of whinging about their killing power.
good question. the only thing that i can see they are designed for is to kill things. there are many other non-lethal ways of disabling(sp?) an attacker.
also, before anyone arcs up about 'if they have a gun, i can use my gun to defend myself', dont bother. that means you are the one killing them, not the other way round. i may not be religious or whatever, but i still dont believe in killing another person.

side note: for a predominantly christain nation, which has, at the moment, the ten commandments on their court buildings, i find it kind of odd that they constantly violate the commandment 'thou shall not kill', regardless of attacking or defence.....

It does exactly what it says on the tin. Tell me what the good things about guns are, instead of whinging about their killing power.

Well, target practice is a good way to relieve stress, and trap shooting is fun competition.

Also hunting. I enjoy fresh venison and rabbit stew, although I rarely hunt, myself.

Also, the tens of thousands of incidents where an innocent person defends themselves with a firearm against an armed aggressor, whether they fire it or not, each year. That's a good thing.

It does exactly what it says on the tin. Tell me what the good things about guns are, instead of whinging about their killing power.

Well, they, er ... kill things. And look shiny. And I guess holding one, knowing that you could use it effectively, could be kinda trippy.

It does exactly what it says on the tin. Tell me what the good things about guns are, instead of whinging about their killing power.


We can use them on you! :sniper: :mp5:

Some of them are shiny! Shiny things are pretty! I like shiny things.

/me steals everybody's watches and jewelry before running out into the middle of the road and getting knocked down.

Also, the tens of thousands of incidents where an innocent person defends themselves with a firearm against an armed aggressor, whether they fire it or not, each year. That's a good thing.
see the edit to my initial post

see the edit to my initial post

Yeah, Christians tend to kill people trying to kill them.. it's an odd quirk..

I blame "Quo Vadis?" He shouldn't have gone for that sappy ending, although it's not really standard required reading for the current generation.

Cap guns are good, and laser pistols with flashing lights and sound effects.
You can play cowboys and Indians, or Flash Gordon.

Guns are great for sport (clay shooting, target practice, biathlon and other olympic sports). They are also an invaluable tool for self defense, not just to defend yourself from human agressors but also from wild animals. Also, they are excellent for hunting. Hunting with guns doesnt have as big a learning curve as hunting with a bow and arrow. You can teach children to hunt with a gun, you cant teach a 9 year old to hunt with a bow.

Guns are great for sport (clay shooting, target practice, biathlon and other olympic sports). They are also an invaluable tool for self defense, not just to defend yourself from human agressors but also from wild animals. Also, they are excellent for hunting. Hunting with guns doesnt have as big a learning curve as hunting with a bow and arrow. You can teach children to hunt with a gun, you cant teach a 9 year old to hunt with a bow.

Do you really think letting a 9 year old use a gun is a good idea?

We can use them on you! :sniper: :mp5:

Well that was expected.

Guns are great for sport (clay shooting, target practice, biathlon and other olympic sports). They are also an invaluable tool for self defense, not just to defend yourself from human agressors but also from wild animals. Also, they are excellent for hunting. Hunting with guns doesnt have as big a learning curve as hunting with a bow and arrow. You can teach children to hunt with a gun, you cant teach a 9 year old to hunt with a bow.
i aknowledge that hunting is a natural human, nay, animal instinct, but concidering how we deal with the process of getting our food these days (ie: cattle yards, etc) is there any point to us hunting anymore?

Do you really think letting a 9 year old use a gun is a good idea?

Only if education is good.

Do you really think letting a 9 year old use a gun is a good idea?

Yes. Compare a country boy who has handled a gun with his parents from an early age to a city boy who has never touched one. Which one do you think has more respect for a gun, and more knowledge of gun safety? The city boy thinks its cool to play with, the country boy knows that you do not aim a gun at anything you dont intend to kill or destroy.

i aknowledge that hunting is a natural human, nay, animal instinct, but concidering how we deal with the process of getting our food these days (ie: cattle yards, etc) is there any point to us hunting anymore?

Probably not for cattle. There's a wide variety of game you can't just buy at the grocery store. Hunting is a social activity in many cases, too.

Only if education is good.

In sweden the kids are allowed to play with guns in festivals. The shocking thing is that they are actually RESPONSIBLE. It seems to me that the problem is education. These kids have been wrapped up in so much cotton woll that they don't know the true evil of guns.

i aknowledge that hunting is a natural human, nay, animal instinct, but concidering how we deal with the process of getting our food these days (ie: cattle yards, etc) is there any point to us hunting anymore?

Its a great hobby. Its a fun all day activity that keeps people out of trouble. Eating something you hunted yourself is far more satisfying than buying something at the store, even if it ends up tasting bad.

Well I think guns can be ok if you handling them like in my country Sweden. There they not intented for defence a la wild west style, there you don't have the guns laying around so the kids can get there hands on them or walzing around in the street with them.

Instead you have three alternatives as a civilian:
You use them for hunting, then you got a licence and also a hunting licence. Then you also useally practice alot, but then not practice or hunting you store your guns in a safe.

You like markmanship, then you join a shooting club and then you can get better weapon, if you show that you are seriuse into markamship (but you don't get machineguns). Then you also store your weapon in a safe then you not practicing or competing.

Or if you want to a machomen and defend you country, you can join the homelanddefence (organisation strictly for homedefence no risk for mission outside sweden even if they have more then UN troops stationed abroad). Then you can be alowed to have your own machineguns, but you have to show that you are reliable, and also here you don't run around in town with them, you just used them in training.

Then we finally have the military and the police, almost the only real problem with guns in sweden, that the police shot people then it's maybee not absolute necessiray and that you have accidents in the military. But still the police only shoot around 30 shoots a year and only kill 2 people a year, maybee because theye mostly faced with people with knives and axes instead of guns and machineguns.

Guns did a lot for empowering the common people. With easy to use projectile weapons there no longer was a need for a warrior caste aka nobility. E.g. the french revolution would have been impossible without guns in the hands of commons.

To be honest I have a pathological fear of guns. I like to avoid them.

Guns did a lot for empowering the common people. With easy to use projectile weapons there no longer was a need for a warrior caste aka nobility. E.g. the french revolution would have been impossible without guns in the hands of commons.
yeah, but we all know where that lead....
btw, it was the giullotine that killed the king and queen, not a gun

you can kill people that annoy you.

Sorry, but killing for sport? bring back foxhunting if thats the way you think.

Make it so the animal has a decent chance of survial, use bows and arrows. they can be just as deadly but take more skill.

In sweden the kids are allowed to play with guns in festivals. The shocking thing is that they are actually RESPONSIBLE. It seems to me that the problem is education. These kids have been wrapped up in so much cotton woll that they don't know the true evil of guns.

Yes, I've seen those festivals. They look wonderful, and we have them in the U.S., too - they're advertized mainly in hunting and shooting magazines, but thousands of kids attend. I can't say that I agree that there is a 'true evil' of guns, even if guns can do evil things. By education, I do mean proper education.

Personally as long as you keep your guns away from me, I don't care what you do.

I am a Canadian citizen with a rifle that I use for hunting occasionally. I enjoy it. I also enjoy gutting the animal I kill, skinning, cleaning, checking for disease, and cutting away the muscle/organ tissues that I can use. And if I were being threatened in my home in Red Deer (not bloody likely, but it could happen) I would defend my property and family with force. And my country.

The good thing about my situation is that I do not have any children that could come close to accessing my rifle unless they were hoodlums breaking in to my home and my strongbox.

Guns are as good or bad as the people that wield them. My country has a higher per capita of guns than the US, but we're generally raised around them and in a culture that promotes responsible gun ownership and use. As well as education and *GASP* certification for handling most firearms! Evil registration! Why can't I just buy a gun without even knowing where the safety button is??!!!???!!?!1212111!!@

Guns are inanimate objects, and thus cannot be good or evil inherently. It matters how they are intended and used by the people that wield them. To take people out of the gun equation would be pandering to the media-hyped censorship-infested "silent majority" that react to the latest carefully crafted soundbyte released by their loval news and/or political organization.

btw, it was the giullotine that killed the king and queen, not a gun
No shit, Sherlock! And the revolutionaries overcame the french loyalist troops by wielding guillotines, eh? Of course the revolution went wrong later but nonetheless it is the crib of modern societies, the beginning downfall of monarchies/aristocracies.

No shit, Sherlock! And the revolutionaries overcame the french loyalist troops by wielding guillotines, eh? Of course the revolution went wrong later but nonetheless it is the crib of modern societies, the beginning downfall of monarchies/aristocracies.
why is it that monarchies, and in some countries, aristocracies, still exist?

why is it that monarchies, and in some countries, aristocracies, still exist?

Because, being born to power does not nessersarily mean you are bad at using it.

And because some aristocracies tied their power not purely to military but economic issues as well. If you control the harvesting of an essential product, you make the rules. Take a look a Bhutan, where it is very prominent.

It does exactly what it says on the tin. Tell me what the good things about guns are, instead of whinging about their killing power.
ouch, bad timing on starting this thread...school shooting in Minnesota sort of makes people inclined to see the down sides of guns.

They are used in a variety of sports.

I used to shoot smallbore 25yard taget shooting. Far from "gung ho" or "Gun nut" it required patience, relaxation, intense concentration and discipline.

I have shot clay target before too, much the same thing: hand-eye coordination, concentration.

Anyone who has handled guns or been brought up with them realises that a fear of a gun just for being a gun is stupid. People who have used guns respect their danger far more than people who haven't.

I'm guessing the "Letting a 9 year old have a gun :eek: !!" comments aren't from people in a farming background and are probably from people who have never or hardly ever fired a gun.

All a gun does is fling lead! It is unsafe if used unsafely, like everything harder, sharper or faster than a sponge!

ouch, bad timing on starting this thread...school shooting in Minnesota sort of makes people inclined to see the down sides of guns.And yet when there is a hit-and-run, people don't "see the down sides of cars"... They blame the driver rather than the car.

Thanks media.

i have to admit, on the side of guns, it isnt really the gun that kills people, it is the person behind it. and as i said before, this is regardless of whether it is the attacker, or the person using it in defence

I'm really sorry, but I just can't resist. Background: In Warcraft III, there is a unit called the rifleman - click him enough times and he'll say, "Guns don't kill people! I do!"

And yet when there is a hit-and-run, people don't "see the down sides of cars"... They blame the driver rather than the car.

Thanks media.
i think we all know why that's a crappy parallel, but i can understand your frustration.

Good about guns... Well, maybe just maybe we (humans) will eventually kill
ourselves and save the nature and globe that way... ;)

It does exactly what it says on the tin. Tell me what the good things about guns are, instead of whinging about their killing power.


I personally like older rifle and the history behind them. I also enjoy tinkering with them, constantly improving or restoring them. It's a very enjoyable hobby and it keeps me off the streets :p

Guns are good for business. Many billionaires ar relying on selling guns to increase the gross margin. Take guns away and they will have slower growth.

Can't say about other countries, but in the US, 2.5 million violent crimes per year are stopped by civilians who display a gun and the criminal stops.

The two most sophisticated national surveys are the National Self-Defense Survey done by Marc Gertz and Kleck in 1995 and a smaller scale survey done by the Police Foundation in 1996.

The National Self-Defense Survey was the first survey specifically designed to estimate the frequency of defensive gun uses. It asked all respondents about both their own uses and those of other household members, inquired about all gun types, excluded uses against animals or connected with occupational duties, and limited recall periods to one and five years. Equally importantly, it established, with detailed questioning, whether persons claiming a defensive gun use had actually confronted an adversary (as distinct from, say, merely investigating a suspicious noise in the backyard), actually used their guns in some way, such as, at minimum, threatening their adversaries (as distinct from merely owning or carrying a gun for defensive reasons), and had done so in connection with what they regarded as a specific crime being committed against them.

The National Self-Defense Survey indicated that there were 2.5 million incidents of defensive gun use per year in the U.S. during the 1988-1993 period. This is probably a conservative estimate, for two reasons. First, cases of respondents intentionally withholding reports of genuine defensive-gun uses were probably more common than cases of respondents reporting incidents that did not occur or that were not genuinely defensive. Second, the survey covered only adults age 18 and older, thereby excluding all defensive gun uses involving adolescents, the age group most likely to suffer a violent victimization.

The authors concluded that defensive uses of guns are about three to four times as common as criminal uses of guns. The National Self-Defense Survey confirmed the picture of frequent defensive gun use implied by the results of earlier, less sophisticated surveys.

A national survey conducted in 1994 by the Police Foundation and sponsored by the National Institute of Justice almost exactly confirmed the estimates from the National Self-Defense Survey. This survey's person-based estimate was that 1.44% of the adult population had used a gun for protection against a person in the previous year, implying 2.73 million defensive gun users. These results were well within sampling error of the corresponding 1.33% and 2.55 million estimates produced by the National Self-Defense Survey.

Among 15.7% of gun defenders interviewed nationwide during The National Self Defense Survey, the defender believed that someone "almost certainly" would have died had the gun not been used for protection -- a life saved by a privately held gun about once every 1.3 minutes. (In another 14.2% cases, the defender believed someone "probably" would have died if the gun hadn't been used in defense.)

In 83.5% of these successful gun defenses, the attacker either threatened or used force first -- disproving the myth that having a gun available for defense wouldn't make any difference.

In 91.7% of these incidents the defensive use of a gun did not wound or kill the criminal attacker (and the gun defense wouldn't be called "newsworthy" by newspaper or TV news editors). In 64.2% of these gun-defense cases, the police learned of the defense, which means that the media could also find out and report on them if they chose to.

In 73.4% of these gun-defense incidents, the attacker was a stranger to the intended victim. (Defenses against a family member or intimate were rare -- well under 10%.) This disproves the myth that a gun kept for defense will most likely be used against a family member or someone you love.

In over half of these gun defense incidents, the defender was facing two or more attackers -- and three or more attackers in over a quarter of these cases. (No means of defense other than a firearm -- martial arts, pepper spray, or stun guns -- gives a potential victim a decent chance of getting away uninjured when facing multiple attackers.)

In 79.7% of these gun defenses, the defender used a concealable handgun. A quarter of the gun defenses occured in places away from the defender's home.

Based on nationally representative samples of crime incidents reported in the National Crime Victimization Surveys, victims who use guns for self-protection were less likely to be injured or to lose property than otherwise similar victims who used other forms of self-protection or who did not resist at all. For example, among robbery victims who used guns, only 17% were injured and only 31% lost property, compared to 25% inury rates and 88% property loss rates among victims who did not resist at all, and 33% injury rates and 65% property loss rates among all robbery victims.

So you are more likely to remain uninjured if, in the US, you use a gun to defend yourself.

And here's what the most respected of the peer reviewers had to say about the Kleck study:

Marvin Wolfgang, the late Director of the Sellin Center for Studies in Criminology and Criminal Law at the University of Pennsylvania, considered by many to be the foremost criminologist in the country, wrote in The Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, Northwestern University School of Law, Volume 86, Number 1, Fall, 1995:

"I am as strong a gun-control advocate as can be found among the criminologists in this country. If I were Mustapha Mond of Brave New World, I would eliminate all guns from the civilian population and maybe even from the police ... What troubles me is the article by Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz. ["Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun," by Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz, published in that same issue of The Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology] The reason I am troubled is that they have provided an almost clear cut case of methodologically sound research in support of something I have theoretically opposed for years, namely, the use of a gun in defense against a criminal perpetrator. ...I have to admit my admiration for the care and caution expressed in this article and this research. Can it be true that about two million instances occur each year in which a gun was used as a defensive measure against crime? It is hard to believe. Yet, it is hard to challenge the data collected. We do not have contrary evidence. The National Crime Victim Survey does not directly contravene this latest survey, nor do the Mauser and Hart Studies. ... the methodological soundness of the current Kleck and Gertz study is clear. I cannot further debate it. ... The Kleck and Gertz study impresses me for the caution the authors exercise and the elaborate nuances they examine methodologically. I do not like their conclusions that having a gun can be useful, but I cannot fault their methodology. They have tried earnestly to meet all objections in advance and have done exceedingly well."
So this data has been peer-reviewed by a top criminologist in this country who was prejudiced in advance against its results, and even he found the scientific evidence overwhelmingly convincing.

Personally as long as you keep your guns away from me, I don't care what you do.

I take you have never fired a gun before. C'mon over to my place if you ever want to try, I'll even cover for the ammo and the range pass.

Good about guns... Well, maybe just maybe we (humans) will eventually kill
ourselves and save the nature and globe that way... ;)

No, that's thermonuclear weapons and smallpox. Guns have been around for centuries, and have had little impact on world population.

No, that's thermonuclear weapons and smallpox. Guns have been around for centuries, and have had little impact on world population.
The penis is faster than the sword

No, that's thermonuclear weapons and smallpox. Guns have been around for centuries, and have had little impact on world population.


So, then I don't have any ideas...