I want to host a respectful debate on whether or not guns should be banned or not based on the Newtown shooting. I would like this to be formal, and also, it would be great if this thread got into the hands of somebody who could do something about it, because we teenagers have an opinion too!
Guns don't kill people, people kill people. Guns are a method, but not a means. That psychopath could have easily gone in there and killed people with a number of other things, like his bare hands for instance. It's not the fact that we have access to guns that causes people to go on a crazy killing spree. That is our society we have to blame. Media is raising our children, I'm not talking about violent video games, I'm talking about Disney channel, the Kardashians, and Jerry Springer. The value in our culture is placed on these very unsatisfactory and immoral role models. People either like them and try to imitate them, in which case that makes these people selfish, superficial and apathetic, or people hate them and see past the superficial and cruel face the media is shoving in ours, which causes them to become depressed about our society and its values. Guns are not to blame, our society is to blame, everyone wants to ignore that, because it is so much easier to blame school shootings on guns then everyone as a whole. If we allow our government to outlaw or even restrict our gun use, that is opening the door to all sorts of regulations the government has no right to enforce. We aren't here to serve the government, the government is here to serve us, and it is not in the interest of the people to outlaw guns.
I second everything Sorla said, and I'd also like to point out that most of the recent shootings have occurred in gun-free zones.
I noticed the National Rifle Association (NRA) was advocating having armed guards in every school. Wouldn't it be better to insist that every teacher in a public school should be armed? Then if a shooter were to enter a classroom, he would know that rather than facing unarmed victims, at least one person would have the abilty to shoot back.
Wow, very good Sorla.
I just think that they should ony be used by responsible people. If a bad person has a gun, they'l be bad with it. If a good person has one, they'll use it for protection. Pus, many deaths from guns occured with illegally obtained guns. So it'll be hard to stop that.
Does the fact that people are going to act violently whether we ban guns or not make it okay? If we can reduce the number, should we not try? Just because it will happen doesn't make it okay. For example, in department stores and supermarkets, there are alarm gates at the exits. People will find ways to steal merchandise from the store no matter what, but they installed alarm gates to deter people and send a clear message that it is wrong to steal. This applies to murder in the same way.
Also, even responsible people can use guns for the wrong reasons. Truth is, no person has a strong enough will to use a gun only to protect themsleves in every possible situation. Responsible people drink alcohal, and alcohal dilutes a persons ability to make decisions. And, in the case of a RESPONSIBLE PERSON, if something happens to them that they feel cannot be solved without violence, such as a cheating or abusive husband/wife they may use the gun for murder rather than protection. In the world where we live, guns are used to murder people, and if they will be used to murder people until the day we get rid of them.
Teachers are thought of as respectable citizens, but they aren't always, and if every teacher in the U.S. was given a gun, the problem would get worse, not better.
Confuzzled, unfortunately, that's what guns were made for. That is their purpose. We take it back to Sorla. Guns are a tool. People can choose to do what they wish with it. Another thing, this man was not diluted by any alchohol. This was a pre-calculated attack. For all we know, if he had planned it well enough, he could have done just as much damage with a sword. Outlawing guns would like be trying to outlaw, say, lions. There are still dozens of other things out there that can be used as instruments of destruction. It's not a matter of outlawing one of them, to truly stop the deaths we would have to outlaw every single weapon in the world. Frankly, that cannot be done. To propose this is preposterous, as to have a truly "safe" community would require us to sit in a windowless, doorless, padded room 24/7 every month of every year for eternity.
Outlawing guns is like trying to take out ONE species of poisonous snake, it's not going to suddenly make all the other poisonous snakes disappear from existent. In fact, those other snakes will just become stronger.
You have a very good point, but guns are doing more harm than good. In fact, the image of guns in media is part of the problem you say is more important than the actual guns, so getting rid of guns, in media, and in real life, will actually result in a better society from your perspective. The problem you have, and the problem I have will both be solved by abolishing guns from our society.
Is anyone on my side?!?!?!? There has to be somebody on my side!
People really need to stop blaming violence on guns and weapons. The only thing we have to blame for violence is people. Guess what, people aren't perfect, they are violent, aggressive, selfish animals, hardwired to survive and pass on their genes. We also happen to be to smart for our own good, making us more dangerous then a typical animal. The image of selfishness and superficialness in media is what influences people to hurt others, not the image of weapons. Weapons have been around since the dawn of time for us, without tools, we would die. The other animals would eat us and destroy our race. Violence has also been around for longer then humans have. It sucks, it's ugly, but there is nothing we can do about it except defend ourselves and those around us from dangers like aggressive people. I would much rather have a gun if a criminal is gonna have one, that way it will at least be an even fight. Call me lazy, but I'd much rather use a weapon in a fight then my bare hands. Fist fighting is a lot messier then gun fighting, believe it or not. Another thing we need to do, is be immensely loyal to other humans for the good of our race. We need to defend the weak, eliminate the dangerous, and be ready to die for the people we care about. Without guns in the general public, things become a lot harder. Criminals will still have guns, and even though the military, government, and police still have guns, I don't trust them farther then I can throw them. In the end, the only people you can count on are yourself, and the other people who will take a stand against cruelty. The government can kill me if they want my weapons so dam.n bad, but I certainly won't make it easy for them. Japan attacked Hawaii instead of the mainland not only for the location, but because they didn't want to mess with American citizens and their guns. We don't need to worry about attackers, not because of our government, but because the American people are locked and loaded.
Wow, you really care about this. I respect that, and I know that all guns aren't going to be banned. Maybe I didn't make myself clear. Automatic assault rifles and guns of that type are used to kill people, and only kill people. If we can eliminate those, people can still have guns, just not ones that are designed for murder. You can defend yourself with a hunting gun, right?But assault rifles are just an easily obtained weapon for criminals, and they are unnecesary to protect yourself. Because they are designed to KILL PEOPLE, people are inclined to think it's okay to kill people, because, hey, they're selling guns that are used to kill people! It is the fault of society, I concede to that point, but don't automatic assault rifles contribute to that a lot? Am I the only one who sees it this way? If, in your words, "guns are a tool", then automatic assault rifles are a tool designed to kill people.
You said yourself, people aren't perfect. But that pint contradicts what you say later, the only people you can count on is yourself, and other people who will take a stand against cruelty. This isn't an overwhelming amount of people, Sorla. We can't fight fire with fire, we need to set down our weapons and find a land of peace among ourselves, if not for humanity, for every child who dies for no reason other than being at the wrong place at the wrong time, every person who didn't do anything other than live their life, and were killed because of it. We need to send a strong message that this will not be tolerated in our country, and no matter how hard you try, you can't do that without putting limitations on gun ownership and manufacturing.
Automatic assult rifles were in NOT designed for murder. Killing, yes, murder, no.
People have the right to defend themselves. When America was first founded, and there was no big government controling everyone, what would we have done if we hadn't all had guns?
We would have died. All of the pilgrims would have been killed.
When I think of all guns being banned from civilians, I imagine the world becoming something out of a dystopian fiction book. IT WOULD SUCK. Criminals always find a way to get guns, and if someone invades your house in the middle of the night, how are the cops going to know? They can be useful, but they CAN'T be relied on to save your life. If that guy wants to kill you, he'll kill you before the cops can get there,even if you call 911.
I am against guns, nothing will change that, but I do understand that we can't uphold a decent government without them. This is the reason I suggest we ban guns that were not designed for hunting, because it is the best way to have a stable society while not having shootings as often. Also, the purchase of ammuntition should be regulated too, because hunting does not require as much ammo as shootings such as the Newtown one.
I think people were talking about making it so ammo clips could only have a certain number of bullets...I think it was no more than ten.
That, in my opinion, is a good idea, because unless you are trying to kill someone, you don't need more than 10 bullets in a clip.
We can't depend on the government so heavily. I'm a big fan of smaller, localized government instead of this corrupt and crazy federal government we have. Who are they to tell us what to do? We pay them money to take care of us, and they use it to ship our children overseas to fight a war that doesn't matter, while they could be using tax money for education or healthcare. The government has outlawed substances for crying out loud, like drugs, but they have no right to do that. They are here to make sure we have good relations with other countries and have a high standard of living. They aren't here to regulate our lives. This nation was built on the idea of personal freedoms, owning guns of any kind is a personal freedom. This shooting shouldn't be a case of adding more regulations to guns, but focusing more on mental health care. Who is to say our government won't turn on us once they take away our guns? They would have nothing to be afraid of if we were unarmed, they would have our money and our freedom. And another thing, I would be dead if I didn't have access to weapons. I can hold my own in a fight, but when you get mugged, there's not much you can do but protect your internal organs with your limbs unless you have a weapon. Being underaged, I can't legally own anything, I'm technically not a person according to the government. They don't let me vote, drive, drink, and a number of other things they have no right to control. So even unregistered weapons have protection purposes. If anyone in that school had a weapon, deaths could have been prevented, but we can't have weapons in school apparently. Frankly, I'm surprised to hear when someone doesn't carry a weapon on them at all times. What would they do if they get into trouble, or someone else needs help? Call me crazy, but I am always armed, and I've never killed anyone or gone all Charles Manson on anyone, I've been able to protect myself and others around me thanks to fire arms. I don't really care if criminals have "illegal" guns, as long as everyone else has guns as well.
It really doesn't matter how many bullets you have in a clip if you look at it like that. You could kill someone with one bullet. You could kill someone with your hands. You could even kill someone with a piece of string, or a pill bottle.
Does that mean we should give people the option? Does it? If no one needs more than 10, we shouldn't give it to them, because it just opens the window for mass murder.