Why do Americans value the ability to own a gun so much?

Martial arts is a close ranged weapon. How does that stop someone from throwing a, say, wrench at you?

 

Duck.

Or use a shield like the medieval knights did.

 

A lot easier than you can if you aren't equally armed...

 

Nonsense I own a gun because the bad guys already have them and very few people defend the right of criminals to carry guns. I don't now of a singe state in the union that would permit a convicted felon to legally own a fire arm let alone conceal carry one.

 

Not nearly as many as you'd imagine.

Many European countries have much more lenient gun laws than Australia. Nearly all allow some form of gun ownership, be it for hunting, sport, or self-defense.

The debate is not over the prohibition of guns. That is completely absurd, not even the UK or Australia have completely prohibited guns. The debate is over carry, and the use of guns for self-defense.

Why do people still believe they should have the ability to own cars after seeing/hearing/reading about all the problems they cause? Because they have a definite use, to get you from A to B in an individual manner, as opposed to public transport. People feel they should be able to own guns for the myriad of peaceful uses they have: for sport, for hunting, for vermin elimination, for self-defense, perhaps just because they enjoy the craftsmanship that goes into a fine weapon.

Personally (Australian, by the way) I own guns for:

1. Sport
2. Hunting/vermin elimination
3. I enjoy guns.

I would carry concealed if I could.

You're coming at this from the wrong perspective. Is gun ownership coercive? Of course not. I own a firearm, I have never initiated a firefight.

I also own a car. I have never crashed, I have never committed vehicular manslaughter. Ownership of neither is coercive in itself.

[hr][/hr]

I highly suggest you read the following book, even just to get a perspective of what the other side actually thinks:

http://www.amazon.com/More-Guns-Less-Crime-Understanding/dp/0226493636

 

Amen brother, don't budge an inch: no regulation, no licenses, no nothing. Don't become like Australia, (*)(*)(*)(*) that - it sucks ass.

 

If saving lives "sucks ass", then a LOT of people have good reason to promote the same.

http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/compareyears/10/total_number_of_gun_deaths

 

A similar drop would be experienced if you prohibited any dangerous item/activity. Gun ownership is not coercive, I never said they weren't dangerous - my previous post was basically conceding that fact.

You would see a similar (much greater) drop in deaths if you prohibited other activities/goods, pools alone kill nearly 4000 people a year nationally, mostly children. My contention has basically been that like pools/cars/paracetamol/treehouses/knives, guns kill a lot of people; but like all of those items, in no sense is ownership/carry in itself coercive, and by enacting a blanket ban you coerce a multitude of people such as myself who own and use firearms for peaceful purposes. Instead, you should go after criminals who use their guns coercively, and leave the rest of us alone to live our lives in peace (including those who commit suicide: ie - half of all gun deaths).

 

Lol, is your mindset typical of Canadians?

 

No, WE are not the enemy. It's pro government, pro regulation people who are the enemy. You think that by creating a law or regulation that somehow it magically make all your problems go away. You obviously haven't lived long enough to realize that laws cannot control a criminal...you just wish it to be so.

 

That's the opinion of a gun control advocate, not a responsible gun owner. You're simply afraid of an inanimate object because of what it is. Nobody needs to know you have guns in your home unless you run your mouth and tell everyone about them. Your fear is illogical, not logical.

 

All true.

Even more so it is a problem with the mindset of people on both sides of the political spectrum. Not trying to derail the thread but the anti gun crowds response to crime and murder compares with many other issues where government interference is expected to solve a problem. Laws and government interference have failed miserably to curb the problem with drugs. It has failed to provide decent education and has failed to manage the economy. It is already failing at providing health care and has failed to protect the environment. It fails to stop gambling prostitution or even abortion.

Both sides ( but more so the left) need to stop looking to government to fix everything and allow people to solve their own issues. No I am not an anarchist I believe in small limited government. How small can best be answered by simply acknowledging what government always does regardless of intent and therefore what it is effective at. Government is always, first and last, an institution of force and violence. In many cases when dealing with domestic issues the violence may only be implied but it is still there. As in do not pay your taxes lose all your property and go to jail. Therefore even social security, welfare , education etc are built on the use force. But of course such efforts fail sooner or later. ( and yes there are a few exceptions but even they do not last long ). On the other hand since government is an institute of violence they sometimes do something right when violence is overt and applied correctly. In other words if you wish to fight and win a war government is the go to guy. If you want select people arrested and locked up for criminal acts government is the one to do it. Government is necessary to provide civil courts for people to solve disputes and maybe a very few other applications but not much.

Whenever someone says their ought to be a law. There probably already is and no there should not be. As I said both sides of the spectrum are guilty of this but the left wing more so. It is never really about safety or crime or saving lives that motivates the gun control loons it is about control. People do not need such control and live better without it. This includes society and the public both of which are really just abstract concepts. Whenever anyone invokes the public good or the good of society or any variation in order to justify a law you should hear alarm bells going off. Such ideas are just flimsy cover for authoritative control over the lives of others which is the real goal.

 

This thread really makes me wonder what kind of a country the US really is.

Do americans live in constant fear of people invading their homes just to murder the crap out of them?

Are people in the US afraid to leave their house unless they bring a loaded gun?

Is the US really such an extremely dangerous place, rife with murder and assault that one needs to carry a gun around at all times to feel safe?

And doesn't this conflict with how peaceful and nice a society with plenty of guns is supposed to be?

*checks UNODC figures for homicide rates*

Oh dear, it's almost seven times higher for the US than for Sweden.

I guess an armed society isn't a polite society after all.

 

Whatever.

Really, Australia is doing better with this. That says a lot.

- - - Updated - - -

WE... are the "government" here.

There is a LOT of cognitive dissonance, in what you suggest.

 

All good if you have power for an alarm and a telephone to call the cops. I like a backup that doesn't require power--a gun.

 

We are a society that is right now driven by fear, paranoia, hatred and anger... among other things.

Guns naturally fit in to all of that ugliness.

In time, things will change... by then many will surely die.

 

Bad guys have guns, so i have the right to defend myself.

 

Why? Our murder rate (most of which is by guns) is at the lowest point it has been since the 1960s.

- - - Updated - - -

Based on the active duty military I know, I disagree.

 

Easy to say if you're a robust, fit male. Martial arts doesn't help the grandma against the 18 yr old gangbanger. A gun gives her a chance.

 

Doesn't help much when it's much higher than any other developed nation.

Heck, the murder rate of the US is more than twice that of Syria. Syria!

It's over four times higher than Australia.

It's bloody 6,7 times higher than Sweden.

If more guns is a magical key to lower crime rates, then there is something incredibly wrong about your country that compensates for it.

 

We're a VIOLENT society. That is exactly what we are.

- - - Updated - - -

It's too damned HIGH. The 1960's is no GOLD STANDARD!!

And ti me, it's about violence overall... not only "murder".

 

Not really, we are just a more connected society making it appear to be more violent. Violence has been down from the high of the 90's.

 

Great points.

We are seriously allowing ourselves to be FOOLED about the overall efficacy of proliferating firearms in this society.

Maybe 100+ years more of carnage, will change us; who knows?

 

As an Australian I must strongly disagree.

 

Don't underestimate a person because of gender. There are many females out there, such as Michelle Yeoh and Zang Zi Yi than can kick a lot of butt. Especially American males who don't really have any training in martial arts or self defense at all.