14
222

[–] munoi 14 points 222 points (+236|-14) ago 

no

0
102

[–] Real_Life_Person 0 points 102 points (+102|-0) ago 

Pretty much any time you ask, "Am I the only one..." this is invariably the answer. Someone out there will agree with you. You could ask, "Am I the only one that thinks murdering people should be legal?" and someone out there will agree that it should.

3
14

[–] Wargasm 3 points 14 points (+17|-3) ago  (edited ago)

I honestly wish that murdering people were legal in some circumstances. We could make the world a better place.

EDIT: Is the proper word "was" or "were?"

EDIT 2: Changed "was" to "were" because the situation is hypothetical.

1
12

[–] 1173038? 1 point 12 points (+13|-1) ago 

I see what you mean, but I think OP was trying to incite a discussion about gun control vs. drug control, as opposed to looking for a straight up answer and thinking he was the only person on the planet who thought that way.

0
2

[–] munk_e_man 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago  (edited ago)

"Am I the only one that thinks murdering people should be legal?" and someone out there will agree that it should.

Uh, yeah. Have you ever tried to walk down the street in a major city only to be faced with people who have no concept of how to walk properly? Idiots who wander out of shops like they've never seen the sky before. Morons who meander down the sidewalk three people shoulder to shoulder at a snail pace. Assholes who stand there distracted by fuck knows what when the light changes at the intersection, and then when you push past them they freak out at you like you're some sort of maniac? Maybe they don't deserve to be murdered, but those people at least deserve a good push into traffic so the fear of death can put some pep in their step. If they can't make it, well...

Conditions: the person you're trying to kill has to be at least your size or larger, and everyone around you should be able to hear/see the situation and go "yeah, they actually deserved it".

0
0

[–] Subutex ago 

I partially agree. Everyone should have a right to kill one person. People propably would be a bit nicer to each other.

1
16

[–] redzilla500 1 point 16 points (+17|-1) ago 

/thread

1
13

[–] munk_e_man 1 point 13 points (+14|-1) ago 

0
0

[–] TotallyNotATroll ago 

Why?

Do you honestly believe all of our guns will magically vanish into thin air and people will no longer want to buy or sell guns anymore in order to protect themselves or whatever other reason (either legal/illegal reasons)

Also, not only that. Banning all guns today would mean all guns made before today are legal, therefore people would still be buying and reselling guns.

1
0

[–] munoi 1 point 0 points (+1|-1) ago 

Wow. So my other comment with "yes" got downvoted to oblivion while this one got top position. Even @Fahari s comment about my comments got more votes than my yes.

0
0

[–] munoi ago  (edited ago)

My comment got me above 100 ccp. Did not expect that.

4
184

[–] charrokharraro 4 points 184 points (+188|-4) ago 

Not at all. Anyone who has done some real research on gun control can see that it would be much more beneficial to increase funding to programs for the mentally ill than randomly ban guns left and right.

It doesn't help that the vast majority of gun control politicians are very ignorant about how guns function, and when they do try to pass legislation they focus on things like magazine bans and barrel shrouds, instead of promoting mental health and gun safety.

1
73

[–] Meadow 1 point 73 points (+74|-1) ago 

This. I don't really think that people are calling for a complete banning of guns in any sense-- they just want stricter regulation regarding who can and cannot buy a gun.

It's such a shame that mental health is such a taboo in this country.

0
30

[–] Karkrash66 0 points 30 points (+30|-0) ago 

I think while there are level-headed people arguing for stricter regulations, there are also quite a few politicians, namely Feinstein, and a minority of the population who would support full scale banning of gun ownership.

0
11

[–] bongler8 0 points 11 points (+11|-0) ago  (edited ago)

It's such a shame that mental health is such a taboo in this country.>

couldn't agree with you more

0
3

[–] taxation_is_slavery 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

They use stricter regulation as a stepping stone to a complete ban. Never give them an inch.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
25

[–] Renoco [S] 0 points 25 points (+25|-0) ago 

Yeah I've been getting very pissed with America politically recently. We're supposed to be one of the best countries in the world, but we can't even call shit like it is. Every political person is a bitch and won't stand up for themselves or anything they want to represent that isn't already a mainstream idea.

4
33

[–] LetsBeFriends 4 points 33 points (+37|-4) ago 

Who tells you that you're one of the best. US ranks quite low in a lot of categories. Maybe reallocate some of that "defense" spending to something that would benefit the citizens.

0
13

[–] undeadninja 0 points 13 points (+13|-0) ago 

isn't already a mainstream idea paid for by their lobbyists.

FTFY

0
3

[–] PoopToaster 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

We're about as "one of the best" as mainstream feminism is for the equality of both genders

0
2

[–] klauskinski 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

M8, most countries use propaganda to tell their populace that their country is the best.

0
2

[–] sirgallium 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

"Let's ban guns based on how aggressive they look."

0
0

[–] Dirty_Asshole ago 

MFW I learn you can grow gun plants in your basement.

15
124

[–] TheWotsit 15 points 124 points (+139|-15) ago 

But the difference is you have clear examples were gun laws have worked, and there doesn't seem to be such an example for drug laws. For example, in the UK where guns are prohibited gun violence is drastically reduced, and you also have things such as the fact that police are much less likely to fatally injure you in the UK. This is often attributed to the fact that they do not carry guns, and they do not expect a criminal to have a gun because 99.9% of times they don't.

10
43

[–] thuvia_1 10 points 43 points (+53|-10) ago 

8
49

[–] TheWotsit 8 points 49 points (+57|-8) ago 

Oh yeah, knife crime here is ridiculous, but I think knives are a much better situation as it gives the wielder much less power than a gun does. I don't claim to know the solution, but OP was saying gun crime would not reduce, in the UK it definitely has.

3
21

[–] PoopToaster 3 points 21 points (+24|-3) ago 

I have far better odds of getting away from someone trying to stab than to shoot me. Whats the effective range on a knife?

0
3

[–] Breadbear 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago  (edited ago)

But that link doesn't seem to make the point I think you're trying to make (that if you take away guns humans will still go around being murderous af) and also isn't consistent with the premise that there's no knife regulation:

Knife crime has increased in England and Wales for the first time in four years, with the number of assaults with blades rising 13%, according to the latest set of police recorded crime figures.

The Office for National Statistics said the 2% rise in all knife crime offences in the 12 months to March marked the end of a downward trend in the previous four years but the total remained more than 50% below its peak six years ago.

The increase to 26,370 offences was announced ahead of a new “two strikes and you’re out” mandatory prison sentence for repeated possession of a knife or blade coming into effect on Friday.

[...] The ONS also said the overall 2% rise in knife crime recorded by the police masked more significant changes in the detail, with a 13% increase in assaults involving a knife, and a 10% rise in knife possession offences. However, robberies at knifepoint fell by 14%.

The official police recorded crime figures also show an apparently startling 37% increase in sexual offences, including rapes. The number of rapes reported to the police was 29,265 – the highest level since new recording standards were introduced 12 years ago.

But the ONS said the surge was due to a greater willingness of victims to come forward and report such crimes and improvements in police recording rather than an increase in sexual attacks. It said the official crime survey showed no significant change in the proportion of adults who reported being a victim of a sexual assault last year.

The underlying theme of the figures – that England and Wales continues to become a safer country – is underlined by the homicide rate. The police recorded 534 murders in the 12 months to March – only one more than in the previous year – and close to the lowest level since 1978 when 532 people were murdered.

The annual murder rate for England and Wales stood at more than 800 a year in the early years of the 21st century but over the past decade has fallen while the population has continued to grow.

So I guess maybe I kinda don't get your point?

1
1

[–] causuistry 1 point 1 point (+2|-1) ago 

15
38

[–] 1171932? 15 points 38 points (+53|-15) ago  (edited ago)

If your goal is to reduce air bag injuries, prohibit air bags. If your goal is to save lives, have more air bags.

If your goal is to reduce gun violence, prohibit guns. If your goal is to save lives, have more guns.

13
54

[–] Guano 13 points 54 points (+67|-13) ago 

That's the most retarded thing I've read so far on Voat holy shit good job

11
39

[–] TheWotsit 11 points 39 points (+50|-11) ago  (edited ago)

This is not the same at all though. An airbag is a safety device that can cause death in some situations. A gun is an object purposefully created to inflict harm.

2
4

[–] Meatsim 2 points 4 points (+6|-2) ago 

Except in reality, that doesn't work

0
4

[–] Batslug 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

If your goal is to save lives, have more guns.

I want that on a T-Shirt.

[–] [deleted] 1 point 6 points (+7|-1) ago 

[Deleted]

0
3

[–] TheWotsit 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Full disclosure, I am living in the UK, so I am probably quite biased.

I wouldn't say that we have especially PC legislation. If possible could you give me an example so that I know what I am arguing against? "Brits have CCTV everywhere" is an Americanism. We really don't have much, and the majority of cameras that I see are privately owned, not government installed. It's not like we have big brother here, and this is coming from someone who live in London. The moment you leave cities and go more rural, there are absolutely no cameras that are government installed.

Why do you think that guns suddenly give Americans more power over their government? Is it common for people to march into the White House with a gun and demand change? I thought that kind of thing was illegal in the US. We have the same systems, votes cause change, not weapons.

Your point on brutality is completely fair, and there is still racism and abuse within the UK police force. However, while still terrible, I think it is much better that in the UK we can call up the police force on the wrongs they have done, rather than just being shot and that be the end of it. I would rather be bruised from abuse than dead from a bullet wound. The absence of guns allows more police offers to be outed for their bad behaviour.

Your liberty argument is completely fair, and our different opinion probably stems from growing up in a different culture. I won't argue this.

But your final point, I don't know why Americans have such a focus on the English Royal Family, but I think due to their hyping up in America you get a misguided view on how much they are relevant to the UK. Remove the Queen and the Royal Family, and you have pretty much the same country. Other than go on political trips, all they really do is give the Queen's speech, and hand over parliament when we elect a new leader. They are very processional and not actually that important. Additionally, you are saying we are a terrible society to be based off, but we have things such as the NHS. Why are you refused health care in America if you cannot afford it? It's ridiculous to refuse people what should be a basic human right. An argument saying you should not learn from Britain because we have a Monarch is just oblivious to the deeper workings of a country.

0
0

[–] PoopToaster ago 

While I sit here in #murrica, with my shitty job being told to be more profitable. Watching the stock price (and compensation of the very few at the top) triple and even quintuple, while I'm offered maybe $0.50/hr. Yeah, thank god I have a gun to defend my well being in the modern world. When my landlord comes for rent, I just pull the gun.

2
5

[–] Renoco [S] 2 points 5 points (+7|-2) ago 

That isn't my point. If guns could be taken completely out of America it probably would be safer, but that isn't going to happen. I was trying to say that it is so easy to obtain any illegal material in America that a ban on guns would just harm law abiding citizens.

1
1

[–] TheWotsit 1 point 1 point (+2|-1) ago 

Most certainly for a while (and I'm talking a generation or two), you would have to wait for guns to drop out of commonality. But also there is the argument that over here if you carry a knife you are much more likely to be stabbed, I wonder if this is the same for guns. Additionally, it's worth pointing out that if you need a gun in the UK it is still possible to get one, just much more difficult than it is in America.

0
0

[–] PoopToaster ago 

Also, lots of our drugs that we have issues with are plants... You really can't "Grow" guns in your basement. Well, my buddy does build custom guns as a hobby, but he really can't put out as much weight in guns as my friend in colorado can in weed.

2
-2

[–] fricknmaniac 2 points -2 points (+0|-2) ago  (edited ago)

And you're right, gun control isn't very effective right now because it's underfunded. Everything about it basically makes it designed to fail. While I'm not saying that we should just throw money at it and hope that it works, but the laws are basically unenforceable at this point because of lack funding.

The recent shooting at the black church shouldn't have happened because the guy shouldn't have been able to buy a gun. He was able to buy a gun because the background check took too long, leaving the sale to the discretion of the seller.

The ATF didn't have a head of the agency for 7 years and the reason was basically because of NRA lobbying. (And that includes George W Bush appointees, not just Obama ones).

Enforce the current laws before introducing new ones, but make sure that the current laws can actually be enforced with the proper amount of funding.

2
88

[–] Moonbat 2 points 88 points (+90|-2) ago 

The point is that nobody cares. If gun control would make America safer, nobody cares.

It's an ideological thing. I'm with the 2nd amendment crowd. It's a freedom issue. Double, triple, quadruple the number of gun homicides in the country per year. I don't care. I want to live in the most free country in the world, and I'm utterly, perfectly willing to sacrifice a little safety in order for my country to stay that way.

1
33

[–] d7inlofi 1 point 33 points (+34|-1) ago 

Violent crime has been going down anyways. People say that we can do much much more, but besides making more criminals out of the prohibition of guns you really can't.

0
12

[–] causuistry 0 points 12 points (+12|-0) ago 

0
5

[–] usableclown 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

Exactly. Just as the war on drugs makes criminals out of normal, non-violent people, a hypothetical war on guns would just make criminals out of the 1/3rd of the populations that owns firearms. Lots of people own guns, and almost none of them ever use their weapons to harm others. You can make criminals out of these people, but smugglers would just continue to bring firearms into the country for gang use.

The situation with full-auto firearms proves the basic idea. Amongst law-abiding individuals, fully automatic weapons are highly controlled under the national firearms act. Despite the law, tons of fully automatic ak-47s and submachine guns illegally find their way into the hands of street gangs.

The people you want to stop from having guns are overwhelmingly already criminals, so criminalizing firearms only places more non-violent people on the wrong side of the law.

0
0

[–] YetiBike ago 

Violent crime is falling in most western nations. For example in the UK violent crime has fallen by 22% over the last 33 years.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/apr/24/crime-rate-england-wales-falls-lowest-level-33-years

1
21

[–] Renoco [S] 1 point 21 points (+22|-1) ago 

That's a great fucking point.

0
3

[–] willfarb 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Damn, yeah it is. I've always been pretty pro gun-control because I live in NZ/Australia/UK and it seems to work pretty well in these places. But I've spent a lot of my life being pro-motorcycle, pro-cannabis and pro- a bunch of other stuff that is considered* dangerous. I'd just never applied that thinking to guns.

*"considered" because cannabis isn't really dangerous in the way most people say it is, but guns and motorcycles sure as fuck are dangerous!

0
0

[–] RamboCommando ago  (edited ago)

Nobody is trying to ban guns outright though.... so innocent people won't be made into criminals.

You can still own a gun, you just have to fill out all the paper work and pass the background checks to be able to do so.

It's like saying driver licenses make innocent people criminals because you want to drive without going through the hassle of proving to everybody you know how first.

The end result of a perfect gun control is: Good guys have guns, bad guys have knives.

0
5

[–] Guano 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

USA is 49th in press freedom, 12th in economic freedom. But number one in incarcerations to name a few 'MURICA

0
1

[–] Moonbat 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

I know :-(

0
4

[–] PoopToaster 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

I don't feel free. I'm chained to my job. I can't afford to better myself or to even move to look for better opportunity. Sure, my "master" is not some dude with a plantation, but I'm not seeing where I'm free.

0
6

[–] lolol42 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

How do you define freedom, then? The freedom to not work? You realize that if you didn't have a job, you would have to hunt/farm/forage for your food. Nobody is making you stay at your desk job. You are 100% free to quit and move to your farm, or go live in the backwoods. What you want is freedom from responsibility, which man has never had and will never have.

0
1

[–] tyrannis 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

I don't feel free. I'm chained to my job. I can't afford to better myself or to even move to look for better opportunity. Sure, my "master" is not some dude with a plantation, but I'm not seeing where I'm free.

Well at least you can go

1
35

[–] Fahari 1 point 35 points (+36|-1) ago 

wow two comments: a yes and a no. I am kinda excited to see where this wild ride goes next!

0
11

[–] Renoco [S] 0 points 11 points (+11|-0) ago 

Make sure to stay tuned to this heated, and intriguing discussion on the insight of gun laws, and the strong effect "yes" and "no".

[–] [deleted] 0 points 9 points (+9|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

[–] [deleted] 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
0

[–] ChillyHellion ago 

That's what happens when you ask a yes or no question. You might instead ask "do you think gun control is more effective than the war on drugs? Why or why not?" or "what's the difference between gun control and the war on drugs?" Sometimes the best discussion questions are open ended ones that don't reveal your own view on an issue.

1
32

[–] Kyndryd 1 point 32 points (+33|-1) ago  (edited ago)

Criminals don't buy guns legally. Why would they? All of the paperwork would lead back to them. I believe that we need better background checks for mental illness and criminal convictions, but to limit the ability of an emotionally and mentally stable individual who hasn't committed any crime to exercise their 2nd amendment right is not going to stop criminals from obtaining weapons.

edit: fixing words cause I can't type nor think good.

6
13

[–] Ad_Infinitum_Forward 6 points 13 points (+19|-6) ago 

You're implying that all criminals get their guns from smugglers overseas. When criminals buy handguns illegally, chances are they were manufactured in the USA.

Also, anyone can make crack or grow weed in their basement. Firearms, however, require a factory of some sorts. I doubt criminals have access the equipment. Banning guns (Assuming they aren't smuggled into the country) will prevent more from entering into the hands of crazies and criminals. It just won't remove those that already exist.

I've just made a shitload of baseless assumptions but I'm too stupid not to post this.

1
21

[–] Kyndryd 1 point 21 points (+22|-1) ago 

1
11

[–] Renoco [S] 1 point 11 points (+12|-1) ago 

All you need to make a gun is plate steel and a welder. Guns aren't complex at all. You have a barrel and a firing pin.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
1

[–] d7inlofi 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

The cartels make Narco subs, if they wanted they could make guns but they don't because of quality. With prohibition though quality would go up https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FH76VoI_hsw

1
6

[–] Iforgotmy_other_acct 1 point 6 points (+7|-1) ago 

Criminals don't buy guns legally

Except for when they do. Colorado shooting

Virginia Tech shooting

Of course, then there are the instances when the weapons were purchased legally - by an apparently negligent owner

So this leaves you and others who share this view in the position of having to define a criminal. The only way I'm able to reconcile your assertion with the links I've posted is that you mean established criminals.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

[–] [deleted] 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago  (edited ago)

[Deleted]

0
2

[–] Kyndryd 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Oh, you're absolutely right. Let me fix that.

1
5

[–] carlosos 1 point 5 points (+6|-1) ago 

There have been enough criminals that bought guns legally. Making it harder to buy guns legally will also make the illegal trade harder since it can't hide between the legal trade.

I do believe that the US will be a safer place with guns made illegal but I do not believe that is the right thing to do. Freedom is being replaced with safety in that case. Like you said, better background checks should exist. Maybe even add a public website that can be accessed for checking if a person is allowed to own a gun that needs to be checked before selling a gun second hand (that adds the risk of the government being able to track guns to later take them away).

0
10

[–] redzilla500 0 points 10 points (+10|-0) ago 

"People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both" - Benjamin Franklin

1
22

[–] manwithaplan 1 point 22 points (+23|-1) ago 

No, you're not. Banning anything doesn't actually keep it off the streets, it just drives it underground. Prohibition is a prime example. Banning the sale and consumption of alcohol didn't keep it from those that cared enough to break the law, and it diverted funds into criminals pockets because there was money to be made on the wrong side of the law.

0
8

[–] causuistry 0 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago 

As long as demand is there, so will supply. Drugs find their way into prisons, which are surrounded by fences and razor wire, and staffed with armed guards.

3
3

[–] OriginalReaper 3 points 3 points (+6|-3) ago 

You can't hide gun factories. Weapons don't get smuggled over from mexico.

0
6

[–] A_Scanner_Darkly 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

0
4

[–] PoopToaster 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

I believe Eric Holder did something "fast and furious" to prove this.

0
3

[–] Rellik88 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

You can make a gun out of a couple parts at Home depot You do realize the first gun was invented in the 1600's?

0
0

[–] RamboCommando ago 

You can grow drugs and make booze, it's a lot more difficult to mass produce guns in your basement.

3
0

[–] Veni_Vidi_Vici 3 points 0 points (+3|-3) ago  (edited ago)

Sure the criminals will have them, but I reckon there will be a sharp decline in accidents involving children from irresponsible gun owners who don't know how to keep their guns out of reach.

Aka: What about the children?

0
6

[–] Boltbeam 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago  (edited ago)

"THINK OF THE CHILDREEEEEN!!!!"

Then their parents win a Darwin award for not securing deadly items. What's stopping the children from drinking a gallon of antifreeze (or, more realistically, enough beer to get drunk enough to get themselves killed) or plugging their phones into an outlet while in the shower if the parents otherwise don't give enough of a shit?

0
2

[–] rivalarrival 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

I reckon there will be a sharp decline in accidents involving children from irresponsible gun owners

The number of kids injured in such accidents is so low that our efforts would better be spent on pool control or hammer control.

If we expand the set from kids to all people, we'd prevent about 40 times more accidental injuries with nailgun control than gun control.

1
21

[–] jiik 1 point 21 points (+22|-1) ago 

Works fine in almost every civilized country.

[–] [deleted] 1 point 11 points (+12|-1) ago 

[Deleted]

0
0

[–] Level_Cannon ago 

Actually, isn't that exactly the point of civilization? Specialization allows people to focus on one thing to improve society and depends on others for their needs. A blacksmith can focus on making nails because he depends on the farmer to trade him food. I don't have to buy guns and train to use them because I pay taxes which support a police force that is trained to react to those situations and keep crime under control. That is a big part of civilization and keeps us away from the wild-west style everyone for themselves.

2
3

[–] Rellik88 2 points 3 points (+5|-2) ago 

How are them knife attacks in the UK?

1
3

[–] fullofawe 1 point 3 points (+4|-1) ago 

Nonexistant here in Australia...

0
2

[–] archer_ 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Have a look at a few of those "civilized countries" and you'll see guns aren't banned. Here are a few examples of first world countries which to one degree or another allow civilian firearms ownership.

  • New Zealand.

  • Canada.

  • Australia.

  • Germany.

  • Norway.

  • Italy.

  • Sweden.

  • Finland.

  • France.

  • Russia.

0
4

[–] OJs_Lawyer 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

Guns certainly aren't banned, but they're way more controlled than in the U.S. We're talking about gun control here, remember? Not the outright banning of firearms. Take a look at Canada's gun statistics and tell me they are comparable to those of the U.S.

0
1

[–] omegletrollz 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

Not really: in my country you can't buy weapons legally but that doesn't prevent a criminal teenager from having one.

Wanna know who supplies the criminals with the hottest equipment? The police and the army. We're not at war. They have no use for submachine guns and missile launchers, might as well make a profit selling them over, right?

0
0

[–] namealreadytaken ago 

If the population in general don't have guns, criminals don't bother getting guns themselves because there's no need.

load more comments ▼ (170 remaining)