Gun Control

Approval Rate: 16%

16%Approval ratio

Reviews 70

Sort by:
  • by


    Wed Mar 06 2013

    I would make it mandatory to issue a 'Killing Licence' and a strict quota for kills with every firearm sold. It would have the effect of reducing gun ownership by weeding out the casual owners and keep the guns in the hands of those who intend to use them.

  • by


    Mon Mar 04 2013

    Oh boy. Anybody here NOT know where I stand on Guns? I don't like 'em. But even I'm not so much of a dumbass that I would try to ban all guns. I'd get assassinated. By a gun. Americans just love the damn things too much. We should probably go to the root of the source and target why as a nation we have the highest Crime of any 1st world Country. We should target why he have such a love of Violence that it's in all of our Media and games. As president I would also limit my own Power to kill. No one man needs so much Power that the Fates of others is in his hands. The government that has the power to take Human life, well Hell, there's not much more they can take after that. They've already taken everything of Value.

  • by


    Fri Jan 25 2013

    Before we start talking about gun control, perhaps we should begin to talk about drone control. While Obama sheds his crocodile tears over innocent dead children here as a result of school shootings (justifiably so), the armed predator drones attacks he has ordered have killed many innocent children in Asia and Africa. Here's an abbreviated list of them, not including those who died in other theaters of action such as Libya or Afghanistan. Is one innocent life worth more to them than the other? Fair question. . .

  • by


    Sun Feb 27 2011

    While I won't go as far as Lawrence O'Donnell to say that we should ban all guns, I do believe we are too lax in this country. Restrictions are necessary.

  • by


    Sat Jan 08 2011

    UPDATE: According to the news coming out of Tuscon today, it is reported that one of the deaths in the shooting at Gabrielle Giffords grocery shopping was a nine year old girl. Question: where did this 22 year old nut get a handgun with an extended magazine, and why did he need a weapon like this? Well, when it comes to violence and death by guns, we're #1! USA! USA! USA! Here's an article from the CDC website about gun violence by children in our gun-happy country: tm One big problem when this issue is debated today is the "intent of the Framers." When the Framers of the Constitution were debating the second amendment, Elbridge Gerry defended the amendment by saying: ‘What, sir, is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty.’ Not a single Framer debated that point, that the private ownership of guns was limited to a state militia in order to prevent having a standing army. Well... Read more

  • by


    Sat Jan 08 2011

    Fuck that! I'm a big fan of guns, and I'll go with the ol' saying: My idea of gun control is using both hands. Statistically speaking, gun control has been shown to have a detrimental effect on crime. When concealed carry was banned in certain cities, murder rates actually went up! This link contains very useful data about firearms: As for a militia being ineffective against the US army, that's simply not true, as Vietnam and Afghanistan have shown us. The US population is much bigger than those countries' and the US territory itself, much, much larger. This means that it would be much more difficult for any army to control. The military might have tanks, but they can't be everywhere at once, and guerrilla tactics is centralized around the avoidance of such weaponry. Though I doubt it'll ever come to the point where US citizens start openly revolting by killing soldiers.

  • by


    Thu Dec 09 2010

    Gun Control?... Ice Age?... I have to think about this...

  • by


    Thu Nov 11 2010

    An important debate... in which most Democrats have chosen the wrong side.

  • by


    Thu Nov 11 2010

    More people own guns,per capita, in Israel for example,than the US and with a lower murder rate.People have a right to protect themselves against murderers and without people taking the moral prohibition against murder seriously, nothing will help...the debate should've ended 72 years ago when Nazi Germany prohibited Jews from owning guns(a day after Kristalnacht)..

  • by


    Thu Nov 11 2010

    It's neither Dem nor Reb that chooses Gun control, it has and always will be the User controlling the gun! Seeing how there has been allot of fatal shootings by the Police because the Police cannot determine gun or no gun; I think it's the people that want better and safer gun Control! I’m all for guns in a controlled environment! I won’t deny that shooting a gun down the range or up in the mountains is not good clean fun. (Hunting.) But the average Joe or a crazed kid walking around with a gun on their side is a different story all together! I think most can agree that there are some people that should not even be able to breathe on a gun, let alone legally be aloud to walk around with one! Stiffer laws that are enforced will deter the idiots out there, letting others who are responsible beings enjoy their toys!

  • by


    Tue May 18 2010

    Guns don't kill people. It's the psychotic wacko with the altered fully automatic AK-47 assault riffle with 10 full magazines on a rampage because his wife and kids left him and he lost everything in the divorce that shows up at the local bank, school, mall, post office, or your place of work that kills people.

  • by


    Fri Apr 30 2010

    It's not gun control that we need, it's some of the freaks that are behind the guns that need controlling.

  • by


    Thu Nov 27 2008

    A convicted felon should not be allowed to have a gun.However just for the sake of conversation, if all guns were made illegal who would obey the law?Answer: Law abiding people whom would not pose a problem with a gun in the first place.If someone breaks the law using a firearm, by all means prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law. Hold them accountable and responsible, but let us not deprive law abiding citizens of the right to gun ownership.

  • by


    Tue Sep 30 2008

    Nobody should be able to have a gun enlese they are the best police in the city. Its wrong cause i no i dont want to be shot. it happens every day in our lives people should take change in this. We could get shot right this second!!!   :(

  • by


    Mon Aug 25 2008

    Isn't it ironic that the people who most ferventy support gun-rights are the least qualified to operate them? (i.e. Rednecks)

  • by


    Sat Jul 26 2008

    We keep our guns.We have that right.And they can't change that and be good for our people too.

  • by


    Wed Mar 12 2008

    when you outlaw guns, only outlaws have guns think about it only the law abiding citizens would follow a gun control law we really need to grasp our constitutional rights and stand strong

  • by


    Sat Jun 23 2007

    Meant to protect the public by keeping weapons out of the hands of criminals. News Flash die hard supporters, the criminals will get their hands on them anyways.

  • by


    Thu Jun 07 2007

    The last posit was specious.  The logic fails when you can supplant other words and come up with a ridiculous(ly obvious) statement:  That there are more guns doesn't spontaneously constitute an urge to kill and maim.  Does the same argument hold for knives?  If there weren't guns, the human being would find creative ways to kill each other, just as they did before the invention of gas-propelled projectiles.Rather, why not look into the contributing factors of homicide/assault by gun?  Who's doing it?  What are their motives?  To chalk it off to "guns" is a form of denying the root cause of this form of mayhem.

  • by


    Sat Apr 28 2007

    UPDATE: numbah gets a helpful vote from me (learn from that, you cowardly unhelpfuls!) for the information about laws regulating automatics. Yet we know that the Glock used by Cho to kill 32 people fired 5 rounds a second. At that rate, the difference between "automatic" and "semi" is semantic. The gun freaks still don't have anything to say beyond their pitifully circular assertions about the power of guns. Let's just get out a tape measure and get this shit over with.I've taught writing for ten years, having seen many students turn in assignments as freaky as Cho's. The difference: they didn't have GUNS. QED.***After the horrors of yesterday's shootings, it is time for us to reconsider our stance on this subject.The gun-rights lobby will tell you that they don't want to make a principle like the Second Amendment subject to the whims of any nutjob who decides to kill 32 people, but the fact is that this is the only time we as a nation get to put aside the insane insistence on absolute... Read more

  • by


    Sun Apr 22 2007

    Every non felon adult american should have a personal defense weapon, there would be less gun crime. Thats a fact!

  • by


    Thu Mar 01 2007

    I agree, we need to enforce the laws we have. And those people who own guns, and their children shoot themselves or others, the parent should be punished to the fullest extent of the law. Reckless endangerment!

  • by


    Thu Oct 19 2006

    I am a proud member of the NRA and don't want anyone telling me I can't own a firearm, BUT, without some sort of control this country would be in a * of a bad shape. Truth...most firearm accidents and crimes are committed by people who are not eligible to own them in the first place. Can you imagine what might happen if we had no regulations at all?

  • by


    Fri Sep 15 2006

    i would ban buying guns and ammunition without a special license for hunting and hold yearly amnesties to encourage people to hand firearms into police. i would generally aim to reduce the number of firearms on the street. if you look at the statistics america is apawling for the number of people shot every year.

  • by


    Tue Jun 27 2006

    I believe in the right to keep and bear arms. Keep them out of the hands of criminals, wacko family members and the Vice President. And that was not "hunting" that the Vice President was doing. Cage raised birds, hand placed in brush and driven to the place where they are, is not "hunting." It's killing.

  • by


    Tue Jun 27 2006

    There is nothing to "deal with" - enforce present laws. . .

  • by


    Fri Jun 02 2006

    This is the Holy Grail for most leftos and a huge gaggle of Democrats. That stand kept Al Gore out of the White House. He lost the Democratic stronghold of West Virginia because of that issue. If WV had followed its ancient pattern, Al Gore would be hearing "Hail to the Chief." What is the problem here? The lefto mopes have the thought that, "Gee, everyone is basically good. If we just take away the 'bad' instruments, then everything is going to be ok! It is knives, spears, guns, billy-clubs, etc. that makes people go bad. If we remove the 'bad' items, crime will just go away."

  • by


    Wed May 24 2006

    No way. It is a proven fact that many criminals have gotten their weopons illegally. New York state has some of the toughest gun control laws in the country...and a pretty high number of crimes with guns.

  • by


    Sun Feb 19 2006

    I guess Cheney had to take the "Gun Control is being able to hit your target" sticker off of his limo,huh?....Jokes aside,I am 100% FOR the right to bear arms.I know that the citizens in the NRA are not the ones out committing crimes with handguns.They are mostly sportsmen,law officers etc. and use their firearms for hunting,shooting targets,and self defense.(protecting their homes and families.)I am ,however,in favor of strict adherence to licenses,permits and gun safety.The sale of firearms needs to be strictly monitored.If someone breaks the law,they should lose the right to bear arms.You should have to be a full fledged citizen and pass safety tests to get a permit or license.

  • by


    Thu Feb 02 2006

    A person who owns a handgun for personal protection is 17 times as likely to lose his life by handgun as a person who does not own a handgun. That simple fact (and it IS a fact) alone underlies my opposition to the manufacture of handguns. Add to that the additional opinion that handguns have no redeeming value at all. They serve no beneficial purpose. They are also barbaric, and the handgun issue is one that I have absolutely no doubt as to how it will ultimately be concluded. Once the world becomes totally civilized, which it someday will, handguns will no longer exist.

  • by


    Sun Jan 22 2006

    Gun control should start firstly with the hand of the owner keeping that piece pointed only at what you intend to shoot, for starters. Control your own weapon and access to it. Now for the government stepping in and setting some limits, I can actually agree with some. Making it more difficult for criminals to obtain a gun at a gun store with an instant background check makes sense to me. Helping to prevent suicides by keeping guns away from mentally and/or emotionally unstable individuals also doubles as a way to protect the public at large, not just that particular person. The wholesale banning, seizure, and destruction of firearms, I will not agree to. Some logical restrictions make sense, but not panic-induced banning or other such nonsense.

  • by


    Sun Jan 15 2006

    Use your brains people, gun control would have zero effect. Does having marijuana illegal stop others from getting it? Does saying you have to be 21 to drink alcohol stop teenagers from doing it? I think not, its completely useless to attempt this. Many say guns kill people, well, if guns kill people, then: Cars make people drive drunk; Pencils misspell words, and spoons make people fat.

  • by


    Fri Jan 13 2006

    I guess you could say that I hold a rather nuanced view on gun control. I don't believe in taking away people's rights to own guns. We all have a right to defend ourselves if the need arises. I don't think that banning guns is the way to keep guns out of childrens' hands either. Why should everyone suffer because of the acts of a few irresponsible adults who fail, either because of stupidity or neglect, to lock up their guns and limit their child or childrens' access to them? That would be like banning 'R' rated movies outright because underage kids sneak into them. It's throwing out the baby with the bathwater. Having said that, I also do not agree with the NRA, which seems to hold that the citizenry should have the right to own more powerful guns, such as AK-47s and perhaps even rocket launchers. I can understand the practicality of owning a simple handgun or shotgun in order to defend your house. But what does a law-abiding citizen need with an AK-47? I also agree with others w... Read more

  • by


    Mon Nov 28 2005

    Gun control is an important issue, in the grand scheme of things it would seem that it would be a good thing. The argument against it basically is that only law abiding citizens was be restricted by gun control while the rest would still have little or no control. In other words we need guns to protect ourselves from criminals who don't care about gun control. There are gun control laws on the books but what needs to happen is that penalties need to be harsher. American society is tightly woven in with fire arms so I don't think they will ever disappear but they do present a problem that will cost may innocent lives.

  • by


    Mon Nov 28 2005

    A 'Good' as a debate issue. Perhaps the item should first determine what understanding there is among contributors regarding the form and purpose for the 'control' of firearms. Drivers licenses, passports, soicial security, car and home ownerships, etc., are forms of control that contribute to an orderly society. There might be a comparable understanding among factions to agree on why and how a form of gun control, without confiscation, is desirable.

  • by


    Sat Nov 19 2005

    While it certainly makes sense to impose limits on purchasing guns (like on age), gun control won't solve the biggest problem with gun-related violence: most of the crimes that are committed with guns are with guns that were obtained illegally. Cracking down on illegal firearms will make a much bigger dent in gun violence than having a waiting period before obtaining one. Overall, when governments before forbade its citizens to arm themselves, it usually did not end very well at all; it was a very definitive step in stripping away rights from the people by making it impossible to defend themselves from an opressive government. Personally, I'm not a big fan of guns (well, not so much the guns as much as the guy who'd be pointing it at me), but I would be terribly alarmed if the government tries to take them away from everyone.

  • by


    Fri Nov 18 2005

    I respect Bird808's viewpoint. My problem with gun control is twofold. First, gun control laws decrease the number of guns owned by responsible, legal gun owners. That is wrong. It's like addressing the problem of too many uninsured vehicle operators by raising the premiums on everyone's auto insurance. Secondly, most present day "gun control" laws do not address the problem of illegally obtained and possessed guns being used in criminal activity. Isn't that the real problem with too many guns? Too many unregistered guns in the hands of potential criminals? But we make LEGAL gun owners jump through hoops to get licensed, etc. etc. The gun control zealots, in their haste to advance their viewpoint, like to characterize ANYONE who owns or wants to own a gun, as irresponsible, brain-dead and likely to take it upon themselves to shoot up the neighborhood at the drop of a hat. What did they do wrong? Regarding the tragedy at Dunblane, wouldn't it be fair to evaluate the "gun co... Read more

  • by


    Thu Nov 17 2005

    In the UK they definitely need to tighten up their gun laws as the Firearms (Amendment) (No. 2) Act 1997 is not enough. I've seen too many lives ruined by these weapons going into the wrong hands, due to Blair having a very relaxed attitude and turning almost a blind eye to the whole situation. On March 13th 1996 in Dunblane, Thomas Hamilton walked into a primary school and fired 105 rounds killing sixteen 4-6 year olds and their teacher. This was just the beginning as now nine years later the UK has degressed concerning gun crime rather than progressed.

  • by


    Wed Nov 16 2005

    I can and should have a gun. Maybe even a few guns.

  • by


    Sat Aug 06 2005

    I live in Australia, and banning of fire arms is the only legislature I will admire John Howard for initiating. I hate guns. My next door neighbour (a teenager), used his father's gun to shoot himself years ago. I know the adage guns don't kill people..., but it's lethal ability makes it a death sentence for suicidal people. Even if the firearms means were eliminated, they'd still use other means, but the other means they choose might not be as potent. You don't ever want to be the one to find someone who has blown themselves away. This issue is passionate for me, and I firmly believe you have to have gun control or bans regardless of the country you reside in.

  • by


    Wed May 25 2005

    Guns don't kill people, it's the idiots that pull the trigger. You cannot punish law abiding citizens and take away their constitutional rights by enforcing outrageous gun control laws. If you really want to crack down on crime, give the police force more power, money, and better training resources.

  • by


    Wed Jan 12 2005

    guns should be controlled JUST LIKE GETTING PREGNANT??? What kind of anti-freedom facist are you? Whats next only attractive whites like you get to breathe? The majority of gun owners are drunk poor and stupid? Even if it were true, now theres something wrong with being poor? Well excuse me for possessing ethics. Drunk, now your just showing your ignorant naivite. Actually Denver the majority of gun owners statistically have less children then non-gun owners. What the hell does having teeth have to do with possessing the basic freedom to bear arms as set forth by the Constitution of The United States of America? I feel very sorry for those poor bastards that don't know how to fire a gun and believe the police will keep you safe forever. Sh!t happens and when it does, you will die. We wont miss ya. Personally i belive an american has the contitutional right to procure any type of weapon imaginable and the soldiers and police of the u.s. gov't should not be allowed to carry any weapon on... Read more

  • by


    Mon Dec 20 2004

    I once read a shirt that read: Criminals For Gun Control! Why Should We Get Hurt While on the Job? Not all people should have guns but not all people should be denied their right to have them.

  • by


    Sat Dec 18 2004

    banning weapons will make it worse. We know this was one of Kerry's idea's. I mean, some people need guns for self-defense and hunting, especially the army

  • by


    Sat Dec 04 2004

    Very well-said, ClassicTVFan! You expressed my feelings on the matter exactly, so I don't need to add anything else.

  • by


    Mon Aug 09 2004

    Simply enforce the 'well regulated militia' provision of the Second Ammendment. Everyone that wants to own a gun also has to join the regular Army, Reserves, or National Guard. I imagine that would change things quite a bit.

  • by


    Fri Aug 06 2004

    If you're against private ownership of firearms, then at least have the balls to attempt to remove them from their owners yourself! Don't hide in your home and send jack-booted thugs armed with sub-machineguns to do it for you!

  • by


    Wed Jul 21 2004

    this will sound simplistic, but guns need to be taken out of the hands of criminals. perhaps if someone commits a violent crime using a gun they should have their hand chopped off. at the very least, it would take them a while to become proficient using their other hand.

  • by


    Mon Jun 14 2004

    Gun control laws work only when you have people who will obey laws, and law abiding gun owners are not the problem.

  • by


    Thu Jun 10 2004

    Amazing. I see the naives came out of the woodwork for this one. Only law enforcement and military personnel could use them. And criminals, of course. Don't ever forget them. And while we're at it, let's all leave our doors unlocked at night since afterall, we WOULD be living in a perfect world where EVERYONE would obey the law, right? The only crime that gun control deters is the unspeakable act of self-defense against someone who never respected your laws/property rights/etc. in the first place, who wishes to harm you and/or take from you by force various things of value (loved ones, material possessions, etc.), and-by-the-way-exactly-who-are-you-to-stand-up-and-defend-yourself-all-the-while-denying-someone-who-never-had-a-chance-their-very-livelihood-and-right-to-steal-from-and-harm-you-without-consequence, anyway? Get me the ACLU...stat!!! I wanna ask you liberals, progressives, neo-socialists, etc., would it really make you feel any safer if you knew that a man who would never thr... Read more