There is no reason for anybody to own a gun.

No but my dog almost once got shot by a farmer after she ran onto his field after sniffing a stray sheep. He was entitled to shoot it, luckily I had my whistle.

 

More people get killed per year by Cars, so do we ban cars?

 

We don't ban cars but they are not usually used to deliberately kill.

If everyone could own a gun the murder rate would go through the roof and the UK would be a very dangerous place.

 

No just Lorries and Caravans , and vans

 

I think the way it is controlled now is adequate enough, of couse there are illegal guns but there still would be illegal ones if we banned all guns.

 

Why don't we just go the whole hog and ban people all together.

 

I had a spud gun.

 

True,but he shouldn't have,it wasn't a failure of law,but some very worrying things going on in high places in Scotland,
he'd been exposed and confronted as a paedophile on Scottish television,for anyone interested google the website
Dunblane unburied,its very sad and it's certainly not the usual internet conspiracy theory site.

 

Just how many crimes are committed using legally owned shotguns? I don't think farmers with guns is much of an issue.

And don't give me any Tony Martin crap. He was doing us all a favour. It is an absolute travesty he was sent down for it.

 

Because killing is not the function of a car.

 

Here's my view, for what it's worth, and I've changed my stance on this many times. I've come from your position, but meeting people with different viewpoints does alter things, taking on board what other peoples lives are like.
Farmers do need guns, and what about hunting? OK, you could argue that people shouldn't hunt, but seriously you just aren't going to stop that. And we are talking about the US, vast open areas, people living in the middle of nowhere and far more dangerous wild animals than we have. I think our gun control laws work well, you rarely hear of cases like this and you generally don't see guns, so much that I'm taken aback when I see armed police at the airport.
I've often said, like you, that there really is no reason for anyone to own a gun, but that's really saying "there's no reason for me to own a gun, so therefore no reason for anyone else to own one".
But, let's look at the US, apart from for hunting why should people own a gun? I didn't think there was a need, but having visited my in-laws in Vermont you get a different perspective. By the way, the only guns my brother-in-law has is a .22 rifle which I massacred a pumpkin with and a musket which even the pumpkin would have got away before he got that working! Yes, it's weird when you go into Walmart and your nephew says "I'm just going to look at the guns!", turned out this particular Walmart didn't sell them, but back to places like Vermont. It's not like being in the UK with the close proximity of major urban areas, many people live out in the middle of nowhere, it can be hundreds of miles to the nearest major town, small towns are often policed by just a sheriff, and that's it. Even then he could be at least 1 or 2 hours drive away, so you have an intruder, you have someone threatening your life a simple 999 call (or in this case 911) isn't a great deal of use.
There should be greater gun control in cities than in rural areas.
The issue in the States is really with semi-automatic weapons and assault rifles, now these I see no reason to own. There was a assault rifle ban in the US in place for 10 years which expired in Sept 2004, in the run up to a Presidential election so pressure from the gun lobby group, the NRA, saw this expire as it was seen as a vote loser for Pres. Bush.
This shooter had a semi-automatic weapon, if there was a ban still in place on these then fewer people would have died, a lunatic is still going to find a way, but just try to reduce the likelihood.
I've been a few US message boards and seen arguments from all sides on this....the arguments from the pro-gun people are that "if you outlaw guns then only outlaws have guns", this is true but also if you ban guns there are less about, it's harder to get hold of one and you can't steal one by breaking into a house.
It's also worth noting that many places in the US have laws that prohibit the carry of weapons, malls etc have signs up saying "no guns", schools and universities have a ban on guns on campus.....this doesn't stop the criminal intend on shooting though, and the other argument put forward often is actually that if MORE people had guns, if there was a law-abiding citizen there with a gun then the shooter could be stopped....personally I find this a quite bizarre notion, because you are just increasing guns and you'd need to be a crack marksman to take out the shooter. It's also even more ridiculous when I've seen people apply it in this case because it was a DARK cinema....another person there with a gun, trying to shot the shooter....you'd just end up with a shootout and another person, or 3 or more firing randomly....it really would have been carnage.
They also have the 2nd amendment in the Constitution which states that "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." and the gun lobby people use this to say it's enshrined in the constitution, my argument against that is to point out in the first instance that it's an "amendment" which shows the Constitution can be changed, but the main argument and constitutional experts also say that that it was for a different time, when the US was a frontier, when it had just won a war of Independence and was still under threat from the British, and when it didn't have an army......the full text states "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". So it was really intended so that an army could be formed if needed, something they no longer need to do.

 

In my opinion even in america (where I concede there MAY be more of a case for it) I don't think guns are needed by anyone. Even in your defence of america you have highlighted two reasons why I feel they should be banned. The first was that your relatives use guns as play things (you were allowed to play with them, shooting pumpkins), the second is that they use them as some kind of vigilante weaponry. Used to punish and stop would be and alleged criminals. In my opinion this is the police's job, not the public's. I wonder how many people in america have been shot and the shooter has got away with it by saying he was being attacked. Thousands?

I just don't really see a need for them at all, wherever somebody states a reason for a particular group to own them there is always an alternative.

If guns were outlawed completely and the punishment for anyone owning or being in possession of a gun was instant life imprisonment there would be far less guns around in the first place for the 'bad guys' to get their hands on and the majority of them would think twice about carrying one even if they could get one if they knew that they would be in prison for life just for being seen with one.

 

The American constitution with regards guns dates back to when they were at 'war' with the British - they were entitled to defend themselves . ( thanks to the Simpsons for that)

 

Punishment for murder isn't instant life imprisonment so why should carrying a gun carry such a sentence?

 

To stop people from carrying them. The problem with automatic sentences for crimes such as murder is that there is always an argument that there were exceptional circumstances, that they felt threatened, that they didnt realise what they were doing etc and while I don't necessarily agree with it I do understand why that means different sentences for different people. With an automatic sentence for possessing a gun it is different, it is black or white, either you have one in your possession illegally or you don't.

 

Ok then, everyone that drink drives or talks on the phone whilst driving should get a life sentence also.

 

Impossible to control - always will be a need for them so there will always be someone prepared to trade / carry them. They are trying to control them by having them registered - take that away and it will be driven underground and not eradicated - in the same way drugs are

 

What is the need for them? So far i've only seen people give a reason for farmers to own them and even then it isn't a need, it is simply a desire because they want to use guns rather than seek alternatives.

 

There's no need for many things in life but people still use them.

 

Guns are power to criminal groups - no need for them but helps them feel in control! Sad but true - crime is a lucrative business