Gun Control Forum on Facebook Gun Control Forum on Google Plus Gun Control Forum on Twitter

Greetings Gun Control Debater

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In with Facebook Sign In with OpenID Sign In with Twitter

Popular Gun Control Forum Categories

In this Discussion

Gun Replacements

edited August 2016 in Gun Control Debates Posts: 246
I know there are many people who believe civilians shouldn't have guns.   I want to preface this question by saying that I'm not judging or picking on you.  I am curious about what you think.  What would you do to defend yourselves?  There have been many shootings in gun-free areas.  What safeguards would you have in place for those areas?

Comments

  • Posts: 49
    Rule 1: criminals don't give a crap about laws
    Rule 2: laws can't change Rule 1

    Based on those simple truths, you decide what is best for you. 

    Those who believe "civilians" should not have guns are either wannabe tyrants or just not the brightest bulbs on the tree.  The right to defend yourself by the means of your choice is a basic human right that predates governments and constitutions.  In a free country, which is allegedly "of the people, by the people, for the people" why shouldn't free citizens be allowed the same means to defend themselves as the government that only rules by their consent is allowed? 
  • I think the reason there are so many shootings in gun free zones is because the shooter knows that it is a gun free zone, and they most likely can cause the most damage there. There is no one there to defend against their attacks. It is the same thing with any other bully. People don't bully people if they can't get away with it. They go for the weaker person. They go for the people they know they can dominate. Who will stand against them in a gun free zone. There needs to be someone available to combat their attacks eve in the gun free zone.  
    DoctorWho
  • Posts: 234
    I agree gun free zone surely doesn't make it a safe zone for the innocent,it does mean a safe zone for criminals to attack though.I am not sure who first come up with this idea but they shouldn't be part of the decision making group.Decisions left up to a idiot will give you just that a decision of a idiot.I don't think common sense is used much today in decision making and when common sense is lost then reality is lost.
  • Yeah, common sense seems to go out the window with politicians.  All they care about is getting re-elected and most of their decisions are driven by that rather than the good of the people. 
  • I think the people should definitely be able to defend themselves, whether with a gun or a sword or something else. It's a basic human right.
  • I agree.  I am not saying that we shouldn't have guns or weapons to defend ourselves.  Rather, I am talking about areas that are already gun-free.  I am asking "what kind of safeguards should we have in place in places where we have no guns". 
  • Posts: 234
    I am a firm believer that you have to meet force with force it is the only thing that is understood.You can't beat gun violence with words,or worthless laws,or unarming the would be victims.That only works in make believe,not in real life situations.That is proven each time these tragic shootings happen,because what is missing in each one of these cases, it is opposition.We wouldn't send our troops into war without guns,but yet they think they can fight the war on crime without them.
  • "nailah783
    October 2015 Posts: 68Thanks
    I think the reason there are so many shootings in gun free zones is because the shooter knows that it is a gun free zone, and they most likely can cause the most damage there. There is no one there to defend against their attacks. It is the same thing with any other bully. People don't bully people if they can't get away with it. They go for the weaker person. They go for the people they know they can dominate. Who will stand against them in a gun free zone. There needs to be someone available to combat their attacks even in the gun free zone. "

    That was so well put !
    If only the anti gun people could understand that statement of truth and get behind it.
  • That statement about bullies hits home for me because as a child, I was bullied and beaten and abused by boys older and stronger, my parents were of no help, teachers were no help either, so I let these bullies have their way with me anytime they wanted, I expected abuse, I even felt I deserved abuse and was asking for it in a way, being so small and helpless, defenseless and thin, weak, frail and feminine in form, girls would often defend me.

    It was only when I fought back, as weak and puny and defenseless as I was, that is when the abuse stopped !!! the bullies did not really want to fight me, they wanted a weak humiliated and helpless little girl, which is what they called me whilst they took embarrassing advantage of me.
  • Posts: 24
    Well I think that the argument against anything like this is that you can never really get rid of guns, so resorting to other means is just not sufficient to keep safe.  In that sense you kind of start to see the circular logic that is at work here, but that is certainly nothing new.  I do have a nice knife, though, which is nice to have, but I would bring it to a gun fight.  Interesting stuff, and thanks for sharing.
  • Posts: 75
    I posit that gun free areas should be heavily policed with rapid response teams stationed in key areas. There should be gun detectors at entrances to populated areas like schools, streets and malls. One overlooked fact is that the populace should also be drilled on emergency response. There should also be community policing and people should be able to monitor each other. I am not advocating for paranoia but a watertight system that would blend with the way of life on a daily basis.
Sign In or Register to comment.