I'm not gonna join in their argument, I'll just give my 2 cents:

Gun control is like asking the criminals to rob our homes, murder us, mug use etc. Why? Because what law breaking criminal will abide to the law and turn in their guns? NONE! They will all hide their guns (you can do that, that's why the TSA gropes 2 year old "terrorists") And then, BAM advantage, they have an unfair advantage, people who previously could stand their ground and shoot trespassers are now forced too: 1. Take it like a little boy, 2. Try and get the law (hint: They'll take their time and will likely show up when it's too late) 3. Attack them which may kill you because why? You're forced to rely on melee tactics which numerous Americans aren't trained to do. Also, amendment 2 doesn't say only a state militia can bear arms, any person can and we are supposed to have access to the same guns as the US troops (the musket argument can be shot down with point, we only had muskets back then, but so did the military) the second amendment is made in case a militia decides to go rogue, the people are protected with equal arms if you want to read the amendment yourself:
 "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."
If you analyze it you will see everything I just said is true. Now to find the thread about marijuana...

Cradily is love : First things first, it is not a good idea to post here if you do not want to join the argument. Someone will counter you and you will have to then counter them.

Second, I agree with you completely

I have to side with tgags123, Sword legion, and tornadocam on this one. It doesnt't make sense to take guns away from the innocent and make them more vulnerable.

I agree with banning gun control, but only to a certain extend. I think it's perfectly fine for people to have semi-automatic pistols, revolvers, or hunting rifles to defend themselves. That's OK with me. But the thing is, I don't see why people need guns like submachine guns, automatic rifles, and automatic weapons similar to these. Heck, even shotguns are questionable. You don't need to be carrying an ak-47 in your house to defend yourself, a simple pistol will be fine. What use will people have with these guns, other than to shoot others? Maybe they are just gun enthusiasts. If that is so, they should just go down to the shooting range and rent an automatic rifle to use (I don't know if that's allowed, though.). That's my opinion. Also, tgags123: You hit the nail on the head with that picture

I don't really see how having stricter gun control laws or banning guns to an extent will have that much of an impact. If you want proof look at pretty much any other country in the world including Sweden (which is where I live and mind you I live in probably one of the city's with the most crime in the country which is still pretty puny with the amount of crime compared to U.S). If it really does have that much of an impact then I'd argue that the problems lie elsewhere and isn't because of the gun laws. I'll also argue that with how loose the current gun laws are in America it can actually lead to more people dying through gun related accidents which are a lot more common then people think, not to mention making it easier for some criminals to get guns.

Popeye116 : im not sure where you live, but last i checked, we in the U.S. are not allowed to handle sub-guns or automatic rifles without proper licensing, and you should see the hoops you have to jump through to get the BATFE to even CONSIDER aproving you for a federal firearms license. your run of the mill wal-mart AK or M4 clone is no more an automatic rifle than an M1911 is a sub-machine gun. lets use semi-auto and burst fire/full-auto handguns as an example, the glock 17 (semi-auto) and the glock 18, which is select fire (semi or fully automatic). or the beretta 92(?) and its 3 round furst fire variant. in short, an "assault weapon" is not measured by its power, capacity or construction, but of its intended functionality, and i myself would go as far to say that any given item can be a weapon, and that any weapon can be an assault weapon if used as such. this is a picture of a simple semi-automatic pistol.



this is the FN Five seveN pistol with 20 5.8x28mm cartridges. its light, ergonimic, and easy to use. it retains the same amount of kinetic energy as the 9mm with higher capacity holding 20 rounds in a flush mag, better penetration, and 30% lower recoil. its the firearm in my layout, and it is also the very same pistol that nidal hasan shot up his army base with. it still puzzles me that no one else on an ARMY BASE, was armed.... this is a perfectly legal semi automatic pistol, and not an assault weapon, but it was used as one.

sorry if their are any typos, spell check does not seem to be working for me.

the united states was founded on guns it is our second amendment right in the constitution and once they start taking away are rights they take our freedom i think people should have guns for two reasons and two reasons only for hunting and for self-defense because think about it if they they take away our guns then the only people who are gonna have guns are law enforcement and if you watch the news lately police with guns scare me more then anything and the other group that would have them are the criminals who obtain them illegally leaving you and me the average people completely defenseless

baileyface544 : Sorry, you're more enlighten than most but (buzzer).
They may be able to shut down manufacturers, but that's a horrible idea for two reasons(no offense(of course, when someone says that, they're usually about to offend somebody, but I'm trying not to))
1-Wliminating manufacturers makes even more of our sic military small arms made in other countries. How does that turn out?
2-Guns would become just like anything else. Find a discreet location on it, and it says "made in China." So we would just import them.

A good thought, but these things just don't work. Although if they were made in China they might break down more easily...LOL kidding. Kind of sort of.
And a good morning to you!(:

Titan127 :
No offence taken. I wouldn't be in a forum titled "Debate" if I had a problem with people disagreeing with me
Although, I think you may have misunderstood what I meant.
I never meant to imply that shutting down manufactures would eliminate guns completely (or that it was what I wanted...I don't)
All I meant is that it would make them less common
Of course guns would be shipped illegal in that instance, but there is one thing you have to take into account
Illegal international shipping...is expensive. Very expensive.
It would be far more expensive than it is to get illegal guns than it is now.
Even if we had military manufactures (which we should) they would still be watched more closely than the ones now
Making it a lot harder to get guns out, and making the stakes higher if you get caught most likely.
What this would mean is that you would no longer be able to get a .45 with the serial filed off for 20$ 
(the price a neighbor was trying to sell me one before, lol)
More illegal guns more expensive would mean less criminals would have them, and the ones who do have them,
(because most assuredly people would still get them) would have less.
Now, I'm against banning guns, very much so.
But for that reason, I can at least understand the argument.
I just don't think it will cut down enough.

baileyface544 : but that's the thing-illegal. Are nail clippers illegal? Made in China. Big difference, I know, but even if we got THAT(to last to look at the italics format tag, but not to lazy to write this xplanation that takes way longer, so I used all caps) legalized to be illegalised, Im only 14 and I can make a musket from scratch. I've done it. If I tried, I could probably make something a little more...advanced. Or just go to Mexico, join the Cartels, and wait for the US government to give me some M4s! LOL. And thanks for...what's the word...ahem...I write my though process as I'm typing...weird, but....um...going into detail, whatever the word for that is. Absentminded me!
Or we could just be like this. Fine by me! I love my dad's high-caliber toy....22...okay fine LOW caliber!
http://www.nationstates.net/nation=ranoria

Titan127 :
Hmm, I'm not entirely sure I understand what you're saying in the first sentence,
though yes there is a big difference between legal, and illegal shipping.
To ship something illegally, several accommodations have to be made, and several people have to be paid off.
This is to avoid the weapons being intercepted by authorities at various check points.
Either that, or you have to find an alternate way to ship them in, which would likely cost money, and carry a higher risk factor.
I apologize if that had nothing to do with what you were saying there.

And yes, there are alternate ways you can get your hands on guns.
Though in this scenario they would be a lot harder to get.
Even making your own weapon would be more difficult,
and require a lot of knowledge or research to make one even halfway decent.
That, combined with the fact that your average petty criminal isn't smart enough to do that
or patient enough to learn.
Nor will they be able to afford a higher priced gun a lot of the time.
And it's this type of person who is the most likely to shoot a another person without real provocation
Just out of sheer idiocy or fear. The gun gives them a feeling of empowerment, and stupidity makes them use it.
So getting guns out of these types of peoples hands would be the priority in this scenario,
and this would partially cut down on the number who do have dangerous, concealed firearms.
Partially

Again, I'm playing devils advocate here. This is the strongest point I can make for that side of the debate.
Here is the main problem with this argument however.
Many people who take this stance believe that none of these low level criminals will be able to get there hands on guns.
That is far from true.
In America, guns have become part of the the culture, and many of these low level criminals would feel they have to have one.
You can make it harder for them to get the weapons, but they will still find a way.
I mean, look at piracy. They've been trying to stamp it out so hard in this country, but people still keep finding ways around it.
Granted, like I said, the average petty criminal isn't that smart, but they are determined.
And while they may not be bright enough to find a way around the system, some of the smarter ones will.
And they will be happy to find a way to use the dumber ones, and exploit them in exchange for weapons.
Some would be left unarmed, sure, but too many will still find a way to get something.
All this would do is inconvenience some, make a market for others,
and assure law-abiding citizens will be at a disadvantage when it comes to self-defense.

Wow this post ran long. Sorry :p

baileyface544 :

Titan127 :

you have both made good points. however, you must also realize that the points being discussed are based on the assumption that shutting down manufacturers legally will actually stop all production of arms in the nation. it can be said with great certainty that it would not. as i have already stated before, this would be the exact same brand of legislative morality (a contradiction in its self.) as prohibition. prohibition did not stop production of alcoholic beverages, it made the mob rich. illegal gun runners would simply manufacture their own, and it would pave the way for the black market to become even more of a lucrative line of work. the smart criminals wont resort to making a crude blunderbus, they will make modern, military grade hardware, and sell it to the morons. in short, it would be not only be a failure, but in fact exaggerate the problem. you cant make the world safer, only your world.

m0ssb3rg935 : that's exactly what I said. While it would be very difficult, you could make a gun.
Even I could make a decent musket. And like he said, what about the smarter people of the world? Not to mention we did agree that it wouldn't cut all gun ownership, but good point, nonetheless.
And then a point. I made WAY back in this thread, look at the UK.
They banned guns. They don't have any guns. But now there's nothing to stop crooks. They take knives, and over 1,000 people are subject to knife crimes a month(not murder, fortunately, but assault) 1038 in January, 410'injured(many seriously) and four killed. So...
What's sad is that this forum is all of us who like guns! Seriously. But I guess its a good thing to.

tgags123 : Great Illustration! Those were my thoughts exactly.

m0ssb3rg935 :
That is certainly a possibility, however it wouldn't be near to the point it is now.
Guns are harder to mass produce without drawing attention than alcohol is.
It would certainly happen, but again these weapons would be harder to find, and cost more.
Good point though, and it would certainly make a lot of people rich who did mange to pull it off.