If guns were made illegal everywhere.

Post Reply New Topic

It would cause feelings of woe and despair for annoying NRA gun nuts. Let's do it.

Gun components will eventually break down, even if it takes a LONG time. To make something like this stick, gun components and maintenance supplies would have the same legal standing as drug paraphernalia. You'd also have to ban the manufacture and sale of ammunition, which would render any gun completely useless. Sure, you could save the cartridges and reuse them, but if you stockpile powder, wadding, and lead, someone is going to eventually notice. Pseudo is a meth precursor, you have to have a prescription for it where I live, and even with a prescription you have a limit on how much you can purchase EVEN IF a doctor refills your prescrip. If I understand correctly, in some places pseudo has a street value of $50 PER PILL. I'm prone to horrible colds, so I stock up on the stuff every few years. It's kinda cool having $1,000 worth of drugs in my medicine cabinet for which I pay little more than $100 when you include the doctor visit. But that's strictly for legit use. I'm not so sure gun components would really be available in the same way. I don't know about lasting 1000 years...I have seen shotgun barrels break after regular use over time.

If I knew firearms would become illegal, I'd invest in 4 or 5 Glock 29s and a few cases of ammo. Simple design, durable materials should make for some serious longevity. My attitude towards guns is that I hope I never have to use one. But in a world in which weapons are illegal, I'd rather be someone with a weapon than someone having to depend on someone else for protection.

Like I've said in a different thread, the problem isn't with guns necessarily. The real problem is with weapons as a whole. Get rid of guns, something else will become weaponized. I've been wanting to get into archery for a long time, for instance. So what's next? Banning crossbows? Banning compound bows with over 50 lbs. draw? What about firearms and archery equipment intended for hunting? Knives/swords? Are we going to ban tae kwon do classes to prevent the human body from being used as a weapon? Getting rid of weapons is senseless.

My favorite gun quote ever:


link to video with ad if you're interested:
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/an-qAay44t47hYY2/death_proof_2007_kim_carries_a_gun/

A Bible-believing Christian would turn the other cheek, and have no use for a weapon.

Kim is a potty-mouth.

Only if they didn't understand the cultural background behind what Jesus was saying and mistakenly became pacifists over it. Whole denominations have been built on that statement, yet they did not know it's original meaning in ancient Jewish culture.

I really love the charmingly naive idea that a gun will protect you against someone else who has a gun. Sorry, but guns do not stop other people's bullets. What a gun does is allow you to make a pre-emptive strike against someone else who you think might have a gun - if they already have theirs in their hand, it's too late.
Unfortunately, it is extremely difficult to have rational debate about the matter with anybody who strongly associates their national identity, and indeed personal identity, with gun ownership.

Eventually they will but with well made guns that usually only means small parts breakage like extractors or other small parts and worn springs. The fact is there will be enough guns still in circulation that they can be canalizated for parts or those parts can be fabricated. Also existing spares. I keep some common small parts for some of mine.

As far as "banning" the manufacture and sale of ammo that would have limited success. Gun and ammo hording became the rage in Jan. 09 when Obama took office. Ammo was being bought by the 500 and 1000 round case faster than the distributors could re-supply themselves. Never mind the reason; the hording DID happen and there are more guns, magazines, and ammo in private hands now than ever. I wouldn't rule out underground ammo manufacturing including all components. Ban something desirable or necessary and that desire and need will find a way, period.

The thousand year thing was meant for guns of decent quality not the el cheapo ones but even they will last that long if you don't use them and they are protected from corrosion well enough. I honestly believe that a firearm of lasting quality will go over 1000 years with moderate use and maintenance.

Shotgun barrels broke? That's kind of a nebulous term. How did they break? I've seen a few of them get bent a little by beyond the norm abuse. I've seen at least one with the choke blown off due to an obstructed bore. I've seen pictures from reliable sources of ruptured barrels from obstructions or misuse of some kind.
If you've seen shotgun barrels broken from normal use please describe the nature of the failures and how they came about.

Some places would probably get safer. Others wouldn't.

A lot of people seem to confuse banning weapons with removing them from the hands of criminals. It doesn't matter how illegal the gun is to a criminal, banning them just removes them from the hands of law abiding citizens.

This is so naive I don't even know if I should dissect it.

Go on, try. It will likely be the funniest thing on WP today.
By the way, you should probably look up the word "naive" first.

Let's start with the basic fact that there are many people who can draw and fire (accurately) far faster than someone could react and shoot...

Also, guns for safety tend to be used in very different scenarios to what you're laying out here. For example, if someone invades my home, a shotgun *will* stop them whether they already have a pistol in their hand or not. I've yet to meet the person who won't die after a round of twelve gauge buck shot in their chest. It's quite easy to just wait for them to come around a corner and open fire before they have a chance to react.

If guns were made illegal everywhere, then that means we all forgot about how well Prohibition really worked out.

Tell ya what; this seems to be gunz-r-bad season here right now and I think I'm in every one of them in PPR and the current events forum. Just go there and read what others and myself have already written. We've coverd the gist of your beliefs and claims very well.
In fact, these debates have been going on for years from time to time here and we've totally shredded the arguments and claims of the gunz-r-bad crowd every time without fail.

And yes, I know what naive means. If I've learned anything on this forum it's about naivety from blatant examples at ever turn.

The bad guys would be armed whether are not guns are legal. Guns exist. Where they do not exist they can be made from off the shelf material.

ruveyn

I am talking about where the guns originally come from.


As I said, only because a legal source exists. Remove the legal source and I am willing to bet home-made guns increase in number in the parts of the world where organized crime is a problem.

Look at Mexico: Most of the guns originate from corrupt governments and their military supply chains. Police and soldiers take their issued guns with them when they become outlaws, sources in the government sell them more, and the former communist bloc countries sell them almost all the rest via central America. Civilian vendors in the US are the smallest source, at 17%, partly due to the high price compared to Russian dealers and a lack of corrupt customs officials here.

Cook at the former communist bloc: Not only is there a lot of loose surplus military hardware and cash-strapped people in charge of it, but there is a huge network of organized crime (that is often protected or ignored by the same officials), who both are consumers and distributors of weapons.

Then look at Germany: legal guns are believed to make up only 25-50% of the total privately owned, but crime is still low due to a general lack of conditions that breed a culture of violent crime.