Skip to content
View in the app

A better way to browse. Learn more.

Thailand News and Discussion Forum | ASEANNOW

A full-screen app on your home screen with push notifications, badges and more.

To install this app on iOS and iPadOS
  1. Tap the Share icon in Safari
  2. Scroll the menu and tap Add to Home Screen.
  3. Tap Add in the top-right corner.
To install this app on Android
  1. Tap the 3-dot menu (⋮) in the top-right corner of the browser.
  2. Tap Add to Home screen or Install app.
  3. Confirm by tapping Install.

Gun Control

Should firearms be controled? 27 members have voted

  1. 1. Should firearms be controled?

    • Yes
      62%
      17
    • No
      37%
      10

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Featured Replies

If you have a look at what's going on in New Orleans, it could be expected given the gravity of the situation. According to reports, society has almost completely broken down there. No doubt this could happen to any city across the globe given the circumstances.

However, there have been reports of people taking the law very much into their own hands by taking shots at invaders. Not only that, but reports of people firing at rescue efforts.

Given the much freer availability of firearms in the US (compared to the UK), is this to be expected? If the licensing and usage firearms were controlled would it have any impact on the level of violence we're now seeing in the NO?

  • Replies 119
  • Views 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

If you have a look at what's going on in New Orleans, it could be expected given the gravity of the situation. According to reports, society has almost completely broken down there. No doubt this could happen to any city across the globe given the circumstances.

However, there have been reports of people taking the law very much into their own hands by taking shots at invaders. Not only that, but reports of people firing at rescue efforts.

Given the much freer availability of firearms in the US (compared to the UK), is this to be expected? If the licensing  and usage firearms were controlled would it have any impact on the level of violence we're now seeing in the NO?

If any society believes it is necessary to control violence in the same way it wishes to control drug usage or alcoholism or sexual immorality, for example, then it is only logical that there should be some control on all weapons designed to inflict personal injury.

Surely to behave otherwise is hypocrisy (there’s that word again).

Not sure I completely understand your question. Are you asking if I think just anybody should be able to buy them with no records checks, background checks, waiting periods, or criminal history queried? If that is the question, then I certainly believe that those things are a good idea before purchasing a firearm for anyone.

If your question is should firearms be prohibited for all regular citizens, I would say definitely not. A long as a person submits to the necessary checks, they shoule be able to buy a firearm. I fully support the right to bear arms.

Guns are licensed in many states and some states require firearms lessons before the gun may be taken home from the shop. The people in NO stole the guns from a store. They are criminals. They do their thing despite the laws.

  • Author
Guns are licensed in many states and some states require firearms lessons before the gun may be taken home  from the shop.  The people in NO  stole the guns from a store.  They are criminals.  They do their thing despite the laws.

Doesn't the fact that regular citizens can obtian a firearm fairly easily, even after going through the correct legal channels, increase the likelyhood of "criminals" obtaining them by other means?

Surely if they were securely locked away and only made available to a select few, the chances of running into them on the streets would be minimal at best...?

I fully support the right to bear arms.

Yup, rip off their sleeves.

Gun control fails less spectacularly in countries that initiated gun control when most of their citizens didn't have firearms.

In the USA, there were already a lot of firearms around when gun control legislation was introduced. It hasn't worked and I don't think it ever will in the States.

I fully support the right to bear arms.

Why?

No matter if something is illegal or not, people can get their hands on anything they want. If someone wants a gun, they can get it a lot easier illegally than legally. Criminals don't usually buy guns through the proper channels. They get them on the black market or from some illegal arms dealer.

I support the right to bear arms because it cuts back on crime and it stops people, namely criminals, from feeling they can take advantage of others whenever they please.

I will cite one example here which funnily enough happened in New Orleans. The city of New Orleans, or perhaps it was the state of Louisiana I'm not sure, gave its citizens the right to carry concealed weapons inside of their cars. At that time, New Orleans was the car-jacking capital of the U.S. After several months of this law being passed, car-jackings in New Orleans dropped by some ridiculous number like 80% or something because the criminals were worried about people having the legal guns in their cars and being able to shoot them. It's an effective deterrent to crime, plain & simple.

Guns dont kill people man, people kill people!

I support the right to bear arms because it cuts back on crime and it stops people, namely criminals, from feeling they can take advantage of others whenever they please. 

I will cite one example here which funnily enough happened in New Orleans.  The city of New Orleans, or perhaps it was the state of Louisiana I'm not sure, gave its citizens the right to carry concealed weapons inside of their cars.  At that time, New Orleans was the car-jacking capital of the U.S.  After several months of this law being passed, car-jackings in New Orleans dropped by some ridiculous number like 80% or something because the criminals were worried about people having the legal guns in their cars and being able to shoot them.  It's an effective deterrent to crime, plain & simple.

Guns dont kill people man, people kill people!

In the UK, we don't even have the right to protect our own homes :o I agree that it can be a good deterrant. However, what worries me, is things that can happen "in the heat of the moment". Something you could live to regret when things have calmed down. Tricky one, this.

I fully support the right to bear arms.

Why?

No matter if something is illegal or not, people can get their hands on anything they want. If someone wants a gun, they can get it a lot easier illegally than legally.

Maybe the high proliferation of illegal guns is due partly to easy access to legal guns? If everybody has them, this should ultimately mean easier access to them for criminals as well, I think.

Illegal guns are not *made* illegally by crime syndicates, they are the same guns as the ones you buy in your store or receive when you sign up as a police officer or as an army recruit. They have just become illegal along the way. [Edit: Sorry, Insight already said that, but it bears repeating...]

Criminals don't usually buy guns through the proper channels.  They get them on the black market or from some illegal arms dealer. 
See above argument. Where do the guns come from before they become "illegal" guns?
I support the right to bear arms because it cuts back on crime and it stops people, namely criminals, from feeling they can take advantage of others whenever they please. 

Do you have any proof the right to bear arms cuts back on crime? In that case, I am genuinely interested in seeing it. Many countries have stricter gun laws than the US and still do not have anywhere near the same crime level. Of course there are many other factors that influence the crime level too, but I really think that easy access to gun will mean more crime (at least more violent crime), not less.

I will cite one example here which funnily enough happened in New Orleans.  The city of New Orleans, or perhaps it was the state of Louisiana I'm not sure, gave its citizens the right to carry concealed weapons inside of their cars.  At that time, New Orleans was the car-jacking capital of the U.S.  After several months of this law being passed, car-jackings in New Orleans dropped by some ridiculous number like 80% or something because the criminals were worried about people having the legal guns in their cars and being able to shoot them.  It's an effective deterrent to crime, plain & simple.
Do you also happen to have corresponding statistics for how many people got shot in this state since the law was introduced, as opposed to before?
Guns dont kill people man, people kill people!

That argument does not stand very well, I think. People will kill more often and more effectively if they have access to gun, simply because it is easier to kill with a gun (deliberately as well as by mistake) than with your bare hands or with a knife.

In a society with a high proliferation of guns, there is bound to be a number of people who come into contact with guns who have not received the proper education to handle them. If people do not keep their guns safely locked away, the risk that children or mentally sick or retarded people find them and use them is also higher.

i think gun control only keeps guns out of the hands of people who would be most unlikely to use them in anger as opposed defensively to protect ones property or person.

any criminal worth his salt will know where to get hold of a gun within 30 minutes should he need one , with or without gun control laws.

since very strict gun control was put into place in the uk , (after random massacres in hungerford and dunblane my gun toting crazies , ) gun crime and deaths by firearms has increased by a massive amount.

controlling something just makes it a more accessible and profitable commodity for criminals.

carrying a gun in your car or on your person outside the home should be heavily punished , but for protecting your home and family i believe guns should be allowed.

carrying a gun in your car or on your person outside the home should be heavily punished , but for protecting your home and family i believe guns should be allowed.

Absolutely agree 100% :o:D

  • Author

TRIPxCORE - Appreciate the response, but meadish has said pretty much how I feel about your post.

taxexile - Interesting perspective. The fact that gun crimes have escalated is something I wasn't aware of. Know any sites supporting this fact?

I personally don't think it is necessary for any private citizen to carry a gun or have one in the home. Several years ago a British farmer was put in prison for shooting a burglar in his home, he was licensed to have the gun in his house but was prosecuted for using it. Me I would prefer to use a baseball bat or a large kitchen knife or else smash my tv over their head, that way I could say I was trying to wrestle it out of their hands as they were stealing it & it slipped & it was an accident (tv/knife ) or self defence (b/ball bat) :o

I wholey defend peoples rights to protect their homes & families but wouldn't feel comfortable living in a society where people could be carrying a gun in their bag or car.

insight , i cant direct you to any websites , but the uk crime statistics are forever being quoted in the uk press to back up dissatisfaction with policing methods , the breakdown of uk society, the dangers of stepping outside your home these days etc.etc.etc and firearm offences are increasing at a frightening rate , and the strict gun control measures brought in , although they have made it almost impossible for anyone to legally own a firearm , have done nothing to cut down gun crime.

guns seem to be used regularly to enforce robberies and muggings , and they are not just for show either, they get used.

Several years ago a British farmer was put in prison for shooting a burglar in his home, he was licensed to have the gun in his house but was prosecuted for using it.

If memory serves me right Boo, wasn't he convicted for "Pre Meditated"? He was waiting for them to come, as they had repeatedly burgled his home. Either way, i think if someone comes into your property, you should have the right to protect it. Unfortunately we cannot protect our "Castles" with Moats and Draw Bridges any more :o:D

Doesn't the fact that regular citizens can obtian a firearm fairly easily, even after going through the correct legal channels, increase the likelyhood of "criminals" obtaining them by other means?

Surely if they were securely locked away and only made available to a select few, the chances of running into them on the streets would be minimal at best...?

Without going into the subject of whether we should spend more money on rehabilitaing criminals. I look at the gun issue from the viewpoint that if we lock up the criminals the rest of us can enjoy our freedoms. The criminal element should not ruin it and restrict the rights of everyone. Restrict the rights of the offenders.

Criminals are still members of society and have not given up all rights to being protected by society but protecting criminals from their inclination to commit crimes should not involve the prohibition of gun ownership by all citizens. By that I mean in the case of gunownership, I don't wish to give up my rights because others theorize or even prove that criminals may be less emboldened to commit a crime if they do not have acess to a gun.

In California proponents of legislation curbing crime argued that a certain percentage of people commit the majority of crimes. They said it starts with juveniles commiting offenses usually surrounding drugs, things like theft, robbery, assualt or possession of illegal substance. Some learn their lesson others go on to become repeat offenders. So in 1994 California adopted the "three strikes" law which means if a person commits three serious felony offenses they are given a 25 years to life sentence as they are considered a habitual criminal. It also doubles the sentence for two-time felons. Everyone can bend statistics but according to these stats the number of crimes has droped.

http://www.threestrikes.org/tenyearstudy_pg2.html

Do Guns Cause Crime?

"The best currently available evidence, imperfect though it is (and must always be), indicates that general gun availability has no measurable net positive effect on [crime] rates.... This is not [to] say gun availability has no effects on violence - it has many ... but these effects work in both violence-increasing and violence-decreasing directions, with the effects largely canceling out. For example, when aggressors have guns, they are (1) less likely to physically attack their victims, (2) less likely to injure the victim given an attack, but (3) more likely to kill the victim, given an injury. Further, when victims have guns, it is less likely aggressors will attack or injure them and less likely they will lose property in a robbery. [Taken together] ... the best available time series and cross-sectional studies [show that], the overall net effect of gun availability on total rates of violence is not significantly different from zero. [Emphasis in original.]1 "

link: http://hnn.us/articles/871.html

It's 4a.m. here I hope I made sense. :o

Gun control is a sharp eye and a steady hand.

When they outlaw guns, only the outlaws will have guns.

Guns don't kill people, I do.

Guns are licensed in many states and some states require firearms lessons before the gun may be taken home  from the shop.  The people in NO  stole the guns from a store.  They are criminals.  They do their thing despite the laws.

Doesn't the fact that regular citizens can obtian a firearm fairly easily, even after going through the correct legal channels, increase the likelyhood of "criminals" obtaining them by other means?

Surely if they were securely locked away and only made available to a select few, the chances of running into them on the streets would be minimal at best...?

Same arguement can be made for illegal narcotics - that hasnt exactly worked either. Criminals will always find a way to have weapons - even we have firearm issues in the UK and we have an outright ban.

Let’s face it guns used by anybody except the military or law enforcement agencies is just plain male sexual sublimation.

Having a gun is a just one of many ways of feeling that you have a big d*ck.

If you don’t believe me, answer me this: why is it only little boys who point their fingers and and say pow, pow (squirt, squirt) and never little girls?

Same arguement can be made for illegal narcotics - that hasnt exactly worked either. Criminals will always find a way to have weapons - even we have firearm issues in the UK and we have an outright ban.

True. Washington, DC has a ban on hand-guns, and it is one of the worst cities in the world for hand-gun related crimes, as it is mainly the criminals (and the police) that have them.

I think it's the same in Japan (hand-guns being banned). Though they don't seem to have the same level of crime, it's pretty much only the police and the criminals that are armed.

And it's not just a matter that they are available legally in other places, therefore it's easy for criminals to get them.

In many countries, acquiring illegal firearms is easier than buying ice-cream. For $300 US, I could have an AK-47 and 300 rounds of ammo delivered in an hour. Ice Cream might take 3-4 hours, depending on what time it is.

If the bad guys can smuggle in tons of narcotics and thousands of illegal immigrants every year (into the US for example), how hard would it be to smuggle in a few thousand firearms as well ?

I forget which famous (?) person said it, but the saying was:

An armed society is a polite society.

I agree with strict gun control.

No one should be allowed to carry them or have them in their homes in my view (military/police/secret services etc excluded where necessary).

I don't think any call for them stands up to much arguement and many of the arguements put up by supporters of arming the public actually act against their arguement.

As I see it:

- Having guns (in the long run) available to the public means there are more guns for criminals to steal or use on the owner.

- Career criminals can often get hold of guns even with strict gun control.

- Many crimes are perpertrated by individuals who are NOT career criminals and do not have direct access to the criminal underclass. Therefore, would find it difficult to get hold of a gun. Including disgruntled eployees and school children.

- There are many accidents where guns have caused serious injury and death to their owners and the owner's family etc.

- Usually (not allways granted) if someone tries to rob/mug an individual the victim is not seriously harmed unless he/she offers resistance.

- If you pull a gun on an armed criminal (or potential criminal) it is probable that they will react in kind (especially if there are more than one). At which point the stakes are greatly raised. You either have to kill (forget aim to injure - injured people can fire back!) or be killed.

- As a Buddhist I can not justify taking a life. I can not justify an attachment to anything that is worth a life.

- As an imperfect Buddhist, a human, I would protect my family to whatever degree was nesessary. That means if I had a gun I would use it to protect my family. This amy or maynot have been necessary.

- Bullets wounds are often fatal. You are more likely to live after being hit with a bat or stabbed than if you are shot.

To me, it all adds up to - keep guns off the street.

PS: UK gun crime figures includes where replicas (including air pistols and even toys) where they have been used to trick a victim into thinking it is a real weopon. In the UK it is illegal to carry an air pistol in the street (must be unloaded, uncocked and packed into a locked trasport case when taking in to public). Air rifles are a little more allowed (due to the fact they are used on outside ranges and for rabbit hunting), but must not be used within 40 Metres from any public road.

PPS: Said Farmer shot the 16 year old theif on his way out of the property. Therefore, the law states that he was not defending his home and family, but acting on revenge - thus the murder rap.

TM - you would be surprised how many ladies own firearms. I go a few times a year to the range with my CZ and I'd say its 50/50.

Given the much freer availability of firearms in the US (compared to the UK), is this to be expected? If the licensing  and usage firearms were controlled would it have any impact on the level of violence we're now seeing in the NO?

High levels of violence didn't commence in NO with the hurricane. It has been there all along.

NO is and has been an extremely violent city for decades. It has ranked at or near the top in per capita murders (i.e., The Murder Capital of the US) and other violent crime for decades.

Why does NO have high violent crime rates? Pick any reasonable rationale and you likely have a piece of the answer.

With respect to gun control, if you look at it purely from legislation and laws that are on the books, then US has more gun control that most of the rest of the world combined. The problem is that the laws that exist aren't effectively enforced, and offenders aren't vigorously prosecuted and punished. The net result is that violent offenders in places like NO are on the rise and they don't give a flyin' <deleted> about gun control laws.

It's a bit rude and crude to say so at such a tragic time, and I wouldn't seriously suggest it, but in reality things might be better in the long run if the "shoot to kill" order were actually carried out on violent offenders who are caught in the act during these difficult times. There is one way to fix violence and anarchy in these kinds of situations and that is with a big <deleted>' flyswatter!

Given the much freer availability of firearms in the US (compared to the UK), is this to be expected? If the licensing  and usage firearms were controlled would it have any impact on the level of violence we're now seeing in the NO?

High levels of violence didn't commence in NO with the hurricane. It has been there all along.

NO is and has been an extremely violent city for decades. It has ranked at or near the top in per capita murders (i.e., The Murder Capital of the US) and other violent crime for decades.

Why does NO have high violent crime rates? Pick any reasonable rationale and you likely have a piece of the answer.

With respect to gun control, if you look at it purely from legislation and laws that are on the books, then US has more gun control that most of the rest of the world combined. The problem is that the laws that exist aren't effectively enforced, and offenders aren't vigorously prosecuted and punished. The net result is that violent offenders in places like NO are on the rise and they don't give a flyin' <deleted> about gun control laws.

It's a bit rude and crude to say so at such a tragic time, and I wouldn't seriously suggest it, but in reality things might be better in the long run if the "shoot to kill" order were actually carried out on violent offenders who are caught in the act during these difficult times. There is one way to fix violence and anarchy in these kinds of situations and that is with a big <deleted>' flyswatter!

Oh and by the way, I voted YES for handgun control.

Handguns, and all firearms for that matter, should be controlled. But I, as a law abiding and responsible citizen, shouldn't be prevented by my government from owning one and using one to defend my family and property if needed.

I don't want or need a full auto kalashnikov or ak-47, but I'm sure as heck gonna want to have my 12-gauge pump with 00-buckshot and my .380 semi-auto with high-velocity hollowpoints at the ready if I need them.

Oh and by the way, I voted YES for handgun control.

Handguns, and all firearms for that matter, should be controlled. But I, as a law abiding and responsible citizen, shouldn't be prevented by my government from owning one and using one to defend my family and property if needed.

I don't want or need a full auto kalashnikov or ak-47, but I'm sure as heck gonna want to have my 12-gauge pump with 00-buckshot and my .380 semi-auto with high-velocity hollowpoints at the ready if I need them.

Why are you guys so in love with pump actions.Whats wrong with a semi-auto 12 guage.A pump is just a pain.

I will never understand the obsession of americans for guns. What is it ? it surely is something that goes beyond that silly note on the Constitution. Is that a power trip for the powerless masses ?

I personally don't think it is necessary for any private citizen to carry a gun or have one in the home. Several years ago a British farmer was put in prison for shooting a burglar in his home, he was licensed to have the gun in his house but was prosecuted for using it. Me I would prefer to use a baseball bat or a large kitchen knife or else smash my tv over their head, that way I could say I was trying to wrestle it out of their hands as they were stealing it & it slipped & it was an accident (tv/knife ) or self defence (b/ball bat) :o

I wholey defend peoples rights to protect their homes & families but wouldn't feel comfortable living in a society where people could be carrying a gun in their bag or car.

By useing a baseball bat you increase the chances that you will disarmed and hurt your self, unless you are trained in hand-to-hand combat. With a gun you don't need to get that close to defend yourself.

Don't bring a knife to a gunfight.

Let’s face it guns used by anybody except the military or law enforcement agencies is just plain male sexual sublimation.

Having a gun is a just one of many ways of feeling that you have a big d*ck.

If you don’t believe me, answer me this: why is it only little boys who point their fingers and and say pow, pow (squirt, squirt) and never little girls?

Oh right, give the people with all the power all the weapons. Come on :o TM, after all your quotes of Churchill, you say this?

Create an account or sign in to comment

Recently Browsing 0

  • No registered users viewing this page.

Account

Navigation

Search

Search

Configure browser push notifications

Chrome (Android)
  1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
  2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
  3. Adjust your preference.
Chrome (Desktop)
  1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
  2. Select Site settings.
  3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.