Originally Posted by TheJFX

In brazil, all guns are banned. more gun deaths than anywhere.In conclusion, I'd like to point out how well banning all guns worked in Brazil.

Originally Posted by torikill10

Dude, I don't want to be another one in that opinion war. But let me just tell you something. There is a policy of giving weapons in exchange of remuneration. You can give or not. It's your choice. But you must show that you know how to use and you need to keep the weapon at home. We didn't banned guns. We just gave another option to discard your gun. And yes, we suffer with gun deaths. Because we can't use guns in public. Also, the guns used by gangs are ilegal guns, that came from other countries.

Just an information, we didn't banned guns. Nobody that wants to use. People prefer to wait and die or get the crook's weapon and kill him. Because one thing is for sure. Killing in self-defense isn't a crime here.
-----
this conversation is getting tough

Originally Posted by TheJFX

Also, just remembered I saw this; Ynvaser, if you've ever shot a gun, or been taught how to shoot, you would know to never aim at legs, or arms, for any reason. Center-of-mass is the go-to area, and there's a multitude of reasons, but essentially, you don't aim for arms or legs because they are small, they can move, and your bullet will continue and possibly injure someone.

Anyways, we have gun trade-ins here too, and there are a huge number of guns traded in. However, with 310 million guns in circulation...

Also, I consider what brazil has in terms of gun laws almost a ban, especially when you have so many deaths by weapons. you have 3 calibers, two major gun manufacturers to choose from, and at almost 2000$ a gun in a poverty and drug-stricken country, noone can afford them, never mind shoot them at 1$ a bullet.

Originally Posted by alert242

http://www.theatlantic.com/internati...deaths/260189/

Japan has very restrictive gun laws and practically no gun crime.

Just a reminder that the recent gun package will not take guns away completely. That's ridiculous, guns are a huge part of American culture and removing them completely will not be possible. Instead, a long-term approach is trying to be put in effect by implementing background checks, mental health checks, etc to restrict who may own a gun.

Also, just throwing out my own personal perspective in the discussion;
JFX, you argue some decent points, but your points about comparing knives to guns and people wanting to look like heroes with guns is what I'd like to point out.
1. The example you brought up, a man killing children with a knife. How old were the children? Were they monster hulks with the ability to fight back? Probably not. Regarding at the recent popular incident at the theater in Colorado (?), if that man had been wielding a knife instead of a gun, don't you think the death toll would be much less? And with the gun package, with the mental health checks and background checks, don't you think the incident might have been avoided all together by simply not allowing him to have a gun in the first place?

Secondly, the hero part. If you're leaving a store, a man comes running from behind you with a submachine gun, are you going to whip out your assault rifle? I don't think you're going to be taking any guns into a store, or any public place to defend yourself and be dubbed a hero. Being able to defend yourself is a no brainer, but the likelihood of you bringing that assault rifle to public places isn't likely at all. Maybe it's in your truck, but as in your examples you don't have time to get to your truck and grab your gun. Six bullets in the chest the second you move. Now, if that guy had been given a background check, mental health tests, etc. Maybe he wouldn't have a gun? Maybe he wouldn't have attempted the murder? But if he tried to anyway, say he's wielding a knife, wouldn't you think you have better chances overpowering him and disarming him while looking like a hero?

Just a reminder, don't make this too heated guis. I've seen these 50 reply-long comments on youtube with total bullshit, but you all raise valid and interesting points, I'm actually having fun reading this.

And props to JFX standing alone on this pro-guns while still bringing up solid points and defending his view.

Originally Posted by TheJFX

For your first point, I can't say that he could've done much. I've talked with ynvaser in steam chat more extensively on this topic, but some of things that came up are what you're mentioning now.
My answer then and now is this; Without guns, why wouldn't they use bombs? Without bombs, cars? Without cars, bows? crossbows? Swords?
A gun is considered a great equalizer. Without guns, small people are generally at the mercy of larger people. Guns completely change that dynamic. Now, if only one person has a gun, that dynamic then gives the man with the gun all of the power. If everyone has guns, everyone has equal power. Hence that everyone should have guns, and be trained to use them.

Second half of your question is quite funny, 'cause it shows just how different the area in I live governs itself.
At any given time, 1 in every 5 people walking around in suburban/semiurban Georgia is carrying a concealed pistol. 1.5 or 2 in every 5 have a rifle or shotgun or both in their vehicle. I keep a 22LR in mine. In some areas, specifically kennesaw, which is five minutes away from my house, you are required to have a rifle in any property you own, and if you cannot afford one, one is given to you by the police. The statistics are beautiful.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kennesaw,_Georgia

Now, I'm not saying the only idea is to arm everyone, but even the mentally challenged have a desire for survival, or to at least make a point with their death. If the media doesn't turn them into demigods for murdering children, and if they get off only a few shots (guns aren't magic, a few hasty shots aren't likely to hit, or kill, anyone) before being shot down, maybe people would stop trying it.
That isn't to say I don't support fuller background checks, however the more you put into "checking" the person whom is requesting the weapon, the closer
you are to creating a national gun registry, and that is something that we certainly cannot allow. A gun registry would set the scene for gun confiscation, much the way as the first step in organizing anything is to take account of it. As it is now, the government could (assuming it got through congress) ban the sale of assault weapons, but those sold would remain sold. When New York decided to create a state-wide gun registry a few weeks ago, thousands stood up to publicly disobey the new law. Assuming it passes, it will be the largest act of civil disobedience in America's history. That should tell you how much we hate gun registry.

@torikill; Alert's posted link is true, but so is the fact that when they had massive natural disasters in thier country, thier people banded together to help each other. There wasn't any looting, and the mafia themselves came to assist. Japan is an amazing place, but also a crazy one. Don't forget world war 2.