Brazil votes on a gun ban this week

[Subjugation]

I know we have a few Brazillians up in herre, so I was wondering what you guys think about your country (with the world's second highest gun-death rate) banning guns?

I hear most Brazillians are actually against it? Pretty serious business.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/americ....ap/index.html

[Pressure Drop]

yeah i seen a thing on the news about it.

Looked pretty extreme in the slums with police in open fire combat with young folk out on the streets


think most of the problem is poverty and education, seems most of them are brought up that way becasue its tough in the slums and that is the way it is. They said the biggest cuase of death their in 15-24 year olds was guns. That is a serious problem but also a difficult one to address if it is a culture of guns.

The best way would be to try and set up programmes to develop the slums but Brazil hasn't got the wealth of say USA and it has a gun violence culture in some of its poorer areas too from what i understand.

not sure how effective in banning the sale of weapons would be, there are allready so many in circulation and they could be easily imported illegally and sold.

[Evasive]

shit

now I can't go to Brazil and shoot:

zannatti, desktop, schope, mega newbie

[Mega Newbie]

we voted it today,i voted to people have the right to buy a gun!!
the violence is big and police dont have control
people are afraid and want guns to defend themselves

[Kolar]

we voted it today,i voted to people have the right to buy a gun!!
the violence is big and police dont have control
people are afraid and want guns to defend themselves

So with people being afraid in general, the police not having control or superior man/fire power and the streets full of untrained, uninteligent people with deadly weapons.. you want more guns in the mix? :huh:

Guns are not for self defense.

[Sarien]

Guns are not for self defense.

The warcry of the person that knows next to nothing about needing to do so.

[Kolar]

The warcry of the person that knows next to nothing about needing to do so.

Canada has a lot of guns actually compared to the USA if you're saying a lot of Canadians don't feel the need to have them. Meeting violence with violence on this level is not self defense. Guns are meant to kill people, not to incapacitate them. This is not acceptable force to be using on people. When you use this kind of force you're no longer a person, you become an angry and violent animal scared beyond belief. You lose whatever you set out to defend.

It's really simple, if no one owns a gun save for the police, then you'll have no use for it to protect youself.

[Sarien]

Canada has a lot of guns actually compared to the USA if you're saying a lot of Canadians don't feel the need to have them. Meeting violence with violence on this level is not self defense. Guns are meant to kill people, not to incapacitate them. At no level is this acceptable force. When you use this kind of force you're no longer a person, you become an angry and violent animal scared beyond belief. You lose whatever you set out to defend.

It's really simple, if no one owns a gun save for the police, then you'll have no use for it to protect youself.

I hate to think of you someday getting into a bad situation with such an asinine and juvenile attitude. That whole paragraph is complete and utter hogwash.

At no level is that acceptable force? So, when I have my pistol on me, and I see your mother being stabbed to death in front of me, I'm not supposed to do anything about that, right? Story Here.

How about if you like to go hiking or generally live in a rural area like I do. I suppose when I'm being attacked and eaten alive by a wild animal, It's completely unacceptable for me to shoot it dead to stay alive. A Handgun and this idiot and his girlfriend would be alive today.

Honest time. You don't know what the hell you're talking about. You're regurgitating the nicities that someone has before you pushed off onto you. So now you believe it's your turn to decry the loss of civilization over a tool. Guess what, they can and are used for self defense. Lots of different ways, in lots of different places. Guess what else? It happens every single day. Please explain to me how killing in order to stop something or someone from killing me, is "unacceptable", please.

[Benno]

The "bad people" will still have guns in a society that bans them, that alone is enough to make it an easy desicion. I don't own a gun, and probably never will, but I will always support the right for people to bear arms since I understand that good government isn't permenant and a dissarmed populace is completly at the mercy of a bad one.

[deathking]

shit

now I can't go to Brazil and shoot:

zannatti, desktop, schope, mega newbie

Im sorry for ur sufferings....

[Kolar]

It is not acceptable force to be using in random situations. For all the times it has saved someones like in the random case some red neck gets attacked by a bear, I could probably time that by a million and show you how many times it has killed an innocent people or has been an excessive use of force. In cases where it is your life, or another's and there is no other way out then yes that kind of force is acceptable. Removing those kind of situations from peoples lives should be the goal, not making it easier to meet the violence head on with more guns and untrained people. Making it harder to buy, sell and move weapons should be the first step, removing it entirely in one go like in Brazil will probably fail because it is engrained into the culture.

All I am saying that weapons being available and on the streets in urban areas does nothing for the people and that self defense should not always constute the death of another. It is so out of control now in the states and now a lot in Ontario and it should be addressed.

I think you're getting emotional over this Sarien, it's understandable given our geographical locations but lets not go that far into it.

[Benno]

even if he did shoot them Dr. sCHOPe would save them.

Dr. sCHOPe> ez cured

[Sarien]

Ok, quoted here so I can answer bit by bit.

It is not acceptable force to be using in random situations.

I agree with you there. It shouldn't be used randomly.

For all the times it has saved someones like in the random case some red neck gets attacked by a bear, I could probably time that by a million and show you how many times it has killed an innocent people or has been an excessive use of force.

I doubt these stats, but let's take it for granted and say that it's 100% true. Then that problem shows that the policing needs to be upped, and the innocent people in an area like that, needs to be even more closely supported and guarded. That has nothing to do with taking guns away or out of the equation.

In cases where it is your life, or another's and there is no other way out then yes that kind of force is acceptable. Removing those kind of situations from peoples lives should be the goal, not making it easier to meet the violence head on with more guns and untrained people.

Ok, You admit that there is a case where it can be acceptable. That's a good start. Removing the kind of situations from people's lives is an ultimate goal, I agree with you there. However, that won't happen as long as there are such things as money, drugs, mental illness, jealousy, and greed. So until then, I, as an adult, am comforted by the security that I can meet violence directed at me or another innocent person in front of me head on.

Making it harder to buy, sell and move weapons should be the first step, removing it entirely in one go like in Brazil will probably fail because it is engrained into the culture.

You would think so, wouldn't you? But it doesn't work like that. It doesn't even come close to actually working like that. When you make weapons harder to buy and own, to legal owners who want nothing to do with them except defend their lives and their property, then they are the only people you're harming. A person that is intent on robbing houses or mugging people, does not care if he breaks a gun ban, or faces an extra 8 months if caught, when the gun provides him or her a big edge in what they are doing. He's already robbing people, the extra 8 months that might come in exchange for a high likelyhood of pointing it and making people do exactly what he says, is nothing.

All I am saying that weapons being available and on the streets in urban areas does nothing for the people and that self defense should not always constute the death of another. It is so out of control now in the states and now a lot in Ontario and it should be addressed.

How, precisely does legal gun ownership do nothing for the people? Self Defense ideally does not constitute the death of another. I agree with you, but you keep going for ideals, and the real world simply just does not work that way. I don't understand how legal gun sales could ever be "out of control". A man that owns 10,000 guns, lives 150 years, and never once harms another soul, how is that a bad thing? You're confusing the availability of a tool to everybody, with people that want to commit crimes. Two completely different topics. It's like trying to talk about hoping it doesn't rain and spoil a family picnic, and then hurricanes in the same sentence.

I think you're getting emotional over this Sarien, it's understandable given our geographical locations but lets not go that far into it.

I am emotional over this topic. This is something that I believe in very strongly, and I'm willing to go head to head with any person on earth over it. Guns cannot be unmade. They're a tool for killing that exists. You can't go back in time and undo it. Putting lawful bans out, is exactly the same as saying if I can't see it, it won't hurt me. The only people you're bothering with them, are people that would obey the laws.

All this about self defense, and barely a word about the political ramifications. Of which, there are lots. Benno touched on it a little. But this could be completely constrained to self defense, and still go on forever.

[Kolar]

Self defense with deadly weapons will almost always mean killing another human being. I probably am too idealistic but if you say the goal is to remove the situation where guns are needed (I.E for self defense) then legal gun owner ship wouldn't be needed.

I know it will harm legal gun owners, making it harder to buy and sell the weapons but unless you want to start profiling these people and selecting who can and can not own a gun based on age, training and a lot of other relevent but personal information; gun control will always be that way. I think if anyone wants to own a gun they should be content and 'happy' that there are enough people out there trying to make sure their guns and guns in genral are not being used for illegal purposes. The eventually removal of guns will happen but people wanting stronger measures for control of guns mainly want to keep it out of the wrong hands first. I meant gun violence and agrovated assult is going up, not that gun sales were going up or anything related to it.

I think legal or not, having the ability to kill a person with modern technology in the blink of an eye is not something every human being is intitiled too nor should every man, woman and child have one.

[Epinephrine]

Allowing everyone to have guns in some vague idea of 'self defense' is a bad idea. There have been tons of studies that have shown that there are WAY WAY WAY more gun deaths attributable to:

-kids firing off guns owned by parents and killing themselves/someone else
-guns being used in domestic disputes
-general accidental gun deaths

Than there are of people who actually carry around a gun all day, get held up then magically pull out their gun in time to shoot the criminal before they get shot themselves first. Face it, most people aren't responsible enough to use guns, and most people will never be in a situation where actually having a gun would have made them actually any safer. I don't know a single person who has ever been in a situation where having a gun would have made them any safer. Meanwhile as listed there are plenty of reasons why people should not have guns in general.

For every hiker that could have killed that bear if only they had a shotgun, there's some idiot that got shot by his drunk buddy during hunting season. For every robber that gets shot down by the convienance store clerk, there's a clerk that gets shot because he didn't just let the robber go and let the police/insurance take care of it but instead tried to fight back with a gun himself. For every old lady that gets stabbed and you can't do anything about it, there's some guy who tries to pull out a hidden weapon while being held up and gets shot while doing it. Anedodes are anedodes, but statistics do not like, and I would say that in general allowing the general public to easily buy guns is a bad idea.