Guns, Are they necessary? Options

[synatribe]

So besides guns being allowed in the military, do you think guns should be allowed into regular peoples hand even if they have a license or a permit for it?

Many countries that are expected to surpass the US in a couple years do not allow guns, they only allow it for strict military reasons and defense reasons. Should US adopt this too?

Opinions welcome, Cussing someone out and bashing isnt :]

[Gigi]

Okay I will admit I didn't read everything in this topic (no time, this is a fly-by post), but here's my two cents:

My argument isn't based on how eliminating guns will eliminate guns for criminals (which is illogical anyway). It involves possessing guns in the first place - every year there are thousands of people who are accidentally killed by guns in the hands of ordinary, everyday people. The truth is that most people don't know how to handle a gun (thus all these accidents), and even more people don't know how to store/hide the gun in a safe place (thus having a large number of these accidents involve children). So the benefit of being able to protect yourself is very plausibly being offset by the costs of accidental deaths.

Also, what makes you think that owning a gun makes you safer? It's hard to know how you'll react in a high-pressure situation, and having that gun may actually prove to be worthless if you don't have the proper training (i.e. police-level training) for handling guns...your reflexes slow down, your vision becomes focused on a target and you could even hurt other people accidentally. The element of shock will always be a hindrance to your protection, even if you have a gun to "protect" yourself.

Which is why I would definitely advocate for stricter regulations on guns. Proper knowledge of gun safety, how to handle a gun, training in high-pressure situations, proper storage of a gun...There's no doubt that having a gun, given that you know how to use it effectively, will protect you. But without all the regulations I mentioned, having a gun would be completely useless and potentially dangerous.

[kryogenix]

Okay I will admit I didn't read everything in this topic (no time, this is a fly-by post), but here's my two cents:

My argument isn't based on how eliminating guns will eliminate guns for criminals (which is illogical anyway). It involves possessing guns in the first place - every year there are thousands of people who are accidentally killed by guns in the hands of ordinary, everyday people. The truth is that most people don't know how to handle a gun (thus all these accidents), and even more people don't know how to store/hide the gun in a safe place (thus having a large number of these accidents involve children). So the benefit of being able to protect yourself is very plausibly being offset by the costs of accidental deaths.

Do you know how many automobile accidents occur? Far more than firearms related accidents. Should we ban cars?

Also, what makes you think that owning a gun makes you safer? It's hard to know how you'll react in a high-pressure situation, and having that gun may actually prove to be worthless if you don't have the proper training (i.e. police-level training) for handling guns...your reflexes slow down, your vision becomes focused on a target and you could even hurt other people accidentally. The element of shock will always be a hindrance to your protection, even if you have a gun to "protect" yourself.

Yes... but how can you train when you're not allowed to own the guns in the first place?

Which is why I would definitely advocate for stricter regulations on guns. Proper knowledge of gun safety, how to handle a gun, training in high-pressure situations, proper storage of a gun...There's no doubt that having a gun, given that you know how to use it effectively, will protect you. But without all the regulations I mentioned, having a gun would be completely useless and potentially dangerous.

But with all the regulations you mentioned, it's nearly impossible to own and operate a gun...