UN Global Gun Ban?

Started by Soleran41 pages
Originally posted by Bardock42
Maybe, but still gun tracking is still a good idea, because, even though some people won't believe it, legal guns kill people too.

It's not the U.N.'s place dictate such regulations nor should they receive such information who has what legal fire arms in the USA.

Originally posted by Soleran
It's not the U.N.'s place dictate such regulations nor should they receive such information who has what legal fire arms in the USA.

I think they should....would make things easier.

Just as long as everyone's in agreement that we should employ the same kind of law enforcement as they use in Minority Report - where you can make the arrest before the crime actually happens - we should all be in good shape for the future.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I think they should....would make things easier.

They can't. They're not of a government body.

Originally posted by Phoenix2001
They can't. They're not of a government body.

It can become one....

Originally posted by Bardock42
It can become one....

No thanks, besides what does the UN gain if its proposed gun ban takes affect?

Originally posted by Soleran
No thanks, besides what does the UN gain if its proposed gun ban takes affect?

Less people killed in the world?

Originally posted by Bardock42
It can become one....

The Countries under the UN would go to war before that shit would ever happen.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Less people killed in the world?

They would do better to stuff that money into feeding countries that have populations that are starving off.

So really my point is the U.N. is wasting resources on this when there are much more significant and easier to fix problems in the world today.

The U.N. would onlt do something that would better suit some means to an end, I doubt they would simply want to end killing as a whole by guns in the USA casused by people in the USA.

Originally posted by Phoenix2001
The Countries under the UN would go to war before that shit would ever happen.

Why the hell are you so fascinated with war and or civil war...I never thought I'd say that but WAR IS NOT TEH ANSWER.

Originally posted by Soleran
They would do better to stuff that money into feeding countries that have populations that are starving off.

So really my point is the U.N. is wasting resources on this when there are much more significant and easier to fix problems in the world today.

The U.N. would onlt do something that would better suit some means to an end, I doubt they would simply want to end killing as a whole by guns in the USA casused by people in the USA.


Yeah, teh UN could do more...then again the US rapes it up the ass every other day so whatever....

Originally posted by Bardock42
Why the hell are you so fascinated with war and or civil war...I never thought I'd say that but WAR IS NOT TEH ANSWER.

Why the hell are you so fascinated with giving your opinion where it is worth less than nothing. When it comes to several different countries pledging their allegiance to a single government NO ONE WILL CARE ABOUT WHETHER WAR BECOMES AN ANSWER OR NOT. It would just happen.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Less people killed in the world?

Like the human population needs another boost.

Originally posted by Arachnoidfreak
Like the human population needs another boost.

Yeah, true....but I mean we can all agree that we don't like to be shot, right?

Originally posted by Soleran
No thanks, besides what does the UN gain if its proposed gun ban takes affect?
Hmmmmmmm CONTROL 🙄

It's obvious that the UN can only suggest gun ban. Nothing more.

Originally posted by Bardock42
That's not the point, although I appreciate your input.

Now easy thing: If there are NO guns (yes no guns, stop changing my examples...no guns...not some guns..no guns....like none at all) then there are no gun related crimes...get it? Sweet.

Nice dream, but that's not gonna happen.......and you call me a dreamer.. 🙄

It's funny how people can argue Pro choice for abortion but not prochoice for guns..

Originally posted by debbiejo
Nice dream, but that's not gonna happen.......and you call me a dreamer.. 🙄

It's funny how people can argue Pro choice for abortion but not prochoice for guns..

No...you call yourself dreamer....

It's funny how people can not read a thread.

I don't like being apart of the UN anyway........I'm for Antinomy.

Wow! That's a good one! I'm impressed and offended. I guess no-one could accuse you of not having a 'grandiose lexicon'.
Because I want to be accused of hiding behind words bigger than the average joe uses.

Originally posted by Bardock42
That's not the point, although I appreciate your input.

Now easy thing: If there are NO guns (yes no guns, stop changing my examples...no guns...not some guns..no guns....like none at all) then there are no gun related crimes...get it? Sweet.

How are you going to accomplish removing guns from existence? That is unrealistic, and probably impossible.

Also, to ask for someone to read the thread... that's hard, it's almost 600 posts. 😖

As for the arguements... I think it's really fair to say currently there is no way to win this. I think Lana said it best on MSN with me that it'd have to be gradually phased in; outright removal would probably ignite a civil war. And yes Bardock, it would, and U.S. Citizens would fight over this "bullshit".

Some things I noticed are: Guns aren't the sole cause of death, and in fact cars kill more than them, as do certain diseases. To this, I say it would make more sense to go down the ladder and fix cars and cure diseases as much as possible, then address guns.

Area's in which it is almost guarenteed someone has a gun, the crime is dramatically less. Area's where there are lot's of "I don't want a gun" people have more homocides because... the murderer's are less afraid to pull a gun there.

Sweden (Switzerland? Either one) is an excellent example of the former. As well, countries with anti-gun laws have generally higher crime rates. Washington D.C. has some of the worst crime in the U.S., and a complete gun-ban (Correlation? Maybe).

Ushgarak has some intersting numbers which do in fact prove the obvious. Less people die by murder's with less guns. But that doesn't refute the fact that in area's where it is assured someone has a gun, there is in fact not only less murders... there is less crime in general.

Originally posted by Phoenix2001
................. are we on the same subject here? Obviously not, because I'm talking about crime in all of its forms. You apparently are speaking about crime involving only guns.

Let's see...The title of the thread is 'UN Global Gun Ban', so perhaps it would be pertinent to discuss guns, rather than crime in general, seeing as that's what the threads about. I'm a patient, handsome man, so I'll wait for you to grasp the topic...gun...ban...'Gun Ban'...got it?

Originally posted by Soleran
Yeah and all that talk is just a waste, the answer to a very simple question is there aren't any countries with gun bans that have zero crimes commited with guns. The rest was just you blithering on to hear yourself speak, next time simple question=simple, answer thanks.

Hey, Soleran. Hi! You failed to grasp the simplicity of my original post. That's your malfunction, not mine. Here it is again: No guns = no gun-related crime. Despite having experienced your ignorance on previous occasions, I'm still flabbergasted that you can't grasp this.