Kay.

For god sakes START USING PUNCTUATON!!!

A. & C. This was brought up because you said our Constitution was "outdated." And my response was not only about our Constitution, but where the Constitution had roots of inspiration from: The Magna Carta.

The rights you enjoy under the Magna Carta are no different from the Constitution, and yet the constitution even added rights that were to be guaranteed by force. Or namely: U.S. citizens who are part of the militia (everyone over the age of 18 is involuntarily drafted into the militia, that part just isn't taught very well anymore). So that aspect of the argument DOES apply.

B. This is where all the problems come in: Guns do NOT cause crime. Guns account for a small percentage of weapons used in crime and they are acquired via illegal means (read John Lotts books I posted about earier, it goes into much greater detail on the issue).

More to come later, gtg school now.

i agree guns dont cause crime but as seen over and over they are easy to get hold of when someone goes bannanas like this and all the guns in the world couldnt stop this individual so the arguement that for protection you all need guns is defunked even with them you couldnt stop this

I find it a bit ironic that you still don't get the picture, and you still are emotionally upset about something happening in another country other than your own and you want to make sure we conform to your views.

Well, why don't you start with your own state for once? Your gun crime is on the rise (even though your Joe Public is unarmed - go figure). It has been rising every year this century.

The point is, your criminals now have channels to get the weapons they want, yet you have no way to defend yourself. So how do you explain that?

Now, why do you care what we do over here when you have your own problems? Your problems scare me way more than mine. I can do something over here. You over there just get to be a victim is all.

Nice

-S

and yet even though ours is rising we dont have school masacres on the scale that you have them how many gun related crimes do you have a year ? i would wager even percentage wise we dont have a fraction of what you do! i have a house a wife 2 kids i dont own a gun ive never seen one in my civilian life outside of the navy except in the holster of a police man at the navy base, we have agreed that guns dont cause crime but what is the percentage of crimes that involves guns in the US ? the ready available nature of guns in the US is playing right into the hands of the lone madman whos got a grudge it isnt you hardend criminals that is doing this its everyday joe blog whos got a chip on his shoulder we can argue about it untill we are blue in the face but untill it happens to your family your never going to change your stance ,also we are not paraniod as a country right now and for many years your nation has been obsessed about protection and this is what the cost is

As you missed above - you are forgetting the stress of living in America. That is what triggers these whackos. How many times do I have tell you the same thing?

Anyway, you have a ton of gun crime related to street drugs. Its epidemic actually in the UK. Do you know that you can buy a sawn off shotgun in London for only 50 pounds? That is cheaper than I can buy it in the US! You can buy an AK-47 fully automatic for only 800 pounds! I'd have an even harder time getting something like that in the States! Don't tell me that you don't have a problem when you do. The only difference is, your problem is a problem where you and you government bury their head in the sand.

Pistols still command a premium in London though, costing upwards of 1000 pounds due to the concealment factor, but are still easily had.

The criminals to have the same channels over here, but still... My home nation Germany has one quarter of the US population (82 million), eight times the population density (232 ppl/km²) and far less than 1/30 the number of deaths caused by guns (~300/year)

To be honest - I'd like to know what difference a gun makes. I'd like what your options are just because you have a gun. Honestly. Even though there are areas which aren't too safe at night over here I can still walk around, and the chance of facing the wrong end of a gun is extremely low. But imagining the situation - what good would a gun in that situation do?

From my point of view you Americans are extraordinarily scared of being threatened with a gun. This is understandable, but it leads to the strange conclusion that having a gun on your own would prevent you from being threatened with a gun. How is that supposed to work? What are you going to do if someone points a gun at you? It doesn't matter whether you have a gun of your own in that situation, you're just as helpless as you were without a gun.
Or the situation at Virginia Tech yesterday. What difference would a couple of armed students have made? Those who wouldn't have been too scared of the chaotic situation would have run around, guns drawn - and not having the slightest idea who of all those armed person the bad guy was. Again I'm imagining the situation, running around the camus, my gun drawn, nowing s**t about the situation. Upon spotting some other person with a gun, what would have been my options? Asking him/her, whether he/she was the bad guy? hilarious, if he /she was, he would have shoot me halfway through my question. No, I think it would even have increased the death toll, as those armed heroes would have killed each other by mistake/accident.

I'd say that carrying a gun even increases your chances of becoming a victim.

This guy offers some interesting perspective and cleans some myths.

http://www.guninformation.org/

On the second amandement:
http://www.guninformation.org/secondamendment.html
http://www.guninformation.org/cases.html

More links on that site, on the left menu.

He sums it up like this:

I'm sorry, but to be quite frank, that is some stupid logic. I mean, why have nuclear weapons? Same question pretty much.

He is whacked too in my opinion. His logic and reasoning on those 30 statements show a complete lack of logic wisdom and intelligence. Sad.

-S

We're talking about guns, one person against another person, each seeing each other. Not about weapons of mass dstruction.

So, if you don't mind, answer my question. Properly, please.

I did. Why have armies? Why have any sort of defense? I see nothing different. I did answer your question because there is no difference. The analogy is identical.

The key word is deterrence. ANother is response. More come to mind.

There is a serious mistake in your considerations. Armies and weapons of mass destructions result in fear, which itselfs may result in backing down (look at the US and North Korea). But this is not the case with guns, is the exact opposite. Your owning of a gun does NOT (repeat: does NOT) deter criminals of commiting crimes against you. It just increases the chance that you become not just a victim of robbery, but of murder.
Neither one nor a hundred armed students at Virginia Tech would have deterred that madman from his killing rampage.
The only 'response' you can make this way is setting an exclamation point that will just further provoke others .

It is a bitterly sarcastic summary, or conclusions from the main texts as I had linked them. If you want to deal with him, pick the main texts, not the 30 items on that list. His arguments and references to lawsuits have more substance than yours.