|
Hey guys I was excited to see so many responses from people across the world interested in gun laws and gun ownership in the United States, but as the other thread was started simply to talk about guns that people own and is not a soapbox for people to stand on. I decided to make this thread to hopefully thwart future attempts to de-rail that thread.
To get this discussion started I will talk a little bit about gun ownership in the US, and more specifically in the state I currently live in of Georgia.
United States citizens have the "right to bear arms" as given to us in our constitution, which is a law originally enacted to hopefully prevent any kind of police state / totalitarian regime etc...
Throughout the US however, gun laws vary drastically from state to state. Some states are more liberal with regards to gun control and vice versa.
The state of georgia has some of the most lenient gun laws in the US.
Among the most interesting of these is our self defense laws, which can be perused here:
GA Self Defense
What this means is that not only am I allowed to have fully loaded chambered ready to fire guns anywhere in my house (i.e. under my bed in a gun locker whatever).
But... if someone intrudes upon my property, I am authorized to use lethal force to defend myself if I simply feel that my life is threatened by said intruder.
This means that the intruder does NOT have to show any kind of weapon, and I DO NOT have to attempt to verbally resolve the situation or try and leave or anything. I am protected by the law if I shoot and kill someone entering my house or property (outside of my house) without my permission without saying ANYTHING to them.
Also in GA you are NOT required to register firearms, you can buy them from gun shows and pay cash, and the only restriction is a background check that only checks to see if you have ever been convicted of a felony charge.
Another thing that is easy to obtain is a "concealed weapons carry permit" this means that by simply filling out a form at your local courthouse and paying a small fee (maybe 50 US dollars) you can conceal and carry (i.e. hide it completely from sight) a loaded and chambered pistol or another firearm with you almost wherever you go. In GA, these weapons can even be carried on public transportation. (although they must be declared at any sort of airport)
Also you are allowed to own "dangerous weapons" if you have a "dangerous weapons permit", which are very difficult to obtain because there are a set number of them in circulation (i.e. they do not issue out additional DW permits beyond what are already issued) and the only way to obtain them is by purchasing one from someone who already owns one. Dangerous weapons are things like fully automatic assault rifles and sawed off shotguns etc...
Anyways hope this sparks some sort of discussion, either about how gun laws differ where you live, or your thoughts and opinions on what ive already discussed.
|
What do we(not US-guys) need to say about this; other than this is totally non-ethical, not civilized and totally out of context?
In every country with a half-decent law you are allowed to kill people in self-defense (even with guns). But this still does not legitimate the carrying of a fully loaded gun.
Do you ever read statistics about Death by guns from gun ownern? Did you even EVER read statistics?
Almost every statistic says that it is more harmful for you family to have a gun at home.
But i guess you heard all this points and more allready which makes me even wonder more why you guys are so stubborn.
|
Uh oh, a thread where Germans can pretend they are ever-civil and infinitely wise again.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
This thread can only end well. This has been exhaustively discussed multiple times on this board. It ends up just being an inefficient regurgitation of the same arguments over and over. No progress is ever made, nor are any opinions ever changed.
|
On July 09 2011 00:34 Communism wrote:
I am protected by the law if I shoot and kill someone entering my house or property (outside of my house) without my permission without saying ANYTHING to them.
No, you aren't.
Ga. Code, § 16-3-24(b) (Defense of real property) "(b) The use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to prevent trespass on or other tortious or criminal interference with real property other than a habitation or personal property is not justified unless the person using such force reasonably believes that it is necessary to prevent the commission of a forcible felony."
Ga. Code, § 16-3-23 (Defense of habitation) "...such person is justified in the use of force [in defense of habitation] which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if: (1) The entry is made or attempted in a violent and tumultuous manner and he or she reasonably believes that the entry is attempted or made for the purpose of [committing violence]; (2) That force is used against another person ... who unlawfully and forcibly enters or has unlawfully and forcibly entered the residence; or (3) the entry is made or attempted for the purpose of committing a felony therein and that such force is necessary to prevent the commission of the felony.
|
That sounds very similar to Florida law regarding guns and self defense. I would think twice about shooting someone that is just in your house without a weapon though as it may cause issues in court when trying to prove why you were scared for your life. I think an unarmed (and not under any drug/alcohol influence) robber would gladly leave the house upon hearing the sound of a shotgun being cocked or the warning from the house owner that they are armed. Regardless, if I feel threatened and in danger of bodily harm or death, I would rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6.
|
On July 09 2011 00:46 DannyJ wrote:
Uh oh, a thread where Germans can pretend they are ever-civil and infinitely wise again.
i dont think that was a clever answer, on top of that, the guy above u is right...
|
I live in Virginia, here it is required to fill out registration paperwork (lots of paperwork). The buyer must also be an adult and have a clean record. You can, however, gift the firearm to someone who is underage. I know of a 12 year old girl who owns a .22 rifle (pellet gun on steroids).
I personally believe if you are purchasing a firearm you have to be educated in the use, safety mechanisms, and maitenance of the firearm.
My guns are for sport, I take them to the range and thats it. I also only go to a range that requires you to take a safety and usage test before you are allowed in a lane. I would not feel comfortable with the mom next door shooting in the lane next to me.
In Virginia we have conceal carry permits, but we also allow for open carry permits (visual in a holster, not concealed).
I know further out west they are starting to restrict firearm usage alot more. Ex: ARs with <10 round fixed magazines and semi-auto only.
|
On July 09 2011 00:43 bluQ wrote:
What do we(not US-guys) need to say about this; other than this is totally non-ethical, not civilized and totally out of context?
In every country with a half-decent law you are allowed to kill people in self-defense (even with guns). But this still does not legitimate the carrying of a fully loaded gun.
Do you ever read statistics about Death by guns from gun ownern? Did you even EVER read statistics?
Almost every statistic says that it is more harmful for you family to have a gun at home.
But i guess you heard all this points and more allready which makes me even wonder more why you guys are so stubborn.
If statistics are what get you hot then I guess that you're in favor of banning swimming pools and cars too. Those kill many more people than guns do every year, despite the fact that there are far fewer of them. It's just that the gun deaths get reported on because shootings are dramatic and bring in the ratings.
|
On July 09 2011 00:46 MozzarellaL wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2011 00:34 Communism wrote:
I am protected by the law if I shoot and kill someone entering my house or property (outside of my house) without my permission without saying ANYTHING to them. No, you aren't. Ga. Code, § 16-3-24(b) (Defense of real property) "(b) The use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to prevent trespass on or other tortious or criminal interference with real property other than a habitation or personal property is not justified unless the person using such force reasonably believes that it is necessary to prevent the commission of a forcible felony." Ga. Code, § 16-3-23 (Defense of habitation) "...such person is justified in the use of force [in defense of habitation] which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if: (1) T he entry is made or attempted in a violent and tumultuous manner and he or she reasonably believes that the entry is attempted or made for the purpose of [committing violence]; (2) That force is used against another person ... who unlawfully and forcibly enters or has unlawfully and forcibly entered the residence; or (3) the entry is made or attempted for the purpose of committing a felony therein and that such force is necessary to prevent the commission of the felony.
Yes we are... what that actually means if you look into the enforcement of this law in reality in GA. Is that If i BELIEVE that you are going to use lethal force then i can use it. You dont have to show any weapons or anything. I just have to BELIEVE that the threat exists. If you would like i can provide links to court cases where this has been supported later on today, I am currently about to go play some golf, but if you really must have supporting evidence I will give it to you.
|
In Maryland, there's a regulated handgun list. You cannot own any besides the ones listed here. You need a background check before you can buy a handgun. Also it is illegal to buy/sell greater than 10 round magazines for handguns and 20 round mags for rifles. But for some reason you can drive to the next state over and buy a 31 round mag and use it in Maryland?? To get a suppressor/class III weapon you need to jump through a bunch of hoops and pay $200 tax.
（╯°□°）╯︵ ┻━┻
|
EDIT: @bluQ
Please don't pretend to know how "non-US guys" feel about the ownership and usage of firearms.
I live in England, but had a "second home" of sorts in the United States which me and my family used to visit ~2-3 times per year. My dad being ex-military has an interest in firearms and owns a large collection of a variety of different weapons. From a young age my brother and I were taught by my father (actually before ever even going to America) how to correctly handle a firearm in a way that was safe and regularly visited the firing range as a recreational activity. Similarly my father still regularly visits the United States to take part in "firearms courses" in which are members of various Law Enforcement Agencies and he also occasionally takes part in competitions,
Thus leading me to conclude that there really isn't anything dangerous about firearms given the proper training and mindset regarding owning a firearm, and in no way is owning a weapon "uncivilised"
That being said, my thoughts on the issue are conflicting. Disregarding the fact that I live in a small town in which there is little to no violence / intrusions that would warrant the use of any kind of firearm, I feel as though the ability to own and use a firearm in the case that the need to defend my home did arise would be relieving.
However, on the other side of that, I know of the negative statistics regarding the number of crimes involving a firearm in the States and they worry me. Not to mention also the "school massacres" that occur, and which if i remember, was one of the main reasons that caused the ownership and use of firearms in England to become "illegal".
|
On July 09 2011 00:53 nemo14 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2011 00:43 bluQ wrote:
What do we(not US-guys) need to say about this; other than this is totally non-ethical, not civilized and totally out of context?
In every country with a half-decent law you are allowed to kill people in self-defense (even with guns). But this still does not legitimate the carrying of a fully loaded gun.
Do you ever read statistics about Death by guns from gun ownern? Did you even EVER read statistics?
Almost every statistic says that it is more harmful for you family to have a gun at home.
But i guess you heard all this points and more allready which makes me even wonder more why you guys are so stubborn. If statistics are what get you hot then I guess that you're in favor of banning swimming pools and cars too. Those kill many more people than guns do every year, despite the fact that there are far fewer of them. It's just that the gun deaths get reported on because shootings are dramatic and bring in the ratings.
guns ar MADE for KILLING
unlike cars and swimming pools
|
I think it's unfortunate that one post in and insults are already being thrown around.
For me, firearms are tools just like any others. They're a sport, and a means of self defense. I enjoy going to the range to shoot holes in targets and just relax, the same as how some people here probably grab a beer and watch the GSL. Actually, I do that, too. 
From a self defense perspective, firearms are absolutely superior tools for self defense for a lot of reasons that should be obvious. While no sane person would ever wish to be involved in such a situation, I don't think I should have to submit to the will of a criminal who wishes to do me harm. I won't like it, but if I have to defend myself (i.e. there's no other option), then I will.
I find it unfortunate so many people are so strongly against firearms ownership. The majority of these people I've talked to are, to be frank, making baseless arguments purely because it feels right to them, rather than their arguments being based on facts and reason.
I hope that people will be civil in this thread so that it doesn't get locked in two pages.
|
On July 09 2011 00:53 nemo14 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2011 00:43 bluQ wrote:
What do we(not US-guys) need to say about this; other than this is totally non-ethical, not civilized and totally out of context?
In every country with a half-decent law you are allowed to kill people in self-defense (even with guns). But this still does not legitimate the carrying of a fully loaded gun.
Do you ever read statistics about Death by guns from gun ownern? Did you even EVER read statistics?
Almost every statistic says that it is more harmful for you family to have a gun at home.
But i guess you heard all this points and more allready which makes me even wonder more why you guys are so stubborn. If statistics are what get you hot then I guess that you're in favor of banning swimming pools and cars too. Those kill many more people than guns do every year, despite the fact that there are far fewer of them. It's just that the gun deaths get reported on because shootings are dramatic and bring in the ratings.
Pools are intended for sports and recreation, while cars are transportation. Give me statistics on accidental v. intentional deaths on those and you might have a valid argument.
|
On July 09 2011 00:54 Communism wrote:
Yes we are... what that actually means if you look into the enforcement of this law in reality in GA. Is that If i BELIEVE that you are going to use lethal force then i can use it. You dont have to show any weapons or anything. I just have to BELIEVE that the threat exists. If you would like i can provide links to court cases where this has been supported later on today, I am currently about to go play some golf, but if you really must have supporting evidence I will give it to you.
You have to reasonably believe. The existence of a person standing on your property in broad daylight does not create the reasonable belief that he is there to commit a violent felony.
Example: Where there is no evidence that the victim was attempting to enter or attack the habitation at the time he was injured by the defendant, the defense of habitation is not available. Coleman v. State, 286 Ga. 291 (2009).
|
On July 09 2011 00:43 bluQ wrote:
What do we(not US-guys) need to say about this; other than this is totally non-ethical, not civilized and totally out of context?
In every country with a half-decent law you are allowed to kill people in self-defense (even with guns). But this still does not legitimate the carrying of a fully loaded gun.
Do you ever read statistics about Death by guns from gun ownern? Did you even EVER read statistics?
Almost every statistic says that it is more harmful for you family to have a gun at home.
But i guess you heard all this points and more allready which makes me even wonder more why you guys are so stubborn.
Couldn't be more accurate. Gun toting in the name of Liberalism is the personification of irony. I think it's time the country moved forward and dumped such laws, but as usual this isn't possible because some ridiculous percentage of gun sales in anchored in the US market.
|
On July 09 2011 00:56 LuckstYle wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2011 00:53 nemo14 wrote:On July 09 2011 00:43 bluQ wrote:
What do we(not US-guys) need to say about this; other than this is totally non-ethical, not civilized and totally out of context?
In every country with a half-decent law you are allowed to kill people in self-defense (even with guns). But this still does not legitimate the carrying of a fully loaded gun.
Do you ever read statistics about Death by guns from gun ownern? Did you even EVER read statistics?
Almost every statistic says that it is more harmful for you family to have a gun at home.
But i guess you heard all this points and more allready which makes me even wonder more why you guys are so stubborn. If statistics are what get you hot then I guess that you're in favor of banning swimming pools and cars too. Those kill many more people than guns do every year, despite the fact that there are far fewer of them. It's just that the gun deaths get reported on because shootings are dramatic and bring in the ratings. guns ar MADE for KILLING unlike cars and swimming pools
And yet the statistics show that swimming pools and cars are far more efficient killers than guns owned by members of the public will ever be. Whoever invented pools and cars would be considered criminally negligent in this age of Chinese lead paint recalls.
|
I am against gun control because from what I saw from statistics, having gun control or none has very little effect on crimes. However, even with no gun control. why would anyway want to buy a pistol or automatic weapon?
|
On July 09 2011 01:03 nemo14 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2011 00:56 LuckstYle wrote:On July 09 2011 00:53 nemo14 wrote:On July 09 2011 00:43 bluQ wrote:
What do we(not US-guys) need to say about this; other than this is totally non-ethical, not civilized and totally out of context?
In every country with a half-decent law you are allowed to kill people in self-defense (even with guns). But this still does not legitimate the carrying of a fully loaded gun.
Do you ever read statistics about Death by guns from gun ownern? Did you even EVER read statistics?
Almost every statistic says that it is more harmful for you family to have a gun at home.
But i guess you heard all this points and more allready which makes me even wonder more why you guys are so stubborn. If statistics are what get you hot then I guess that you're in favor of banning swimming pools and cars too. Those kill many more people than guns do every year, despite the fact that there are far fewer of them. It's just that the gun deaths get reported on because shootings are dramatic and bring in the ratings. guns ar MADE for KILLING unlike cars and swimming pools And yet the statistics show that swimming pools and cars are far more efficient killers than guns owned by members of the public will ever be. Whoever invented pools and cars would be considered criminally negligent in this age of Chinese lead paint recalls.
I would love to see those statistics. Give me accidental v. intentional deaths/murders as well please.
|
On July 09 2011 00:50 LuckstYle wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2011 00:46 DannyJ wrote:
Uh oh, a thread where Germans can pretend they are ever-civil and infinitely wise again. i dont think that was a clever answer, on top of that, the guy above u is right...
Dear you: Since the people in this thread (not in prison for murder) clearly aren't the people killing people with guns, please stop associating gun ownership with mass murder. Would you appreciate it if we responded in kind by pointing out that large amounts of American military industrialization is due in part to a specific incident of invasion and mass murder committed by people other than yourself in your country? I doubt it.
Since you aren't Hitler, and American gun owners aren't Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold (Columbine), why don't we keep the discussion rational instead? Guns don't kill people any more than kitchen knives or box cutters. They're tools. Yes, they're tools that were designed with the express intent of causing harm, but originally so were bladed tools. We still sell kitchen knives.
|
On July 09 2011 00:46 MozzarellaL wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2011 00:34 Communism wrote:
I am protected by the law if I shoot and kill someone entering my house or property (outside of my house) without my permission without saying ANYTHING to them. No, you aren't. Ga. Code, § 16-3-24(b) (Defense of real property) "(b) The use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to prevent trespass on or other tortious or criminal interference with real property other than a habitation or personal property is not justified unless the person using such force reasonably believes that it is necessary to prevent the commission of a forcible felony." Ga. Code, § 16-3-23 (Defense of habitation) "...such person is justified in the use of force [in defense of habitation] which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if: (1) T he entry is made or attempted in a violent and tumultuous manner and he or she reasonably believes that the entry is attempted or made for the purpose of [committing violence]; (2) That force is used against another person ... who unlawfully and forcibly enters or has unlawfully and forcibly entered the residence; or (3) the entry is made or attempted for the purpose of committing a felony therein and that such force is necessary to prevent the commission of the felony.
I don't understand how that doesn't corroborate what communism just said?
Basically if the person breaks in and does anything other than run away immediately after being confronted, you can kill them.
|
United States17042 Posts
Anyways hope this sparks some sort of discussion, either about how gun laws differ where you live, or your thoughts and opinions on what ive already discussed.
Preemptively closing this thread - with this kind of lack of focus in the OP, it seems clear that this is going to degenerate down to "america vs the world" again. Otherwise, with that kind of just straight opinion OP, blog it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
