I can probably compare is to the whole drug situation in the US, I mean there is a huge drug war going on in Mexico for crying out loud!
Another example is Prohibition laws of the 1920's in the US where alcohol was banned. It didn't stop people from making it or selling it.
Nateman wrote:
Actually, Texas has a higher gun homicide rate than most blue states, including states such as New York and New Jersey. The only highly liberal states that beat it are Illinois and California. But that's kinda expected. And I'm pretty sure it's not because people in those states aren't armed... quite the opposite...
Source.
Hmm... Maybe that's why their death penalty seems to harsher in that state. God forbid I'd have to go to court in the state of Texas, even for a parking violation!
Statistics: Posted by Zone Ant — October 12th, 2011, 10:07 pm
]]>
That's why you keep guns in a safe place, and raise diciplined kids who know guns kill. All that may be true statisticlly, but if my family does it right, it keeps us safer, and therefore, i'll defend my constitutional right. If everyone showed common sense, there'd be little issue.
Yes, that's all well and good, but it's not going to happen. You're being unrealistically idealistic. I'm sure I don't need to cite statistics to say that there are plenty of kids who are not disciplined, families who do not keep their guns in safe places (apparently, the oven is a not-unheard of gun storage). I really don't like the phrase "common sense," because it's not common. What you think is common sense, others think is completely wrong. If everyone showed common sense, would we need laws?
Now, about that constitutional right: The wording is "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." (Emphasis mine) Are you part of the military? Back when the Constitution was written, a gun was actually useful on a regular basis for hunting (and fighting off Native Americans who wanted their land back). In this day and age, guns are used only for sport or personal defense (which actually doesn't work; see Nateman's link).
Statistics: Posted by Tahu 1000 — June 17th, 2011, 6:20 pm
]]>
Quote:
The largest affected age groups are young people. Do you honestly believe those children are getting their hands on guns by themselves? A lot of gun-related death occurs with the very item bought to protect a family. If you compare this data to somewhere like, say, Canada, you'll find we have 20-30% as much death in the 15-24 range. Why? Because kids can't get their hands on guns, because their parents didn't buy any for "personal protection."
That's why you keep guns in a safe place, and raise diciplined kids who know guns kill. All that may be true statisticlly, but if my family does it right, it keeps us safer, and therefore, i'll defend my constitutional right. If everyone showed common sense, there'd be little issue.
How will it keep you safer? If you keep it locked away so that its not accessible by children or by someone breaking into your own house, it'll be uselessly difficult to pull out in a situation where it could help. You know what actually keeps you safe? A home security system. Or a dog. Doesn't have to be a big one. They hear the dog bark, everyone wakes up, and the bad guys flee.
So, most burglars are a local teen, not a cold-hearted professional killer. So are you going to shoot little Timmy when he makes a stupid mistake? Or are you just going to stop yourself from being a target by using logical countermeasures. Dogs and security systems are something readily apparent, but I guess you could hang a sign in your window saying you'll shoot all trespassers. You know, if they were stupid enough to try to break in when you were at home and awake.
Statistics: Posted by Nateman — June 17th, 2011, 12:08 pm
]]>
The largest affected age groups are young people. Do you honestly believe those children are getting their hands on guns by themselves? A lot of gun-related death occurs with the very item bought to protect a family. If you compare this data to somewhere like, say, Canada, you'll find we have 20-30% as much death in the 15-24 range. Why? Because kids can't get their hands on guns, because their parents didn't buy any for "personal protection."
That's why you keep guns in a safe place, and raise diciplined kids who know guns kill. All that may be true statisticlly, but if my family does it right, it keeps us safer, and therefore, i'll defend my constitutional right. If everyone showed common sense, there'd be little issue.
Statistics: Posted by Razick — June 16th, 2011, 7:46 pm
]]>
The largest affected age groups are young people. Do you honestly believe those children are getting their hands on guns by themselves? A lot of gun-related death occurs with the very item bought to protect a family. If you compare this data to somewhere like, say, Canada, you'll find we have 20-30% as much death in the 15-24 range. Why? Because kids can't get their hands on guns, because their parents didn't buy any for "personal protection."
I lived in a rural area myself. I had my very own gun at the age of 13. I am grateful that my parents taught me proper gun control and kept them locked up and inaccessible to everyone but my father. But because of this necessary security, they would be terrible to use defensively. They were only there for hunting and recreation. Having a gun in easy reach for a dire situation does not help much when compared to much simpler methods of security - good locks, a security system, a little awareness, and good lighting. Heck, even a dog helps, it doesn't even have to be mean -- just loud.
Quote:
This discussion has become ridiculous, I live in Texas and almost everyone has a gun. In my house, we feel much safer because if someone breaks in... They will either die or be held at gunpoint for the police.
Criminals no this... that's why I have lived in three different conservative pro gun areas and never had a gunshot except for sport, and never had a homicide near by.
They tend to be in liberal areas where the law abiding citizens are not armed. Simple as that.
I have the right to bear arms within reason, period. For sporting and self defence.
Actually, Texas has a higher gun homicide rate than most blue states, including states such as New York and New Jersey. The only highly liberal states that beat it are Illinois and California. But that's kinda expected. And I'm pretty sure it's not because people in those states aren't armed... quite the opposite...
Source.
Statistics: Posted by Nateman — March 18th, 2011, 8:44 pm
]]>
Here CRIMINALS who any sain person will agree are scum, break into a house, they are aware of the risk of death or capture. Better the criminal die than me or my family.
Is carrying a weapon worth a life? Since one person says they should get life in prison.
----
Oh, and if they are willing to harm others, and potentially kill, as many do, to get my possessions, are they really deserving of life? I DO NOT WANT TO KILL, but if I have to for my and my families safety I will and have little regrets. I'll pray for they're soul and thank god I had a gun.
Statistics: Posted by Razick — March 18th, 2011, 10:55 am
]]>
This discussion has become ridiculous, I live in Texas and almost everyone has a gun. In my house, we feel much safer because if someone breaks in... They will either die or be held at gunpoint for the police.
Criminals no this... that's why I have lived in three different conservative pro gun areas and never had a gunshot except for sport, and never had a homicide near by.
They tend to be in liberal areas where the law abiding citizens are not armed. Simple as that.
I have the right to bear arms within reason, period. For sporting and self defence.
Because breaking in to somewhere means that its ok to be killed? over here that is called murder(then later manslaughter
) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Martin_%28farmer%29No matter what you believe, posessions are not worth a life.
Statistics: Posted by Sarah — March 18th, 2011, 8:34 am
]]>
Criminals no this... that's why I have lived in three different conservative pro gun areas and never had a gunshot except for sport, and never had a homicide near by.
They tend to be in liberal areas where the law abiding citizens are not armed. Simple as that.
I have the right to bear arms within reason, period. For sporting and self defence.
Statistics: Posted by Razick — March 18th, 2011, 6:57 am
]]>
If all the police carry guys then your gona have criminals carying guns to counter them.
Not if only the police can get the guns.
Quote:
if you increase the punishment for carrying knives to the same as carrying guns or carrying any weapon gives you a life sentence then people will just carry guns.
Statistics to back this up please? I'm pretty sure people willing to use a weapon to commit a crime don't care what sentence they'll get if they're caught, rather which is the more effective weapon to use.
Statistics: Posted by Nate — March 14th, 2011, 9:59 am
]]>
Also were like 46th on the list, usa is about 24th,
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_m ... per-capita
That list is actually based on heavily outdated data; recent data puts the USA #89 at a rate of 5.0 intentional homicides per 100000 people, and the UK at #152 with 1.28. I should also point out that's roughly a 38% decrease in the UK from 2.06 in 2002.
So what exactly is the "problem" being discussed here? Media paranoia in the UK, perhaps?
Statistics: Posted by Eadwulf — March 13th, 2011, 9:16 am
]]>
if you increase the punishment for carrying knives to the same as carrying guns or carrying any weapon gives you a life sentence then people will just carry guns.
Plus it aint that bad in New york city than there are about 400-600 murders a year and in the whole of the uk there is 600-800.
Also were like 46th on the list, usa is about 24th,
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_m ... per-capita
Statistics: Posted by killa kiaba — March 6th, 2011, 11:29 am
]]>
Statistics: Posted by Tahu 1000 — March 5th, 2011, 8:16 pm
]]>
There are many cases of citizens stopping robberies rapes and murders due to being armed.
That's my opinion.
Also, yes, your police should carry guns and tasers as the American police do, it really helps.
Statistics: Posted by Razick — March 4th, 2011, 9:41 am
]]>
http://www.calgarysun.com/news/alberta/ ... 19226.html
I wasn't implying that violent crime = dead.
My whole post was in response to him calling US citizens "Senseless" because we kill each other with guns... and then I obviously offended all the brits because they're having a severe case of denial even though I obviously posted proof and links and an entire google page of results backing up what I said... But that's fine. I said my piece and made my point, whether you choose to acknowledge it or simply pick apart what I'm saying by implying I implied something, when I clearly didn't is up to you. I frankly couldn't care less, it's your time you're wasting. Not mine.
Statistics: Posted by Suicide Messiah — April 5th, 2010, 2:12 am
]]>
Sarah wrote:
Suicide Messiah wrote:
Blah blah blah
WHATEVA WHATEVA, I WRITE WHAT I WAWNT
School shootings are "Spree" shootings. We have like 4-6 a year and maybe 50 die per year from them.
Even though the U.S. might have more gun related crimes, the UK actually has a higher violent crime rate. So clearly all you have to do is look at all the links I provided and the multitude of studies backing up what I said to see what a problem the UK has. I only brought it up in the first place because he was coming across as snide and implying that US citizens are "senseless". When really I could have turned around and said the exact same thing to him with statistics backing it all up.
It doesn't really matter how a person dies, dead is dead, and in the UK you're more likely to be a victim of a violent crime.
dunno about you, But i would prefer to take a guys fist rather than a bullet anyday.
Violent crime =/= Death
Statistics: Posted by reggie — April 5th, 2010, 1:48 am
]]>
Suicide Messiah wrote:
Blah blah blah
WHATEVA WHATEVA, I WRITE WHAT I WAWNT
School shootings are "Spree" shootings. We have like 4-6 a year and maybe 50 die per year from them.
Even though the U.S. might have more gun related crimes, the UK actually has a higher violent crime rate. So clearly all you have to do is look at all the links I provided and the multitude of studies backing up what I said to see what a problem the UK has. I only brought it up in the first place because he was coming across as snide and implying that US citizens are "senseless". When really I could have turned around and said the exact same thing to him with statistics backing it all up.
It doesn't really matter how a person dies, dead is dead, and in the UK you're more likely to be a victim of a violent crime.
Statistics: Posted by Suicide Messiah — April 5th, 2010, 12:05 am
]]>
I could go buy a P90 at a nearby store actually... expensive as hell though.
Parents are SUPPOSED to keep these things locked up as well or they lose their FOID card. no real way to know for sure that they're being locked up and the owner is the only one with access though.
Statistics: Posted by Pyro3000 — March 31st, 2010, 5:16 pm
]]>
school shootings are usually done with illegal firearms that are supposed to be unobtainable in the US
Depends on your definition of "illegal". Certainly it is "illegal" for a teen to carry a license handgun that their father owns (or grandparent/uncle/etc like what normally happens). Normally comes out these guns are "stolen" from the families house. It's not like they are grabbing full auto AK-47's or M16's to do these shootings, but hunting rifles and handguns I can go a mile down the road and buy.
Statistics: Posted by Burks — March 31st, 2010, 6:44 am
]]>
Also, if you're bringing a weapon somewhere for "self-defense" it can't really be considered self-defense. If you're being messed with at school you talk to someone. You don't decide you're going to stab or shoot them the next time they do it. That's you taking a pre-emptive strike.
Quote:
Look at it this way, if you decided to rob me at gun point, and I pulled out my own gun, would you drop yours and run? No, you'd most likely shoot me thinking that if you didn't I'd shoot you. If however I didn't have a gun, yes, I may be forced to give up possessions, but I walk away with my life, something far more valuable than phones, ipods, money, or whatever it is a thief might be after.
If you've seen their face they're going to shoot you. The only reason they haven't already is because they're nervous or they're covering their face. They teach you not to just pull out your gun if someone is close to you, as well. You pull it out at a distance. Self-defense with a firearm is usually home security or work related.
Bar tenders are allowed to carry them for example.
Statistics: Posted by Pyro3000 — March 30th, 2010, 11:23 pm
]]>
Fullmetal Shinobi wrote:
Matt wrote:
Anyone carrying around weapons should be able to be given a life sentence.
Absolutely ridiculous idea, in my opinion.
I, too, think this is a ridiculous idea, Some people have weapons for self-defense, there's no harm in that?
I may have already replied to this, since this is a fairly old thread, however I would just like to say, there is harm in that. Think of it this way, if I were being bullied by someone and I decided to bring a knife in to school to defend myself, at best, if he attacks me, I stab him, and I'm now a murderer. At worst, he gets the knife off me and now he has a weapon of his own, so I am in much more danger than before.
I think if anyone should be allowed weapons it should only be trained officials such as military personnel and police officers. Look at it this way, if you decided to rob me at gun point, and I pulled out my own gun, would you drop yours and run? No, you'd most likely shoot me thinking that if you didn't I'd shoot you. If however I didn't have a gun, yes, I may be forced to give up possessions, but I walk away with my life, something far more valuable than phones, ipods, money, or whatever it is a thief might be after.
I'm not saying everyone who carries a weapon is a bad person, but carrying a weapon *is* a bad idea unless you have been trained with it and you are in an environment where you *need* that weapon, for example, as a soldier, or as a police officer working in a dangerous area.
Quote:
The difference being in the UK, they outlaw guns and knives and what happened is
people get auto 9mm-HK's from Germany, or get knives anyway.
Then they know any law-abiding citizen won't have anything
and nor will the cops be able to stop them.
Yes, it is true that people still have access to guns and knives, however guns are very rare here. Most guns around are actually converted WW2 firearms that are just as dangerous to the user as they are to whoever he/she decides to point it at. If guns were readily available as they are in the US then we should see much more gun crime here. Knife crime however is another issue, while if you're carrying a knife you will be arrested, 9/10 times you won't be charged and your weapon will just be confiscated, kitchen knives are just as good as any fancy combat knife in most cases. I don't personally know how we can solve this, but I do think the police taking a harsher stance on people found carrying weapons would at least be an improvement.
-Matt
Statistics: Posted by Matt — March 30th, 2010, 12:15 pm
]]>