Guns: will a ban reduce crime?

[pompey_spud]

OK Shadow, lets go.

 

 

 

If you would be so kind as to directely reply to my last point?

[WutangFlu]

Ding ding* round 1....

 

 

 

*walks away from this thread forever.

[Bubsa]

Me too. Can't you guys just PM over this?

[Faux]

 

But what about these bullied teens who do this most often? With no gun in the garden shed, or on the mantlepiece, or whereevr you people hide them, the kid can't simply snap, and then take the gun to school to kill his tormentors.

 

 

 

Do you think the sight of gun makes them 'snap'? That's weird. If they have the ability to kill someone, they won't hesitate using another lethal weapon.

 

 

 

And read this http://www.calgunlaws.com/article-480.html

 

 

 

Who knew that criminals ignore the law?

 

 

 

And fyi, guns are banned in campuses. Guess how well that worked :\

[Viktorkrum77]

Although it is impossible to at this point, I feel that the UK is in the wrong banning guns because no matter how hard you try, people will get their hands on them, and no one who is innocently cornered will be able to retaliate.

 

 

 

We should have guns for everyone, but this is highly improbable at this point. However, both Switzerland and a small town in Georgia do this, and their crime rate is the lowest in the world. You're not going to shoot someone who has a gun.

[Faux]

Ding ding* round 1....

 

 

 

*walks away from this thread forever.

 

 

 

Me too. Can't you guys just PM over this?

 

 

 

He has the ability to make a thread as both of you can. Why not? It's not just about us, I'm sure other people would love to argue about this. I'm sure Ragen would agree with me on this.

[angryjoe]

UK population: 60000000 Shootings per year: 200

 

US population: 300000000 Shootings per year: 11000

 

 

 

Those figures are rough but approximately right.

 

 

 

If that doesn't prove gun laws work i don't know what does. I know there are many more factors to take into account but surely restrictions on guns is probably the biggest factor.

[Sk4terpunk90]

OK Shadow, lets go.

 

 

 

That seems a tad, immature?

 

 

 

Do this over PM please.

[MyPurpleCrayon]

OK Shadow, lets go.

 

 

 

That seems a tad, immature?

 

 

 

Do this over PM please.

 

Quit spamming his legit topic, or get out.

 

 

 

I'll reply later but right now I have a game of tennis to attend.

[Bubsa]

Ding ding* round 1....

 

 

 

*walks away from this thread forever.

 

 

 

Me too. Can't you guys just PM over this?

 

 

 

He has the ability to make a thread as both of you can. Why not? It's not just about us, I'm sure other people would love to argue about this. I'm sure Ragen would agree with me on this.

 

 

 

No you're right, it just seemed a bit of a personal thing when he said: "OK Shadow, let's go".

 

 

 

 

But what about these bullied teens who do this most often? With no gun in the garden shed, or on the mantlepiece, or whereevr you people hide them, the kid can't simply snap, and then take the gun to school to kill his tormentors.

 

 

 

Do you think the sight of gun makes them 'snap'? That's weird.

 

 

 

Now you're putting words into people's mouths :\ He meant that they snap and then reach for the gun, not see the gun and snap. If the gun isn't there, he's saying it's harder to take the frustration out on such a grand scale.

[pompey_spud]

 

But what about these bullied teens who do this most often? With no gun in the garden shed, or on the mantlepiece, or whereevr you people hide them, the kid can't simply snap, and then take the gun to school to kill his tormentors.

 

 

 

Do you think the sight of gun makes them 'snap'? That's weird. If they have the ability to kill someone, they won't hesitate using another lethal weapon.

 

So why do you never hear of crazed knife-massacres? Or baseball-bat massacres? Sure these people might have the will, but the guns provide them the means.

[Faux]

UK population: 60000000 Shootings per year: 200

 

US population: 300000000 Shootings per year: 11000

 

 

 

Those figures are rough but approximately right.

 

 

 

If that doesn't prove gun laws work i don't know what does. I know there are many more factors to take into account but surely restrictions on guns is probably the biggest factor.

 

 

 

I wish life was as simple as one plus one.

 

 

 

But it's not.

 

 

 

You forgot to think about how the US is much more diverse than the UK. You also forgot that the UK has about a fifth of the US population. The degree of conflict of interest increases as you go up.

[pompey_spud]

We should have guns for everyone, but this is highly improbable at this point. However, both Switzerland and a small town in Georgia do this, and their crime rate is the lowest in the world. You're not going to shoot someone who has a gun.

 

Trouble is, these people are rational and sane. If you gave everyone in Britain a gun, there would be civil war. The muslim extremist minorities would go crazy, the black teenage gangs in london would also go crazy, as would traffickers, and the general lowlifes. It wouldn't work.

[Faux]

Now you're putting words into people's mouths :\ He meant that they snap and then reach for the gun, not see the gun and snap. If the gun isn't there, he's saying it's harder to take the frustration out on such a grand scale.

 

 

 

That's funny, he didn't mention anything about that. I guess you know more about what he says than himself.

 

 

 

So why do you never hear of crazed knife-massacres? Or baseball-bat massacres? Sure these people might have the will, but the guns provide them the means.

 

 

 

Because they have the ability to use the gun. Take out the guns, and you'll have those in its place.

[pompey_spud]

Now you're putting words into people's mouths :\ He meant that they snap and then reach for the gun, not see the gun and snap. If the gun isn't there, he's saying it's harder to take the frustration out on such a grand scale.

 

 

 

That's funny, he didn't mention anything about that. I guess you know more about what he says than himself.

 

 

 

So why do you never hear of crazed knife-massacres? Or baseball-bat massacres? Sure these people might have the will, but the guns provide them the means.

 

 

 

Because they have the ability to use the gun. Take out the guns, and you'll have those in its place.

 

But that's the point. With a baseball bat, or a knife, you simply can't kill in a crowded place. You would have people diving on the killer, throwing projectiles, with nor fear of anything firing at them. Guns are the only weapons which leave the killer in COMPLETE control against multiple people.

[Faux]

 

But that's the point. With a baseball bat, or a knife, you simply can't kill in a crowded place. You would have people diving on the killer, throwing projectiles, with nor fear of anything firing at them. Guns are the only weapons which leave the killer in COMPLETE control against multiple people.

 

 

 

You underestimate people's imagination. A car can easily kill multiple people, a homemade molotov cocktail, etc.

[Sk4terpunk90]

Think of the enormous under-ground gun market.

 

 

 

It'd probably be pretty ugly.

[pompey_spud]

 

But that's the point. With a baseball bat, or a knife, you simply can't kill in a crowded place. You would have people diving on the killer, throwing projectiles, with nor fear of anything firing at them. Guns are the only weapons which leave the killer in COMPLETE control against multiple people.

 

 

 

You underestimate people's imagination. A car can easily kill multiple people, a homemade molotov cocktail, etc.

 

But we're talking about bullied, sad teenagers. Not professional assassins. The gun is the only really harmful device anyone can use.

[angryjoe]

UK population: 60000000 Shootings per year: 200

 

US population: 300000000 Shootings per year: 11000

 

 

 

Those figures are rough but approximately right.

 

 

 

If that doesn't prove gun laws work i don't know what does. I know there are many more factors to take into account but surely restrictions on guns is probably the biggest factor.

 

 

 

I wish life was as simple as one plus one.

 

 

 

But it's not.

 

 

 

You forgot to think about how the US is much more diverse than the UK. You also forgot that the UK has about a fifth of the US population. The degree of conflict of interest increases as you go up.

 

I know life isn't as simple as 1+1 thats why i said there are more factors than that.

 

Point about the diversity taken.

 

However; I didn't put this because i thaught people may see it a patronising and i thaught it was pretty obvious but -

 

300000000/ 6000000 = 5

 

11000/200= 55

[Faux]

But we're talking about bullied, sad teenagers. Not professional assassins. The gun is the only really harmful device anyone can use.

 

 

 

Teenagers aren't even allowed to have guns, are they?

[Parabola]

One thing that must be said, and isn't for either side, is that statistics on their own mean pretty much nothing in this argument.

 

 

 

One can say "country X has 1% gun ownership but has a higher murder rate than country Y which has 25% gun ownership" - it may well be that the country with fewer murders has different influences that affect crime, such as harsher sentences, a more effective police force, higher employment rates, whatever. It works both ways round, too.

[pompey_spud]

I'm pretty sure the US age limit is something like 15.

 

 

 

Besides, thats also not the point. The point is, because of this right to bear arms, a lot of households have these guns, giving the teenagers the means of these massacres, when normally they wouldn't be able to get hold of anything nearly as harmful.

[Faux]

However; I didn't put this because i thaught people may see it a patronising

 

 

 

It is obvious. But like I already said, it's not just one plus one when you're dealing with the diversity of 300 million compared to a fifth of that that barely has the conflict of interest of the 300 million.

 

 

 

edit: or like how Parabola explained it above, I kinda suck at explaining <<

[pompey_spud]

However; I didn't put this because i thaught people may see it a patronising

 

 

 

It is obvious. But like I already said, it's not just one plus one when you're dealing with the diversity of 300 million compared to a fifth of that that barely has the conflict of interest of the 300 million.

 

Agreed, like what Parabola said too.

[Faux]

I'm pretty sure the US age limit is something like 15.

 

 

 

Besides, thats also not the point. The point is, because of this right to bear arms, a lot of households have these guns, giving the teenagers the means of these massacres, when normally they wouldn't be able to get hold of anything nearly as harmful.

 

 

 

It's not the government's fault if the teenager stole from a licensed gun owner anymore.