Gun Control

[Enamoured]

I'm all for private access to weapons, including handguns. Arming the populace is one way to protect against the government, let alone other individuals.

[obfuscator]

I'm all for private access to weapons, including handguns. Arming the populace is one way to protect against the government, let alone other individuals.

Yes, arming the populace helps kill innocent people, and arms the criminals too..

[Furah]

I'm all for private access to weapons, including handguns. Arming the populace is one way to protect against the government, let alone other individuals.

Yes, arming the populace helps kill innocent people, and arms the criminals too..

Who still keeps the guns when the populace have to turn their guns in? Criminals. No matter what laws you bring in, no matter how much you tighten up security, criminals will always get their hands on guns. As long as guns exist, criminals will get them. If they don't exist, they'll make them. With $200 and a Sunday afternoon off and I could have a built-from-scratch revolver that will take shotgun rounds. I'd probably break my wrist firing it, but it's not that hard to make one.

[jasignhagj]

Say what you will, but no one could ever successfully occupy the US for a long period of time, simply because of the number of armed citizens who would make life hell for the occupiers.

[obfuscator]

I'm all for private access to weapons, including handguns. Arming the populace is one way to protect against the government, let alone other individuals.

Yes, arming the populace helps kill innocent people, and arms the criminals too..

Who still keeps the guns when the populace have to turn their guns in? Criminals. No matter what laws you bring in, no matter how much you tighten up security, criminals will always get their hands on guns. As long as guns exist, criminals will get them. If they don't exist, they'll make them. With $200 and a Sunday afternoon off and I could have a built-from-scratch revolver that will take shotgun rounds. I'd probably break my wrist firing it, but it's not that hard to make one.

Yet the statistics aren't conducive to this conclusion, as the States has far higher rates of gun crime per capita then countries where guns are severely restricted.

[KittyKat]

I'm all for private access to weapons, including handguns. Arming the populace is one way to protect against the government, let alone other individuals.

Yes, arming the populace helps kill innocent people, and arms the criminals too..

Who still keeps the guns when the populace have to turn their guns in? Criminals. No matter what laws you bring in, no matter how much you tighten up security, criminals will always get their hands on guns. As long as guns exist, criminals will get them. If they don't exist, they'll make them. With $200 and a Sunday afternoon off and I could have a built-from-scratch revolver that will take shotgun rounds. I'd probably break my wrist firing it, but it's not that hard to make one.

Yet the statistics aren't conducive to this conclusion, as the States has far higher rates of gun crime per capita then countries where guns are severely restricted.

That's because people turn to using knives.

[Furah]

I'm all for private access to weapons, including handguns. Arming the populace is one way to protect against the government, let alone other individuals.

Yes, arming the populace helps kill innocent people, and arms the criminals too..

Who still keeps the guns when the populace have to turn their guns in? Criminals. No matter what laws you bring in, no matter how much you tighten up security, criminals will always get their hands on guns. As long as guns exist, criminals will get them. If they don't exist, they'll make them. With $200 and a Sunday afternoon off and I could have a built-from-scratch revolver that will take shotgun rounds. I'd probably break my wrist firing it, but it's not that hard to make one.

Yet the statistics aren't conducive to this conclusion, as the States has far higher rates of gun crime per capita then countries where guns are severely restricted.

Switzerland also has high availability of guns, yet they have a low crime rate.

 

Minutes of Evidence[/i], Colin Greenwood, Select Committee on Northern Ireland Affairs, January 29,

2003.']... the major surveys completed in the past 20 years or more provides no evidence of any relationship between the total number of legally held firearms in society and the rate of armed crime. Nor is there a relationship between the severity of controls imposed in various countries or the mass of bureaucracy involved with many control systems with the apparent ease of access to firearms by criminals and terrorists.

[Alg]

Perhaps other societal factors can be cited for the rate of crimes.

[Skeptical]

Merely having firearms does not mean a nation can resist occupation.

 

Look at Afghanistan: a huge number of AK's, and yet they still can't compete with Coalition American forces.

[Racer434]

See, the problem with guns is that they incite violence.

If you were walking down the street with $100 in your wallet, and a man came up to you and demanded it, what would you do? You'd probably give it to him, and be short $100.

 

If you had a gun, you'd shoot him, and instead of being down $100, you've now killed someone.

 

But if gun laws were more lax and mostly everyone was carrying a gun then robbery wouldn't happen because the robber would be afraid of getting shot...

 

I see what your talking about but gun laws really need to be a happy medium to where people really want one can get it in a reasonable amount of time, while shady people would be somewhat restricted to applying for a gun permit

[Alg]

I see what your talking about but gun laws really need to be a happy medium to where people really want one can get it in a reasonable amount of time, while shady people would be somewhat restricted to applying for a gun permit

This would only happen if there was a guarantee that most people would be carrying a gun. Even with highly lax gun laws people are not going to be walking down the street armed. There will still be people that are against guns as well, and as a result a mugger would still probably have a good chance of finding someone who isn't armed to rob.

[jasignhagj]

Merely having firearms does not mean a nation can resist occupation.

 

Look at Afghanistan: a huge number of AK's, and yet they still can't compete with Coalition American forces.

 

Because we've won the war in Afghanistan...

[Dizzle229]

We still don't control large areas of it.

[Giordano]

Merely having firearms does not mean a nation can resist occupation.

 

Look at Afghanistan: a huge number of AK's, and yet they still can't compete with Coalition American forces.

 

Because we've won the war in Afghanistan...

But the Soviet Union didn't. With a culture already used to guns, train them the right way (US intervention) and they can stop empires.

[Dupin]

Guys, Spork's being sarcastic. The war in Afghanistan was a [bleep]ing disaster.

[Furah]

This would only happen if there was a guarantee that most people would be carrying a gun. Even with highly lax gun laws people are not going to be walking down the street armed. There will still be people that are against guns as well, and as a result a mugger would still probably have a good chance of finding someone who isn't armed to rob.

Would he be willing to risk his life for that chance of $100? Especially since a lot of people carry fake wallets around.

[Alg]

This would only happen if there was a guarantee that most people would be carrying a gun. Even with highly lax gun laws people are not going to be walking down the street armed. There will still be people that are against guns as well, and as a result a mugger would still probably have a good chance of finding someone who isn't armed to rob.

Would he be willing to risk his life for that chance of $100? Especially since a lot of people carry fake wallets around.

Depends on the criminal.

[jasignhagj]

Guys, Spork's being sarcastic. The war in Afghanistan was a [bleep]ing disaster.

 

Internets for you, sir.

[obfuscator]

See, the problem with guns is that they incite violence.

If you were walking down the street with $100 in your wallet, and a man came up to you and demanded it, what would you do? You'd probably give it to him, and be short $100.

 

If you had a gun, you'd shoot him, and instead of being down $100, you've now killed someone.

 

But if gun laws were more lax and mostly everyone was carrying a gun then robbery wouldn't happen because the robber would be afraid of getting shot...

 

I see what your talking about but gun laws really need to be a happy medium to where people really want one can get it in a reasonable amount of time, while shady people would be somewhat restricted to applying for a gun permit

Yet this has proven to be totally untrue, as gun crime is incredibly high in the states despite many of the innocent being better armed then the criminals.

[Furah]

See, the problem with guns is that they incite violence.

If you were walking down the street with $100 in your wallet, and a man came up to you and demanded it, what would you do? You'd probably give it to him, and be short $100.

 

If you had a gun, you'd shoot him, and instead of being down $100, you've now killed someone.

 

But if gun laws were more lax and mostly everyone was carrying a gun then robbery wouldn't happen because the robber would be afraid of getting shot...

 

I see what your talking about but gun laws really need to be a happy medium to where people really want one can get it in a reasonable amount of time, while shady people would be somewhat restricted to applying for a gun permit

Yet this has proven to be totally untrue, as gun crime is incredibly high in the states despite many of the innocent being better armed then the criminals.

Scroll up half a page please, look at that quote I made.

 

"...past 20 years or more provides no evidence of any relationship between the total number of legally held firearms in society and the rate of armed crime..."

 

The high crime rate in America is because of a violent society.

[Skeptical]

When we stop letting idiots own guns, we will no longer have teenagers shot for egging cars or children shooting themselves or others while playing around with a relatives gun.

 

If you want to own a gun "like your daddy did" please don't pretend that it's because you think it will stop criminals: it never has, and it never will. In a back alley, someone pulls a gun on you: you manage to pull your Tek-9 out from underneath your jacket at shoot some crackhead in the face before he pulls the trigger, all so that you don't have to hand over a Visa that can be canceled within 10 minutes.

[Giordano]

How people defend their guns is their problem, I hate it when people bring these close-range situtations because not all of them are like that.

 

You can a million possibilities from 1 bad one.

[Zierro]

you think it will stop criminals: it never has, and it never will

 

Holy [cabbage].

 

That is literally all that needs to be said.

[Alg]

How people defend their guns is their problem, I hate it when people bring these close-range situtations because not all of them are like that.

 

You can a million possibilities from 1 bad one.

That's the thing. How many people in the States legally own guns? Out of those, how many shoot teenagers for egging their cars? How many are the kinds of criminals you wouldn't trust around a gun? A very small number. Though you'd think that with the amount of coverage the media gives to gun crime, every single gun owner is a potential murderer with an incredibly short fuse, like that guy.

[sees_all1]

you think it will stop criminals: it never has, and it never will

 

Holy [cabbage].

 

That is literally all that needs to be said.

 

Yeah, except it isn't based in fact.

 

From Arguing With Idiots, by Glenn Beck (pg 57)

Actual reports of successful defensive non-shootings are low (and you won't find them in the news - nothing could bore the media more than "no shots fired"), but that doesn't mean they aren't out there. Social scientists studying the phenomenon disagree widely about the actual numbers, but one set of thirteen different surveys yielded results ranging from 760,000 to over 3 million defensive gun uses per year. According to another particularly well-respected survey, no shots were ever fired in over three-fourths of such defensive gun uses.

 

 

A.D.D. moment- A few grassroots efforts are under way to do the job the media won't and track defensive gun uses. You can find updates on two of them here:

www.keepandbeararms.com/opsd

www.claytoncramer.com/gundefenseblog/blogger.html

(emphasis mine)

 

From the back of the book:

SOURCE:

Gary Kleck, "Guns and Self Defense," in Targeting Guns: Firearms and Their Control (Piscataway, N.J.: Aldine Transaction, 1997).

Google'd the source, the guy is a criminologist at Florida State University and has a phd.