Guns

[blike]

Guns...

[Radical Edward]

guns don't kill people, people kill people

 

 

however guns make it a damn site more efficient.

[Sayonara]

Do you think people 'get' that just because your right to own a gun is protected by the constitution, it doesn't make owning an assault rifle mandatory?

[atinymonkey]

Originally posted by Radical Edward

guns don't kill people, people kill people

 

Or as Eddie Izzard said, Monkeys with guns. The tricky part is teaching them how to reload.

[fafalone]

In several places (I'm aware of 2 in the US, and 1 in AU), there's a law on the books REQUIRING everyone to own a gun. The crime rate for these towns is virtually zero.

 

And banning guns is just plain stupid. The criminals are still going to have guns whether they're legal or not.

 

Furthermore, hunting is a legitimate sport under the right circumstances.

[blike]

Just a quick glance at the polls and I'm sure me and faf are the only people who voted "yes".

[Matzi]

Just a question for you two (or everyone else who votes yes): Why do you want to have your own weapons?

[blike]

Originally posted by Matzi

Just a question for you two (or everyone else who votes yes): Why do you want to have your own weapons?

 

Mostly to protect myself and my family. I'd probably hunt a little if I lived in the right area.

[Radical Edward]

have you seen the statistics though? It hardly seems like "self defence" is worth it to me.

[blike]

Feh, I've seen so many statistics and studies both for and against gun control. For everyone that shows gun control effective, I could produce one that shows it ineffective.

 

 

In 1987 Florida (my state) passed a "right to carry" law. Everyone said it would lead to an increase in violance, yada yada.

 

Between 1987 and 1996, the homicide rate went down 36%, and the firearm homicide went down 37%. Handgun homicide went down 41%. All this while the national averages were -.4%, +15%, and +24% respectively.

 

=====================

 

Like fafalone said, if guns were illegal, only people bent on breaking the law would have them.

 

PLUS HOW WOULD I GO A HUNTIN'?

[Sayonara]

Anyone can make percentage rate changes look good.

 

Most western countries, Japan and Aus have gun death rates below 100 people per year.

 

The USA has about 10,000-12,000 per year.

 

Clearly there is something wrong with this picture.

[blike]

Originally posted by Sayonara³

Anyone can make percentage rate changes look good.

 

Most western countries, Japan and Aus have gun death rates below 100 people per year.

 

The USA has about 10,000-12,000 per year.

 

Clearly there is something wrong with this picture.

 

Less cars, less automobile accidents. Its quite difficult to assert the role firearms play in homicides. We can throw around numbers showing that Japan has a lower gun-related death rate than America, but when you take a look at their non-firearm related death rates compared to ours, its extremely low. Nations like Israel and Sweden also throw a wrench into statistics like that because their gun-ownership rates are near that of the United States, but their homicide rates are way lower.

 

Even though Britain banned guns in (what year? 97?) their murder rates were at 100-year highs this past year. Violent crimes are also on the rise in England, yet the rate of violent crimes (and murder rates) in the US [which allows carrying of concealed weapons] are falling to 50-year lows. Of course, this study was performed before the civil disarmarment, so the rise in English crime cannot be attributed to the absence of guns. I'm merely showing that even though the US has a higher rate of gun ownership per 1,000 people, our crime rates are still falling.

 

Crime and Justice in the United States and in England and Wales, 1981-96

 

"the U.S. robbery rate as measured in the victim survey was nearly double England's in 1981, but in 1995 the English robbery rate was 1.4 times America's (figure 1)

 

the English assault rate as measured in the victim survey was slightly higher than America's in 1981, but in 1995 the English assault rate was more than double America's (figure 2)

 

the U.S. burglary rate as measured in the victim survey was more than double England's in 1981, but in 1995 the English burglary rate was nearly double America's (below, and figure 3 of the report)

 

the English motor vehicle theft rate as measured in the victim survey was 1.5 times America's in 1981, but in 1995 the English rate for vehicle theft was more than double America's (figure 4)

 

the U.S. murder rate as measured in police statistics was 8.7 times England's in 1981 but 5.7 times in 1996 (figure 5)

 

the U.S. rape rate as measured in police statistics was 17 times England's in 1981 but 3 times in 1996 (figure 6)

 

the U.S. robbery rate as measured in police statistics was 6 times England's in 1981 but 1.4 times in 1996 (figure 7)

 

the U.S. assault rate as measured in police statistics was 1.5 times England's in 1981, but in 1996 the English assault rate was slightly higher than America's (figure 8)

 

the U.S. burglary rate as measured in police statistics was slightly higher than England's in 1981, but in 1996 the English burglary rate was more than double America's (below, and figure 9 of the report) "

 

 

 

The violent crime rates of England and Wales exceed the US, but we still got you beat on murders, although if the trend continues the figures will converge in the next decade.

 

In conclusion, statistics are confusing. I just think I should be able to protect myself and my family with lethal deterrance.

[fafalone]

Guns should not be illegal because they can be used for a crime.

 

By this trend, baseball bats ought to be outlawed because of the number of acts of vandalism and lethal assault they are used for.

 

Knives should be illegal, because you might stab someone with them.

 

And of course, you can kill someone with your bare hands.

 

 

 

Make laws against the crime, not the weapon... because the definition of a weapon is far too broad.

 

 

(On a side note for Americans, felt-tip markers are illegal under the DMCA. This is a perfect example of what I'm talking about.)

[Radical Edward]

Originally posted by fafalone

Guns should not be illegal because they can be used for a crime.

 

By this trend, baseball bats ought to be outlawed because of the number of acts of vandalism and lethal assault they are used for.

 

Knives should be illegal, because you might stab someone with them.

 

you play a game with baseball bats, knifes are used for cutting food and other such things. Guns are for nothing but killing. you can argue all you like that "but they are for sport too" but then why have semi automatic weapons, weapons that reload automatically? At the most for a sport you need a single shot weapon.

 

most of it though, as has been pointed out, is down to the people with the Guns. I wouldn't really argue against Blike having a gun, because he seems like a pretty intelligent sort, but there are far more people out there who shouldn't have guns, and until something is done to limit stupid people getting hold of insanely powerful arsenals of weapons, then I can't really condone the availability of Guns as it stands.

Britain's lack of Guns came about after the Dunblane massacre, a typical case where Gun access laws were not good enough, and an idiot got hold of a load of weapons... As a result of a public outcry and knee jerk reaction by the government, voila, no-one has (legal) guns anymore... however the problem was not solved at all, because since Dunblane, gun crime has been rising. In essence, the banning of guns in the UK was completely pointless, and so the same would probably be said for the US. Gun crime may remain at a persistant level (though probably slightly lower, as less family feuds would end up in firefights), however one thing that really would drop, is Gun deaths by suicide.

[blike]

but there are far more people out there who shouldn't have guns, and until something is done to limit stupid people getting hold of insanely powerful arsenals of weapons, then I can't really condone the availability of Guns as it stands.

 

Agreed. I should have clarified my position a little. Fully automatic weapons and other guns designed soley to indiscriminately kill should not be legal. The private citizen has no business with those.

 

I also agree that certain people shouldn't have access to guns. People with a history of anger management problems, criminal backgrounds, psychiatric disorders, etc... should not be afforded guns. That doesn't sound very fair I guess, at least for those with psychiatric disorders since its not really their fault.

[fafalone]

Originally posted by Radical Edward

you play a game with baseball bats, knifes are used for cutting food and other such things. Guns are for nothing but killing. you can argue all you like that "but they are for sport too" but then why have semi automatic weapons, weapons that reload automatically? At the most for a sport you need a single shot weapon.

It's just easier.

 

Should automatic crossbows be illegal?

 

If you're hunting something (or even shooting a discus), and you miss, you don't have time to reload before you lose the target.

 

Besides, it only takes one shot to kill something.

[spacemanspiff]

guns should be alowed. however the fact that it is harder to get a drivers liscense than a large gun seems a wee bit off to me.

[fafalone]

Harder to get a drivers license!?!??! Have you seen some of the bufoons of the roads??? I'd rather see a chimp behind the wheel the some of the idiots out there, especially the jackass that went off-road to pass me on the alley... I was doing 90.

[Matzi]

Originally posted by fafalone

Guns should not be illegal because they can be used for a crime.[...]

I'd say: paradoxon.

 

Anyway, is it really so easy to get a gun in the US?

I think its quite hard here in Germany (at least if the administration works as supposed to which does not apply to Erfurt last year) to get a weapon. You need a license for weapon use and I thinks it's not that easy to get. To buy a weapon you must be a licensed hunter as well.

Besides, I think getting a driver's license here in - as many people say - not that easy as in the US.

[blike]

Anyway, is it really so easy to get a gun in the US?

 

Not sure exactly what the laws are. I'm pretty sure if you're over 21 you can walk down to your local walmart and pick up a shotgun or .22. I think we have some law that says you have to wait 7 days to pick the gun up though. This is supposed to deter spur of the moment "rage murders" by giving the person a chance to cool down. I know you need a permit to carry a concealed weapon, but I doubt its hard to obtain. Probably requires a background check and maybe a few safety classes at most.

[spacemanspiff]

Have you seen some of the bufoons of the roads???

 

Have you seen some of the bufoons with guns?

 

i'd rather see that chimp with a car than a gun. well... depending on how much ammo he has

 

maybe drivers liscense wasn't the best example. but my point is that if anything should be difficult to get, it's a gun. especially the big, you-have-no-reason-to -have-amor-piercing-bullets type guns.

[Glider]

Originally posted by blike

Agreed. I should have clarified my position a little. Fully automatic weapons and other guns designed soley to indiscriminately kill should not be legal. The private citizen has no business with those.

Handguns (pistols & revolvers) were designed solely for the purpose of shooting people. They are absolutely no use for anything else. They may be used for target practice, but even then, they're a bit pants (excluding the purpose built, counterweighted, long barreled olympic target pistols, but people never buy them for personal use). The only reason a hangun exists is to be used on other people. That's what they were designed for. I think that whether or not they are used to 'indiscriminately' kill is more a feature of the owner than of the design of the weapon.

 

I also agree that certain people shouldn't have access to guns. People with a history of anger management problems, criminal backgrounds, psychiatric disorders, etc... should not be afforded guns. That doesn't sound very fair I guess, at least for those with psychiatric disorders since its not really their fault.

I know what you mean, but then people with epilepsy, narcolepsy or schizophrenia aren't allowed driving licences. Problem is, if you can buy a weapon at 21, that leaves an awful lot of time. The majority of people don't develop severe psych. disorders (e.g. schizophrenia) until their mid-late 30s/early 40s. Same with severe depression (tends to occur in middle age), and severe stress related conditions.

 

I've had the opportunity to have a play with several kinds of gun; pistols and SMGs (blowing little holes in things from 50 meters); rifles (SLR), LMGs and GPMGs (blowing little holes in things from 300 meters); and 'proper' guns, (blowing things to oblivion from several miles away). It was a blast at the time, but I wouldn't want to own any of them. I do believe that anything other than a shotgun or a purpose built hunting rifle, is simply a weapon, the sole purpose of which is to blow little holes in other people.

 

I think that people who consider hunting a sport, but who feel they need fully automatic weapons to engage in it, need to put in some serious range-time. Otherwisy they might just as well set some claymores and go and drink beer in their tents for the day.

[blike]

Originally posted by Glider

Handguns (pistols & revolvers) were designed solely for the purpose of shooting people. They are absolutely no use for anything else. They may be used for target practice, but even then, they're a bit pants (excluding the purpose built, counterweighted, long barreled olympic target pistols, but people never buy them for personal use). The only reason a hangun exists is to be used on other people. That's what they were designed for. I think that whether or not they are used to 'indiscriminately' kill is more a feature of the owner than of the design of the weapon.

 

True, but the lethality of a handgun is limited to its magazine of maybe 7 shots. They cannot be "sprayed" into a large crowd of people to mow them down. The only reason you would need an automatic weapon is to mass kill. A pistol, on the other hand, is a single-shot weapon that is easy to aim and gets the job done.

 

I do believe that anything other than a shotgun or a purpose built hunting rifle, is simply a weapon, the sole purpose of which is to blow little holes in other people.

 

yep, and these are perfect for protection

[fafalone]

Originally posted by blike

Not sure exactly what the laws are. I'm pretty sure if you're over 21 you can walk down to your local walmart and pick up a shotgun or .22. I think we have some law that says you have to wait 7 days to pick the gun up though. This is supposed to deter spur of the moment "rage murders" by giving the person a chance to cool down. I know you need a permit to carry a concealed weapon, but I doubt its hard to obtain. Probably requires a background check and maybe a few safety classes at most.

 

In Florida, you have to pay a $200 fee, take a firearms safety course, and have thorough background check to obtain a concealed weapons permit.

[Glider]

Originally posted by blike

yep, and these are perfect for protection

...against someone without a gun