Gun Control

[clemson357]

OK, some of you might say this belongs in the assault weapon thread, but it doesn't, that thread is just way off topic.

I am writing this because of the wide spread views I have seen posted, which IMO are uninformed. the following are FACTS:

— Crime did not fall in England after handguns were banned in January 1997. Quite the contrary, crime rose sharply. Yet, serious violent crime rates from 1997 to 2002 averaged 29 percent higher than 1996; robbery was 24 percent higher; murders 27 percent higher. Before the law, armed robberies had fallen by 50 percent from 1993 to 1997, but as soon as handguns were banned, the robbery rate shot back up, almost back to their 1993 levels.

— Australia has also seen its violent crime rates soar after its Port Arthur gun control measures (search) in late 1996. Violent crime rates averaged 32 per cent higher in the six years after the law was passed (from 1997 to 2002) than they did the year before the law in 1996. The same comparisons for armed robbery rates showed increases of 45 percent.

— The 2000 International Crime Victimization Survey, the most recent survey done, shows that the violent crime rate in England and Australia was twice the rate in the US.

Everyone wants to take guns away from criminals. The problem is that if the law-abiding citizens obey the laws and the criminals don’t, the rules create sitting ducks who cannot defend themselves. -FOX NEWS

what some people don't know is that it is illegal for criminals to have guns. no one who has a felony conviction in the united states can legally own a gun. they can't own a pistol, a shotgun, a rifle, a muzzle loader, or an assault rifle. that means every law you put on top of that is only effecting people who are law abiding up to this piont in time.

I agree there is a serious problem in the U.S. But restricting people rights to own firearms is not the answer, as i think the facts above show. If you are seriously concerned, rally for more law enforcement funding, donate to education programs for inner city kids, lobby for stiffer penalties for criminals; don't go after the rights of people who have done nothing wrong

I will come back to this thread in 6 months, and post as to the crime increase since the assault weapon ban has been lifted. I can almost promise there will be no increase.



up to this point i have tried to be very factual and serious in my argument, but i have one more thing to say, which is strictly opinion:

If you can read this post, and you believe all the statistics in it are true, and you still push for gun control, YOU HAVE LOST YOUR MIND.

[jrock5730]

OK, some of you might say this belongs in the assault weapon thread, but it doesn't, that thread is just way off topic.

I am writing this because of the wide spread views I have seen posted, which IMO are uninformed. the following are FACTS:

— Crime did not fall in England after handguns were banned in January 1997. Quite the contrary, crime rose sharply. Yet, serious violent crime rates from 1997 to 2002 averaged 29 percent higher than 1996; robbery was 24 percent higher; murders 27 percent higher. Before the law, armed robberies had fallen by 50 percent from 1993 to 1997, but as soon as handguns were banned, the robbery rate shot back up, almost back to their 1993 levels.

— Australia has also seen its violent crime rates soar after its Port Arthur gun control measures (search) in late 1996. Violent crime rates averaged 32 per cent higher in the six years after the law was passed (from 1997 to 2002) than they did the year before the law in 1996. The same comparisons for armed robbery rates showed increases of 45 percent.

— The 2000 International Crime Victimization Survey, the most recent survey done, shows that the violent crime rate in England and Australia was twice the rate in the US.

Everyone wants to take guns away from criminals. The problem is that if the law-abiding citizens obey the laws and the criminals don’t, the rules create sitting ducks who cannot defend themselves. -FOX NEWS

what some people don't know is that it is illegal for criminals to have guns. no one who has a felony conviction in the united states can legally own a gun. they can't own a pistol, a shotgun, a rifle, a muzzle loader, or an assault rifle. that means every law you put on top of that is only effecting people who are law abiding up to this piont in time.

I agree there is a serious problem in the U.S. But restricting people rights to own firearms is not the answer, as i think the facts above show. If you are seriously concerned, rally for more law enforcement funding, donate to education programs for inner city kids, lobby for stiffer penalties for criminals; don't go after the rights of people who have done nothing wrong

I will come back to this thread in 6 months, and post as to the crime increase since the assault weapon ban has been lifted. I can almost promise there will be no increase.



up to this point i have tried to be very factual and serious in my argument, but i have one more thing to say, which is strictly opinion:

If you can read this post, and you believe all the statistics in it are true, and you still push for gun control, YOU HAVE LOST YOUR MIND.

MROTTO, I had better see this thread getting locked, especially since you locked one that was 11 days old and had many replies.

[clemson357]

MROTTO, I had better see this thread getting locked, especially since you locked one that was 11 days old and had many replies.


why, tell me why. because it has views in it that oppose yours?

there is no reason to lock this thread and you know it. it is factual and well reasoned, and contains things which are not repeats of old threads, the fact that you want it locked without even thinking about what it says shows what kind of person you are.

[cyberhound]

why, tell me why. because it has views in it that oppose yours?
Despite your caveat, the thread is probably going to be considered a duplicate.

[clemson357]

maybe you should have lived in nazi germany, they had the type of censorship and oppression that you seem to like.

[jrock5730]

maybe you should have lived in nazi germany, they had the type of censorship and oppression that you seem to like.

:lol :lol I must laugh at the statement. This belongs in the assault weapon thread, as much as you don't like it. Nothing to do with my views, but the views of the creators of this site. By the way, I think you should wake up from your dream and let reality slip in for a while.

[clemson357]

....By the way, I think you should wake up from your dream and let reality slip in for a while.

you can't understand what reality is. reality is the situation in england and australia: people are suffering from the groundless, mindless, and idiotic fears of people like you.

[clemson357]

This belongs in the assault weapon thread, as much as you don't like it.

the assault weapon thread is about a specific law that expired on a specific type of gun, not gun control as a broad topic. or that is what it is supposed to be about.

[System]

Gun control to me means two things and one main thing alone.

1st not as big of a deal, but a background check for all people buying firearms. If you have nothing to hide, no big deal just wait a few days till you get your gun.

2nd and the rule I think all should follow

Gun control means hitting what you are aiming at.

[clemson357]

I have no problem with a background check, it ensures criminals don't get guns.

[System]

I also am in support for tougher penalities for criminals that obtain guns illegeally and use them in crime.

I think we need to bring back the firing squad, no more of this nice death sentance.

They are going to die, who cares if they don't feel anything..what are they going to do, complain?

[mr.MikeD]

The 2000 International Crime Victimization Survey, the most recent survey done, shows that the violent crime rate in England and Australia was twice the rate in the US.
or

In 1998/99, Australia had 64 firearm homicides, the lowest number since the
National Homicide Monitoring Program commenced at the Australian Institute of
Criminology a decade ago. On a population basis, this works out at a rate of 3 firearm
homicides per million population. In contrast, the United States, whose crime rate
(other than homicide) is generally no higher than Australia’s, had 9143 known firearm
homicides in 1998—on a population basis, 41 per million, 14 times the Australian rate. Source: http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/tandi/ti151.pdf

So many stats. Also, if you go read any of this article it also says that liscenced owners were not responsible for over 90% of the gun crimes. Take what you will. My ONLY point with this post is that there a lot of statistics out there, and I for one don't have time to read them all. Hopefully lawmakers, etc, do, but I doubt it.

[mwjorgens]

I have no problem with a background check, it ensures criminals don't get guns.
it doesnt though. im sure its been said in this thread or somewhere else already but chris rock is right, 'we dont need gun control, we need bullet control':D

[EatSleepJeep]

I don't have to wait to buy guns any longer. Why? My state requires a "permit to acquire pistols or revolvers" with every handgun sale. It is renewed annually and has an initial 7-10 day wait period while they do your background check. The permit is automatically rescinded if you are charged with a disqualifying offense, and reinstated if one is cleared of those charges. It is effective and fair, and i have no problems with waiting periods and the current controls. It's nice to see gun crime being more enthusuiastically prosecuted and sentenced, as well.

[clemson357]

In 1998/99, Australia had 64 firearm homicides, the lowest number since the National Homicide Monitoring Program commenced at the Australian Institute of Criminology a decade ago.

there is a difference between firearm homicide and homicide altogether. If the rate of violent crime went up 32%, and the rate of firearm homicide went down all that shows is that criminals aren't using guns but are still comitting more crimes because they know you don't have a gun.

is the object to lower crime or to lower crimes comitted with guns. if crime goes up, but less of it is done with firearms, have you succeeded? I think the answer is no, because you have still put more people in danger.

[Daevian]

http://www.americansforgunsafety.com/the_issues_background.asp

3rd paragraph down please.

Government is so silly sometimes.

[fleckhead]

we need more god damned people control.

[clemson357]

It could also show that the criminals did have guns, they just didn't kill anyone with them. like an armed robbery, usually you don't have to kill the people, just pull a gun and say "give me your wallet". so there is no firearm homicide, but it is still a violent crime

[clemson357]

WOW, you can't purchase a gun if you are dishonorably discharged from the military. I don't know if I agree with that.

[clemson357]

:thumbsup we need more god damned people control.

[chevman]

I am writing this because of the wide spread views I have seen posted, which IMO are uninformed. the following are FACTS:


I think a more accurate statment would be that everything you offered were statistics open to interpretation. They may have a basis in factual information, but what they imply is not necessarily fact, so much as one possible interpretation of the numbers.

All that being said, I don't think you can analyze gun control strictly based on the numbers. You also can't base it solely on the 2nd amendment. There has to be a meeting in the middle that both sides seem unwilling to do.

[clemson357]

I think a more accurate statment would be that everything you offered were statistics open to interpretation. They may have a basis in factual information, but what they imply is not necessarily fact, so much as one possible interpretation of the numbers.

All that being said, I don't think you can analyze gun control strictly based on the numbers. You also can't base it solely on the 2nd amendment. There has to be a meeting in the middle that both sides seem unwilling to do.

It is a fact that after gun control efforts it England violent crime went up 29%, and in Australia after gun control efforts violent crime increased 32%. Those are FACTS. What you can imply from those facts isn't, but the statistics are facts.

[DMBSignGuy]

Do we not understand that gun control does not equal banning guns :confused: maybe we should straighten that out.

[System]

Gun control means hitting what you are aiming at.

Period....

[chr35919]

here's some gun control for ya:

Colombia melts 18,000 weapons
Public smelting of arsenal aimed at showing progress against militias
The Associated Press
updated 8:06 p.m. CT, Fri., Dec. 14, 2007

SOGAMOSO, Colombia - Former paramilitaries and victims of their violence banded together Friday to destroy a huge cache of weapons used during the right-wing militias' decade-long reign of terror.

In a somber ceremony attended by foreign dignitaries, dozens of demobilized fighters and victims of their crimes dumped 18,051 rifles, machine guns and rocket launchers — a cache weighing 60 tons — into a giant caldron.

The arsenal, which included 2.7 million bullets and was handed over as part of a 2003 peace pact, was smelted into material that will be used to create metal sculptures to be auctioned off to compensate victims.

Colombia's government celebrated the event as proof the country's skittish peace process with paramilitaries is advancing, despite mounting evidence some militias are rearming and former warlords are breaking pledges to confess their crimes.

"Today we've buried forever 18,051 weapons that sowed terror and blood on Colombian soil," Peace Commissioner Luis Carlos Restrepo told reporters at the state-owned foundry where the cache was destroyed.

Wealthy cattle ranchers financed the paramilitaries' rise in the late 1980s to protect their properties from marauding leftist rebels. The militias quickly evolved into some of the nation's bloodiest criminal organizations, amassing huge fortunes of stolen land and seizing control of much of the country's lucrative cocaine trade.

The peace accord with the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia, a paramilitary umbrella group known as the AUC, led warlords to demobilize 31,000 men and confess crimes in exchange for reduced prison terms and protection from extradition.

But human rights groups have widely criticized Colombia's peace process as overly lenient toward the right-wing militias. The U.S. classifies the AUC as a terrorist organization and has requested the extradition of several of its leaders on drug-trafficking charges.

Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22266094/

[buzz05232000]

"In 2005/06 there were 766 offenses initially recorded as homicide by the police in England and Wales (including the 52 victims of the 7 July 2005 London bombings),[17] a rate of 1.4 per 100,000 of population. Only 50 (6.6%) were committed with firearms, one being with an air weapon.[18] The homicide rate for London was 2.4 per 100,000 in the same year (1.7 when excluding the 7 July bombings).[19]

By comparison, 5.5 murders per 100,000 of population were reported by police in the United States in 2000, of which 70% involved the use of firearms (75% of which were illegally obtained).[20] New York City, with a population size similar to London (over 8 million residents), reported 6.9 murders per 100,000 people in 2004."

[clemson357]

"In 2005/06 there were 766 offenses initially recorded as homicide by the police in England and Wales (including the 52 victims of the 7 July 2005 London bombings),[17] a rate of 1.4 per 100,000 of population. Only 50 (6.6%) were committed with firearms, one being with an air weapon.[18] The homicide rate for London was 2.4 per 100,000 in the same year (1.7 when excluding the 7 July bombings).[19]

By comparison, 5.5 murders per 100,000 of population were reported by police in the United States in 2000, of which 70% involved the use of firearms (75% of which were illegally obtained).[20] New York City, with a population size similar to London (over 8 million residents), reported 6.9 murders per 100,000 people in 2004."

Your observations are exactly what I'd expect. More murders are committed with guns in places where people are allowed to own guns. I'd also suspect that more SUV's are involved in accidents in the US than in England, because there are far fewer SUV's in England.

The only argument for gun control is that crime will go down. And yet nothing can detract from the fact that violent crime, including gun crime, has gone up in England since their gun ban. The same goes for Australia.

[Lcsulla]

Your observations are exactly what I'd expect. More murders are committed with guns in places where people are allowed to own guns. I'd also suspect that more SUV's are involved in accidents in the US than in England, because there are far fewer SUV's in England.

The only argument for gun control is that crime will go down. And yet nothing can detract from the fact that violent crime, including gun crime, has gone up in England since their gun ban. The same goes for Australia.

The 75% illegal guns used for homicides is also a good stat to throw at those who want to repeal the second amendment.

[kbail1230]

OK, some of you might say this belongs in the assault weapon thread, but it doesn't, that thread is just way off topic.

I am writing this because of the wide spread views I have seen posted, which IMO are uninformed. the following are FACTS:

— Crime did not fall in England after handguns were banned in January 1997. Quite the contrary, crime rose sharply. Yet, serious violent crime rates from 1997 to 2002 averaged 29 percent higher than 1996; robbery was 24 percent higher; murders 27 percent higher. Before the law, armed robberies had fallen by 50 percent from 1993 to 1997, but as soon as handguns were banned, the robbery rate shot back up, almost back to their 1993 levels.

— Australia has also seen its violent crime rates soar after its Port Arthur gun control measures (search) in late 1996. Violent crime rates averaged 32 per cent higher in the six years after the law was passed (from 1997 to 2002) than they did the year before the law in 1996. The same comparisons for armed robbery rates showed increases of 45 percent.

— The 2000 International Crime Victimization Survey, the most recent survey done, shows that the violent crime rate in England and Australia was twice the rate in the US.

Everyone wants to take guns away from criminals. The problem is that if the law-abiding citizens obey the laws and the criminals don’t, the rules create sitting ducks who cannot defend themselves. -FOX NEWS

what some people don't know is that it is illegal for criminals to have guns. no one who has a felony conviction in the united states can legally own a gun. they can't own a pistol, a shotgun, a rifle, a muzzle loader, or an assault rifle. that means every law you put on top of that is only effecting people who are law abiding up to this piont in time.

I agree there is a serious problem in the U.S. But restricting people rights to own firearms is not the answer, as i think the facts above show. If you are seriously concerned, rally for more law enforcement funding, donate to education programs for inner city kids, lobby for stiffer penalties for criminals; don't go after the rights of people who have done nothing wrong

I will come back to this thread in 6 months, and post as to the crime increase since the assault weapon ban has been lifted. I can almost promise there will be no increase.



up to this point i have tried to be very factual and serious in my argument, but i have one more thing to say, which is strictly opinion:

If you can read this post, and you believe all the statistics in it are true, and you still push for gun control, YOU HAVE LOST YOUR MIND. I agree with the part in bold.

EDIT: I didn't realize your post already had so much bold. My agreement goes along with the restricting people's rights statement.

[symbian]

Ill keep my AR-15 Assault rifle thanks!

[bradshaw06]

i really hope PA doesnt pass the gun control law its trying to

[Aubrie]

I have no problem with a background check, it ensures criminals don't get guns.


The criminals will get them anyway.

[chr35919]

The criminals will get them anyway.you're right. maybe we should just stop making them:eek:hump

[clemson357]

The criminals will get them anyway.


True. I guess what I was really getting at was that background checks don't hurt anything so long as they are nearly instantaneous.

[kerplunk!]

i really hope PA doesnt pass the gun control law its trying to?

http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSN1962838820071219?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews

[ShotgunDMB]

I want a gun. They're cool.

[bradshaw06]

?

http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSN1962838820071219?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews

:confused

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/cityregion/s_542148.html

[kerplunk!]

you're right. maybe we should just stop making them:eek:humpWhile I don't necessarily agree with this I will say that the excuse of "well, the criminals will just get the guns anyway so we shouldn't make it as damn hard as possible for potential criminals (someone who hasn't used a gun to commit a crime!) to get them" is ridiculous.

The idealistic idea behind "gun control" is to stave off crime. One of the best ways to do that is, oh I dunno, LIMIT the availability of guns. But, gee wiz, Americans MUST have their arms! It's in the constitution!

You wonder why America has so much gun violence? But I guess that is every other other Americans fault but "yours", right? It's not as if the very having of a gun (which, let's be honest here folks and ask ourselves who among America really needs a gun?) heightens the probability of more gun violence...

It just baffles me how some Americans cannot see the correlation. I suppose they just don't care...unless something bad happens to them or one of their loved ones, that is. And then it's: blame the parents, blame the criminal, blame the gun manufactures...blame everyone except myself for being a party to this mess by even owning a gun in the first place.

Guns are tools; weapons. They hurt and kill and really nothing more. This is what they were designed for, like the A-bomb. And who in America deserves to have their own personal atomic weapon?

Like I hinted at earlier, I'm all for those who truly need a gun to have one. But owning a gun just because some 100+ year old piece of paper tells you it's your "right" to is not good enough. I can understand how having a gun would make some folks feel more secure, and maybe they all just keep them locked away, but still, it means the guns are out there. The question remains: do they need to be?

[ShotgunDMB]

Canadians are such pussies......

Guns aren't used just to kill. You can use them for target practice, shooting ranges..etc. Grow a pair and shoot one on a free day...Also, hunters use guns..ya know, to kill animals..not people. Maybe we should ban knives, hammers, and axes too..since they're sometimes used to kill people/things.

[bradshaw06]

^ or chairs, or cars... more people die in car accidents and household accidents then do by guns

[bradshaw06]

putting limits on guns only affects the law abiding citizen, criminals are still going to get them illegal, no matter how many there are. thats what they do commit illegal acts

[SmoothG]

Canadians are such pussies......


Intelligent and informed comment.

[kerplunk!]

People, this is not a "slippery slope" argument.

Nice distraction from the main issues at hand though.

And no, Canadians are not "pussies". But if by pussy you mean we don't murder each other at a yearly exponential rate, sure, I guess we are.

In Canada, we make it extremely hard for someone to purchase a handgun. In fact, I believe the majority of gun violence in my country has been committed by people with legally purchased guns. So, the limiting factor seems to work for us, why not America?

[ShotgunDMB]

did it offend you? if so..man up bro. man up. this is what's wrong with this country, and others. theres no reasoning and logical thinking. criminals don't give a flying fuck about what restrictions you put on guns..they're criminals!!! they generally dont care about rules!! shocking, i know.

[SmoothG]

did it offend you? if so..man up bro. man up.

Haha. No, I am not offended. I just thought it was funny. Man up, bro! That's quality stuff.

[ShotgunDMB]

Haha. No, I am not offended. I just thought it was funny. Man up, bro! That's quality stuff.

:thumbsup Actually I think the word "bro" should be banned from being used in the United States. Awful word. Canada, and San Fran though..different story.

[kerplunk!]

putting limits on guns only affects the law abiding citizen, criminals are still going to get them illegal, no matter how many there are. thats what they do commit illegal acts

But where would they get all these guns if not nearly as many were produced by America for America (and the rest of the world)?

Imports? Couldn't America make it very hard for other countries to send guns?

Look, I'm not saying there's a cure-all for gun violence - or violence in general (because that is up to the individual usually), but I am saying there has to be a way to at least slow it down. Limiting the availability of guns seems like a good start.

And what law abiding citizen is going to freak out if there are less guns in shops or shows or banks or schools?

[ShotgunDMB]

Guns are cool. Guns are fun. If you're a dude, you shouldnt be against guns...

[Lcsulla]

How come when the argument is amnesty for illegals the left swears to me that we need to get them 'out of the shadows' so we know where they are and can keep tabs on them.

Conversely, when it comes to gun control; apparently the same people want to push them 'into the shadows' so we don't know where they are and cannot keep tabs on them?

[jcc522]

Guns are tools; weapons. They hurt and kill and really nothing more. This is what they were designed for, like the A-bomb. And who in America deserves to have their own personal atomic weapon?



actually i have a gun that i only shoot skeet with

[kerplunk!]

actually i have a gun that i only shoot skeet withI bet you're in the minority.

[Lcsulla]

I bet you're in the minority.

You're probably right. Target shooting is far more popular than skeet.

[ShotgunDMB]

Don't you know everybody buys a gun just so they may, just possibly have an intruder come in and steal their belongings/rob them..just so they may have the chance to KILL someone!

[jcc522]

You're probably right. Target shooting is far more popular than skeet.


but skeet is more fun :hug

[ShotgunDMB]

Let's go buy some guns. Kerplunk! And Smooth G especially.

[mdmarvich]

Is gun control really even an issue??? This is the most I've heard about it since the 90's.

[dontburnthe_pig]

Great thread.

I saw a poster in my sociology class showing the amount of gun related deaths in various countries compared to the USA's. It was a huge desparity, however, it was from the mid 90s.

Obviously, the issue is moral responsibility, I think. But in this country, that is something that is far and away from important.

With every law in place in favor of law abiding citizens, it should be very hard for convicted criminals to own a gun. But, just like always, there is going to someone who needs to make money and can do it by selling guns illegally.

[clemson357]

Is gun control really even an issue??? This is the most I've heard about it since the 90's.

Unfortunately it is always an issue, and it doesn't get much media attention. Neither Hillary or Obama have ever seen a gun control law they didn't like. It was either this year or last year that Hillary Clinton voted against a bill that essentially said that the government couldn't confiscate your gun without cause during a natural disaster. Imagine that, a Presidential candidate who believes the government should be able to permanently confinscate your personal property without a warrant, probable cause, or even a reason.

[Lee3691]

Imagine that, a Presidential candidate who believes the government should be able to permanently confinscate your personal property without a warrant, probable cause, or even a reason.
Or wiretap your phone or read your email. There are many issues that have to do with privacy, and neither political party has a bounty on being better then the other.

[cbarlow]

I agree with those who are saying that gun control laws are only hurting the law abiding citizens. Like someone previously stated, I own a gun for the safety of my household and only for that reason. For a little history background, correct me if I'm wrong please, but the 2nd Amendment was enacted for the reason that our founding fathers wanted the American public to be able to defend themselves incase of invasion and incase the government ever became to controlling ever again (which is why we broke away from England in the first place). So I think any gun control law kind of contradicts that original idea. Plus even if gun control laws are put in place and the whole process slows down, doesn't mean that guns still won't fall into criminals hands (I know someone mentioned this, but I thought it was a good point). Hell heroine and coke are illegal but people still manage to get their hands on that.

On a side note, might not be as relevant to this thread, but does anyone know where to find statistics of crime for states that allow you to carry a concealed gun compared to those that don't? (I'm not sure if there is states that do, but I have a feeling Texas and Florida do...??)

[clemson357]

Or wiretap your phone or read your email. There are many issues that have to do with privacy, and neither political party has a bounty on being better then the other.

I agree.

[championmullo]

Canadians are such pussies......

Guns aren't used just to kill. You can use them for target practice, shooting ranges..etc. Grow a pair and shoot one on a free day...Also, hunters use guns..ya know, to kill animals..not people. Maybe we should ban knives, hammers, and axes too..since they're sometimes used to kill people/things.

That's simply not true. Guns only exist to kill; animals or people. Yes, over time target shooting and similar things have evolved as sports; but the fact is guns exist as weapons, they are made to kill and destory.

Hammers are made to hammer nails; knives are made to slice things; the potential they have to cause harm is aside from their real purpose. A gun's potential to cause harm is it's real purpose.

[championmullo]

It is a fact that after gun control efforts it England violent crime went up 29%, and in Australia after gun control efforts violent crime increased 32%. Those are FACTS. What you can imply from those facts isn't, but the statistics are facts.

I know this post is old...but i'm going to reply anyway...

You are right when you say that what you can imply from these facts are not facts. The reality is, a rise in violent crime could well be to do with many other factors, not necessarily gun control.

As i've pointed out to you in previous threads, the reality in Australia is that most people didn't have guns in the first place; the strict gun laws that were introduced had little to no impact on the large majority of the population. Therefore, linking the violent crime statistic to the gun laws is a stretch at best, at worst it's misleading.

Yes, the hardened criminals can still get guns, but that's why they're hardened criminals, because they will do whatever it takes to commit crimes. What our gun laws stop are the disturbed teenagers who want to shoot up their school, the angry wife who finds her husband cheating, the desperate drug addict.

I live in Australia. I know what it's like here. My experience, and the experience of every single Australian i know, some of whom have been the victims of violent crime, is that the gun laws here are good and should stay.

You can quote statistics as you please, but i live in a country with strict gun control laws, and i am safe.

EDIT: the last thing i'll add is that i firmly believe that gun ownership is far too inculturated into the fabric of American life, and therefore tightening gun laws would be practically impossible. But, i think that's the only real reason against gun control, and it's purely a practical one.

[clemson357]

I know this post is old...but i'm going to reply anyway...

You are right when you say that what you can imply from these facts are not facts. The reality is, a rise in violent crime could well be to do with many other factors, not necessarily gun control.

As i've pointed out to you in previous threads, the reality in Australia is that most people didn't have guns in the first place; the strict gun laws that were introduced had little to no impact on the large majority of the population. Therefore, linking the violent crime statistic to the gun laws is a stretch at best, at worst it's misleading.

Yes, the hardened criminals can still get guns, but that's why they're hardened criminals, because they will do whatever it takes to commit crimes. What our gun laws stop are the disturbed teenagers who want to shoot up their school, the angry wife who finds her husband cheating, the desperate drug addict.

I live in Australia. I know what it's like here. My experience, and the experience of every single Australian i know, some of whom have been the victims of violent crime, is that the gun laws here are good and should stay.

You can quote statistics as you please, but i live in a country with strict gun control laws, and i am safe.

EDIT: the last thing i'll add is that i firmly believe that gun ownership is far too inculturated into the fabric of American life, and therefore tightening gun laws would be practically impossible. But, i think that's the only real reason against gun control, and it's purely a practical one.

Most people in America don't own guns either. I believe the stat is 45% of American homes have guns in them. And yet even though most of us don't own guns, you seem to think it is ingrained in American culture.

I think you have quoted me the stat before, or someone has, and the actual figure for Australians owning guns before the ban was something around 40%, similar to what it is today in the US.

And contrary to your assertion, you are not safe. You are less safe than you were before the ban, and you are also less safe that U.S. citizens, according to a study on crime in industrialized nations conducted by the UN.

[buzz05232000]

45%? Really? I didn't even know it was that high. Very depressing.

[jcc522]

I've got three guns in my house

[championmullo]

Most people in America don't own guns either. I believe the stat is 45% of American homes have guns in them. And yet even though most of us don't own guns, you seem to think it is ingrained in American culture.

I think you have quoted me the stat before, or someone has, and the actual figure for Australians owning guns before the ban was something around 40%, similar to what it is today in the US.

And contrary to your assertion, you are not safe. You are less safe than you were before the ban, and you are also less safe that U.S. citizens, according to a study on crime in industrialized nations conducted by the UN.

When i say the gun culture is so ingrained in the American culture, i am not so much referring to levels or ownership or use but on the very fact that this conversation is even happening. In Australia, it's a non issue, this kind of debate doesn't happen.

If we were as terribly unsafe as you seem to think we are, you'd think we would be debating it. Or we're idiots.

You say that we are unsafe, but you don't live here. As i said before, we don't have school shootings here, we don't have 'crimes of passion'; because those people who may commit those crimes can't get guns.

Either we Australians are deluding ourselves, and some big bad criminal is going to slaughter us in our sleep. Or statistics don't tell you the whole story, and we're doing just fine.

[mdmarvich]

Unfortunately it is always an issue, and it doesn't get much media attention. Neither Hillary or Obama have ever seen a gun control law they didn't like. It was either this year or last year that Hillary Clinton voted against a bill that essentially said that the government couldn't confiscate your gun without cause during a natural disaster. Imagine that, a Presidential candidate who believes the government should be able to permanently confinscate your personal property without a warrant, probable cause, or even a reason.

no, still not really an issue. law abiding citizens will always be legally entitled to own a gun. period.


The (D) will take away all your guns!!!! Run for the hills!!!!!!! AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!

[chr35919]

Most people in America don't own guns either. I believe the stat is 45% of American homes have guns in them. And yet even though most of us don't own guns, you seem to think it is ingrained in American culture.

I think you have quoted me the stat before, or someone has, and the actual figure for Australians owning guns before the ban was something around 40%, similar to what it is today in the US.

And contrary to your assertion, you are not safe. You are less safe than you were before the ban, and you are also less safe that U.S. citizens, according to a study on crime in industrialized nations conducted by the UN.no way. really???

[clemson357]

Either we Australians are deluding ourselves, and some big bad criminal is going to slaughter us in our sleep. Or statistics don't tell you the whole story, and we're doing just fine.

Statistics apparently don't tell the whole story. What I find particularly disturbing is the fact that you are factually and undeniably less safe, and yet you keep dodging the issue.

Maybe you don't have multiple victim shootings. What you have is more individual killings, whether by gun, knife, or hand. More people are dead, more people are raped, robbed, and endangered. And you think you have achieved something. I am very happy you "feel" safe.

[chr35919]

you know, with more guns the world would be a better place.

[ShotgunDMB]

sorry, if some piece of shit tries to rob me/stab me i deserve the right to inflict justice.:thumbsup i like being alive..i'd like to keep it that way.

[chr35919]

sorry, if some piece of shit tries to rob me/stab me i deserve the right to inflict justice.:thumbsup i like being alive..i'd like to keep it that way.
do many people really carry concealed weapons to prevent robbery?:lol

[ShotgunDMB]

shit, we should. if some scumb bag wants to try to jack me while im in my car or something, i should be able to reach into the little glove department and wahla! justice.

[FunkyTeaParty]

Would you enjoy killing someone?

[ShotgunDMB]

if it meant i get the live another day? you're damnnnnnnn right i would. i wouldnt be killing mother theresa here.

[FunkyTeaParty]

But if this actually happened and you shot a guy carjacking you, would you be thrilled?

[bubba40]

To answer the original topic, I completely support the second ammendment.

[ShotgunDMB]

But if this actually happened and you shot a guy carjacking you, would you be thrilled?

i sure wouldnt. it would be eery and weird. but hey, i like living...im not ready to go yet, so...you gotta do what you gotta do.

[mdmarvich]

if it meant i get the live another day? you're damnnnnnnn right i would. i wouldnt be killing mother theresa here.

What if mother theresa was trying to steal your car?

[buzz05232000]

What if mother theresa was trying to steal your car?
In order to not look like a "sensitive pussy", he would have to get out of the car, put a gun to her head and rape her and then kill her.

[mdmarvich]

In order to not look like a "sensitive pussy", he would have to get out of the car, put a gun to her head and rape her and then kill her.

Yeah, you're probably right....

[clemson357]

What if mother theresa was trying to steal your car?

I would just give it to her. I heard she died a few years back, and I generally don't mess with people who can rise from the dead.

[mdmarvich]

I would just give it to her. I heard she died a few years back, and I generally don't mess with people who can rise from the dead.


Good point. Unless you have one of those Ghostbuster vacuum packs, you'd be screwed.

[chr35919]

Good point. Unless you have one of those Ghostbuster vacuum packs, you'd be screwed.
:lol

[clemson357]

Good point. Unless you have one of those Ghostbuster vacuum packs, you'd be screwed.

I have a dustbuster.

[championmullo]

Statistics apparently don't tell the whole story. What I find particularly disturbing is the fact that you are factually and undeniably less safe, and yet you keep dodging the issue.

Maybe you don't have multiple victim shootings. What you have is more individual killings, whether by gun, knife, or hand. More people are dead, more people are raped, robbed, and endangered. And you think you have achieved something. I am very happy you "feel" safe.

What i find disturbing is that you are ignoring my reality of having lived in the place you are talking about for 22 years; knowing hundreds, if not thousands of people in this place, many of whom have lived here for longer than i, who agree with what i am saying.

As an aside, last year an acquaintance of mine was murdered, stabbed to death by some 16 year old kid. So i know that my country is not a utopia. However, you give the impression that Australia is a seething criminally infested hell hole; and if we all had guns, we'd be better off; this is patently untrue. You say Australia is less safe than the USA, yet the USA's murder rate is 5.9 per 100 000 people, higher than Australia's 1.28, but never mind that.

What i think our difference here is not really about statistics or what is safe or what is not; but our world views.

It seems to me, from the observations i've made in threads around this forum, that your world view seems to revolve around a general distrust of other people's actions, motivations and their potential to cause you and your loved ones harm. People are out there to get you, and you should have every freedom to stop them.

I, on the other hand, generally believe that, though there are people who do harm to other people out there, for the most part people will leave me be, and i will leave them be. There are not murderers and rapists around every corner and as long as laws continue to uphold my consistent experience of walking the streets safely, then i have no reason to change them. In the end, if someone really wants to kill me and steal my shoes, no law will stop them.

In other words, you seem to think people are bad, i tend to think they're pretty good most of the time.

I could be completely misguided in my observations and I'm not saying your view is wrong, it may well be right and i'm painfully, possibly fatefully naive. But these worldviews will mean any common ground is going to be difficult.

[Lcsulla]

I have a dustbuster.

better off with a bushmaster...

[clemson357]

What i find disturbing is that you are ignoring my reality of having lived in the place you are talking about for 22 years; knowing hundreds, if not thousands of people in this place, many of whom have lived here for longer than i, who agree with what i am saying.

As an aside, last year an acquaintance of mine was murdered, stabbed to death by some 16 year old kid. So i know that my country is not a utopia. However, you give the impression that Australia is a seething criminally infested hell hole; and if we all had guns, we'd be better off; this is patently untrue. You say Australia is less safe than the USA, yet the USA's murder rate is 5.9 per 100 000 people, higher than Australia's 1.28, but never mind that.

What i think our difference here is not really about statistics or what is safe or what is not; but our world views.

It seems to me, from the observations i've made in threads around this forum, that your world view seems to revolve around a general distrust of other people's actions, motivations and their potential to cause you and your loved ones harm. People are out there to get you, and you should have every freedom to stop them.

I, on the other hand, generally believe that, though there are people who do harm to other people out there, for the most part people will leave me be, and i will leave them be. There are not murderers and rapists around every corner and as long as laws continue to uphold my consistent experience of walking the streets safely, then i have no reason to change them. In the end, if someone really wants to kill me and steal my shoes, no law will stop them.

In other words, you seem to think people are bad, i tend to think they're pretty good most of the time.

I could be completely misguided in my observations and I'm not saying your view is wrong, it may well be right and i'm painfully, possibly fatefully naive. But these worldviews will mean any common ground is going to be difficult.

You keep talking about your feelings and perspective. Thats all good and well. I meant it when I said I am glad you "feel" safe. But the fact is that your government passed a law restricting the liberties of its citizens, promising you things would be safer, and now they are less safe. Its undeniable.

Australia's laws really don't bother me that much. I never plan on living there. I use it as an analogy for what would happen here. You are also correct in saying that the murder rate is higher here. America is has a very materialistic, violent, instant-gratification-based culture. But if Australia is any lesson, violence will only get worse when the law-abiding segment of the population is disarmed.

[clemson357]

better off with a bushmaster...

I always thought bushmaster sounded like some sort of women's sexual toy.

[Crazy#41]

1. Banning guns works, which is why New York, DC, and Chicago cops need guns.

2. Washington DC's low murder rate of 69 per 100,000 is due to strict gun control, and Indianapolis' high murder rate of 9 per 100,000 is due to the lack of gun control.

3. Statistics showing high murder rates justify gun control but statistics showing increasing murder rates after gun control are "just statistics."

4. The Brady Bill and the Assault Weapons Ban, both of which went into effect in 1994, are responsible for the decrease in violent crime rates, which have been declining since 1991.

5. We must get rid of guns because a deranged lunatic may go on a shooting spree at any time and anyone who would own a gun out of fear of such a lunatic is paranoid.

6. The more helpless you are, the safer you are from criminals.

7. An intruder will be incapacitated by tear gas or oven spray, but if shot with a .357 Magnum will get angry and kill you.

8. A woman raped and strangled is morally superior to a woman with a smoking gun and a dead rapist at her feet.

9. When confronted by violent criminals, you should "put up no defense — give them what they want, or run" (Handgun Control Inc. Chairman Pete Shields, Guns Don't Die - People Do, 1981, p. 125).

10. The New England Journal of Medicine is filled with expert advice about guns; just like Guns and Ammo has some excellent articles on heart surgery.

11. One should consult an automotive engineer for safer seatbelts, a civil engineer for a better bridge, a surgeon for spinal paralysis, a computer programmer for Y2K problems, and Sarah Brady for firearms expertise.

12. The 2nd Amendment, ratified in 1787, refers to the National Guard, which was created 130 years later by an act of Congress in 1917.

13. The National Guard, funded by the federal government, occupying property leased to the federal government, using weapons owned by the federal government, punishing trespassers under federal law, is a "state militia".

14. These phrases,"right of the people peaceably to assemble," "right of the people to be secure in their homes," "enumeration's herein of certain rights shall not be construed to disparage others retained by the people," and "The powers not delegated herein are reserved to the states respectively, and to the people," all refer to individuals, but "the right of the people to keep and bear arms" refers to the state.

15. We don't need guns against an oppressive government, because the Constitution has internal safeguards, but we should ban and seize all guns, thereby violating the 2nd, 4th, and 5th amendments to that Constitution.

16. Rifles and handguns aren't necessary to national defense, which is why police departments, federal enforcement agencies, the armed forces, and the US Coast guard have millions of them.

17. Private citizens shouldn't have handguns, because they serve no military purpose, and private citizens shouldn't have "assault rifles," because they are military weapons.

18. The ready availability of guns today, with waiting periods, background checks, fingerprinting, government forms, et cetera, is responsible for recent school shootings, compared to the lack of school shootings in the 40's, 50's and 60's, which resulted from the availability of guns at hardware stores, surplus stores, gas stations, variety stores, mail order, et cetera.

19. The NRA's attempt to run a "don't touch" campaign about kids handling guns is propaganda, and the anti-gun lobby's attempt to run a "don't touch" campaign is responsible social activity.

20. Guns are so complex that special training is necessary to use them properly, and so simple to use that they make murder easy.

21. A handgun, with up to 4 controls, is far too complex for the typical adult to learn to use, as opposed to an automobile that only has 20.

22. Women are just as intelligent and capable as men but a woman with a gun is "an accident waiting to happen" and gun makers' advertisements aimed at women are "preying on their fears."

23. Ordinary people in the presence of guns turn into slaughtering butchers but revert to normal when the weapon is removed.

24. Guns cause violence, which is why there are so many mass killings at gun shows.

25. A majority of the population supports gun control, just like a majority of the population supported owning slaves.

26. A self-loading small arm can legitimately be considered to be a "weapon of mass destruction" or an "assault weapon."

27. Most people can't be trusted, so we should have laws against guns, which most people will abide by because they can be trusted.

28. The right of online pornographers to exist cannot be questioned because it is constitutionally protected by the Bill of Rights, but the use of handguns for self defense is not really protected by the Bill of Rights.

29. Free speech entitles one to own newspapers, transmitters, computers, and typewriters, but self-defense only justifies bare hands.

30. The ACLU is good because it uncompromisingly defends certain parts of the Constitution, and the NRA is bad, because it uncompromisingly defends other parts of the Constitution.

31. Charlton Heston, as former president of the NRA, is a shill who should be ignored, but Michael Douglas, as a representative of Handgun Control, Inc., is an ambassador for peace who is entitled to an audience at the UN arms control summit.

32. Police operate with backup within groups, which is why they need larger capacity pistol magazines than do "civilians" who must face criminals alone and therefore need less ammunition.

33. We should ban "Saturday Night Specials" and other inexpensive guns because it's not fair that poor people have access to guns too.

34. Police officers, who qualify with their duty weapons once or twice a year, have some special Jedi-like mastery over handguns that private citizens can never hope to obtain.

35. Private citizens don't need a gun for self-protection because the police are there to protect them even though the Supreme Court says the police are not responsible for their protection.

36. Citizens don't need to carry a gun for personal protection but police chiefs, who are desk-bound administrators that work in a building full of cops, DO need a gun.

37. "Assault weapons" have no purpose other than to kill large numbers of people. The police need assault weapons. You do not.

38. When Microsoft pressures its distributors to give Microsoft preferential promotion, that's bad; but when the Federal government pressures cities to buy guns only from Smith & Wesson, that's good.

39. Trigger locks do not interfere with the ability to use a gun for defensive purposes, which is why you see police officers with one on their duty weapon.

40. Handgun Control, Inc., says they want to "keep guns out of the wrong hands". Guess what? *You've got the wrong hands.*

[codyk09]

did u type all that urself, u need a hobby, anyways gun control is good in some areas not in others in my area people hunt, in inner stl people cant hunt

[TwoStep2888]

HAY GUYZ LOOK WOT I RED HER ILL COPY AND PAST IT LOL

Yeah, I got that chain email, too.

did u type all that urself, u need a hobby, anyways gun control is good in some areas not in others in my area people hunt, in inner stl people cant hunt

Yeah, but people in urban areas can travel to areas where people hunt. I'm anti-gun control. I think everyone with a criminal record should be allowed to own a gun, but I think there should be extensive background checks first.

[cbarlow]

^^^so many statements in that huge mess that i disagree with

[ShotgunDMB]

Gun control doesn't work. I wish people would stop pretending it does. Criminals will get guns regardless..yada, yada. It's getting kind of old.

[Crazy#41]

Yeah, I got that chain email, too.


Some members of the board didn't get it though..

Do you think I posted it with the assumption people would believe I took 40 of my own opinions and posted them in numerical order?

[Crazy#41]

u need a hobby

I recently started to collect coins..

You guys down in the States need more different design quarters.
I been collecting for.. 2 months, roughly, and have 91 different Canadian quarters.

[ShotgunDMB]

Anyway, if cities really want to stop gun related violence, they have to attack the problem through getting people jobs, and a way out of the inner cities that breed crime. Poverty breeds crime. There's always the isolated incident of some nutball getting a gun and blowing people away, but those make up a small fraction of gun violence. I'm fine with background checks, and even a mental health check..but anything beyond that is excessive.

[VanHorneDog]

I recently started to collect coins..

You guys down in the States need more different design quarters.
I been collecting for.. 2 months, roughly, and have 91 different Canadian quarters.

i heard canadians collect guns too. how many do you have?

[cbarlow]

Gun control doesn't work. I wish people would stop pretending it does. Criminals will get guns regardless..yada, yada. It's getting kind of old.

Something that I actually agree with you on :thumbsup

[colegibson]

I recently started to collect coins..

You guys down in the States need more different design quarters.
I been collecting for.. 2 months, roughly, and have 91 different Canadian quarters.



You haven't heard of the State Quarters?

[Crazy#41]

i heard canadians collect guns too. how many do you have?


Barley anyone I know owns a gun. There parents do, but only rifles, for hunting..

You guys will laugh but I've never fired a gun. Only a BB/Pellet gun...

Yes I know, I know.. I haven't lived, since I've never fired a gun.

anywayss.. I was just onthe PC cause I'm waiting for my turn to play rockband.. It's funner with a buzz on ;)

peace

[Crazy#41]

You haven't heard of the State Quarters?

I figured there would be such thing, because we have provincial quarters...
Like 30 per province. haha.

I'll look into it, thanks.

[colegibson]

I figured there would be such thing, because we have provincial quarters...
Like 30 per province. haha.

I'll look into it, thanks.


We have one quarter for each 50 state with a design based on the state. They release 5 a year and it started in 1999. Each state is released in order according to when it joined the Union. I've been collecting them since the start.

[trpnbillie11]

You control your gun, I'll control mine.

Gun control.

[TwoStep2888]

Yeah, but people in urban areas can travel to areas where people hunt. I'm anti-gun control. I think everyone with a criminal record should be allowed to own a gun, but I think there should be extensive background checks first.

Fuck. Without. I meant without.

[TwoStep2888]

Some members of the board didn't get it though..

Do you think I posted it with the assumption people would believe I took 40 of my own opinions and posted them in numerical order?

No, but I do think you very rarely post an original thought, instead posting endless youtube videos and chain letters. It's kind of annoying.

[TwoStep2888]

Gun control doesn't work. I wish people would stop pretending it does. Criminals will get guns regardless..yada, yada. It's getting kind of old.

:thumbsup

[nitz]

Keep the right to own guns. Decriminalize marijauna. Take the resources and jail cells made available and use for stiffer sentences for violent criminals. Less crime. Less criminals on the streets. More freedom. More safety.

[Aubrie]

Gun control doesn't work. I wish people would stop pretending it does. Criminals will get guns regardless..yada, yada. It's getting kind of old.

Thank you! :D

[cbarlow]

Keep the right to own guns. Decriminalize marijauna. Take the resources and jail cells made available and use for stiffer sentences for violent criminals. Less crime. Less criminals on the streets. More freedom. More safety.

:thumbsup

[Crazy#41]

No, but I do think you very rarely post an original thought, instead posting endless youtube videos and chain letters. It's kind of annoying.

I do post my share of youtube links, yaddayadda, but I post my opinion..
A LOT and everyone disagrees with me here...

Everything in the DMBc part of the board is original. Post in here is my own, just a lot in 24um was links and shit and I don't post there anymore

[jimibadfish]

Gun control doesn't work. I wish people would stop pretending it does. Criminals will get guns regardless..yada, yada. It's getting kind of old.

:thumbsup

[jimibadfish]

Fuck. Without. I meant without.

Don't sweat it; it was apparent

[jimibadfish]

A vast majority of violent crimes involving guns are commited by people who illegally acquired them.

Gun laws mainly effect law-abiding citizens. In a negative way.

[jcc522]

i like guns

[nitz]

I do post my share of youtube links, yaddayadda, but I post my opinion..
A LOT and everyone disagrees with me here...

Everything in the DMBc part of the board is original. Post in here is my own, just a lot in 24um was links and shit and I don't post there anymore

I find youtube clips to the point, visually stimulating, and often fun.:hug