Gun Law

[Brianwp]

I find this distressing idea credible but since you say "firm statistical fact" I am a little curious to know the statistics and where they come from?

I'd also like to know about the "Overall experience demonstrates that far from giving protection it increases the risk." statement.

 

[Brianwp]

A gun is tool? No offense mate, but tell me one practical use for a Handgun.....
Practical meaning something you can use it for in everyday life. Swinging a Hammer, driving a Car ect. Keeping one stashed under your pillow so someone with the same thing doesn't get you first isn't that practical. Guns are good for shooting things. That's all.

Does someone get hurt every time a Car is used? Someone doesn't get hurt every time a Gun is used but I think you get my point.
Guns will always be around in the US because they make a lot of money.

Yes, a gun is a tool. The practical use is shooting someone. It's not a happy go lucky use, not a very pretty use, but it's a very practical use when people's lives are in danger. It may not be something we use in everyday life..I hope I never have to use one. But if that day comes, it will be very useful.

 

[Brianwp]

Cars, hammers and baseball bats all have other, necessary functions, guns do not.

I remember an incident used as an argument against gun ownership.

A guy goes to bed the night before his birthday, his teenage daughter (16 - 17 year old, i think) is out, staying at a friends house, dad awakes and hears a noise downstairs, he knows it must be an intruder as his wife is beside him in bed and his daughter is out, he grabs his gun, creeps to the top of the stairs and on seeing a movement at the bottom blasts away, on turning on the light he sees his daughter lying dead in the hall, she had decided to come home in the early hours so that she could surprise her dad.

Now every time he celebrates his birthday he must also mourn his daughter.

And how many "little Timmys" find dads gun in the bedside drawer and decide to play cops and robbers with their little friend, or their little sister, and then spread their brains across the bedroom wall?

Guns do have other uses...besides hunting, (I'm not going there with you, Sam:mrgreen, there's target shooting, trap, skeet, and such. That's just as much a necessary function as a baseball bat is to play baseball with.

The tragedies you mentioned are horrible, that's why gun training and safety courses are so important. Lots of little Timmies stick forks into electrical outlets, or drown in swimming pools, or eat deadly chemicals from under the kitchen sink cabinet too. So responsible parents take precautions, and so do responsible gun owners. Any guy who leaves a loaded handgun lying around within reach of a child is an idiot. That's what gun safes are for.

I have three sons, and I have taught them all how to be responsible with a firearm. Never point a gun at anyone, whether you know it's empty or not. Always be sure of your target before you shoot. Don't target shoot without a hill or barrier behind your target. Don't shoot around roads. Don't climb a tree with a loaded gun. Don't lean a loaded firearm against a tree. If anyone hands you a weapon the first thing to do is check to see if the chamber is empty. You get the idea.

I understand your point, though. You eschew violence..so do I. Humans are a violent bunch, and I hate that fact. I read of atrocities, (like soldiers in Croatia that would stop by a woman nursing a baby and cut the baby in half and hand it back to her) that occur in different countries, and it scares me. It's not just the story that scares me, but to think that people are capable of such evil...that scares me. But it is a fact, and I would rather be prepared to deal with it as opposed to losing my own life, or seeing my family harmed.

 

[marquis]

Guns do have other uses...besides hunting, (I'm not going there with you, Sam:mrgreen, there's target shooting, trap, skeet, and such. That's just as much a necessary function as a baseball bat is to play baseball with.

The tragedies you mentioned are horrible, that's why gun training and safety courses are so important. Lots of little Timmies stick forks into electrical outlets, or drown in swimming pools, or eat deadly chemicals from under the kitchen sink cabinet too. So responsible parents take precautions, and so do responsible gun owners. Any guy who leaves a loaded handgun lying around within reach of a child is an idiot. That's what gun safes are for.

I have three sons, and I have taught them all how to be responsible with a firearm. Never point a gun at anyone, whether you know it's empty or not. Always be sure of your target before you shoot. Don't target shoot without a hill or barrier behind your target. Don't shoot around roads. Don't climb a tree with a loaded gun. Don't lean a loaded firearm against a tree. If anyone hands you a weapon the first thing to do is check to see if the chamber is empty. You get the idea.

I understand your point, though. You eschew violence..so do I. Humans are a violent bunch, and I hate that fact. I read of atrocities, (like soldiers in Croatia that would stop by a woman nursing a baby and cut the baby in half and hand it back to her) that occur in different countries, and it scares me. It's not just the story that scares me, but to think that people are capable of such evil...that scares me. But it is a fact, and I would rather be prepared to deal with it as opposed to losing my own life, or seeing my family harmed.

What you say is perfectly true-as far as it goes. The cold, stark fact is that statistically you are putting yourself and family at greater risk-much greater risk-if you arm yourself.Of course you can't transfer statistics from the general to the specific so there will inevitably be cases (trotted out by the gun lobby) where being armed has saved somebody and not being armed has resulted in loss of life.But don't let the tail wag the dog, there are far more cases pointing the other way.Like people who don't like wearing a seatbelt in a car because they feel safer being thrown clear in an accident.A few times it does save a passenger but it isn't a course of action I would advise.However much safer you might FEEL is irrelevant (I could launch into a spiel of risk analysis involving "perceived" risk as opposed to "actual" risk but I'll save you that)

The other cause for concern is the frame of mind of gun owners.I haven't a gun, see no need for one and don't want one. I don't know anybody who has one apart from the odd farmer with a shotgun.I've fired a good many rounds at the Queen's expense and know what they can do.It's my belief they have no place in a civilised society. It's a Catch 22 situation-those who can be trusted with them don't want one and don't have one.

 

[Snapper314]

Yet horrendous killing sprees and individual murders have occurred here and the guns were legally held by cowardly scum who would have been toothless worms had they not had access to these weapons. At least with a knife or a blunt instrument such as a baseball bat, you are much less powerful, your victim is not quite as helpless.

Oh yeah...

Those 9/11 hijackers didn't do much damage with their box cuters...


And the Oklahoma bomber, Timothy McVeigh didn't do much harm with a truck full of fertilizer.

:breathefi

When will Sheople like you realize, it isn't the TOOL that some whacko uses that is the problem?!? It is their desire to harm people for whatever disturbed reason that needs to be addressed and stopped!

 

[Brianwp]

Well, scounds..he has a point, innit?

Just watch Braveheart...how does that look to you? Hacking people to death, getting axed, or skull fucked by a dagger in the eye? From the victim's point of view...no thanks, Jack, I'd rather get shot.

As a matter of fact, I'd rather get shot, ala' Gary Gilmore, than get lethal injection! I think being shot with a firearm is about the most humane way to die, as far as death by violence goes. I'm no Jack Kevorkian, but I think statistics bear this out...

"A common suicide method is to use a firearm. Generally, the bullet will be aimed at point-blank range, often at the head or less commonly into the mouth or pointed at the chest. In the United States, firearms remain the most common method of suicide, accounting for 53.7% of all suicides committed during 2003.[14]" (Wikipedia)

I know that wasn't exactly your point, but I still believe that people are still going to commit violence regardless of the method..firearms may be easier, but your good old conscientuous murderer will get the job done nonetheless. If he's going to kill someone with a knife, he's not really that much less powerful, because he isn't going to cordially invite the guy to a knifefight...he's going to wait until he can get behind him and quickly slit his throat. Sure, there's a lot more murders now than there used to be before the gun, but there's also a lot more people. As corny as it sounds, I think "guns don't kill people, people kill people" is still a valid point. If it wasn't guns, it would be something else.

And by the way, killing someone with a gun may be more effective, but it still takes a lot of nerve to end someone's life, regardless of the method. If you don't agree, you obviously haven't held a gun on a person. Knowing that a few ounces of finger pressure can irretrievably end a life in a split second takes a hell of a lot of nerve.

 

[Sam Spade]

I'd rather face an assailant armed with a knife or iron bar than one armed with a gun, i'd have a much better chance of surviving, even if unarmed myself.

You talk about the 9/11 murderers, or the Oklahoma bomber, what about the Washington sniper, or any of the school massacres, none of them used knives or bats, if the had then the students and teachers could have rushed the killer and over powered him, can't do that with a gun nut.

I have the greatest respect for the US, except your gun laws.

They're insane.

 

[Brianwp]

New stats...

"FBI Data Again Shows More Guns = Less Crime

Friday, May 28, 2010

Anyone needing proof that fanaticism for gun control hasn't waned on Capitol Hill, that anti-gunners are—as Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) put it last year—only waiting to "pick the time," should watch the video of Mexican president Felipe Calderon's speech to Congress last week, versions of which have been posted on youtube.com. When Calderon asked that the federal "assault weapon" ban be re-imposed, a very large number of U.S. Representatives and Senators present gave him a standing ovation.
However, on Monday the FBI released crime statistics that should cause the applauding anti-gunners to sit on their hands. The statistics indicate that between 2008 and 2009, as gun sales soared, the number of murders in our country decreased 7.2 percent. That amounts to about an 8.2 percent decrease in the per capita murder rate, after the increase in our nation's legal and illegal population is taken into account. And it translates into about a 10.5 percent decrease in the murder rate between 2004, when the ban expired, and the end of 2009. And finally, it means that in 2009 our nation's murder rate fell to a 45-year low.
The FBI's report was also bad news for anti-gunners elected to other offices. With the Supreme Court's decision in McDonald v. City of Chicago no more than a few weeks away, Mayors Bloomberg, of New York City, and Daley, of Chicago—who fear that it will require them to respect the Second Amendment for the first time—have continued to beat their drums for gun control. As we have noted, Bloomberg recently encouraged a Senate committee to support the Lautenberg-King terrorist watchlist bills. And last week Daley told a Chicago Reader reporter, who expressed skepticism about the effectiveness of Chicago's handgun ban, "It's been very effective." Holding a bayonet-equipped rifle, Daley added, "If I put this up your butt, you find out how effective it is."
But, murders in big cities declined over 11 percent between 2008 and 2009, translating to over a 12 percent decrease in the big city murder per capita rate. We hope, but don't expect, that the indisputable fact that an increase in gun ownership does not necessarily correspond to an increase in crime, will reduce the frequency of Bloomberg's stunts aimed at gun shows, and Daley's periodic rants against the firearm industry."

 

[-KA-]

FBI Data Again Shows More Guns = Less Crime

 

[riverrat]

My gun has saved my life. Unfortunately my dog was killed by the attacker. I miss my dog and i thank God that i was packing that night. Outlaw guns and i will be an outlaw.

 

[Sam Spade]

New stats...

What is the saying??

There are lies, damned lies and statistics.

Sorry, mate, you and i will never see eye to eye on this.

And don't tell me you believe the F.B.I?

 

[marquis]

Oh yeah...

Those 9/11 hijackers didn't do much damage with their box cuters...


And the Oklahoma bomber, Timothy McVeigh didn't do much harm with a truck full of fertilizer.

:breathefi

When will Sheople like you realize, it isn't the TOOL that some whacko uses that is the problem?!? It is their desire to harm people for whatever disturbed reason that needs to be addressed and stopped!

This argument gets trotted out all the time and remains as specious and as flawed as ever.The trouble with it is it's perfectly true until you think about it.Tools are made to facilitate things.Guns are designed to kill and injure though they do serve other more trivial ends like target shooting.More to the point they are designed to do so from a distance and thus remove much of the risk or involvement of a direct assault.In other words to make killing a less stressful ansd easier option.As 30 000 deaths a year will bear out.
Every time you pick one up you are reminded of its purpose.It's not like so many other things pressed into service as murder weapons.

 

[luddite]

All this talk of guns has taken us off track.

The subject is gun laws.

Do they deter criminals from using guns or do they make a change in the statistics ?

 

[Snapper314]

All this talk of guns has taken us off track.

The subject is gun laws.

Do they deter criminals from using guns or do they make a change in the statistics ?

News Flash...

CRIMINALS BREAK LAWS.

There are laws against theft, r@p3, murder, drug possession & use, and countless other things. Yet these crimes continue to happen.

Some folks seem to think firearms are the CAUSE of certain crimes. They are not. They are inanimate objects. PEOPLE commit crimes. If you think removing firearms will somehow make everyone safer, you need to understand Human Nature.

Some other idiots thought removing firearms would solve the problem in a country called Rwanda in Africa:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rwandan_Genocide

 

[Quagmire]

Outright bans on handguns and semiautomatic firearms (like those implemented in the U.K. and AUS) serve only to disarm a law-abiding populace for the convenience of lawbreakers.

As Snapper mentioned, many great atrocities in the world's history were committed after first removing people's rights to weapon ownership.

 

[Brianwp]

What is the saying??

There are lies, damned lies and statistics.

Sorry, mate, you and i will never see eye to eye on this.

And don't tell me you believe the F.B.I?

Sorry, Sam, I guess we never will. I'm actually very liberal in most of my beliefs except for this. You have to remember I grew up in a country where guns were a national treasure, very useful and appreciated. Most of the gun owners that I've known were all upright guys, responsible gun owners who respected firearms and practiced great safety. Just like England isn't all double decker buses and bobbies and telephone booths, America isn't the wild west. Gun ownership isn't as alarming to us as it may be to you.

And yes, on this issue I would believe the FBI. They're not Boy Scouts, but they're not the NRA, they have no reason to promote firearms in the US, probably the opposite.

 

[Sam Spade]

As Snapper mentioned, many great atrocities in the world's history were committed after first removing people's rights to weapon ownership.

And even more were committed, and are being committed by allowing people to own guns.

"Guns do not kill people, people kill people",

Right, but people with guns kill lots of people, usually innocent people.

I wonder what the stats are with regard to the number of innocent people defending themselves with guns, and the number of innocent people being killed by guns?

We had two major incidents in the UK where guys with guns went nuts and murdered many innocent folk, we learned our lessons and banned the damn things, we don't get disgruntled employees walking into work and blasting away, we don't get stressed out or bullied kids taking daddy's guns to school and letting out years of torment, we don't get ex army snipers taking pot shots at shoppers, sure we do have gun crime, but all committed with illegally held firearms.

Thank Bob I live in the UK.

Edit: ~ Ooh, look, I'm a member....well, I've been called worse.:mrgreen:

 

[marquis]

And even more were committed, and are being committed by allowing people to own guns.

"Guns do not kill people, people kill people",

Right, but people with guns kill lots of people, usually innocent people.

I wonder what the stats are with regard to the number of innocent people defending themselves with guns, and the number of innocent people being killed by guns?

We had two major incidents in the UK where guys with guns went nuts and murdered many innocent folk, we learned our lessons and banned the damn things, we don't get disgruntled employees walking into work and blasting away, we don't get stressed out or bullied kids taking daddy's guns to school and letting out years of torment, we don't get ex army snipers taking pot shots at shoppers, sure we do have gun crime, but all committed with illegally held firearms.

Thank Bob i live in the UK.

To put things into perspective , even with criminal gangs and drug turf wars we are only talking about 60 gun deaths a year in the whole of the UK.It's so rare that police actually record the number of shots fired by illegal weapons and in many cities and counties it's in single figures PER YEAR.So a population CAN be disarmed pretty effectively and live significantly safer as a consequence.There were no gun restrictions here until 1920.

 

[scoundrel]

Oh yeah...

Those 9/11 hijackers didn't do much damage with their box cuters...

Which proves what, exactly? Better to let embittered and unstable Islamofascists carry firearms onto aeroplanes? Easier to take precautions against terrorists armed with Stanley knives than terrorists armed with guns?:crazy:

And the Oklahoma bomber, Timothy McVeigh didn't do much harm with a truck full of fertilizer.

:breathefi

I've tried quite hard, but I cannot re-construct this sentence into anything rational. It means nothing at all in the context of a discussion of gun laws. Unless of course you want to say that the genie is out of the bottle and America is stacked out with violent crazies anyway, regardless of guns (which I can't quite believe). As a matter of fact, America's nihilistic lunatic fringe would seem to me to be one of the most powerful arguments in favour of gun controls in US jurisdiction. People like that shouldn't have grown up toys in case they hurt themselves. However I am British and I still will not say to Americans what they should decide in their own back yard, only that the right to bear arms will be recognised in the UK over my cold dead body (where did I get "cold dead" from, I wonder?).

When will Sheople like you realize, it isn't the TOOL that some whacko uses that is the problem?!? It is their desire to harm people for whatever disturbed reason that needs to be addressed and stopped!

This is the second verse of the Rifle Prayer from Full Metal Jacket. I have highlighted in bold the relevent section.

Without me my rifle is useless.
Without my rifle, I am useless.
I must fire my rifle true.
I must shoot straighter than my enemy who is trying to kill me.
I must shoot him before he shoots me.
I will.

It takes two to tango, doesn't it?

When will Sheople like you realize...

I'm a firm believer in reciprocity but just this once, for the general good, I note this insult but I am turning the other cheek. Be careful not to slap it.

 

[scoundrel]

News Flash...

Some other idiots thought removing firearms would solve the problem in a country called Rwanda in Africa:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rwandan_Genocide

I read the whole link and couldn't find the bit where the Tutsi victims of the Rwandan Genocide were actively disarmed by anyone. I did find the bit where the Hutu perpetrators were actively tooling up with AK47s and hand grenades prior to the start of the atrocities: it wasn't only machetes by any means. I don't think your example supports your argument, Snapper.