RE: The issue of firearms

RE: The issue of firearms (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Starbuck09 -> RE: The issue of firearms (8/12/2009 4:59:29 PM)
I have to go to bed now Loki so I shall catch up with you tommorow.

Loki45 -> RE: The issue of firearms (8/12/2009 5:09:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 Loki, so how is the murder rate in the US almost 4 times higher than that of the UK, according to the 2006 figures ? http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=108&subid=900003&contentid=255032 But is there a gun murder rate in Britain? That's my point. They have an outright BAN on firearms....yet innocent people are still being killed by them.

Loki45 -> RE: The issue of firearms (8/12/2009 5:11:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Starbuck09 Yes gun crims has had a small upsurge in recent years for a number of reasons. Like I say the answer to quell it is not to make guns readily available to everyone Loki. But that argument can be also applied to why we should not ban them. You have a ban there. And still the criminals get the guns. That's my whole point. Your country tried the ban thing. It's not working. So to say the U.S. should ban them is ridiculous. Because I can point to your country as making my point for me. You banned firearms there, but who still has the firearms? The criminals.

Politesub53 -> RE: The issue of firearms (8/13/2009 1:57:19 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Loki45 quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 Loki, so how is the murder rate in the US almost 4 times higher than that of the UK, according to the 2006 figures ? http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=108&subid=900003&contentid=255032 But is there a gun murder rate in Britain? That's my point. They have an outright BAN on firearms....yet innocent people are still being killed by them. Firstly, there is no outright ban on ALL firearms. Secondly the number of people killed by firearms fell by 20% last year, to a total of 42. By my reckoning that means the figure for the US should be around 250, given population sizes. Even if you double the 2008 figure and compare it with the 2008 figure for the US ( this is all gun deaths for both countries ) The UK figure would be around 500, since the US has a population six times bigger, that makes out pro rata total 500. The comparable US figure is 30,000 plus. So your argument falls rather flat when faced with official figures. FACT: In 2006, there were 30,896 gun deaths in the U.S: 12,791 homicides (41% of total deaths), 16,883 suicides (55% of total deaths), 642 unintentional shootings (2% of total deaths), 360 from legal intervention (1.2% of total deaths) and 220 from undetermined intent (.8% of total deaths). (Numbers obtained from CDC National Center for Health Statistics mortality report online, 2009.) http://www.ichv.org/Statistics.htm Please note the source this report quotes from, so I would assume the figures are correct.

Termyn8or -> RE: The issue of firearms (8/13/2009 3:22:52 AM)
I don't know about the fuzzy math applied to generate those figures Polite, but LEOs kill more than anyone else in this country, and I am not so sure this is per capita. Regardless of that, if the figure of 55% suicide is correct, that is not only news to me, but is quite disturbing. I have had some mighty bad times in life and have considered ending it all at times, but I never did it. (obviously) What does that say about our life and times though ? No matter what it is not a good thing. Has life lost it's luster to that degree ? Inidentally, if you pull a gun on a cop you know has a gun, is that considered suicide ? If so it would explain the numbers. But if not, are they saying that over half the people who shoot anyone shoot themselves ? Actually if so, so be it, they didn't kill anyone else. We have no more right to force another to live than we do to force another to die, unless there is good reason of course. But let's not go into that here, we could just start another thread for that. There is enough hijacking going on already. T

TheGorenSociety -> RE: The issue of firearms (8/13/2009 3:32:35 AM)
Old Chinese proverb you can ban all weapons and criminals will still find them and use them.hell in Mexico they have their own machine shops turning out better stuff then some firearm manufactures. they have no problem stealing from Armies. That is why they are criminals. Last time I checked law enforcement is not capable of preventing crime any more then the guy next door is, unless the guy next door is armed himself.

Rhodes85 -> RE: The issue of firearms (8/14/2009 12:04:10 AM)
'Either she was trespassing on posted property, and the old man had valid reason to shoot' No. Trespassing or not that doesn't give him the right to shoot at anyone. Around here he'd likely have been getting shot back, and not with beanbag ammo. You have to be careful who you shoot at. Though I would have liked to see him use the 'she was a robber defense' lol....I can see it now....her running off the property with a plasma tv strapped to the back of the horse...very amusing So, she just accepted an apology and that was it? Shes FAR more forgiving than I would have been.

Archer -> RE: The issue of firearms (8/14/2009 6:57:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: VanIsleKnight Well, for starters, you can make it much more difficult to legally own a gun. Restrict the sales of firearms and ammunition to -very- specific shops, no deals where if you sign-up here or buy this you get a free gun. You go to a gun store with your license, purchase the gun, wait three days, get the gun. Your information is flawed as to what the laws currently are in the US. You can only buy new guns from FEDERAL FIREARMS LISCENSE holders now. It's been that way since the 1960's. Those "Free Gun" deals in order to get your gun you have to go to the gun shop and pick it up (Another Micheal More "poetic Liscence" issue from his movie taken as fact without getting the facts first) When you win, get a "free gun" you get a voucher and then have to go to the federally liscenced firearms dealer and fill out the paperwork they run the background check (Instant Check System) and if the computer doesn't find your name on the prohibited list you get the gun. We voted to have the Instant Check System instead of a waiting period. Another thing you can do is recycle guns. Sounds really hippyish to do but melt them down or whatever it is that recyclers do. They're only valuable as evidence for so long. The more guns there are available, the cheaper or easier they'll be to get. Guns confiscated during criminal investigations where the person is convicted do in fact after a period of time ( enough to allow for appeals etc) already get chopped up and melted down. Again a suggestion you make that is already in effect in the US. Proper education and stricter requirements for a license with similar penalties for misuse, handling, or care. In my opinion they should be treated like cars, if you can't prove to safely and responsibly handle them, you don't deserve to have them. (Though this infringes on the "right to bear arms" so instead take away the privilege to purchase and own lethal ammunition) Federal law since this is a federal, nationwide issue should take priority, not state law. Firearms Laws as to who can and cannot buy and sell are Federal laws already again you have been misinformedas to how gun laws in the US work.No state can make the requirements less stingent than the federal laws, however some states have made it more stringent. The law already says 18 for long guns 21 for handguns (Federal) it already says if you have a mental condition that makes you unstable you can't buy one, (this provision already on the books but has until recently lacked infrastructure of mental health commitment records being input into the National Instant Check System until the Virginia Tech shootings but that problem has had some progress. National Instant Check System Improvement Act of 2007) The law already says if you are a convisted felon you can't buy one. The problem is not a lack of laws on the books it is a lack of will to actually enforce the laws we already have. Most of your suggested improvements that could be made on US gun laws, actually ALREADY ARE laws.

Starbuck09 -> RE: The issue of firearms (8/15/2009 10:29:49 AM)
Loki your argument here makes no sese. Britain has very stict gun laws. As a c onsequence our rate of gun crime is miniscule compared to america and is one of the factors that meas our murder rate is between a seventh and a quater of yours. The fact that we still have an xtremely low preponderace of gun crime shows that theban does work not th it doesn't. Presumably by your logic you look at my country and think that banning heroin is a bad idea?

Loki45 -> RE: The issue of firearms (8/15/2009 4:10:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Starbuck09 Loki your argument here makes no sese. Britain has very stict gun laws. As a c onsequence our rate of gun crime is miniscule compared to america and is one of the factors that meas our murder rate is between a seventh and a quater of yours. The fact that we still have an xtremely low preponderace of gun crime shows that theban does work not th it doesn't. Presumably by your logic you look at my country and think that banning heroin is a bad idea? Actually, the argument makes a lot of sense if you'd just look at it objectively and not defensively for your country. Let's keep it as simple as possible with a single question: You banned firearms there. Who has them now?

Politesub53 -> RE: The issue of firearms (8/15/2009 4:14:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Loki45 quote: ORIGINAL: Starbuck09 Loki your argument here makes no sese. Britain has very stict gun laws. As a c onsequence our rate of gun crime is miniscule compared to america and is one of the factors that meas our murder rate is between a seventh and a quater of yours. The fact that we still have an xtremely low preponderace of gun crime shows that theban does work not th it doesn't. Presumably by your logic you look at my country and think that banning heroin is a bad idea? Actually, the argument makes a lot of sense if you'd just look at it objectively and not defensively for your country. Let's keep it as simple as possible with a single question: You banned firearms there. Who has them now? Your changing your tune, as well as the goalposts. You asked about gun crime, and now I have given you figures showing they are relatively low, you ask who has the guns now. No one is being defensive, just giving you the facts you wont accept.

Loki45 -> RE: The issue of firearms (8/15/2009 4:21:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 Your changing your tune, as well as the goalposts. You asked about gun crime, and now I have given you figures showing they are relatively low, you ask who has the guns now. No one is being defensive, just giving you the facts you wont accept. I'm not changing anything. I'm sticking to the one thing that has been my point all allong -- outlaw guns and the outlaws are the ones who have them. Forget about stats, and rates and all of that for a moment and just answer that basic question. Britain has banned guns. Who has them now?

Politesub53 -> RE: The issue of firearms (8/15/2009 4:27:43 PM)
If you want to be pedantic, a few criminals have guns, that wasnt what you asked me though, was it. The point remains we have a very low murder rate, by guns or otherwise, you dont.

Loki45 -> RE: The issue of firearms (8/15/2009 4:32:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 If you want to be pedantic, a few criminals have guns, that wasnt what you asked me though, was it. The point remains we have a very low murder rate, by guns or otherwise, you dont. Perhaps. But lets ask those 'few' victims Britain has if they feel the bans are working. Oh wait, we can't. They're dead. And the cops? They got there in time to clean up the mess. That's how it happens. When SECONDS count, cops are MINUTES away. Good luck thwarting a firearm-wielding intruder with a baseball bat.

Politesub53 -> RE: The issue of firearms (8/15/2009 4:57:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Loki45 quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 If you want to be pedantic, a few criminals have guns, that wasnt what you asked me though, was it. The point remains we have a very low murder rate, by guns or otherwise, you dont. Perhaps. But lets ask those 'few' victims Britain has if they feel the bans are working. Oh wait, we can't. They're dead. And the cops? They got there in time to clean up the mess. That's how it happens. When SECONDS count, cops are MINUTES away. Good luck thwarting a firearm-wielding intruder with a baseball bat. I have to laugh, now you use capitals to try and prove a point, probably because you cant use facts. It is rare for a civillian not involved in street gangs, to be shot dead. Its fairly rare for gang members to be shot dead. There is a higher chance of me being struck by lightning, if you still dont believe me, do some research.

Loki45 -> RE: The issue of firearms (8/15/2009 5:29:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 I have to laugh, now you use capitals to try and prove a point, probably because you cant use facts. It is rare for a civillian not involved in street gangs, to be shot dead. Its fairly rare for gang members to be shot dead. There is a higher chance of me being struck by lightning, if you still dont believe me, do some research. Rare maybe, but it does still happen, doesn't it? It happens ALOT here in the States. Banning weapons tomorrow won't stop that, it will make it worse.

Starbuck09 -> RE: The issue of firearms (8/16/2009 9:59:15 AM)
What you are saying makes no sense loki and in fact objectivity is what your posts are lacking. The ''defence'' of my country is pointing out that our laws on guns work extremely well to keep gun crime low. Look at your question who has guns in Britian. Answer a very very small number of criminals. On your logic shall we ask all the may many citizens in America who are victims of gun crime how they feel about gun laws in their country? Oh wait we can't as they're dead all of them. By the way loki the only time I have defended my country was when you asserted that it was repressive and I pointed out it was not. Everything else is simply facts about our gun laws. You didn't answer me about heroin either. We have heroin use so shopuld we repeal the ban on that substance?

DomImus -> RE: The issue of firearms (8/16/2009 1:31:47 PM)
I'm damned glad that this senior citizen had a firearm in his possession.

Starbuck09 -> RE: The issue of firearms (8/16/2009 1:35:53 PM)
So what domimus. No one is arguing that there is no benefit to having firears the argument is that the negatives outweight the positives. I'm sure the thousands of innocents killed by firearms in america would have been damned glad if the criminals weren't given ready access to such powerful weapons.

Loki45 -> RE: The issue of firearms (8/16/2009 3:52:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Starbuck09 So what domimus. No one is arguing that there is no benefit to having firears the argument is that the negatives outweight the positives. I'm sure the thousands of innocents killed by firearms in america would have been damned glad if the criminals weren't given ready access to such powerful weapons. The "negatives" only out-weigh the positives when the gun owner makes more 'negatives' by not learning how to properly handle or store his fire arms. The right to bear arms should not come without responsible training.

Page: << < prev 6 7 [8] 9 10 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

4.296875E-02