RE: A safer world with or without guns?

RE: A safer world with or without guns? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Polls and Other Random Stupidity

[Poll]

A safer world with or without guns?

safer with no guns at all

32% (16)

safer with everyone having a gun

42% (21)

keep the status quo

26% (13)

Total Votes : 50

(last vote on : 10/8/2012 5:19:29 PM)
(Poll will run till: -- )

Message

DonGiovani -> RE: A safer world with or without guns? (4/12/2012 1:42:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: searching4mysir Gun laws only affect law-abiding citizens. For those who plan on breaking the law anyway, they will find a way to get a gun, whether or not it is illegal. ^^^^ This. 'Nuff said.

FrostedFlake -> RE: A safer world with or without guns? (4/12/2012 4:36:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DonGiovani quote: ORIGINAL: searching4mysir Gun laws only affect law-abiding citizens. For those who plan on breaking the law anyway, they will find a way to get a gun, whether or not it is illegal. ^^^^ This. 'Nuff said. I think more needs saying. I personally have manufactured over 50,000 rounds. I have gone through about as many factory loads. Add in the .22s and I'm pushing the hell out of 200,000 rounds. I killed one thing. And ate it. I am trying to recall an accident involving both myself and someones gun. The only one I can come up with is, a brake locked on my '66 pickup, causing a wreck. (do the maintenance!) The pair of .22s in the rack clocked me and my little brother across the noggins. Guns are not dangerous. They are deadly. The difference could not be clearer. Hardycybermaster doesn't like guns BECAUSE he doesn't like guns. There is no more to it than that and there is nothing that will ever change his mind. That there is nothing that will change his mind does not strengthen his nonexistent yet voluble argument. And, very fortunately, I do not rely upon hardycybermaster for my civil rights. Now, how about we ask the machinists and carpenters how many of their journeymen have less than ten fingers? ETA : And another thing. How long do you think it would take me to make a gun? Unless you are talking about waving a magic wand, there is no way to get the djinn back into the bottle. http://thehomegunsmith.com/ quote: The Mantra of the British ‘Gun Owner’* “I have been examined by the agents of the crown and found fit to own firearms. I have been granted a police approved firearms license. I have installed a police approved ‘security cabinet’ in my police approved home in which I will keep my police approved gun and police approved bullet at all times. I will only use ‘my gun’ where approved by the police. I will only take ‘my gun’ where approved by the police. I will only shoot ‘my gun’ when approved by the police. I will only shoot ‘my gun’ where approved by the police. I will only sell ‘my gun’ to another person approved by the police. If I wish to buy another gun I must ask the police. I will offer my home and guns for inspection by the police upon demand. When it is deemed necessary to confiscate ‘my gun’ I will dutifully hand ‘my gun’ to the police approved police at the police approved police station, and thank them for their assistance" I will, at all times, and to the best of my ability, support and uphold these police approved privileges.“ *A licensed gun is not owned by the person holding it but is only on loan for the duration of the license. Upon expiry of the license the gun will be confiscated by the agents of the state. The British ‘gun owner’ is predominantly a HUMAN SHEEP. They support the tightest gun laws (a slowly tightening noose around their own necks) as a means of upholding their ‘special’ status in society — the only kid on the block to own a legal firearm! I picture them in the SAME ilk as Hitler‘s Gestapo or Stalin’s KGB. They revel in their ‘selection’ by a totalitarian state to lord-it over the ‘common’ man. These, ‘specially selected’ beings are given ‘special privileges’ in return for their bootlicking - subservient groveling and revel in their ‘privileges’ like children awarded a gold sticker at school! Luckily, throughout the length and breadth of the British Isles illicit firearms manufacturing is now a large cottage industry, as this website is testament. Gun enthusiasts are manufacturing their own firearms on a staggering scale, and in as diverse locations as house basements, attic rooms, garden sheds and redundant farm buildings. No government or police force will ever tell free men what guns they can or cannot own, where they can buy or sell them and where they can keep and use them. The rights of the Un-common man must always be respected. We have news for the government scum control freaks, the agents of the state who do their bidding and the human sheep gun owning elitists who have succumbed to the above mantra.... YOU WILL NEVER WIN And, speaking of the devil : http://gizmodo.com/5901114/man-steals-guns-and-a-taser-and-goes-on-the-craziest-crime-spree-you-can-imagine

DaKid8 -> RE: A safer world with or without guns? (4/12/2012 11:23:39 AM)
I think it would be a much safer world if noone else had guns except me. If that isn't possible I believe that criminals and people that are going to do bad are going to be able to find guns no matter what, so we might as well let innocent people arm themselves.

LaTigresse -> RE: A safer world with or without guns? (4/12/2012 12:13:30 PM)
Considering I live in an area where most people have guns, Considering I live in an area where A LOT of not very bright people are furthering their, not very brightness, with meth. Considering I know what meth does to the brain and the paranoia that it creates..... I am ambivalent about guns.

Musicmystery -> RE: A safer world with or without guns? (4/12/2012 1:02:25 PM)
Everytime I hear the tired rants about guns and security, I think of the one person here who was robbed, my neighbor. They stole...his guns. He's much safer now.

SoulAlloy -> RE: A safer world with or without guns? (4/12/2012 2:36:37 PM)
I honestly don't think it'll be any more or less safe - a gun is a tool, the mind of the person wielding it is the potential danger. A gun can kill from a distance, but a knife is much more subtle and easy to hide. Virtually anything can be used as a weapon. One fact I remember from uni is that statistically speaking most murders are committed by a person who knew the victim/s... So you could be safer by knowing no one...

Iamsemisweet -> RE: A safer world with or without guns? (4/12/2012 2:43:34 PM)
I like to hunt. I know lots of other people who also like to hunt. I don't know if the world would be safer without guns (well, it definitely would be for ducks and deer), but I do know that a lot of people would be deprived of a sport that they enjoy and that encourages conservation. When I lived on my remote, rural, property, I wouldn't have felt safe without a gun in my pocket when I had to go to the barn at night, or when uninvited strangers knocked on my door. I never had to use it, but I felt safer knowing I had it.

hardcybermaster -> RE: A safer world with or without guns? (4/12/2012 4:09:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FrostedFlake quote: ORIGINAL: DonGiovani quote: ORIGINAL: searching4mysir Gun laws only affect law-abiding citizens. For those who plan on breaking the law anyway, they will find a way to get a gun, whether or not it is illegal. ^^^^ This. 'Nuff said. I think more needs saying. I personally have manufactured over 50,000 rounds. I have gone through about as many factory loads. Add in the .22s and I'm pushing the hell out of 200,000 rounds. I killed one thing. And ate it. I am trying to recall an accident involving both myself and someones gun. The only one I can come up with is, a brake locked on my '66 pickup, causing a wreck. (do the maintenance!) The pair of .22s in the rack clocked me and my little brother across the noggins. Guns are not dangerous. They are deadly. The difference could not be clearer. Hardycybermaster doesn't like guns BECAUSE he doesn't like guns. There is no more to it than that and there is nothing that will ever change his mind. That there is nothing that will change his mind does not strengthen his nonexistent yet voluble argument. And, very fortunately, I do not rely upon hardycybermaster for my civil rights. Now, how about we ask the machinists and carpenters how many of their journeymen have less than ten fingers? ETA : And another thing. How long do you think it would take me to make a gun? Unless you are talking about waving a magic wand, there is no way to get the djinn back into the bottle. http://thehomegunsmith.com/ quote: The Mantra of the British ‘Gun Owner’* “I have been examined by the agents of the crown and found fit to own firearms. I have been granted a police approved firearms license. I have installed a police approved ‘security cabinet’ in my police approved home in which I will keep my police approved gun and police approved bullet at all times. I will only use ‘my gun’ where approved by the police. I will only take ‘my gun’ where approved by the police. I will only shoot ‘my gun’ when approved by the police. I will only shoot ‘my gun’ where approved by the police. I will only sell ‘my gun’ to another person approved by the police. If I wish to buy another gun I must ask the police. I will offer my home and guns for inspection by the police upon demand. When it is deemed necessary to confiscate ‘my gun’ I will dutifully hand ‘my gun’ to the police approved police at the police approved police station, and thank them for their assistance" I will, at all times, and to the best of my ability, support and uphold these police approved privileges.“ *A licensed gun is not owned by the person holding it but is only on loan for the duration of the license. Upon expiry of the license the gun will be confiscated by the agents of the state. The British ‘gun owner’ is predominantly a HUMAN SHEEP. They support the tightest gun laws (a slowly tightening noose around their own necks) as a means of upholding their ‘special’ status in society — the only kid on the block to own a legal firearm! I picture them in the SAME ilk as Hitler‘s Gestapo or Stalin’s KGB. They revel in their ‘selection’ by a totalitarian state to lord-it over the ‘common’ man. These, ‘specially selected’ beings are given ‘special privileges’ in return for their bootlicking - subservient groveling and revel in their ‘privileges’ like children awarded a gold sticker at school! Luckily, throughout the length and breadth of the British Isles illicit firearms manufacturing is now a large cottage industry, as this website is testament. Gun enthusiasts are manufacturing their own firearms on a staggering scale, and in as diverse locations as house basements, attic rooms, garden sheds and redundant farm buildings. No government or police force will ever tell free men what guns they can or cannot own, where they can buy or sell them and where they can keep and use them. The rights of the Un-common man must always be respected. We have news for the government scum control freaks, the agents of the state who do their bidding and the human sheep gun owning elitists who have succumbed to the above mantra.... YOU WILL NEVER WIN And, speaking of the devil : http://gizmodo.com/5901114/man-steals-guns-and-a-taser-and-goes-on-the-craziest-crime-spree-you-can-imagine You are right, I don't like guns but not because I just don't like guns as you suggest. As previously stated I think cops should be armed and if pushed I guess hunting is OK if the animal is eaten afterwards. My main objection is the gun in every house culture and the thought that any kind of trespass can be met with fatal force. I guess it's just hard to understand when I live in a country where very few people live in so much fear that they feel they have to arm themselves to keep them and theirs safe, and part of the reason I am not that scared is that there are so few guns around, confrontation is less likely to be deadly. I have been around, and lived in Stockwell and Brixton ( not the gentrified parts) and never felt in fear for my life. Do so many Americans actually live with so much fear that they feel they have to own a gun? I know the stock answer is "just in case" but there are thousands of ways to die that a gun can't protect you from. I bet every gun owner doesn't choose their car purely on how safe it is, your 66 pick up being a perfect example. It could have killed you AND other innocent people. but you would rather spend cash on a gun than on a service or a better car. Odd. ps. speaking of odd the British gun owner mantra thing was way fucking weird, seriously man

OsideGirl -> RE: A safer world with or without guns? (4/12/2012 4:29:34 PM)
Making laws against guns, doesn't stop criminals from possessing guns. quote: ORIGINAL: hardcybermaster My main objection is the gun in every house culture and the thought that any kind of trespass can be met with fatal force. Yeah, I guess we just let strangers do whatever they want and become victims. I read a statistic that said that burglary and vandalism is so rife in Dublin, that people don't even bother to report it most of the time.

kalikshama -> RE: A safer world with or without guns? (4/12/2012 6:59:28 PM)
quote: If you take away the gang and drug related killings, ARE there that many gun related murders? It's long so just giving conclusion below. http://www.kean.edu/~jkeil/Welcome_files/Gun%20Control.pdf American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Inc. The Effectiveness of Gun Control Laws: Multivariate Statistical Analysis Author(s): Ik-Whan G. Kwon, Bradley Scott, Scott R. Safranski, Muen Bae Source: American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Vol. 56, No. 1 (Jan., 1997), pp. 41-50 Published by: American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Inc. ...Conclusions THIS STUDY examined the effectiveness of gun control laws and regulations using state level data. The multivariate'statistical regression model suggests that the existence of gun control laws indeed have a deterrent effect on firearm deaths, although this relationship is weaker than previously reported. If, however, the United States had had a uniform gun control law similar to the 1977 Canadian law, the impact may have been stronger than that found here, which relies on systems of laws that vary significantly between states. Accordingly, it appears that the Brady Bill, if implemented properly, may have significant impact on deterring the number of deaths associated with the firearm use. However, and more important, this study also shows that the major association for firearm fatalities is with socioeconomic factors such as poverty levels and alcohol consumption. Unless this country directs its efforts toward the socio- economic ills which appear to bear the strongest relationship to violent deaths Gun Control Laws by firearms, the fatalities likely will remain high whether this country has gun control laws or not. These findings may make sense when we consider that systems of laws with their consequent punishments are, essentially, negative approaches to behavior modification. While such systems of control are necessary, sociologists and psychologists as well as management scholars have, for several decades, noted that positive approach to motivating people toward desired ends tend to be much more effective than punishment. While reducing violence in society is most certainly not fully analogous to the problems of motivating employees (nor as simple), the lessons learned about improving the conditions in which people must operate and, if possible, identifying and tying valued rewards to desired actions, may well be applicable here. If crimes of passion are, as many experts claim, often motivated by hopelessness, then efforts to reduce or even eliminate the hopelessness sources of such-and perhaps even provide reason for hope- are likely to have a positive impact. The results of the current study, which indicate that poverty and alcohol consumption are more closely linked to levels of firearm deaths than is absence or presence of gun control laws, provide support for this line of thinking. The results of this study suggest, therefore, that resources may be more effectively used if directed toward social and economic programs rather than toward systems of regulation and punishment that may simply seek to place restrictions on someone they already feels they have nothing to gain from social compliance, and nothing more to lose.

kalikshama -> RE: A safer world with or without guns? (4/12/2012 7:02:19 PM)
quote: If you take away the gang and drug related killings, ARE there that many gun related murders? Perhaps more on point: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2005/06/28/gun-deaths050628.html The risk of death by gunshot has been cut in half in Canada and is far smaller than in the United States, Statistics Canada says. In a study issued on Monday, the federal agency notes that Canadian gun-control laws have been stiffened in recent decades and gun registration has been made compulsory, but it draws no conclusions about the cause of the falling death toll. It says that 816 people — 767 males and 49 females — died of firearms-related injuries in Canada in 2002, the most recent year examined in the study. This represented 2.6 deaths per 100,000 population, down from 5.9 per 100,000 in 1979, it said. Among males, the 2002 rate was 4.9 deaths per 100,000, down from 10.6 in 1979. Among females, it was 0.3, down from 1.2. In a cross-border comparison for the year 2000, Statistics Canada says the risk of firearms death was more than three times as great for American males as for Canadian males and seven times as great for American females as for Canadian females. Because more of the U.S. deaths were homicides (as opposed to suicides or accidental deaths), the U.S. rate of gun homicide was nearly eight times Canada's, the agency says. Homicides accounted for 38 per cent of deaths involving guns in the United States and 18 per cent in Canada. But even as Canada's rate of gun homicide shrank (to 0.4 per 100,000 population in 2002 from 0.8 in 1979), handguns moved into a dominant role. Handguns accounted for two-thirds of gun homicides in 2002, up from about half in the 1990s, the agency says. Consistently through the period, about four-fifths of Canadian firearms deaths were suicides, it says.

OsideGirl -> RE: A safer world with or without guns? (4/12/2012 7:36:44 PM)
In the US, gun ownership is at the highest level since 1993, but violent crime has decreased: quote: According to the figures released today by the FBI, the estimated number of violent crimes in 2010 declined for the fourth consecutive year. Property crimes also decreased, marking the eighth straight year that the collective estimates for these offenses declined. Self reported gun ownership is the highest since 1993, with record low numbers of people in favor of a handgun ban. Gun ownership is up across the board even among women and Democrats. The bottom line is that crime is down significantly, but there is no definitive explanation. We cannot point to one thing and say this is why crime is down. What we can say is that increased gun sales, increased gun ownership and liberalized gun laws have not resulted in an increase in crime.

subcdinsprings -> RE: A safer world with or without guns? (4/12/2012 7:45:09 PM)
Banning murder didn't exactly cause that statistic to drop to zero. Guns are just a tool, much like a hammer, axe, or chainsaw. It's cliche, but guns don't kill people, assholes (that will still get a gun if they're outlawed) do. Gun violence seems to be so prevalent because it is so in your face and shocking. In spite of the problems that can cause, I hope it stays that way forever because when we get immune to that level of violence, we're done as a species.

FrostedFlake -> RE: A safer world with or without guns? (4/13/2012 2:45:44 AM)
quote: I bet every gun owner doesn't choose their car purely on how safe it is, your 66 pick up being a perfect example. It could have killed you AND other innocent people. but you would rather spend cash on a gun than on a service or a better car. Odd. ps. speaking of odd the British gun owner mantra thing was way fucking weird, seriously man 1/ I don't spend cash to maintain my cars. I own tools. The issue is, do I use them properly? 2/ "Way fucking weird" is a fair characterization. It is interesting that you were able to notice that without noticing that. 3/ If you would spend some time in Switzerland, you might come to understand what a "gun culture" is all about. When Hitler asked them what they would do if they were invaded, they said, "We'll shoot." When Hitler asked what they would do if they were outnumbered 2 to 1, they said, "We'll shoot, twice." Instead of an invasion, Hitler sent them Messerschmidts. Why not visit the Swiss and discuss with them the idea of turning in their guns?

DesFIP -> RE: A safer world with or without guns? (4/13/2012 8:56:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Iamsemisweet I like to hunt. I know lots of other people who also like to hunt. I don't know if the world would be safer without guns (well, it definitely would be for ducks and deer), but I do know that a lot of people would be deprived of a sport that they enjoy and that encourages conservation. Actually where I live the highest cause of auto fatalities is deer. So although not having hunters would be safer for deer, it would be worse for people. With that said, there's no way I could field dress a deer. So I'm not going to hunt because they need to be gutted immediately.

OsideGirl -> RE: A safer world with or without guns? (4/13/2012 10:25:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subcdinsprings Banning murder didn't exactly cause that statistic to drop to zero. Guns are just a tool, much like a hammer, axe, or chainsaw. It's cliche, but guns don't kill people, assholes (that will still get a gun if they're outlawed) do. Mexico has strict gun laws. Basically, only small caliber is allowed. The murder rate for Cuidad Juarez alone in 2010 was 3,103. Then there was headline for the UK, which has some of the strictest gun laws in the world: quote: England has worse crime rate than the US, says Civitas study England and Wales has one of the worst crime rates among developed nations for rapes, burglaries and robberies, a major report has found. Japan has the one of the lowest crime rates in the world. They have very strict gun (and sword) laws. Switzerland which requires every male to own a rifle, is somewhere in middle. The reality is that whether the law permits firearms or not, it doesn't seem to be a controlling factor on the crime level.

hardcybermaster -> RE: A safer world with or without guns? (4/13/2012 3:50:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: OsideGirl quote: ORIGINAL: subcdinsprings Banning murder didn't exactly cause that statistic to drop to zero. Guns are just a tool, much like a hammer, axe, or chainsaw. It's cliche, but guns don't kill people, assholes (that will still get a gun if they're outlawed) do. Mexico has strict gun laws. Basically, only small caliber is allowed. The murder rate for Cuidad Juarez alone in 2010 was 3,103. Then there was headline for the UK, which has some of the strictest gun laws in the world: quote: England has worse crime rate than the US, says Civitas study England and Wales has one of the worst crime rates among developed nations for rapes, burglaries and robberies, a major report has found. Japan has the one of the lowest crime rates in the world. They have very strict gun (and sword) laws. Switzerland which requires every male to own a rifle, is somewhere in middle. The reality is that whether the law permits firearms or not, it doesn't seem to be a controlling factor on the crime level. sorry but you need to work out what a statistic is, to quote.... I read a statistic that said that burglary and vandalism is so rife in Dublin, that people don't even bother to report it most of the time that is not a statistic it is a statement, and also The murder rate for Cuidad Juarez alone in 2010 was 3,103. 3103 what? I am looking at the civitas data right now, you seem to be ignoring the US. Englands crime figures are bad compared with other EU nations.However the graphs clearly show the the US has a massively higher homicide rate, nearly 10 times higher rate of major assault and higher rates of rape and car theft but we have a higher burglary rate. Burglary versus homicde rape and major assault, I know which I am picking

hardcybermaster -> RE: A safer world with or without guns? (4/13/2012 4:05:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FrostedFlake quote: I bet every gun owner doesn't choose their car purely on how safe it is, your 66 pick up being a perfect example. It could have killed you AND other innocent people. but you would rather spend cash on a gun than on a service or a better car. Odd. ps. speaking of odd the British gun owner mantra thing was way fucking weird, seriously man 1/ I don't spend cash to maintain my cars. I own tools. The issue is, do I use them properly? 2/ "Way fucking weird" is a fair characterization. It is interesting that you were able to notice that without noticing that. 3/ If you would spend some time in Switzerland, you might come to understand what a "gun culture" is all about. When Hitler asked them what they would do if they were invaded, they said, "We'll shoot." When Hitler asked what they would do if they were outnumbered 2 to 1, they said, "We'll shoot, twice." Instead of an invasion, Hitler sent them Messerschmidts. Why not visit the Swiss and discuss with them the idea of turning in their guns? You spend a lot of time in Switzerland then flakey? Your profile doesn't suggest a man who has been travelling to Europe much recently. However I have friends in Geneva( ironically they work for MSF, Médecins Sans Frontières, that's doctors without borders just in case I am right about your travel experience, when they are not in Geneva they are generally trying to sort the shit out caused by wars, terrible the damage guns can do isn't it?) and to compare Swiss gun culture with US gun culture is laughable. They have rules about how you can dispose of your toenail clippings and god help you if you fart loudly in a built up area. I never ever felt in the slightest danger in Switzerland, they are the most boring and anal people I have ever encountered. From civitas major assaults US 281/100k Switzerland 3 100k homicide US 5.6/100k Swiss 0.8/100k The Swiis are from Venus, Americans are from Mars mate. Where do you get this stuff from?

FrostedFlake -> RE: A safer world with or without guns? (4/14/2012 5:52:33 AM)
quote: I never ever felt in the slightest danger in Switzerland, they are the most boring and anal people I have ever encountered. And they are all armed. At a much higher level of firepower than in the United States. Sufficiently well to hold off a modern mechanized army. How do you explain this? I hate to ask, but I noticed that you didn't. Did you? ETA : And don't call me mate.

tj444 -> RE: A safer world with or without guns? (4/14/2012 5:59:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FrostedFlake quote: I never ever felt in the slightest danger in Switzerland, they are the most boring and anal people I have ever encountered. And they are all armed. At a much higher level of firepower than in the United States. Sufficiently well to hold off a modern mechanized army. How do you explain this? I hate to ask, but I noticed that you didn't. Did you? ETA : And don't call me mate. imo, he did explain it... 2 totally different cultures.. (& as did I in my post on page 1) "to compare Swiss gun culture with US gun culture is laughable. From civitas major assaults US 281/100k Switzerland 3 100k homicide US 5.6/100k Swiss 0.8/100k "

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 next > >>

Spam Policy

6.445313E-02