RE: Canadian gun control... (Full Version)

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



Message


Marc2b -> RE: Canadian gun control... (10/24/2014 12:21:59 PM)

quote:

My point is that those who aren't abiding by the current gun laws aren't likely to abide by the next one(s) passed. The only people who are going to be impacted by more gun laws are the ones who are abiding by the gun laws. I didn't mean abiding by every law when I said "law abiding." I meant those that are abiding gun laws.


Not necessarily. Yeah, sure, the gun hard core gangster who buys his illegal guns a dozen at a time might not care but the guy interested in only one gun might.

Then again maybe it might make some of the more hardens people think twice. Let's say that in jurisdiction X the penalty for smuggling illegal gins is five years. Then the law is changed to make it twenty years ( a new gun law doesn't necessarily have to be a new ban). That might make some think twice about the risk/reward factor. The point continues to remain that it is not an all or nothing factor and failure to achieve perfection is never a reason to not bother with the good.

Also, the more important point remains whether or not gun deaths, not necessarily all gun crime, is reduced.




BamaD -> RE: Canadian gun control... (10/24/2014 1:08:15 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Marc2b

quote:

My point is that those who aren't abiding by the current gun laws aren't likely to abide by the next one(s) passed. The only people who are going to be impacted by more gun laws are the ones who are abiding by the gun laws. I didn't mean abiding by every law when I said "law abiding." I meant those that are abiding gun laws.


Not necessarily. Yeah, sure, the gun hard core gangster who buys his illegal guns a dozen at a time might not care but the guy interested in only one gun might.

Then again maybe it might make some of the more hardens people think twice. Let's say that in jurisdiction X the penalty for smuggling illegal gins is five years. Then the law is changed to make it twenty years ( a new gun law doesn't necessarily have to be a new ban). That might make some think twice about the risk/reward factor. The point continues to remain that it is not an all or nothing factor and failure to achieve perfection is never a reason to not bother with the good.

Also, the more important point remains whether or not gun deaths, not necessarily all gun crime, is reduced.

No the point is whether deaths are reduced, regardless of the instrument.




Greta75 -> RE: Canadian gun control... (10/24/2014 2:23:57 PM)

So, here's the conclusion base on stats: http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/United-Kingdom/United-States/Crime

UK Murder Rate per 1 million people - 11.68
USA Murder Rate per 1 million people - 42.01
UK total Crimes - 109.96 per 1000 people
USA total Crimes - 41.29 per 1000 people

US has more murders than UK. But UK has significantly more over all crime.

There is also more robbery in UK than US. I believe this is due to lack of guns that empowers people. Guns do act as some kind of deterrant for crimes like these. Like if a robber knows you have a gun, would they rob you, or go rob someone else gunless? Even if they have guns.

I rather be instantly shot to death than have to deal with multiple robberies constantly. So, still, pro-gun for US.

42 murders per 1 million people is still quite good for a gun country. Quite minimum. Of course I guess murder rate could possibly be higher because spraying bullets can kill more people than using knives in the same short time.




BamaD -> RE: Canadian gun control... (10/24/2014 2:29:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Greta75

So, here's the conclusion base on stats: http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/United-Kingdom/United-States/Crime

UK Murder Rate per 1 million people - 11.68
USA Murder Rate per 1 million people - 42.01
UK total Crimes - 109.96 per 1000 people
USA total Crimes - 41.29 per 1000 people

US has more murders than UK. But UK has significantly more over all crime.

There is also more robbery in UK than US. I believe this is due to lack of guns that empowers people. Guns do act as some kind of deterrant for crimes like these. Like if a robber knows you have a gun, would they rob you, or go rob someone else gunless? Even if they have guns.

I rather be instantly shot to death than have to deal with multiple robberies constantly. So, still, pro-gun for US.

42 murders per 1 million people is still quite good for a gun country. Quite minimum. Of course I guess murder rate could possibly be higher because spraying bullets can kill more people than using knives in the same short time.

Not to say that 42/1000000 is good but it is much better than the 79/1000000 of 15-20 years ago.




Politesub53 -> RE: Canadian gun control... (10/24/2014 4:43:24 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee


quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

Well you wouldnt see it that way, would you Aylee. Some of us put saving lives first.

Read the figures to see if gun laws work or not. You will note that ownership isnt banned outright, just some sensible laws put in place.

http://www.businessinsider.com/canada-australia-japan-britain-gun-control-2013-1


Ah yes. The theory that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled by her own pantyhose, is somehow morally superior to a woman explaining to police how her attacker got that fatal bullet wound.

Can you imagine the difference it could of made if the mother's and father's or even the girls themselves in Rotherham had had access to firearm?

Oh wait. That might actually take a life. Rape is just a property crime, after all.


Now you are trying to put words in my mouth. I never mentioned rape, not once. The only theory I have is that yet again you are talking shit. As for mentioning Rotherham, thats some fucking lowpoint, even for you. Let me point something out though, any father could have killed his daughters abuser, any woman with a knife could have defended herself. You continually suggest the only solution is to flood the streets with guns, some of us are more enlightened.




PeonForHer -> RE: Canadian gun control... (10/24/2014 5:36:56 PM)

quote:

For once I agree with you. They are not your problem. Yet so many folks over there still feel the need to spend hours and hours arguing over what our gun laws should say.


Why do certain people throw that line out as though it's a trump argument?

Many of us tend to have opinions about how people are treated in other countries. This is because our feelings as to what we think is right and wrong transcend national borders. Thus, for instance, lots of people here - Americans and non-Americans alike - care about the deaths from diseases in Africa, or by government thugs in Zimbabwe, or by pirates on the high seas.

Why should we make an exception for the USA? Are you really saying that we shouldn't care about Americans who get shot and killed, THB, because such Americans should be unimportant to us here in other countries?




thishereboi -> RE: Canadian gun control... (10/24/2014 9:37:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

For once I agree with you. They are not your problem. Yet so many folks over there still feel the need to spend hours and hours arguing over what our gun laws should say.


Why do certain people throw that line out as though it's a trump argument?

Many of us tend to have opinions about how people are treated in other countries. This is because our feelings as to what we think is right and wrong transcend national borders. Thus, for instance, lots of people here - Americans and non-Americans alike - care about the deaths from diseases in Africa, or by government thugs in Zimbabwe, or by pirates on the high seas.

Why should we make an exception for the USA? Are you really saying that we shouldn't care about Americans who get shot and killed, THB, because such Americans should be unimportant to us here in other countries?


I said I agreed it wasn't his problem, if you have a problem with that, take it up with him.




BitYakin -> RE: Canadian gun control... (10/24/2014 10:50:37 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53


quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee


quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

Well you wouldnt see it that way, would you Aylee. Some of us put saving lives first.

Read the figures to see if gun laws work or not. You will note that ownership isnt banned outright, just some sensible laws put in place.

http://www.businessinsider.com/canada-australia-japan-britain-gun-control-2013-1


Ah yes. The theory that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled by her own pantyhose, is somehow morally superior to a woman explaining to police how her attacker got that fatal bullet wound.

Can you imagine the difference it could of made if the mother's and father's or even the girls themselves in Rotherham had had access to firearm?

Oh wait. That might actually take a life. Rape is just a property crime, after all.


Now you are trying to put words in my mouth. I never mentioned rape, not once. The only theory I have is that yet again you are talking shit. As for mentioning Rotherham, thats some fucking lowpoint, even for you. Let me point something out though, any father could have killed his daughters abuser, any woman with a knife could have defended herself. You continually suggest the only solution is to flood the streets with guns, some of us are more enlightened.



and you continually say goofy things like anyone is suggesting the streets be flooded with guns...
or is that you just talking shit yet again

under our current laws, the streets are certainly NOT flooded with guns. in the over 50 years of my life in the USA, I could count on one hand the number of times I have seen a gun in public that was not in the possession of a police/security officer...

I haven't seen her or anyone else suggest we do away with EVERY SINGLE GUN LAW that would produce the FLOODING you mention, and as things stand NOW the streets are NOT FLOODED with guns.

so where do you get this suggesting the streets be flooded with guns crap?


all that is, is FANATICAL shit talking!




crazyml -> RE: Canadian gun control... (10/25/2014 2:35:41 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee

Can you imagine the difference it could of made if the mother's and father's or even the girls themselves in Rotherham had had access to firearm?



Ok, let's try this thought experiment.

If the mothers and fathers of the girls had had access to a firearm, there's not a great deal that they would have done. If they had a) been properly aware of what was happening and b) cared enough, there are plenty of other ways to fuck someone up. But assuming that a father both knew about what was going on I can understand, as a parent myself, why he might have taken the law into his own hands. Of course the likelihood of him being killed in the attempt to secure vigilante justice would have been somewhat higher, and the likelihood of him executing the wrong person would have been pretty high as well. Not to mention the right that everyone, even the most fucked up criminal, has to due process is a pretty important right. As rights go, it's as important a right (if not more so) than the right to bear arms.

Assuming that the access those parents had to firearms was a result of firearms being readily available, it would also mean that the criminals who were committing these crimes would have had ready access to firearms which would have raised the risk to the victims and innocent third parties.

So yeah, I can imagine the difference it would have been made, and it would have been pretty shitty.




eulero83 -> RE: Canadian gun control... (10/25/2014 3:29:41 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Greta75

So, here's the conclusion base on stats: http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/United-Kingdom/United-States/Crime

UK Murder Rate per 1 million people - 11.68
USA Murder Rate per 1 million people - 42.01
UK total Crimes - 109.96 per 1000 people
USA total Crimes - 41.29 per 1000 people

US has more murders than UK. But UK has significantly more over all crime.

There is also more robbery in UK than US. I believe this is due to lack of guns that empowers people. Guns do act as some kind of deterrant for crimes like these. Like if a robber knows you have a gun, would they rob you, or go rob someone else gunless? Even if they have guns.

I rather be instantly shot to death than have to deal with multiple robberies constantly. So, still, pro-gun for US.

42 murders per 1 million people is still quite good for a gun country. Quite minimum. Of course I guess murder rate could possibly be higher because spraying bullets can kill more people than using knives in the same short time.


total number of crimes is not a good yardstick to compare the situation in two countries and even more when we are talking about gun policies, as it's recorded differently in different countries. For example the 41.29 in the USA is the 2006 sum of homicide + rape + robbery + aggravated assoult + larceny + burglary + motor vehicle theft, those are not all the crimes for example fraud, drug sale, pimping, battery and many more. In UK there is no statistic for aggravated assoult but for generic assoult and this is quite a significative difference, and you also have to figure out yourself what crimes were recorded in UK's statistics.
here there is a comparative study on those crimes recorded in both countries but still with the simple assoult vs aggravated assoult problem, if you add those rates you'll find a total rate (every 1000 people) of 20.97 for England and Whales and 14.02 for USA and the difference in the total is almost the difference in the assoult figure, so if we ignore that figure we have 13.67 and 11.40, that's quite closer, the main difference on this two numbers stands in the burglary rate.
If your concern is just about the chances of being robbed or killed the total of those two crimes is the same in both countries: 138 out of 100000 people but with a better chance to loose your life instead of your wallet in the usa.




thishereboi -> RE: Canadian gun control... (10/25/2014 5:58:28 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53
You continually suggest the only solution is to flood the streets with guns, some of us are more enlightened.




Well if that is true then you should have no problems linking a post where she suggested the answer is to flood the streets with guns. Otherwise we are going to have to assume you are just talking out of your ass again.




Politesub53 -> RE: Canadian gun control... (10/25/2014 5:08:53 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi


quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53
You continually suggest the only solution is to flood the streets with guns, some of us are more enlightened.




Well if that is true then you should have no problems linking a post where she suggested the answer is to flood the streets with guns. Otherwise we are going to have to assume you are just talking out of your ass again.


Unlike you, I am bright enough to know what the fuck I am talking about.

Do you really think arming everyone in the UK wouldnt be flooding the streets with guns, because Aylee suggested the Rotherham case would be different if everyone had access to firearms. I know you are just trolling like usual, like you normally fucking do, but I felt the need to ask all the same.




thishereboi -> RE: Canadian gun control... (10/25/2014 5:11:37 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53


quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi


quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53
You continually suggest the only solution is to flood the streets with guns, some of us are more enlightened.




Well if that is true then you should have no problems linking a post where she suggested the answer is to flood the streets with guns. Otherwise we are going to have to assume you are just talking out of your ass again.


Unlike you, I am bright enough to know what the fuck I am talking about.

Do you really think arming everyone in the UK wouldnt be flooding the streets with guns, because Aylee suggested the Rotherham case would be different if everyone had access to firearms. I know you are just trolling like usual, like you normally fucking do, but I felt the need to ask all the same.




So once again you make a claim that someone said something yet can't seem to find a link to back up your bullshit.




Politesub53 -> RE: Canadian gun control... (10/25/2014 5:21:44 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

So once again you make a claim that someone said something yet can't seem to find a link to back up your bullshit.


Only in your mind you stupid cow.

If you cant read a simple sentence without understanding nuances, maybe you should go back to grade school. You didnt even manage to do it in the simple post I presented. If you wish to go down the childish route of pedantics, thats your fucking problem and not mine.




thishereboi -> RE: Canadian gun control... (10/25/2014 5:47:40 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53


quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

So once again you make a claim that someone said something yet can't seem to find a link to back up your bullshit.


Only in your mind you stupid cow.

If you cant read a simple sentence without understanding nuances, maybe you should go back to grade school. You didnt even manage to do it in the simple post I presented. If you wish to go down the childish route of pedantics, thats your fucking problem and not mine.




You are the one making claims and then failing to back them up. Throwing out childish insults isn't going to change that but it seems to be all you have.




Politesub53 -> RE: Canadian gun control... (10/25/2014 5:56:42 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

You are the one making claims and then failing to back them up. Throwing out childish insults isn't going to change that but it seems to be all you have.


Learn to not only read, but comprehend, than get back to me.

laughable that you moan about insults, given your posting history.




Kirata -> RE: Canadian gun control... (10/26/2014 2:46:49 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

laughable that you moan about insults, given your posting history.

Well in all fairness, she's never called you a "stupid cow." [:)]

K.








MercTech -> RE: Canadian gun control... (10/26/2014 6:31:29 AM)

I've been a yank among the Canadians since June this year. I get a lot of questions about U.S. and guns. "Do you really carry a pistol to be safe when you are home?" Sheesh, what you learn from watching news that is really scare tactics for ratings.

On open carry.... being in a state where open carry is legal in no way means you can carry a gun anywhere. What it means that if there is not a public safety reason to ban firearms; it is legal for you to carry one openly. You can carry in a car, you can't carry in a bar. You can carry to put posts in, you can't carry to post a letter in. You can carry in your room but not carry buying a broom. ..... firearms are restricted by use of the venue in "open carry" states not blanket bans for everyone everywhere. i.e. no firearms in courtrooms, school grounds, mass transportation terminals, government offices, places licensed to sell alchohol, stadiums, gymnasiums. Private business may post their place of business "no firearms allowed" and the ban is enforced by law. (I'm mentioning provisions of Mississippi state law that I am most familiar with. Other states may differ.) The point is that "open carry state" in no way means "Wild Wild West"... until they get steam powered walking spiders at least..

From what I gather on Canadian gun laws from talking to the fellows who hunt; the key thing is the "License to Acquire". Plus you have to have a secure storage for any weapons in your home. You have to have your license to acquire to purchase a firearm and renew annually while you own the weapon. Sheesh, if you want to borrow your dad's rifle you have to get your license to acquire. Acquire a pistol? Not likely bub! Just letting my fellow U.S. citizens know what it looks like on the deckplates. Guns aren't banned in Canada but regulated tightly.

Tight regulation still didn't prevent nut job Islamic converts from arming themselves and assaulting the parliament building. I am of the personal opinion that if the front line security guards and been armed and trained to use arms the fruit loops would not have gotten as far as they did. Shooting the honor guard at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier in the back deserves some special corner of hell.





thishereboi -> RE: Canadian gun control... (10/26/2014 6:32:07 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

laughable that you moan about insults, given your posting history.

Well in all fairness, she's never called you a "stupid cow." [:)]

K.








No I didn't. And I notice with all his huffing and puffing he still hasn't given us a link to back up his bullshit statement.




DesideriScuri -> RE: Canadian gun control... (10/26/2014 9:17:48 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53
quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi
quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53
You continually suggest the only solution is to flood the streets with guns, some of us are more enlightened.

Well if that is true then you should have no problems linking a post where she suggested the answer is to flood the streets with guns. Otherwise we are going to have to assume you are just talking out of your ass again.

Unlike you, I am bright enough to know what the fuck I am talking about.
Do you really think arming everyone in the UK wouldnt be flooding the streets with guns, because Aylee suggested the Rotherham case would be different if everyone had access to firearms. I know you are just trolling like usual, like you normally fucking do, but I felt the need to ask all the same.


Where did anyone say that everyone in the UK should be armed? Suggesting everyone have access to arms doesn't mean everyone is going to be armed. We aren't all armed in the US, are we? Yet, our access isn't amazingly limited at all. What makes you think allowing UK Citizens who want firearms to be allowed to have firearms means that all UK Citizens will be armed, and that guns will flood the streets (I haven't seen a gun being carried on the street by anyone but a LEO, though I do know there have been at least some concealed carrying).




Page: <<   < prev  7 8 [9] 10 11   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875