quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

You can twist it to be racist if you like - I didn't bring race or colour into it; you have.

If DC has a bad rep because it has loads of gangs and drugs etc, then any ban will have little or no effect.
Your police won't do their job and 'law abiding citizens' run and hide and won't help either.
I have no idea if DC has more blacks than VA so don't try to play the race card with me.
If VA is just a better place to be, so be it.
If you want to believe it is the blacks that make DC a bad area - that makes YOU the racist, not me.

And obviously, those that already had firearms, used them like they always did do.
If new criminals wanted to get in on the act but couldn't get a firearm, they used something else instead.

Just like jihadists have worked out that getting hold of guns over here is getting harder for them.
It's not so easy to go on a shooting spree like they have done in the past 2-3 years.
So what do they do??
They change tactics and use trucks to run people down or use knives to attack people.
So the gun stats don't rise but knife crime does. How surprising!! DUH!

It really isn't so hard to work these things out Bama.
But people like you want to bury your heads and because the gun stats stay the same, the measures didn't work.
You are worse than a one-trick pony with no idea of alternatives.
People outside of the US seem to be more versatile and adaptable than US citizens who appear to be rather dense in some areas and can't think out of the box.
Shit, you guys can't even make tea!

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles
I know when it came out and it is a plain and simple study of the laws and the results in the US of those laws, not some magic spell to fall under, unlike the misrepresentation of the fact and figures most anti-gun advocates spew out .

I haven't read it but I'm willing to bet that it isn't 100% objective and unbiased.

A lot of the stats that we 'spew out' come from sources that are objective and are usually internationally neutral.
I would trust those figures far more than any book written by someone with a vested interest.


ETA: and it's waaay out of date too!

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1
...
Then explain to the rest of us how the gun crazy USA is the country with the highest number of deaths per capita?

People in the USA kill each other many different ways perhaps it has nothing to do with whether the US has guns or not but just that Americans like to kill each other.

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1
Gun ownership in such high numbers creates death and misery - not reduce it.

Some proof of the correlation would be nice, the book I mentioned seems to say otherwise.

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1
Bama argues that gun deaths are reducing by what he calls 'a significant amount'.
By my calculation, it would take more than a century to bring it down to the levels of other civilised countries.
That ain't good enough.

Then might I suggest you move to one of those "civilized countries", I kind of like it here.
;-)

He lives in the UK , why do you think he knows everything.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles
It is commonly known that "statistics" can be twisted to make even lies seem true.

But if you read the book, you would see that the author doesn't spend a lot of time editorializing and a spends lot time pouring over the statistics and questioning and reexamining them to make sure they are saying what they appear to be saying.

As for being out of date, we are not talking about the 1800's here, we are talking about the late 20th century. Even then only the numbers will have changed but the conclusions would more than likely be pretty much the same.

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

I know the book he quotes is waaay out of date.

I also know that every civilised country outside of the US has waaay less gun crime than you do.
What was it tamaka used to try and justify the figures??
741 people shot in the US - in a gun society.
We have had 4 in the same period - in a non-gun society.
You have 5x our population yet 185x the deaths by gun.
That proves our system works - our laws and our enforcement of them.
Something you guys don't apear to be able to achieve or even come close.

I don't need to know anything else.
Quite simply: gun culture = more deaths and almost 2 orders of magnitude out of proportion.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:


Finally, more than a few of the non-American anti gun proponents hail from a country which is one of the most surveilled countries in the free world, Great Britain, which from an American stand point is a violation of individual rights.

To be fair though, Jeff, though we're surveilled a lot here in the UK, we don't get our brains blown out by cops all the time, like you lot your side of the Atlantic seem to do. I know which I'd prefer, individual-rights-wise.

If you stay out of Chicago, Detroit, DC, gang neighborhoods that number effectively goes to zero. (All places run by liberals for the past three generations)

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles
It is commonly known that "statistics" can be twisted to make even lies seem true.

But if you read the book, you would see that the author doesn't spend a lot of time editorializing and a spends lot time pouring over the statistics and questioning and reexamining them to make sure they are saying what they appear to be saying.

As for being out of date, we are not talking about the 1800's here, we are talking about the late 20th century. Even then only the numbers will have changed but the conclusions would more than likely be pretty much the same.

You use that book to bolster your argument that flies in the face of every other statistic out there given by internationally coroborated neutral sources.

If there's one source that doesn't tally with the rest, there's only two conclusions -
1) it's waay ahead of it's time and everyone else is wrong; or,
2) it's biased and untrue.

I know which I prefer to believe (hint: it's not your out-dated book).


And I get along quite well with the EU TYVM!!

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:


Finally, more than a few of the non-American anti gun proponents hail from a country which is one of the most surveilled countries in the free world, Great Britain, which from an American stand point is a violation of individual rights.

To be fair though, Jeff, though we're surveilled a lot here in the UK, we don't get our brains blown out by cops all the time, like you lot your side of the Atlantic seem to do. I know which I'd prefer, individual-rights-wise.

If you stay out of Chicago, Detroit, DC, gang neighborhoods that number effectively goes to zero. (All places run by liberals for the past three generations)

Now we know that's not true.

Detroit 1962.

DC didn't have a mayor until 1975.

Still, guns are like drugs even if illegal...you can get them.

Plus since we know that guns don't kill people...people kill people, then Iran and any other country that wants nukes...can have nukes.

After all, nukes don't kill people...people kill people.

And if you then try to argue we can't let nukes be dev. by countries we think are lunatics then we don't want guns in the hands of people we think may be lunatics.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
What you don't know is that there have been 22 studies since then.
19 agree with Lott's conclutions.
2 say it doesn't make any difference.
1 agrees with you.
To bad that one (done by the Brady Bunch) refused peer review (all the rest submitted to it) wouldn't reveil it sourches , and would tell wat their methods were.
You also add to your ignorance the fact that after peer review Lott corrected concerns about his methods and still came to the same conclusions and came through per review much better the 2nd time.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or

Well let me pose a question :

If you are say out in the garage and some guy comes up and wants to rob you, regardless of whether he is armed or not, and you pull out a gun and he runs away, do you call the cops ?

This is the US and I tell you, I bet most people don't. As long as they didn't have to pull the trigger they usually want to keep their mouth shut. Like me, I go out to the garage to smoke pot. the cops come and ask "what do I smell here ?", of course I answer "Lumber". But I do not need the hassle of talking to them and I do not need the hassle of a dead body either. I wouid have to call the kid to dig a hole, and I can't count on him in the middle of the night because he works days.

And there are crimes prevented just by the perp knowing you (or someone) is armed. Show me how many armed robberies took place at police stations. I know one happened at a gun store a few years back but that was a fluke. Another place is certain bars. they have a law now, which I think could be fought on Constitutional grounds, that you can't bring a gun to a bar. But armed robberies are still very rare at like biker bars because they like me, simply do not care what is legal and what is not. If the guy who shoots you goes to jail for thirty days and has to pay a fine, you are just as dead.

Getting caught killed or maimed is what prevents crime here. This is not a civilised society. We are an arrogant and spiteful people. Other countries are a bit different. What's ore their governments have learned that it is easier to manage people who are happy and content. The US government seems to want to do the opposite, and this is both parties, everyone. You get a job with the government here most people get on a power trip. Cops are the worst when it happens to them. Licensed to kill, and with attitude, and hatred.

But if anyone want to say we should not have guns, ask why the police have them. There is a reason.

We have the same reason.

T^T

It is perfectly legal to prohibit guns on private property...Re: Repub National Convention.

It is legal to keep other people from bringing guns onto your property, the government prohibiting you from having them on your property is quite a diiferent thing.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:


Finally, more than a few of the non-American anti gun proponents hail from a country which is one of the most surveilled countries in the free world, Great Britain, which from an American stand point is a violation of individual rights.

To be fair though, Jeff, though we're surveilled a lot here in the UK, we don't get our brains blown out by cops all the time, like you lot your side of the Atlantic seem to do. I know which I'd prefer, individual-rights-wise.

If you stay out of Chicago, Detroit, DC, gang neighborhoods that number effectively goes to zero. (All places run by liberals for the past three generations)

Now we know that's not true.

Detroit 1962.

DC didn't have a mayor until 1975.

Still, guns are like drugs even if illegal...you can get them.

Plus since we know that guns don't kill people...people kill people, then Iran and any other country that wants nukes...can have nukes.

After all, nukes don't kill people...people kill people.

And if you then try to argue we can't let nukes be dev. by countries we think are lunatics then we don't want guns in the hands of people we think may be lunatics.

quote:

ORIGINAL: WinsomeDefiance

quote:

ORIGINAL: CaptR

quote:

ORIGINAL: WinsomeDefiance

Yes, my friend who frequents gun shows said background check only. Buy and walk out.

That shouldn't happen. I'm surprised it does.

Why shouldn't it happen? I go to gun shows and purchase firearms. I'm law abiding, my guns are registered, I've passed the required background checks and been declared safe and sane. You tell me why I shouldn't be able to leave the premises with my purchase.

I said that, because I thought they were breaking state laws. As I said later, I had a brain fart and forgot that each state has its own regulations.

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles
Oh I get it, you live in the UK and have no clue about what the US is all about. Your country is too small to have real Federal and State laws. The US stands for United States, meaning it is a group of individual States bound together by agreement, much like the EU is trying to do, no thanks to the UK. That means that each State is responsible for governing itself and making its own laws and the Federal Government is suppose to be the "mediator" between the States to hold them together and smooth things out between them.

"supposed to be" being the operative words. Clearly, it isn't working too well is it.

And I lived in the US for more than 8 months too - in NC and FL.
So at least I have a little first-hand experience of the US and not just a 2 week vacation in Disneyland.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:


Finally, more than a few of the non-American anti gun proponents hail from a country which is one of the most surveilled countries in the free world, Great Britain, which from an American stand point is a violation of individual rights.

To be fair though, Jeff, though we're surveilled a lot here in the UK, we don't get our brains blown out by cops all the time, like you lot your side of the Atlantic seem to do. I know which I'd prefer, individual-rights-wise.

If you stay out of Chicago, Detroit, DC, gang neighborhoods that number effectively goes to zero. (All places run by liberals for the past three generations)

Now we know that's not true.

Detroit 1962.

DC didn't have a mayor until 1975.

Still, guns are like drugs even if illegal...you can get them.

Plus since we know that guns don't kill people...people kill people, then Iran and any other country that wants nukes...can have nukes.

After all, nukes don't kill people...people kill people.

And if you then try to argue we can't let nukes be dev. by countries we think are lunatics then we don't want guns in the hands of people we think may be lunatics.

DC passed the gun ban after home rules went into effect. I lived there from 75-80 It was a cesspool when I got there and once they got home rue taht became the good old day. Remember their first mayor went to jail for dealig drugs. When he got out he ran again played the race cardb and got re-elected. Any city that would elect a convicted drug dealer is corrupt tom the core.

quote:

ORIGINAL: CaptR

quote:

ORIGINAL: WinsomeDefiance

quote:

ORIGINAL: CaptR

quote:

ORIGINAL: WinsomeDefiance

Yes, my friend who frequents gun shows said background check only. Buy and walk out.

That shouldn't happen. I'm surprised it does.

Why shouldn't it happen? I go to gun shows and purchase firearms. I'm law abiding, my guns are registered, I've passed the required background checks and been declared safe and sane. You tell me why I shouldn't be able to leave the premises with my purchase.

I said that, because I thought they were breaking state laws. As I said later, I had a brain fart and forgot that each state has its own regulations.

No, when purchasing a firearm in Virginia you go through a federal background check as well as a state. It's my understanding federal background checks are required in every state.

quote:

ORIGINAL: CaptR

quote:

ORIGINAL: WinsomeDefiance

quote:

ORIGINAL: CaptR

quote:

ORIGINAL: WinsomeDefiance

Yes, my friend who frequents gun shows said background check only. Buy and walk out.

That shouldn't happen. I'm surprised it does.

Why shouldn't it happen? I go to gun shows and purchase firearms. I'm law abiding, my guns are registered, I've passed the required background checks and been declared safe and sane. You tell me why I shouldn't be able to leave the premises with my purchase.

I said that, because I thought they were breaking state laws. As I said later, I had a brain fart and forgot that each state has its own regulations.

No, when purchasing a firearm in Virginia you go through a federal background check as well as a state. It's my understanding federal background checks are required in every state.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles
Oh I get it, you live in the UK and have no clue about what the US is all about. Your country is too small to have real Federal and State laws. The US stands for United States, meaning it is a group of individual States bound together by agreement, much like the EU is trying to do, no thanks to the UK. That means that each State is responsible for governing itself and making its own laws and the Federal Government is suppose to be the "mediator" between the States to hold them together and smooth things out between them.

"supposed to be" being the operative words. Clearly, it isn't working too well is it.

And I lived in the US for more than 8 months too - in NC and FL.
So at least I have a little first-hand experience of the US and not just a 2 week vacation in Disneyland.

It's working okay, no States have seceded lately unlike the UK did from the EU.

Yep, you lived here more than 8 months so you know all about the US. You could have been born in the US and lived here all your life and there are parts of the US, if you moved there, it would take 20 or 30 years before they even considered you a neighbor.

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji
The problem isn't here. It's your mind numbed little control freak needing to bury your head because the big bad world is bad and scary.

The big bad world is only scary in the US.

Everywhere else where they have guns (yes, we do have them, just like you), is relatively peaceful.

You need to read a newspaper once in a while, because what you're saying "ain't necessarily so".

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1
Ok... so quote me figures from any other civilised country that show where the gun deaths are higher than the US??

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1
And I don't read newspapers - I have 2 different news channels streaming 24/7 in more than one room.

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1
Newspapers are out of date before they get printed.

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1
Oh, and the UK stands for United Kingdom.
We don't even have states - we have completely individual countries bound together!!

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:


Finally, more than a few of the non-American anti gun proponents hail from a country which is one of the most surveilled countries in the free world, Great Britain, which from an American stand point is a violation of individual rights.

To be fair though, Jeff, though we're surveilled a lot here in the UK, we don't get our brains blown out by cops all the time, like you lot your side of the Atlantic seem to do. I know which I'd prefer, individual-rights-wise.

If you stay out of Chicago, Detroit, DC, gang neighborhoods that number effectively goes to zero. (All places run by liberals for the past three generations)

Now we know that's not true.

Detroit 1962.

DC didn't have a mayor until 1975.

Still, guns are like drugs even if illegal...you can get them.

Plus since we know that guns don't kill people...people kill people, then Iran and any other country that wants nukes...can have nukes.

After all, nukes don't kill people...people kill people.

And if you then try to argue we can't let nukes be dev. by countries we think are lunatics then we don't want guns in the hands of people we think may be lunatics.

DC passed the gun ban after home rules went into effect. I lived there from 75-80 It was a cesspool when I got there and once they got home rue taht became the good old day. Remember their first mayor went to jail for dealig drugs. When he got out he ran again played the race cardb and got re-elected. Any city that would elect a convicted drug dealer is corrupt tom the core.

Well no big deal but DC's first mayor was Walter Washington, got 2 terms and retired into obscurity.

You write of Marion Barry who was a scum bag, simply protected is entourage and political structure, got set up for crack cocaine possession, (not sales) served the full 6 mos. of his sentence and left office.

Then he came back when elected to the city council and the mayor again but was stripped of all relevant mayoral powers by the Clinton admin. following up on congress having created a District Control Bd. to assume all powers.