Actually, it's crime across the board that is dropping. And for an examination of all the reasons why, check out the book Freakonomics. The conclusions are surprising, to say the least; I never would have thought about the reason for the drop as even being related. Wouldn't have even occurred to me.
Gun Control is ridiculous
- Thread starter Quad4_72
- Start date
-
- Tags
- gun control
Actually, it's crime across the board that is dropping. And for an examination of all the reasons why, check out the book Freakonomics. The conclusions are surprising, to say the least; I never would have thought about the reason for the drop as even being related. Wouldn't have even occurred to me.
Do you feel there would be an increase in crime?
Lothian
should be banned
Can you show me the stats behind this ?
From what I can see the numbers are not near this. I do note however that violent crime includes robbery and snatch theft. In half of all violent crime there is no injury. I also note that late night brawling is counted. This is a 'fairly common' crime in the UK. Late at night drunken lads and lasses end up fighting. Something tells me that guns wouldn't help this situation. I also note that in half of the violent crime figures for the UK the attacker is family or a friend.
Perhaps if I saw all the things you have seen as often as you have seen them I would feel different. I haven't. I do think however you need to focus on the likelihood of crimes not the severity. Then you need to look at the number of times a gun would help. You say it can happen to anyone at any time. This means you must be continuously armed. I could not live anywhere where I need (physically or mentally) to be continuously armed. That is not a life.
Lothian
should be banned
I have read it but don't remember that part. I don't recall it being tight gun laws. Am I wrong ?
Lothian
should be banned
I do. I also think each 'crime' would have the potential to be more serious. People mug because they have a need. If the people they are mugging have guns the muggers will have them as well. If muggers have guns some of them will use them.
Nope. Had nothing to do with gun laws. Get the book again; there's a whole chapter on it. They actually talk a bit about the gun laws, but conclude that they really didn't have an effect one way or the other.
Lonewulf
Humanistic Cyborg
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2005
- Messages
- 10,375
This has been mentioned before. Do you guys ever read posts?
--Hunting
--Range target shooting.
--Self defense
What's wrong with hunting, or range shooting?
Lonewulf
Humanistic Cyborg
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2005
- Messages
- 10,375
If a man is charging me, ESPECIALLY IF HE'S HOLDING A MELEE WEAPON, then YES, I will assume he is.
What if I warned him? What if I said, "I HAVE A GUN!" What if he didn't stop? You're saying I should allow him to beat me? Or kill me?
Nice. I didn't know that in the UK, it was necessary to allow someone to kill you. I am so not visiting, then, when I go over to Europe this summer.
You're silly if you think that allowing him to beat me (possibly to death) is SO much more civilized.
You seem to assume that I won't shout a warning first. I don't get this. I guess you must be more telepathic than you let on...
You don't know me. You don't know how I'd act or react in any given situation. And you ESPECIALLY don't know guns safety and what you are taught. Yet here you are, acting as if YOU are the one that's telepathic.
Stick to the topic and stop with the personal attacks on other Members - remember argue the argument not the arguer.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic Posted By: Darat
My apologies.
Last edited:
Lonewulf
Humanistic Cyborg
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2005
- Messages
- 10,375
What are your chances of being attacked without guns? Per 10,000 people.
How different are the cultures? Especially the gang/crime cultures?
How prevalent are drugs?
You're talking about two different nations, both that are quite different on multiple levels. I dont' think that a straight side-by-side comparison of violence really shows much. The fact is that you can't get shot in the UK, but fine; it's also a relatively small landmass that can keep control of firearms, I presume. In the same way that Singapore can have a total gun control over their firearms, being an island with a population of 4 million.
See, in the U.S., it's almost impossible, especially with modern record-keeping. Once a gun is stolen or resold, the paper trail gets a bit iffy.
Yet I have many friends that have, quite frankly, in the past needed to defend themselves. You may think that it's so incredibly rare, but I have friends and know others that have NEEDED the ability to defend themselves.
People here don't care about that, though. They WANT us to be beaten, or injured, or killed, or raped. We can't even have a gun just to be able to defend ourselves... or even for hunting or target shooting.
Hey, I don't expect to get bitten by a poisonous snake when going hiking, but can't I carry a bit of antivenom just in case? Or is that absolutely insane, because my chances are low?
It may have a factor, however, especially since, as I mentioned, you're talking two different cultures and landmasses, with two different population sizes. It's easier to regulate shipping in the UK (from what I understand) given that it's an island, but the U.S. is huge with access to both Mexico and Canada, and the desire for firearms is very prevalent within the majority population.
Which is why I liken total gun control with prohibition. It just wouldn't work. Too many people that want their firearms, and too many people willing to supply 'em. We can't even keep illegals from crossing the border when the party in power seems to want to prevent them... how can we prevent guns smuggling? This is even ignoring the firearms still out there. Baron and The Fool love to skip over that bit. And when people refuse to give up their guns... well, people like Baron don't mind throwing someone in jail for that, I suppose.
(For the record, Lothian, I don't mean any vitrial towards you that I've been directing towards Baron or The Fool. You're actually coming back with some reasoned responses. You're far more civilized.
)
Last edited:
Lonewulf
Humanistic Cyborg
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2005
- Messages
- 10,375
So if I kill you with a knife or an axe, it's better than with a gun?
Explain.
I find it interesting how Baron talks about how crazy I am, making all these wild and bizarre assumptions on me, yet you're the one that seems to think that it's okay to kill someone just for having a gun on an airplane, without taking a single moment to reason. Yet, baron doesn't think that YOU'RE crazy, oh no sir, because you just happen to agree with him! It's much more sane to rush an air marshal and kill him... that is, after all, Baron's idea of "civilized". LOL!
Last edited:
baron
Unregistered
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2006
- Messages
- 8,627
Well, you have shown your true colours. You really are some twisted piece of work. I suppose you deserve congratulations for keeping the real you hidden for so long.
I don't know who "The Fool" is, but I doubt he has a desire to see a woman raped and killed any more than I do.
Perhaps you should apologise for these unwaranted accusations before you're banned.
For 15 pages I have repeatedly asked you and other gun supporters to address the issue - the actual statistics. I, and others, have posted links to documents and figures that demand answers. You have not attempted to make sensible argument, instead you have shown yourself to be an unreasonable, paranoid individual of low intelligence who, if I had my way, would not be allowed to wield a sharp stick let alone a gun.
The upshot is you haven't got a clue what you're talking about. Your naive posturing is an embarrassment. In a way I feel bad for you. It can't be easy thinking like you do, being scared all the time whilst bluffing it out under the guise of your macho internet alter-ego.
Anyway, I've nothing more to say to you other than when I accept or reject your apology.
To address those who are merely misguided in the argument as opposed to simply sick, I will check back on this thread later in the hope that somebody can provide a reasoned response to the actual figures - the murder rate, the murder by firearms rate and the child death by firearm stats.
Last edited:
As far as I know gun control laws are about controlling guns not knives or axes.
Lonewulf
Humanistic Cyborg
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2005
- Messages
- 10,375
Which we have. Numerous times.
And many answered them.
I'm sure that others would disagree.
Aw, I love you too. I wouldn't trust you with a firearm either, considering the way you yourself have acted throughout this thread.
It's not coming.
Actually, I do know what I'm talking about. Just because I don't agree with you and dislike how The Fool handwaved off a claim that a woman mangaed to survive a situation thanks to threatening with a gun...
Naive posturing? Sure. I'm not scared all the time, though. Sorry, but stop acting telepathic when you suck at it.
I have a question: HOw is this not ad hominem?:
Yes, I'm dumb, unreasonable, AND paranoid. When, actually, I'm not.
Last edited:
Lonewulf
Humanistic Cyborg
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2005
- Messages
- 10,375
Yet, let me make this jump...
If someone is willing to kill with a gun, he is also more than willing to kill with another weapon. I know, it's crazy, maybe I'm being presumptuous, but there are plenty of killers that do not use guns. Many people have died from being BEATEN to death. One of my friends has been beaten (almost to death) several times, making it out through only force of will.
I consider being stabbed with a knife, or hit in the head with a crowbar or axe, to be only slightly worse than being shot. Yet here I only see guns statistics thrown about, yet no non-gun violence statistics thrown out. Yet their point is that if you get rid of guns, ALL violent crime lowers. I do not agree with this presumption, and I think that getting your head chopped off is just as fatal as getting shot in the head. In fact, getting shot in the head, assuming it doesn't hit your brain (or the most vital parts of your brain), you can survive. Axe being buried halfway into your neck, I don't think so.
Time to bury another myth: Knives are as dangerous as guns.
I once again urge people to look up the old gun thread. There's much to be learned, and we don't have to go over the same, worn out arguments again.
Who here have indicated that they want a woman to be raped?
Who here have indicated that they want a woman to be killed?
Where has this point been made?
Lonewulf
Humanistic Cyborg
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2005
- Messages
- 10,375
I assumed that that was the main issue. I mean, you want to lower crime, right? Or do you just mean gun crime?
What's the point of preventing people from getting shot, when it just makes them more likely to get stabbed or hacked?
Lothian
should be banned
Nothing if that is what tickles your fancy. However, you don't need to carry a gun at all times in case you feel the urge to go target shooting or hunting.
Skibum said that anyone can attack at anytime. It follows that to protect himself from anyone at anytime he must always be armed. I said that I did not have the same fear of being attacked.
Sure if you want to go target shooting or hunting you need a gun but the point I was making was the constant need to be armed not the occasional leisure shooting times.
So no one has actually made that point?
Lonewulf
Humanistic Cyborg
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2005
- Messages
- 10,375
Miss Anthrope said:
Yet her story was handwaved away. This suggests to me that people really don't care about her ability to defend herself, or that people actually exist that need to defend themselves.
People like Baron seem to assume that, quite frankly, you can only pull the trigger with a firearm. There's no such thing as simply threatening or saying, "I HAVE A GUN!", which alleviates many potential hostile situations.
Last edited: