Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Law abiding citizen.....

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Wow- what a loooong thread on a subject that has all kinds of logical proof and statistics that show guns are not evil.

    Florida- eased laws on carry permits. Result to date- crime went down.

    Canada- banned guns. Result- [recent articles] cops are having problems with armed criminals. Gun violence/use of guns in crimes is UP. (They are trying to blame "America's Culture of Violence" for the problem)

    Great Britian- Gun Ban in effect. Gun violence is up. More and more armed LEOs are being used. The old "unarmed bobby" may just disappear in a few more years.

    The Land Down Under- gun ban in effect. Gun violence is up.

    Washington DC- Gun ban in effect. Yep, gun crimes are up.

    Vermont- guns are ok. Not much gun crime.

    It's been shown time and time again, that:

    - an armed society is a polite society.

    - criminals don't care about the law and taking guns away from law-abiding citizens makes them victims.

    - generally speaking law-abiding citizens don't commit crimes with guns (while we can't dispute there are incidents of gun violence in domestic situations, there are many more incidents of knife, blunt instrument, personal weapons[ie. hands and feet] incidents than gun use) An example of this is that very little gun violence is committed by permit holders in CT. Typically, the people that obey the law and get a permit are people that obey the law- we shouldn't fear them.

    - there are almost NO examples of a person who legally owns a fully automatic weapon using it in a criminal incident. We shouldn't fear those people.

    We have this tendency to try to legislate the tools used rather than the people who use them. The fact is it's the people committing the crimes that are the problem. Once we educate the people that they are wrong to break any of the many laws on the books that pertain to the use of all of the tools, we'll stop a lot of the crime. Demonizing the implement they use is counter-productive.

    People kill. Knives, baseballs, cars, beer bottles, .....even guns- don't.
    "Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince" - Unknown Author
    ______________________________________________

    "That government is best which governs the least, because its people discipline themselves." - Thomas Jefferson
    ______________________________________________

    “There are two ways to conquer and enslave a nation. One is by the sword. The other is by debt.” - John Adams

    Comment


    • *claps & whistles loudly*

      An impressionable child in a tumultuous world, and they say I'm at a difficult stage... --Meat Loaf

      Professional Stupidity Recognition Technician

      Comment


      • My cousin, a statistician, got these for me.

        developed nations murder rates: gun crimes included
        per 100,000

        US (95-97) 8.2

        Finland (96) 3.3

        Northern Ireland (96-97) 2.3

        Scotland (96-97) 2.2

        Belgium (93-94) 1.8

        Source: World Health Organization

        And Kleck's infamous study. For a moment, let us assume that Kleck was correct in his 2.5 million statistic:

        34% percent of these, according to Kleck, were burglaries.

        However, from the NCVS from that same year, it is revealed that there were 6 million burglaries. Only 1.3 million of those were "hot" (someone at home)
        Since only 41% of us households own a firearm, and since the victims in 2/3 of the occupied dwellings remained asleep, the 2.5 million figure requires us to believe that gun owners used their guns over 100% percent of the time (Hemenway 67)

        tink

        Comment


        • Also, according to Kleck, 64% of people in his survey using a gun reported it to police. Even if this were true, it often exceeds the total number of crimes reported to police. (ludwig 2000).

          Respondents from the survey claimed to have SHOT more than two hundred thousand criminals (kleck 1997). Yet each year, only one hundred thousand gunshot victims, criminal or otherwise, are admitted to emergency rooms

          Nonwhites are the most likely to feel less safe when more people own guns, as 61% feel less safe (Miller, Azrael, and Hemenway 2000)

          -tink
          Last edited by Tinkertoys; 01-17-2006, 10:28 AM.

          Comment


          • I did, in fact, read Lott's book during my 2 plus months of research for counterarguments. I had my cosuin fact check it, and it was full of holes.

            -tink

            Comment


            • "Guns are used against wome to intimidate and kill. More than six percent of women report being threatened by a gun, with 3 percent having reported one used against them. Most of these threats were by intimates (Tjaden and Thoennes 1998)." A national survey found that threats in the home using guns against women were far more common than home self defense gun uses by women against anyone (Azrael and Hemenway 2000).

              Note: I heavily borrowed parts from David Hemenway's book, Private Guns, Public Health for this post. Borrowed sentences can be found on page 123.

              -tink

              Comment


              • Now I say, enough of the lower courts, here are cases relating to the second amendment:

                "it is clear that the Second Amendment guarantees no right to keep and bear a firearm that does not have some reasonable relationship to the preservation of a militia." (Lewis v. United States, 445 US 55, 66 [198-]).

                "the Second Amendment protects the people's right to maintain an effective state militia, and does not establish an individual right to own or possess firearms for personal or other use." (Silveira v. Lockyer, 312 F. 3d 1052, 1066 [9th Cir. 2002])

                "Considering this history, we cannot conclude that the Second Amendment protects the individual possession of military weapons" (United States v. Hale, 978 F. 2d 1016, 1019 [8th US Cir. 1992])

                -tink

                Comment


                • according to FNA209, there are very few cases in which a person who legally owns a fully automatic weapon has used it in a crime. While true, look at the restrictions, which are very stringent. Guns are guns, no matter who holds them. the only way to halt gun crimes is to limit their manufacture.

                  -tink

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Tinkertoys
                    [9th Cir. 2002])
                    -tink
                    That is all you really needed to say there Tink. Actually...in this state, the State Supreme Court has held that the second amendment actually IS an individual right, and further that carrying openly in public was also a given right.


                    .....now for your statistics. I don't really doubt them...but you miss what we have been saying all along...(before the Tink show there... ) Where there are more guns...there will be more guns --to the exclusion of other weapons of availability-- used in crimes. This is simply a symptom of a free society. In Austrailia they banned swords and are looking into long kitchen knives the last I heard. Why? Because the bad guys started using them in crime instead of guns, but the CRIME RATE INCREASED.

                    Tink ..man get off that horse...its starting to rot under you....
                    An impressionable child in a tumultuous world, and they say I'm at a difficult stage... --Meat Loaf

                    Professional Stupidity Recognition Technician

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by zap
                      That is all you really needed to say there Tink. Actually...in this state, the State Supreme Court has held that the second amendment actually IS an individual right, and further that carrying openly in public was also a given right.


                      .....now for your statistics. I don't really doubt them...but you miss what we have been saying all along...(before the Tink show there... ) Where there are more guns...there will be more guns --to the exclusion of other weapons of availability-- used in crimes. This is simply a symptom of a free society. In Austrailia they banned swords and are looking into long kitchen knives the last I heard. Why? Because the bad guys started using them in crime instead of guns, but the CRIME RATE INCREASED.

                      Tink ..man get off that horse...its starting to rot under you....

                      Actually, the knives thing is in England. Look at the violent crime rates for other countries where gun control is used: they are lower than ours. We have the highest rates of robbery, sexual assault, burglary and car theft, among other things, yet we have the most guns per person. Also, even if criminals switch to other weapons, decreasing the thousands of gun deaths a year is well worth it. How easy is it to kill fifteen people in a crowd with a knife? It's not, but with a gun, it is. i think here I have at least successfully destroyed the 2.5 million self defense gun uses, and for now, I feel satisfied.

                      -tink

                      Comment


                      • [QUOTE=zap]That is all you really needed to say there Tink. Actually...in this state, the State Supreme Court has held that the second amendment actually IS an individual right, and further that carrying openly in public was also a given right.


                        Are you talking about Ohio?

                        -tink

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Tinkertoys
                          Guns are guns, no matter who holds them. the only way to halt gun crimes is to limit their manufacture.
                          I love this argument. Statistically speaking in the US, cars are responsible for far more deaths every year than firearms. So, does that mean we should stop making cars? How come we don't see more anti-car advocates protesting their manufacture? Could it be because they are a necessary piece of a equipment to guarentee their freedom? Well guess what, us warriors feel the same way about guns.

                          Tink your quotes have no merit. Mainly because I still legally own guns, but also because anyone can quote anyone saying anything and take it out of context.

                          Your statistics are from someone I've never heard of. I'd trust the numbers more if they came from a wider vareity of sources rather than someone with an agenda.

                          Tink, there's the old addage "If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns." Cliche to be sure, but still very true. Don't you understand that outlawing firearms will only take them out of the hands of law-abiding citizens? Most guns that are used in crimes all over the US- including Columbine- were illegaly obtained. The frustrating part is the gun laws that are made right now aren't currently enforced. What since would it make to make new ones?

                          Although I know I'm talking to a brick wall. To quote Euripides, "Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish." I'll never win an arguement with a liberal- because they like to use emotions and feelings and I use clear, cold logic.
                          You have no right to not be offended.-Neal Boortz

                          Comment


                          • [QUOTE=Centurion44]I love this argument. Statistically speaking in the US, cars are responsible for far more deaths every year than firearms. So, does that mean we should stop making cars? How come we don't see more anti-car advocates protesting their manufacture? Could it be because they are a necessary piece of a equipment to guarentee their freedom? Well guess what, us warriors feel the same way about guns.

                            Guns are not intended to kill people, and are used far more than guns. Statistically speaking, per use, guns kill or injure scores more people than cars.

                            Tink your quotes have no merit. Mainly because I still legally own guns, but also because anyone can quote anyone saying anything and take it out of context.

                            fine then, research them. I think you will find that I did not take the rulings out of context. Partly because I posted the ENTIRE conclusion to the ruling.

                            Your statistics are from someone I've never heard of. I'd trust the numbers more if they came from a wider vareity of sources rather than someone with an agenda.
                            I cited a variety of sources, and by the way. David Hemenway is a professional researcher with the Harvard Injury Control Research center.

                            Tink, there's the old addage "If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns." Cliche to be sure, but still very true. Don't you understand that outlawing firearms will only take them out of the hands of law-abiding citizens? Most guns that are used in crimes all over the US- including Columbine- were illegaly obtained. The frustrating part is the gun laws that are made right now aren't currently enforced. What since would it make to make new ones?

                            first of all, the NRA has lobbied to restrict the ATF's power. And your funny little cliche is pretty unrelated to what is at hand. But rather than fall into the argument about England, How many criminals in japan have guns?

                            Although I know I'm talking to a brick wall. To quote Euripides, "Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish." I'll never win an arguement with a liberal- because they like to use emotions and feelings and I use clear, cold logic. Sure, it is clear, cold logic. But it is also illogical.

                            Comment


                            • On the Columbine topic, the weapons were LEGALLY purchased, according to testimony given to House Judiciary Committee by Robyn Anderson, on january 27, 2000. The weapons were purchased using a loophole, the dealer at the gun show the firearms were purchased from was not required by law to have any paperwork and the boys were not required to undergo a background check.

                              -tink

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Centurion44
                                Although I know I'm talking to a brick wall. To quote Euripides, "Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish." I'll never win an arguement with a liberal- because they like to use emotions and feelings and I use clear, cold logic.
                                ^5

                                He won't even see the idiocy in this statement:

                                Originally posted by Tinkertoys
                                i think here I have at least successfully destroyed the 2.5 million self defense gun uses, and for now, I feel satisfied.

                                .......I think he's just here to entertain himself....he's the only one who sees that as a result of his babbling
                                An impressionable child in a tumultuous world, and they say I'm at a difficult stage... --Meat Loaf

                                Professional Stupidity Recognition Technician

                                Comment

                                MR300x250 Tablet

                                Collapse

                                What's Going On

                                Collapse

                                There are currently 4614 users online. 311 members and 4303 guests.

                                Most users ever online was 158,966 at 04:57 AM on 01-16-2021.

                                Welcome Ad

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X