| Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Micheal Dietrich
Terradyne Networks
   |
Posted - 2008.05.23 21:39:00 -
[1]
By Carey Gillam Fri May 23, 11:07 AM ET
KANSAS CITY, Missouri (Reuters) - A Missouri car dealer said on Thursday sales have soared at his auto and truck business since launching a promotion this week that promises buyers a free handgun or a $250 gas card with every purchase.
Max Motors, a small Butler, Missouri dealership that has as its logo a grimacing cowboy wielding a pistol, has sold more than 30 cars and trucks in the last three days, far more than its normal volume. And owner Mark Muller credits his decision to start offering buyers their choice of a $250 gas card or a $250 credit at a gun shop.
"This thing has taken off. Sales have quadrupled," said Muller. The store sells both used and new vehicles including General Motors and Ford products.
Every buyer so far "except one guy from Canada and one old guy" has elected to take the gun, Muller said. Muller recommends his customers select a Kel-Tec .380 pistol.
"It's a nice little handgun that fits in your pocket," he said.
Muller said the promotion was inspired by Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, who is vying with Hillary Clinton to be the Democratic nominee for the presidential election in November.
"We did it because of Barack Obama. He said all those people in the Midwest, you've got to have compassion for them because they're clinging to their guns and their Bibles. I found that quite offensive."
"We all go to church on Sunday and we all carry guns," said Muller. "I've got a gun in my pocket right now. I have a rifle in my truck. We've got to shoot the coyotes out here, they're attacking our cows, our chickens. We're not clinging to nothing. We're just damn glad to live in a free country where you can have a gun if you want. This is the way it ought to be."
Rules for this thread:
Keep it civil, outright bashing will be reported.
GO!
|
Zephyr Rengate
Prophets Of a Damned Universe
|
Posted - 2008.05.23 21:41:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Zephyr Rengate on 23/05/2008 21:43:17
Rednecks 
"except one guy from Canada and one old guy" - Made me lol
 Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
I habe no life. 
|
Micheal Dietrich
Terradyne Networks
|
Posted - 2008.05.23 21:47:00 -
[3]
This is one time when the term redneck really does apply 
I live in a area where if you don't see a gun rack in a truck it's either brand spankin new or from out of town.
|
Frezik
Basically Outdated Stereo Equiptment
|
Posted - 2008.05.23 22:02:00 -
[4]
I once bought a $300 car (for the sole purpose of learning to drive a stick) that the previous owner forgot to clean out before selling it. I got a free subwoofer box, amplifier, CD boombox, and weed pouch (hidden in the spare tire toolkit). Though not any actual weed, unless there was some elsewhere on the car that I never found. Had to be careful not to give a police officer an excuse to search the car. 
|
Bigeasy
Ad Astra Vexillum
Brutally Clever Empire
|
Posted - 2008.05.24 00:00:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Frezik
Had to be careful not to give a police officer an excuse to search the car.
Just tell him no...
Let them hate, so long as they fear-Caligula |
Lithalnas
Headcrabs
|
Posted - 2008.05.24 00:06:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Bigeasy
Originally by: Frezik
Had to be careful not to give a police officer an excuse to search the car.
Just tell him no...
if its stoored properly, its ok. In CA you have to have the gun locked away from the ammo in the trunk. In midwest states, its ok to have a gunrack and it unloaded.
-------------
fixed for greater eve content |
Keorythe
Terra Rosa Militia
Sev3rance
|
Posted - 2008.05.24 01:11:00 -
[7]
In Texas you can transport a loaded firearm if you're going across counties but if it has a safety it must be engaged (this includes rifles and shotguns). If you're within the same county it has to be unloaded and stored properly in the trunk unless you have a concealed carry license in which case you can wear it on your body whenever. You just have be sure to hand the CCL along with you drivers license and insurance to the officer at the same time even if he doesn't ask and even if you aren't carrying a weapon.
To the gun or gas thing...what kind of selection does he have? A keltec .380 is a crappy little plinker. I mean if he had an M9 or a P226 I'd be all over that.
Awesome way to protest Obama's foot in mouth comment about Midwest people. Funny how the first thing people try to use to demean someone from that area or further south is the whole guns, bible, redneck lines.
|
Megan Maynard
Out of Order
|
Posted - 2008.05.24 02:46:00 -
[8]
HAHA, epic.
Guns are really fun, fun to shoot, fun to clean, fun to look at, fun to reload, fun to buy, fun to customize.
No gun law ever lowered crime rates effectively. Gun education is a proven method to lower crime rates.
Canada has 4 times the number of guns per person, yet their gun crime per person is lower then the states.
It's a culture thing. If you grow up with guns, and learn to respect them, you are a better citizen and a safer person then someone who has no clue what a gun is.
You aren't going to stop someone from shooting another person committed to the task. They will still find a gun no matter how many laws are put into place.
Gun laws take guns out of the hands of good people who should have them and puts them into the black market and those who abuse them....
Miz Stelth Bomerz iz the ****nit.
|
Xrak
Black Eclipse Corp
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.05.24 03:11:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Megan Maynard
HAHA, epic.
Guns are really fun, fun to shoot, fun to clean, fun to look at, fun to reload, fun to buy, fun to customize.
No gun law ever lowered crime rates effectively. Gun education is a proven method to lower crime rates.
Canada has 4 times the number of guns per person, yet their gun crime per person is lower then the states.
It's a culture thing. If you grow up with guns, and learn to respect them, you are a better citizen and a safer person then someone who has no clue what a gun is.
You aren't going to stop someone from shooting another person committed to the task. They will still find a gun no matter how many laws are put into place.
Gun laws take guns out of the hands of good people who should have them and puts them into the black market and those who abuse them....
College shootings etc etc.
|
Surfin's PlunderBunny
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.05.24 03:26:00 -
[10]
Guns can easily be aquired illegally (And cheaper). Just a matter of talking to the right people 
If someone is going to go on a shooting spree, I don't think they care about the legality of the gun.
One funny thing... try to find a school shooting in Utah. I been trying but can't find any, only state in the union that allows students to carry on campus
() ()
(â;..;)â
(")(") |
Nomakai Delateriel
Shadow Company
Souls of Vengeance
|
Posted - 2008.05.24 06:38:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Megan Maynard
Canada has 4 times the number of guns per person, yet their gun crime per person is lower then the states.
It may be an issue of mentality indeed. And laws for that matter.
1. It's illegal to own a firearm without a permit.
2. Prohibited firearms licenses are extremely rare. A prohibited weapon is pretty much anything that doesn't fit into the restricted or unrestricted categories.
3. Restricted firearms are also relatively rare. Surveys indicate that only about 1 in every 20 firearms in canada is a restricted firearm. Restricted firearms include ALL pistols (even flintlocks) and some rifles&shotguns. The only way you'll ever get a restricted firearm is for competitive shooting. No, you won't get one for self-defense. Restricted firearms can also only be used in designated areas (shooting ranges) and unless you're transporting it (unloaded and in unfirable condition. That is with some form of lock) directly from the range to your home (or vice versa) you need to ask for a permit (each and every time).
4. Unrestricted firearms include many types of rifles and shotguns (with a clip of 5 shots or less) and these are also illegal to use for self defense (against humans that is). It is however legal to use these weapons for hunting, target practice etc.
5. AFAIK these days owning a firearm means that you must have gone through a gun safety course.
6. Some provinces have much stricter laws.
So no. Gun ownership in Canada is nothing like gun ownership in the US.
It's more like Switzerland where pretty much everyone owns a Sig550 (everyone in the militia and everyone that chose to keep theirs after their militia service ended. If you're not in the militia however the weapon is converted to semi-auto), but the use is very restricted and there are far more rifles than handguns.
______________________________________________
-You can never earn my respect, only lose it. It's given freely, and only grudgingly retracted when necessary. |
Micheal Dietrich
Terradyne Networks
|
Posted - 2008.05.24 07:01:00 -
[12]
I love the swiss ways. I mean check out the crime rate there, super low compared to us in the states.
|
Max Payne206
|
Posted - 2008.05.24 07:47:00 -
[13]
Desert Eagle please
|
Jinx Barker
GFB Scientific
|
Posted - 2008.05.24 07:52:00 -
[14]
Sometimes I am embarrassed to be an American.... yes, yes, yes, we have a large number of crazy people in our country. Please do not judge all of us by the same token.
Does it make any difference that I was bourn and raised in Europe till I was 17? I hope so... I love my country, again, but we have nut-jobs everywhere.... look at our president, we must have suffered a national lobotomy when we elected him? And no, I did not vote for the monkey-brains.
|
Spaztick
|
Posted - 2008.05.24 09:27:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Micheal Dietrich
I love the swiss ways. I mean check out the crime rate there, super low compared to us in the states.
I wouldn't say the lower crime rate in Switzerland is directly related to the gun laws there, not that it doesn't contribute to it, but saying swiss gun laws = super low crime rates isn't accurate.
But seriously, more people should have some type of spacer in their sigs to show it's not part of the post. |
WalksWithCane
|
Posted - 2008.05.24 11:20:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Xrak
College shootings etc etc.
Yea, it's too bad that a citizen with a concealed gun permit wasn't on campus those days. Perhaps they could have saved lives instead of watching people get slaughtered like sheep while they huddled together praying that someone would stop the shooter....
|
Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba
|
Posted - 2008.05.24 12:44:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Micheal Dietrich
"We did it because of Barack Obama. He said all those people in the Midwest, you've got to have compassion for them because they're clinging to their guns and their Bibles. I found that quite offensive."
I refuse to respect religious beliefs, and i refuse to respect people who hold them. |
Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba
|
Posted - 2008.05.24 12:57:00 -
[18]
Edited by: Sokratesz on 24/05/2008 12:57:34
Originally by: WalksWithCane
Originally by: Xrak
College shootings etc etc.
Yea, it's too bad that a citizen with a concealed gun permit wasn't on campus those days. Perhaps they could have saved lives instead of watching people get slaughtered like sheep while they huddled together praying that someone would stop the shooter....
I don't think the average citizen with a gun permit would have a) the guts and b) the skill to stop a determined shooter, especially not if he's moving fast and wearing kevlar. (see virtech)
I refuse to respect religious beliefs, and i refuse to respect people who hold them. |
Mtthias Clemi
The Space Bastards
|
Posted - 2008.05.24 13:00:00 -
[19]
"You guys cling to your guns!"
"OH YEAH!! ILL SHOW YOU!!!!! FREE GUNS FOR ALL!!! HURRAYYY!!"
What?
|
Xen Gin
Universal Mining Inc
Forged Dominion
|
Posted - 2008.05.24 13:51:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Megan Maynard
No gun law ever lowered crime rates effectively. Gun education is a proven method to lower crime rates.
And the USA is accomplishing education how? If you did it Canada's way, you'd all be a lot better off.
In some places you do need guns for hunting and protection from wildlife, but a full auto glock 18c or an Uzi in downtown LA is not one of them.
The problem is that you guys give guns to people who barely (and sometimes don't) know that you don't point the barrel at yourself.
If you want to harp on about how guns save lives and that eduction works, actually show us some proof that the mass public is being educated in how to use guns.
|
Megan Maynard
Out of Order
|
Posted - 2008.05.24 15:02:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Nomakai Delateriel
Originally by: Megan Maynard
Canada has 4 times the number of guns per person, yet their gun crime per person is lower then the states.
It may be an issue of mentality indeed. And laws for that matter.
1. It's illegal to own a firearm without a permit.
2. Prohibited firearms licenses are extremely rare. A prohibited weapon is pretty much anything that doesn't fit into the restricted or unrestricted categories.
3. Restricted firearms are also relatively rare. Surveys indicate that only about 1 in every 20 firearms in canada is a restricted firearm. Restricted firearms include ALL pistols (even flintlocks) and some rifles&shotguns. The only way you'll ever get a restricted firearm is for competitive shooting. No, you won't get one for self-defense. Restricted firearms can also only be used in designated areas (shooting ranges) and unless you're transporting it (unloaded and in unfirable condition. That is with some form of lock) directly from the range to your home (or vice versa) you need to ask for a permit (each and every time).
4. Unrestricted firearms include many types of rifles and shotguns (with a clip of 5 shots or less) and these are also illegal to use for self defense (against humans that is). It is however legal to use these weapons for hunting, target practice etc.
5. AFAIK these days owning a firearm means that you must have gone through a gun safety course.
6. Some provinces have much stricter laws.
So no. Gun ownership in Canada is nothing like gun ownership in the US.
It's more like Switzerland where pretty much everyone owns a Sig550 (everyone in the militia and everyone that chose to keep theirs after their militia service ended. If you're not in the militia however the weapon is converted to semi-auto), but the use is very restricted and there are far more rifles than handguns.
I realize the ownership is different, but the AMOUNT per person is much higher then the US. Which is what I stated.
Miz Stelth Bomerz iz the ****nit.
|
Shriken Grey
Fade to Black Inc
|
Posted - 2008.05.24 16:56:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Sokratesz
Edited by: Sokratesz on 24/05/2008 12:57:34
I don't think the average citizen with a gun permit would have a) the guts and b) the skill to stop a determined shooter, especially not if he's moving fast and wearing kevlar. (see virtech)
Maybe not, but even if there's only a 10% chance they'll do something isn't that better than nothing? Also, there are many military veterans on my campus, who have been trained in handling rather similar situations.
|
Brea Lafail
|
Posted - 2008.05.24 17:10:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Mtthias Clemi
"You guys cling to your guns!"
"OH YEAH!! ILL SHOW YOU!!!!! FREE GUNS FOR ALL!!! HURRAYYY!!"
What?
I think the point is that they're proud of their guns and bibles.
I'm all in favor of mandatory gun education before you're allowed to own one, problem is that it means that somewhere theres a list of every (legal) gun owner in the country and that the government could possibly restrict access to said education as a way of prohibiting some people from owning a weapon. So. Guns for all I say. Just limit the magazine capacity or somesuch.
But really, I don't see how a promotion from a small car dealership has much of anything to do with gun laws (except it shows that people in that region like guns).
|
Mr Friendly
|
Posted - 2008.05.24 23:06:00 -
[24]
The problem is not with guns, the problem is there are far too many nitwits with guns. If all gun owners were thoroughly trained in safe handling and use of guns, there'd be far fewer problems. Sadly, there are many places where acquiring a gun permit requires only that you can sign your name and are currently breathing (likely through the mouth). Recipe for disaster, anyone?
|
Kravick Drasari
|
Posted - 2008.05.24 23:20:00 -
[25]
Edited by: Kravick Drasari on 24/05/2008 23:25:20
Edited by: Kravick Drasari on 24/05/2008 23:23:53
Edited by: Kravick Drasari on 24/05/2008 23:20:49
Originally by: Sokratesz
Edited by: Sokratesz on 24/05/2008 12:57:34
Originally by: WalksWithCane
Originally by: Xrak
College shootings etc etc.
Yea, it's too bad that a citizen with a concealed gun permit wasn't on campus those days. Perhaps they could have saved lives instead of watching people get slaughtered like sheep while they huddled together praying that someone would stop the shooter....
I don't think the average citizen with a gun permit would have a) the guts and b) the skill to stop a determined shooter, especially not if he's moving fast and wearing kevlar. (see virtech)
You underestimate those who have been properly trained in the use of firearms. Its not like what you see in movies where there are fire fights and nether side can hit anything. As far as the kevlar thing, he wasn't wearing a kevlar lined helmet. If I was there with a firearm I definitely would have done something to try and stop him. I may not leave the situation unwounded but the other guy wouldn't be ether.
I grew up around guns my entire life. They are a tool just like every other weapon. You take guns away and we'll start using knives and baseball bats. There is nothing wrong with firearms themselves as long as everyone has equal access to them. States with concealed to carry laws have less crime than those that don't. Plus, its very very easy to get illegal firearms.
Look at Japan. Firearms are illegal there. Not even the police have them. It doesn't stop their citizens from maiming and killing each other though. Japan has a higher per capita assault with deadly weapons than America does incidents involving firearms. Those people are absolutely violent and the lack of firearms hasn't done anything to stop it.
If someone wants to kill someone the lack of a firearm isn't going to stop them. They will find a way.
---
My cat Putter approves of this post.
Be a Ninja! You know you want too: http://www.animecubed.com/billy/?Kravick |
Micheal Dietrich
Terradyne Networks
|
Posted - 2008.05.24 23:27:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Spaztick
Originally by: Micheal Dietrich
I love the swiss ways. I mean check out the crime rate there, super low compared to us in the states.
I wouldn't say the lower crime rate in Switzerland is directly related to the gun laws there, not that it doesn't contribute to it, but saying swiss gun laws = super low crime rates isn't accurate.
I don't know if its true or not but I heard in Switzerland everyone must serve in the armed forces at some point which to me is excellent training in a firearm.
To top off a criminal knowing how many homes must have a firearm must be a huge deterrent from breaking and entering.
|
Kravick Drasari
|
Posted - 2008.05.25 00:39:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Micheal Dietrich
Originally by: Spaztick
Originally by: Micheal Dietrich
I love the swiss ways. I mean check out the crime rate there, super low compared to us in the states.
I wouldn't say the lower crime rate in Switzerland is directly related to the gun laws there, not that it doesn't contribute to it, but saying swiss gun laws = super low crime rates isn't accurate.
I don't know if its true or not but I heard in Switzerland everyone must serve in the armed forces at some point which to me is excellent training in a firearm.
To top off a criminal knowing how many homes must have a firearm must be a huge deterrent from breaking and entering.
Don't they also have a law that allows you to shoot someone in your house without being charged for murder?
---
My cat Putter approves of this post.
Be a Ninja! You know you want too: http://www.animecubed.com/billy/?Kravick |
Surfin's PlunderBunny
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.05.25 02:36:00 -
[28]
ooooh, speaking of the Swiss... look up the Swiss mini gun. they made a gun with watchmaking parts.... tiny little thing. Smallest gun ever made and I want one
() ()
(â;..;)â
(")(") |
Tobias Xiaosen
The Perfect Storm
|
Posted - 2008.05.25 04:18:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Kravick Drasari
Look at Japan. Firearms are illegal there. Not even the police have them. It doesn't stop their citizens from maiming and killing each other though. Japan has a higher per capita assault with deadly weapons than America does incidents involving firearms. Those people are absolutely violent and the lack of firearms hasn't done anything to stop it.
If someone wants to kill someone the lack of a firearm isn't going to stop them. They will find a way.
Link it or it didn't happen. From what I recall, Japan has one of the lowest, if not, THE lowest crime rates in the world. But maiming and killing is still prevalent, just that its self-inflicted (queue highest suicide rate in the world...)
-----------------------------------------------
THE AWARD FOR MOST RIDICULOUS DREAM EVER GOES TO... |
Surfin's PlunderBunny
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.05.25 04:33:00 -
[30]
In Japan they just disguise themselves as vending machines
() ()
(â;..;)â
(")(") |
Xrak
Black Eclipse Corp
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.05.25 04:58:00 -
[31]
The fact of the matter is that countries with high levels of firearms have higher firearm related deaths.
|
Surfin's PlunderBunny
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.05.25 07:12:00 -
[32]
Edited by: Surfin''s PlunderBunny on 25/05/2008 07:15:36
And countries with more landmines have more landmine related deaths
*Edit: Oh yeah, and countries that have more wild boar stampedes have higher deaths due to stampeding boars 
See where I going with this?
() ()
(â;..;)â
(")(") |
Xrak
Black Eclipse Corp
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.05.25 07:48:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Surfin's PlunderBunny
Edited by: Surfin''s PlunderBunny on 25/05/2008 07:15:36
And countries with more landmines have more landmine related deaths
*Edit: Oh yeah, and countries that have more wild boar stampedes have higher deaths due to stampeding boars
See where I going with this?
Well done, you took my point and tried to make it work for you. You failed.
Without wanting to sound like a character from a certain film, the problem is choice. (Ok I lied, I wanted to sound like the character). You don't choose to have wild boars, and most people wouldn't choose to have landmines either.
Instead you have the selfish people who have guns and can handle them properly, but for everyone one of these people, there are probably 10 people who cant. So when they get attacked by someone they can use their gun, that's fine. But what about the people who dont have or want a gun.
The entire basis of the bit that says about your "right to bear arms" is supposed to be so that you can overthrow the government if they get a bit too much like the British. I think it's kinda ironic that the people who are trying to take away your rights are the ones who dont want gun control.
|
Nomakai Delateriel
Shadow Company
Souls of Vengeance
|
Posted - 2008.05.25 07:49:00 -
[34]
That japan has a high rate of crime is indeed bull****.
On a population of roughly 126-127 million they have (per year from 1996 to 2000):
Average of about 1300 murders per year. The comparable figure for the united states (population: 280 mil) is on average 16000+
Average of about 4000 robberies (though with an upwards curve) per year. United states: 400,000+
Average of about 8000 cases of Assault (upwards curve) per year: United states: About 1,000,000.
______________________________________________
-You can never earn my respect, only lose it. It's given freely, and only grudgingly retracted when necessary. |
Surfin's PlunderBunny
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.05.25 08:29:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Xrak
Instead you have the selfish people who have guns and can handle them properly, but for everyone one of these people, there are probably 10 people who cant. So when they get attacked by someone they can use their gun, that's fine. But what about the people who dont have or want a gun.
... That's totally their problem, they have the freedom to leave the country
() ()
(â;..;)â
(")(") |
Jame Malice
|
Posted - 2008.05.25 10:33:00 -
[36]
"cuz i'm prous to be an american
where the standards are so low..."
My own version of the song... i wish i was in Austrailia right now. -_-
|
Frezik
Basically Outdated Stereo Equiptment
|
Posted - 2008.05.25 17:25:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Xrak
The fact of the matter is that countries with high levels of firearms have higher firearm related deaths.
Both sides of the issue tends to trot out studies that show a higher/lower crime rate due to gun laws. In the end, it's more likely that gun availability is weakly correlated to general crime, so you should look at other factors instead.
|
Father Maynard
|
Posted - 2008.05.25 17:56:00 -
[38]
Edited by: Father Maynard on 25/05/2008 17:58:35
Originally by: Nomakai Delateriel
That japan has a high rate of crime is indeed bull****.
On a population of roughly 126-127 million they have (per year from 1996 to 2000):
Average of about 1300 murders per year. The comparable figure for the united states (population: 280 mil) is on average 16000+
Average of about 4000 robberies (though with an upwards curve) per year. United states: 400,000+
Average of about 8000 cases of Assault (upwards curve) per year: United states: About 1,000,000.
Like the other guy said, post proof or its bull****. Not that I don't believe you, or the first guy, but both sides need creditable sources.
I find the whole gun debate rather pointless. Both sides claim the other side is selfish. Those with guns are selfish for having guns. Those without guns are selfish for wanting to take them away. Its a never ending cycle of stupidity. Having guns is fine. Not having guns is fine. There are countries all over the world that prove both having and not having them works. The one thing that everyone seems to agree on is the education and care of handling guns, or lack there of.
However, there is one thing I see a lot that concerns me. One person with a gun goes crazy and starts shooting people, yet theres never anyone there with a gun to protect themselves. I can't help but think there would be a lot less killing spree related deaths if people could defend themselves in these situations. That would require people being able to carry guns themselves. You can say that if guns where made illegal that this situation would never happen, but thats foolishly naive. Illegal guns = black market goods and its actually easier to get a gun on the black market in the US than it is to do the 5 day wait with a back ground check. I can walk down the street and buy a gun from the drug dealers with no questions asked. Not that I would do such a thing but the option is definitely there. Also consider where the market for illegal guns comes from. Yep, the same people who deal *****, *******, and other drugs. It would just make the criminal element richer and give them more control.
Also keep in mind that making something illegal doesn't make it unaccessible. Countries around the world have been "fighting the war on drugs" for decades to no effect. People have been getting high and dying from it for decades and there is no stopping it. All the while the Columbian drug cartels get richer and richer. Yep, they have guns too. Lots of em. They like to sell those guns as well.
|
Nomakai Delateriel
Shadow Company
Souls of Vengeance
|
Posted - 2008.05.25 21:41:00 -
[39]
Edited by: Nomakai Delateriel on 25/05/2008 21:41:04
Originally by: Father Maynard
Edited by: Father Maynard on 25/05/2008 17:58:35
Originally by: Nomakai Delateriel
That japan has a high rate of crime is indeed bull****.
On a population of roughly 126-127 million they have (per year from 1996 to 2000):
Average of about 1300 murders per year. The comparable figure for the united states (population: 280 mil) is on average 16000+
Average of about 4000 robberies (though with an upwards curve) per year. United states: 400,000+
Average of about 8000 cases of Assault (upwards curve) per year: United states: About 1,000,000.
Like the other guy said, post proof or its bull****. Not that I don't believe you, or the first guy, but both sides need creditable sources.
Statistics(format: xls) from the Japan Statistical Yearbook 2008
Couldn't find that particular paper online, so will that do?
______________________________________________
-You can never earn my respect, only lose it. It's given freely, and only grudgingly retracted when necessary. |
Father Maynard
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 07:56:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Nomakai Delateriel
Edited by: Nomakai Delateriel on 25/05/2008 21:41:04
Originally by: Father Maynard
Edited by: Father Maynard on 25/05/2008 17:58:35
Originally by: Nomakai Delateriel
That japan has a high rate of crime is indeed bull****.
On a population of roughly 126-127 million they have (per year from 1996 to 2000):
Average of about 1300 murders per year. The comparable figure for the united states (population: 280 mil) is on average 16000+
Average of about 4000 robberies (though with an upwards curve) per year. United states: 400,000+
Average of about 8000 cases of Assault (upwards curve) per year: United states: About 1,000,000.
Like the other guy said, post proof or its bull****. Not that I don't believe you, or the first guy, but both sides need creditable sources.
Statistics(format: xls) from the Japan Statistical Yearbook 2008
Couldn't find that particular paper online, so will that do?
That'll do. I don't think the lack of guns is the reason for the lack of crime though.
|
Alassra Eventide
Veldspar Industries
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 15:31:00 -
[41]
If you go look up the gun-related incidences in the US from back when gun education was actually involved in the school system (in most cases voluntarily, but it was still offered) compared to nowadays when most of the "education" is done via movies, videos games, tv, and other people without good firearm education, I think you'll see a corresponding trend.
Also, anyone here ever been shot while wearing a kevlar vest? There's still a LOT of impact force translated through that vest. Especially the older ones that didn't have all the ceramics in them. It might stop the bullet from puncturing you, but you still take that hit. A couple moderately spaced shots into you will still shock/put you out of reaction for a couple seconds before you respond if you aren't ready for it/never had it happen before.
|
P'uck
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 15:33:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Xrak
The entire basis of the bit that says about your "right to bear arms" is supposed to be so that you can overthrow the government if they get a bit too much like the British. I think it's kinda ironic that the people who are trying to take away your rights are the ones who dont want gun control.
very well put.
|
Nomakai Delateriel
Shadow Company
Souls of Vengeance
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 16:16:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Alassra Eventide
Also, anyone here ever been shot while wearing a kevlar vest? There's still a LOT of impact force translated through that vest. Especially the older ones that didn't have all the ceramics in them. It might stop the bullet from puncturing you, but you still take that hit. A couple moderately spaced shots into you will still shock/put you out of reaction for a couple seconds before you respond if you aren't ready for it/never had it happen before.
Considering from what I saw in Kosovo, you'll barely feel it if the vest is hit with something similar to a 9mm.
Of course the people there were wearing Class IVs with trauma plates (in our case. I think the british only had class III).
7.62 NATO on the other hand would be an entirely different thing (we were shown on a dummy wearing a IV with no trauma plates how much force there would be. That bullet left a serious dent).
Also, so far nobody has designed a class III or IV that covers the entire body and still offers reasonable mobility. Hit someone in someplace where the vest only provides protection against shrapnel (or no protection at all), like the neck/face for example, and they go down anyway.
______________________________________________
-You can never earn my respect, only lose it. It's given freely, and only grudgingly retracted when necessary. |
Admus
Multiverse Corporation
Cosmic Anomalies
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 16:16:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Megan Maynard
...You aren't going to stop someone from shooting another person committed to the task. They will still find a gun no matter how many laws are put into place.
I just want to comment on this statement. While this is true that committed criminals will find guns, I wonder if a lot of shootings could be avoided simply if a very troubled and mentally unstable individual didn't have such easy access to them.
----------------------------------------------------------
"Villains always have antidotes. They're funny that way." |
Admus
Multiverse Corporation
Cosmic Anomalies
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 16:25:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Kravick Drasari
Edited by: Kravick Drasari on 24/05/2008 23:25:20
Edited by: Kravick Drasari on 24/05/2008 23:23:53
Edited by: Kravick Drasari on 24/05/2008 23:20:49
Originally by: Sokratesz
Edited by: Sokratesz on 24/05/2008 12:57:34
Originally by: WalksWithCane
Originally by: Xrak
College shootings etc etc.
Yea, it's too bad that a citizen with a concealed gun permit wasn't on campus those days. Perhaps they could have saved lives instead of watching people get slaughtered like sheep while they huddled together praying that someone would stop the shooter....
I don't think the average citizen with a gun permit would have a) the guts and b) the skill to stop a determined shooter, especially not if he's moving fast and wearing kevlar. (see virtech)
You underestimate those who have been properly trained in the use of firearms. Its not like what you see in movies where there are fire fights and nether side can hit anything. As far as the kevlar thing, he wasn't wearing a kevlar lined helmet. If I was there with a firearm I definitely would have done something to try and stop him. I may not leave the situation unwounded but the other guy wouldn't be ether.
I grew up around guns my entire life. They are a tool just like every other weapon. You take guns away and we'll start using knives and baseball bats. There is nothing wrong with firearms themselves as long as everyone has equal access to them. States with concealed to carry laws have less crime than those that don't. Plus, its very very easy to get illegal firearms.
Look at Japan. Firearms are illegal there. Not even the police have them. It doesn't stop their citizens from maiming and killing each other though. Japan has a higher per capita assault with deadly weapons than America does incidents involving firearms. Those people are absolutely violent and the lack of firearms hasn't done anything to stop it.
If someone wants to kill someone the lack of a firearm isn't going to stop them. They will find a way.
I also want to point out that mass murders like college shootings would have been much more difficult to perpetrate armed with a chopping knife and a nailbat. Guns are better at killing, so while the crime rate may remain the same, perhaps the fatality rate will decrease.
----------------------------------------------------------
"Villains always have antidotes. They're funny that way." |
Nomakai Delateriel
Shadow Company
Souls of Vengeance
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 16:39:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Admus
Originally by: Megan Maynard
...You aren't going to stop someone from shooting another person committed to the task. They will still find a gun no matter how many laws are put into place.
I just want to comment on this statement. While this is true that committed criminals will find guns, I wonder if a lot of shootings could be avoided simply if a very troubled and mentally unstable individual didn't have such easy access to them.
There is also the issue that if a criminal expects you to have a gun they're more likely to have a gun of their own and be ready to use it at the slightest provocation.
Here in Sweden even it will take a lot before even the most hardened criminals use their weapons to try to kill.
In any case, it's a complicated issue and I find that both sides (pro-gun and anti-gun) tend to use examples with little or no regard for the other factors that are involved. "Wohoo. Japan. Low crime rate! No guns!" "Wohoo! Switzerland. Low crime rate. Lots of guns!"
Looking at for example both Japan and Switzerland (nations with low crimerate) they're both feature fairly isolated and culturally homogeneous populations with a strong sense of community (or at least that's my impression) and a low (cultural) tolerance for anti-social behavior.
The more you feel that you belong to a community/family the less likely you are to behave violently against them. Classic group psychology (us/them), no?
I'm sure there are psychological/social studies comparing various areas with high/low-crime rate and different gun-laws and trying to isolate what kind effect gunslaws have on crimerate when social issues have been into account, but for some reason I've never seen anyone cite one of those in the gun debate.
______________________________________________
-You can never earn my respect, only lose it. It's given freely, and only grudgingly retracted when necessary. |
Alassra Eventide
Veldspar Industries
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 17:42:00 -
[47]
Primarily because the number of actual studies done on something like that, and don't have massive logic flaws or leading conclusions in them, is pretty low, unfortunately :(
|
Kravick Drasari
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 18:39:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Admus
I also want to point out that mass murders like college shootings would have been much more difficult to perpetrate armed with a chopping knife and a nailbat. Guns are better at killing, so while the crime rate may remain the same, perhaps the fatality rate will decrease.
You fail to understand how everyone having guns would put a stop to this before more than one person goes down. Walk into a room with 20 people with the intention of going on a killing spree. All 20 of these people have guns themselves. The first bullet you fire will have 19 (20 if the first guy didn't die) other guns pointed and firing back at you. The incident is over as soon as it starts.
---
My cat Putter approves of this post.
Be a Ninja! You know you want too: http://www.animecubed.com/billy/?Kravick |
Nomakai Delateriel
Shadow Company
Souls of Vengeance
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 18:58:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Kravick Drasari
You fail to understand how everyone having guns would put a stop to this before more than one person goes down. Walk into a room with 20 people with the intention of going on a killing spree. All 20 of these people have guns themselves. The first bullet you fire will have 19 (20 if the first guy didn't die) other guns pointed and firing back at you. The incident is over as soon as it starts.
*sigh* Go go gunlobby-mobile.
Unless these guys were top notch bodyguards expecting **** to go down it would take a lot longer than that for people to react. Unless they were of course mentally prepared to kill at the slightest provocation. And you REALLY don't want that kind of society.
Soldiers, bodyguards and police officers (etc) can have that kind of mentality ON THE JOB, but not 24/7. And they go through a lot of training to be able to handle that kind of pressure.
If you're not in the mindset and expecting trouble it will take a surprising amount of time for people to react and start to think.
And from the point where the brain actually realizes "holy crap I'm being shot at" and identifying the threat anything from 1-10 seconds will have passed (if not more).
From that point they'll have to draw their guns and respond.
The attacker on the other hand is ready to kill from the get go and has a drawn gun. He has the initiative.
Depending on the weapon and situation it could be 18, or 15 or 10 vs1. Or 0 vs 1 if he has some form of grenade (If I felt like it I could make a fairly reliable one and have it ready next week).
The more lethal the weapon, the more things favor the guy with the initiative.
______________________________________________
-You can never earn my respect, only lose it. It's given freely, and only grudgingly retracted when necessary. |
Alassra Eventide
Veldspar Industries
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 20:49:00 -
[50]
I'd like to point out the guy who got a Darwin award for trying to rob a gunstore in texas at gunpoint and didn't get off more than two shots before he was killed by the owner, customers, and the sheriff in the store.
|
Surfin's PlunderBunny
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 21:25:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Alassra Eventide
I'd like to point out the guy who got a Darwin award for trying to rob a gunstore in texas at gunpoint and didn't get off more than two shots before he was killed by the owner, customers, and the sheriff in the store.
Shot 57 times, iirc
() ()
(â;..;)â
(")(") |
Kravick Drasari
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 22:45:00 -
[52]
Edited by: Kravick Drasari on 26/05/2008 22:47:06
Originally by: Nomakai Delateriel
Originally by: Kravick Drasari
You fail to understand how everyone having guns would put a stop to this before more than one person goes down. Walk into a room with 20 people with the intention of going on a killing spree. All 20 of these people have guns themselves. The first bullet you fire will have 19 (20 if the first guy didn't die) other guns pointed and firing back at you. The incident is over as soon as it starts.
*sigh* Go go gunlobby-mobile.
Unless these guys were top notch bodyguards expecting **** to go down it would take a lot longer than that for people to react. Unless they were of course mentally prepared to kill at the slightest provocation. And you REALLY don't want that kind of society.
Soldiers, bodyguards and police officers (etc) can have that kind of mentality ON THE JOB, but not 24/7. And they go through a lot of training to be able to handle that kind of pressure.
If you're not in the mindset and expecting trouble it will take a surprising amount of time for people to react and start to think.
And from the point where the brain actually realizes "holy crap I'm being shot at" and identifying the threat anything from 1-10 seconds will have passed (if not more).
From that point they'll have to draw their guns and respond.
The attacker on the other hand is ready to kill from the get go and has a drawn gun. He has the initiative.
Depending on the weapon and situation it could be 18, or 15 or 10 vs1. Or 0 vs 1 if he has some form of grenade (If I felt like it I could make a fairly reliable one and have it ready next week).
The more lethal the weapon, the more things favor the guy with the initiative.
Followed by:
Quote:
I'd like to point out the guy who got a Darwin award for trying to rob a gunstore in texas at gunpoint and didn't get off more than two shots before he was killed by the owner, customers, and the sheriff in the store.
Sorry, Nomakai, you lose. Nothing personal of course, but you underestimate how quickly people can react. Its not 10 seconds. Not even close. More like 1.44 to 2.5 seconds (if you're not mentally impared).
Everyone needs to be on equal footing even if they don't like it. Guns arn't going away. They will always exist. Since guns will always be available to the criminal element, no matter what people may say or think. The general public needs to be on equal footing. Anything less and we are at the absolute mercy of said criminal element.
The police can't do anything unless they are actually there and we all know 98% of the time they arn't. They can't be every where all of the time. Police response time is also pretty bad, and even then maybe one or two will show up. You may say let the criminal have what they want but I refuse to submit to anyone trying to rob me or kill me. I will fight back.
---
My cat Putter approves of this post.
Be a Ninja! You know you want too: http://www.animecubed.com/billy/?Kravick |
Nomakai Delateriel
Shadow Company
Souls of Vengeance
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 23:36:00 -
[53]
Right, and "robbery" = "intent on a killing spree" how exactly?
I doubt the robber in that example was intent on a killing spree (since he didn't manage to kill anyone). He was intent on getting money by threatening to use force, and thus gave the other guys the advantage by not acting upon his initiative (and thus giving it away). Which means that killing him was probably a god damn tragedy. 57 shots? That's IMHO not justified violence in self-defense, that's murder (except that in this case it was legal).
Every human has a sovereign right to their own body, and that includes self-defense. It does not include jumping on an excuse to kill another human being when it's not necessary, or using excessive force when doing so.
______________________________________________
-You can never earn my respect, only lose it. It's given freely, and only grudgingly retracted when necessary. |
Steakkbone
Helios Incorporated
Insurgency
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 23:58:00 -
[54]
This is why I love America.
|
Steakkbone
Helios Incorporated
Insurgency
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 00:01:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Admus
Originally by: Kravick Drasari
Edited by: Kravick Drasari on 24/05/2008 23:25:20
Edited by: Kravick Drasari on 24/05/2008 23:23:53
Edited by: Kravick Drasari on 24/05/2008 23:20:49
Originally by: Sokratesz
Edited by: Sokratesz on 24/05/2008 12:57:34
Originally by: WalksWithCane
Originally by: Xrak
College shootings etc etc.
Yea, it's too bad that a citizen with a concealed gun permit wasn't on campus those days. Perhaps they could have saved lives instead of watching people get slaughtered like sheep while they huddled together praying that someone would stop the shooter....
I don't think the average citizen with a gun permit would have a) the guts and b) the skill to stop a determined shooter, especially not if he's moving fast and wearing kevlar. (see virtech)
You underestimate those who have been properly trained in the use of firearms. Its not like what you see in movies where there are fire fights and nether side can hit anything. As far as the kevlar thing, he wasn't wearing a kevlar lined helmet. If I was there with a firearm I definitely would have done something to try and stop him. I may not leave the situation unwounded but the other guy wouldn't be ether.
I grew up around guns my entire life. They are a tool just like every other weapon. You take guns away and we'll start using knives and baseball bats. There is nothing wrong with firearms themselves as long as everyone has equal access to them. States with concealed to carry laws have less crime than those that don't. Plus, its very very easy to get illegal firearms.
Look at Japan. Firearms are illegal there. Not even the police have them. It doesn't stop their citizens from maiming and killing each other though. Japan has a higher per capita assault with deadly weapons than America does incidents involving firearms. Those people are absolutely violent and the lack of firearms hasn't done anything to stop it.
If someone wants to kill someone the lack of a firearm isn't going to stop them. They will find a way.
I also want to point out that mass murders like college shootings would have been much more difficult to perpetrate armed with a chopping knife and a nailbat. Guns are better at killing, so while the crime rate may remain the same, perhaps the fatality rate will decrease.
Is America a violent country? CHECK.
Is America full of diversity which translates to hate? CHECK.
Impossible to ban guns in America because they will still be smuggled in, like alcohol during prohibition? CHECK.
Stop calling for gun control, it is simply not feasible.
|
Mr Friendly
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 00:36:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Nomakai Delateriel
Right, and "robbery" = "intent on a killing spree" how exactly?
I doubt the robber in that example was intent on a killing spree (since he didn't manage to kill anyone). He was intent on getting money by threatening to use force, and thus gave the other guys the advantage by not acting upon his initiative (and thus giving it away). Which means that killing him was probably a god damn tragedy. 57 shots? That's IMHO not justified violence in self-defense, that's murder (except that in this case it was legal).
Every human has a sovereign right to their own body, and that includes self-defense. It does not include jumping on an excuse to kill another human being when it's not necessary, or using excessive force when doing so.
Sorry, as soon as someone acts like they are going to kill me, I have the right to kill them right back. Once they start actually trying to kill me, I will chase them down the street if need be to kill them.
Tragedy? Are you daft? Children dying of suffocation in a house fire is tragic... making sure a guy is dead after he tried to kill you is justified homicide.
|
Nomakai Delateriel
Shadow Company
Souls of Vengeance
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 01:22:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Mr Friendly
Sorry, as soon as someone acts like they are going to kill me, I have the right to kill them right back. Once they start actually trying to kill me, I will chase them down the street if need be to kill them.
Tragedy? Are you daft? Children dying of suffocation in a house fire is tragic... making sure a guy is dead after he tried to kill you is justified homicide.
Then you're no better than any criminal. And most legal systems recognize that (if you shoot someone when they're helpless or running away, then pretty much every legal system in the world is going to have you serving time).
Me, I'm not daft. It's just an extension of a logically consistent philosophy. A philosophy that starts with the assumption that the key to civilization and a just society is respect for the individual and an individuals right to his/her own body.
It's a tragedy because they probably killed when it wasn't absolutely necessary. Killing is the most gross violation of someone elses individuality that you can do, and the only justification to do it is when it's absolutely necessary to protect your individual rights and the invididual rights of others. When that justification isn't there, then it's a tragedy. No matter who it is.
Once you start to go beyond the preservation of yourself, and instead enforcing your will upon others when it's not absolutely necessary to protect your own individual rights (or the protection of the individual rights of others). Then you're trying to exert your will on others, and that's on the path to tyranny and oppression.
It's especially bad when push comes to shove. I saw that in Kosovo. People who wanted Eye for an Eye (of course all filtered through their own prejudice), and people who wanted more than just to protect their individual rights and the individual rights of others.
______________________________________________
-You can never earn my respect, only lose it. It's given freely, and only grudgingly retracted when necessary. |
Kravick Drasari
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 02:10:00 -
[58]
Edited by: Kravick Drasari on 27/05/2008 02:11:22
Edited by: Kravick Drasari on 27/05/2008 02:10:50
Originally by: Nomakai Delateriel
Originally by: Mr Friendly
Sorry, as soon as someone acts like they are going to kill me, I have the right to kill them right back. Once they start actually trying to kill me, I will chase them down the street if need be to kill them.
Tragedy? Are you daft? Children dying of suffocation in a house fire is tragic... making sure a guy is dead after he tried to kill you is justified homicide.
Then you're no better than any criminal. And most legal systems recognize that (if you shoot someone when they're helpless or running away, then pretty much every legal system in the world is going to have you serving time).
Me, I'm not daft. It's just an extension of a logically consistent philosophy. A philosophy that starts with the assumption that the key to civilization and a just society is respect for the individual and an individuals right to his/her own body.
It's a tragedy because they probably killed when it wasn't absolutely necessary. Killing is the most gross violation of someone elses individuality that you can do, and the only justification to do it is when it's absolutely necessary to protect your individual rights and the invididual rights of others. When that justification isn't there, then it's a tragedy. No matter who it is.
Once you start to go beyond the preservation of yourself, and instead enforcing your will upon others when it's not absolutely necessary to protect your own individual rights (or the protection of the individual rights of others). Then you're trying to exert your will on others, and that's on the path to tyranny and oppression.
It's especially bad when push comes to shove. I saw that in Kosovo. People who wanted Eye for an Eye (of course all filtered through their own prejudice), and people who wanted more than just to protect their individual rights and the individual rights of others.
I am laughing at you now.
Quote:
Sorry, as soon as someone acts like they are going to kill me, I have the right to kill them right back. Once they start actually trying to kill me, I will chase them down the street if need be to kill them.
Tragedy? Are you daft? Children dying of suffocation in a house fire is tragic... making sure a guy is dead after he tried to kill you is justified homicide.
Couldn't have said it better myself. As soon as people start acting like that they lose the right to be treated as a human being IMO.
---
My cat Putter approves of this post.
Be a Ninja! You know you want too: http://www.animecubed.com/billy/?Kravick |
pwnedgato
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 02:17:00 -
[59]
Partially because it seems to be the consensus already reached and mostly because I feel like linking this.
Proper weapon handling is key
Originally by: Crumplecorn
These is a forum for this.
|
Kravick Drasari
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 02:49:00 -
[60]
Originally by: pwnedgato
Partially because it seems to be the consensus already reached and mostly because I feel like linking this.
Proper weapon handling is key
That guy is definitely not "shooting blanks".
---
My cat Putter approves of this post.
Be a Ninja! You know you want too: http://www.animecubed.com/billy/?Kravick |
Keorythe
Terra Rosa Militia
Sev3rance
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 08:39:00 -
[61]
Originally by: Nomakai Delateriel
57 shots? That's IMHO not justified violence in self-defense, that's murder (except that in this case it was legal).
Depends on how many people were in the store and how many rounds each one fired. Its like that one guy who was shot 30+ times by the cops and they tried to sue for "murder". 8 cops, 4 rounds each...do the math.
|
Shadowsword
COLSUP
Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 10:39:00 -
[62]
Originally by: Megan Maynard
HAHA, epic.
Guns are really fun, fun to shoot, fun to clean, fun to look at, fun to reload, fun to buy, fun to customize.
Fun, why? Does it makes you feel powerfull?
Quote:
No gun law ever lowered crime rates effectively. Gun education is a proven method to lower crime rates.
Canada has 4 times the number of guns per person, yet their gun crime per person is lower then the states.
It's a culture thing. If you grow up with guns, and learn to respect them, you are a better citizen and a safer person then someone who has no clue what a gun is.
It's a culture thing, yes. Mainly. And a gun control law will be the first essential step in changing that culture.
Quote:
You aren't going to stop someone from shooting another person committed to the task. They will still find a gun no matter how many laws are put into place.
Gun laws take guns out of the hands of good people who should have them and puts them into the black market and those who abuse them....
As someone who live wihtin a country with strict gun laws, I can tell you that it's HARD to get a gun in the blackmarket (not that I tried, but logic and the number of crimes involving guns is proof enough of it). There's just not that many black marketers willing to take risks, with any customer being potentially a covert cop or someone who'll spill the beans when he'll get caught.
------------------------------------------
|
Kusha'an
RuffRyders
Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 14:59:00 -
[63]
Originally by: Nomakai Delateriel
There is also the issue that if a criminal expects you to have a gun they're more likely to have a gun of their own and be ready to use it at the slightest provocation.
Uhhh...that statement couldn't be more ridiculous. But I'm willing to read any statistical cite that proves it.
When was the last time a police station was attacked?
Vermont has a border with New York and yet its crime rate is a small fraction of New York's. Vermont has a conceal carry law that says anyone inside the state can carry without a license. Point being that a criminal, realizing that anyone might be carrying, will likely go somewhere else.
----
What part of "shorn't" do you not understand? |
Kusha'an
RuffRyders
Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 15:00:00 -
[64]
Originally by: Shadowsword
Fun, why? Does it makes you feel powerfull?
Wow. No clue.
----
What part of "shorn't" do you not understand? |
Batwigg
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 15:21:00 -
[65]
Edited by: Batwigg on 27/05/2008 15:22:55
Originally by: Kravick Drasari
Everyone needs to be on equal footing even if they don't like it. Guns arn't going away. They will always exist. Since guns will always be available to the criminal element, no matter what people may say or think. The general public needs to be on equal footing. Anything less and we are at the absolute mercy of said criminal element.
I live in a country with incredibly harsh gun laws (ALL firearms except hunting rifles and shotguns are 100% illegal for everyone. Police officers do not carry guns, except for the SWAT teams), this is pure bull****.
There hasn't been a murder with a firearm here in Iceland, ever. There hasn't been a single incient of a firearm assisted robbery here. Criminals carrying guns is unheard of, absurd even. Why? Because owning a pistol, or any other firearm designed to shoot at humans and not animals is punishable by up to 10 years in prison.
In a society with no guns, a knife gets the same job as a pistol done when it comes to crime. The only difference is, knives have a fatality rate hundreds of times lower than a gun.
Guns are tools, but they are completely despicable tools designed to murder other people, and have no business whatsoever in the hands of civilians.
Also, in before "YEAH WELL ENJOY YOUR FACIST GOVERNMENT". I find this amusing, as the politicians that oppose gun control are the ones that are also slowly taking your freedom and liberties away. Firearms are not needed to prevent government power abuse.
|
Surfin's PlunderBunny
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 15:27:00 -
[66]
Originally by: Shadowsword
Fun, why? Does it makes you feel powerfull?
I find them very aesthetically pleasing actually
Originally by: Shadowsword
It's a culture thing, yes. Mainly. And a gun control law will be the first essential step in changing that culture.
That's also the first step to starting the next Civil war
Originally by: Shadowsword
As someone who live wihtin a country with strict gun laws, I can tell you that it's HARD to get a gun in the blackmarket (not that I tried, but logic and the number of crimes involving guns is proof enough of it). There's just not that many black marketers willing to take risks, with any customer being potentially a covert cop or someone who'll spill the beans when he'll get caught.
As someone who lived in Detroit for 6 years, I can assure you it is incredibly easy to get an assault weapon illegally. You can get a Chinese made AK-47 for $150 (Yes, cheaply made but still a full auto assault rifle). It's all a matter of knowing who to talk to
() ()
(â;..;)â
(")(") |
nihlanth
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 18:32:00 -
[67]
Edited by: nihlanth on 27/05/2008 18:36:09
Originally by: WalksWithCane
Originally by: Xrak
College shootings etc etc.
Yea, it's too bad that a citizen with a concealed gun permit wasn't on campus those days. Perhaps they could have saved lives instead of watching people get slaughtered like sheep while they huddled together praying that someone would stop the shooter....
It's too bad that there wasnt very good parenting nor culture of acceptance and tolerance those days when he was a kid, as well as adequate mental health/special ed support - maybe the shooter would not have gone on a rampage to begin with?
Not everything can be solved by violence, the shooter could have still killed one or two people before going down because people cant read minds. Therfore, allowing guns on campus does not solve the problem.
I'm tired of people making excuses to carry guns. I do not feel safer knowing that some average Joe bloe sitting next to me in class has a loaded glock in his pocket - who still has a hangover from last night's party.
Might doesn't make right - it simply spawns more might in its wake.
|
Micheal Dietrich
Terradyne Networks
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 18:34:00 -
[68]
I see very few people talking about the actual article. I've already asked for a mod clean up since some of you feel it's funner to start a flame war.
|
nihlanth
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 18:38:00 -
[69]
Edited by: nihlanth on 27/05/2008 18:38:09
Originally by: Micheal Dietrich
I see very few people talking about the actual article. I've already asked for a mod clean up since some of you feel it's funner to start a flame war.
Oh gimme a break. You knew very well that the article was going to spawn a political flame war. Dont play stupid.
|
Micheal Dietrich
Terradyne Networks
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 18:45:00 -
[70]
Originally by: nihlanth
Edited by: nihlanth on 27/05/2008 18:38:09
Originally by: Micheal Dietrich
I see very few people talking about the actual article. I've already asked for a mod clean up since some of you feel it's funner to start a flame war.
Oh gimme a break. You knew very well that the article was going to spawn a political flame war. Dont play stupid.
It is possible for people to discuss without being children about it. And I see a good number of people in this thread that have the ability to do that. I also see a few alts made solely to comment in this thread and turn it into a flame war (check post histories).
People can be intellegent about any subject and it's not their fault people like you fail at it. Don't play conceited.
|
Kusha'an
RuffRyders
Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 18:59:00 -
[71]
Originally by: nihlanth
Not everything can be solved by violence, the shooter could have still killed one or two people before going down because people cant read minds. Therfore, allowing guns on campus does not solve the problem.
I'm tired of people making excuses to carry guns. I do not feel safer knowing that some average Joe bloe sitting next to me in class has a loaded glock in his pocket - who still has a hangover from last night's party.
Might doesn't make right - it simply spawns more might in its wake.
"An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life."
-Robert A. Heinlein
"Those who cling to the untrue doctrine that violence never settles anything would be advised to conjure up the ghosts of Napoleon Bonaparte and of the Duke of Wellington and let them debate it. The ghost of H!tler could referee, and the jury might well be the Dodo, the Great Auk, and the Passenger Pigeon. Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in history than has any other factor, and the contrary opinion is wishful thinking at its worst. Nations and peoples who forget this basic truth have always paid for it with their lives and freedoms."
-Robert A. Heinlein
----
What part of "shorn't" do you not understand? |
Kravick Drasari
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 19:04:00 -
[72]
Originally by: Batwigg
Edited by: Batwigg on 27/05/2008 15:22:55
Originally by: Kravick Drasari
Everyone needs to be on equal footing even if they don't like it. Guns arn't going away. They will always exist. Since guns will always be available to the criminal element, no matter what people may say or think. The general public needs to be on equal footing. Anything less and we are at the absolute mercy of said criminal element.
I live in a country with incredibly harsh gun laws (ALL firearms except hunting rifles and shotguns are 100% illegal for everyone. Police officers do not carry guns, except for the SWAT teams), this is pure bull****.
There hasn't been a murder with a firearm here in Iceland, ever. There hasn't been a single incient of a firearm assisted robbery here. Criminals carrying guns is unheard of, absurd even. Why? Because owning a pistol, or any other firearm designed to shoot at humans and not animals is punishable by up to 10 years in prison.
In a society with no guns, a knife gets the same job as a pistol done when it comes to crime. The only difference is, knives have a fatality rate hundreds of times lower than a gun.
Guns are tools, but they are completely despicable tools designed to murder other people, and have no business whatsoever in the hands of civilians.
Also, in before "YEAH WELL ENJOY YOUR FACIST GOVERNMENT". I find this amusing, as the politicians that oppose gun control are the ones that are also slowly taking your freedom and liberties away. Firearms are not needed to prevent government power abuse.
And I also call bull**** on this as well. We have the same law regarding gun use in crimes and it doesn't deter gun crimes at all. Your lack of crime has to do with something else. In the United States if you commit robbery you get X years in jail. If you commit the same crime but use a gun you get another 5-15 years (varies by state) automatically added to your sentence. Also, depending on the state, if the gun was fired intentionally, whether you hit someone or not, you automatically get attempted murder charges added on to that crime. These added punishments do not deter gun related crimes here.
I'm going to say the reason for that is because of the differences in culture. However, I'm not going to state those reasons as it would derail this thread into something completely different and I'd probably be accused of something I'm not even though I'd have statistical hard proof from the US government themselves.
---
My cat Putter approves of this post.
Be a Ninja! You know you want too: http://www.animecubed.com/billy/?Kravick |
pwnedgato
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 21:02:00 -
[73]
Edited by: pwnedgato on 27/05/2008 21:03:20
I don't think countries like Iceland make a very good example about how to run a country. Iceland and many similar nations all have rather homogeneous populations, small ones at that. Saying "look at Iceland we have the happiest people in the world! all 313k of them". I mean woohoo a country with a population the size of a mid-sized town is able to police them as if there is *gasp* just a town's worth of them. Same thing with other nordic nations. Guess what folks? Government Does not scale
Originally by: Crumplecorn
These is a forum for this.
|
Bish Ounen
Omni-Core Freedom Fighters
Ethereal Dawn
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 21:03:00 -
[74]
Originally by: Kusha'an
"An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life."
-Robert A. Heinlein
"Those who cling to the untrue doctrine that violence never settles anything would be advised to conjure up the ghosts of Napoleon Bonaparte and of the Duke of Wellington and let them debate it. The ghost of H!tler could referee, and the jury might well be the Dodo, the Great Auk, and the Passenger Pigeon. Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in history than has any other factor, and the contrary opinion is wishful thinking at its worst. Nations and peoples who forget this basic truth have always paid for it with their lives and freedoms."
-Robert A. Heinlein
Q.F.T.
Truer words were never spoken.
Also, to the Icelander, I would imagine that your country's experience with gun crime about parallels that of Switzerland and Japan. Indeed, I suspect that if every Icelander were issued firearms at birth the gun crime rate would be as non-existent as it is now. Kudos to Iceland, but that doesn't help solve problems in larger, more diverse countries.
|
Surfin's PlunderBunny
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 22:51:00 -
[75]
Hey, wasn't the 2nd amendment put in place to stop the government from turning the citizens into subjects? Uh oh... I smell a conundrum brewing
() ()
(â;..;)â
(")(") |
Kravick Drasari
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 23:24:00 -
[76]
Edited by: Kravick Drasari on 27/05/2008 23:30:44
Edited by: Kravick Drasari on 27/05/2008 23:26:40
"The New American magazine reminds us that March 25th marked the 16th anniversary of Kennesaw, Georgia's ordinance requiring heads of households (with certain exceptions) to keep at least one firearm in their homes. The city's population grew from around 5,000 in 1980 to 13,000 by 1996 (latest available estimate). Yet there have been only three murders: two with knives (1984 and 1987) and one with a firearm (1997). After the law went into effect in 1982, crime against persons plummeted 74 percent compared to 1981, and fell another 45 percent in 1983 compared to 1982. And it has stayed impressively low. In addition to nearly non-existent homicide (murders have averaged a mere 0.19 per year), the annual number of armed robberies, residential burglaries, commercial burglaries, and *%*!s have averaged, respectively, 1.69, 31.63, 19.75, and 2.00 through 1998.
With all the attention that has been heaped upon the lawful possession of firearms lately, you would think that a city that requires gun ownership would be the center of a media feeding frenzy. It isn't. The fact is I can't remember a major media outlet even mentioning Kennesaw. Can you? The reason is obvious. Kennesaw proves that the presence of firearms actually improves safety and security. This is not the message that the media want us to hear. They want us to believe that guns are evil and are the cause of violence. The facts tell a different story. What is even more interesting about Kennesaw is that the city's crime rate decreased with the simple knowledge that the entire community was armed. The bad guys didn't force the residents to prove it. Just knowing that residents were armed prompted them to move on to easier targets. Most criminals don't have a death wish. There have been two occasions in my own family when the presence of a handgun averted potential disaster. In both instances the gun was never aimed at a person and no shot was fired."
From an article in The New American Magazine. Its out dated obviously, but theres further proof that its not the guns that cause crime. Google Kennesaw and you'll find its not made up.
EDIT: Fixed wall of text.
---
My cat Putter approves of this post.
Be a Ninja! You know you want too: http://www.animecubed.com/billy/?Kravick |
Kravick Drasari
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 23:25:00 -
[77]
Edited by: Kravick Drasari on 27/05/2008 23:25:14
Sorry, double post.
---
My cat Putter approves of this post.
Be a Ninja! You know you want too: http://www.animecubed.com/billy/?Kravick |
Batwigg
|
Posted - 2008.05.30 02:56:00 -
[78]
Edited by: Batwigg on 30/05/2008 02:57:41
Originally by: Kravick Drasari
From an article in The New American Magazine. Its out dated obviously, but theres further proof that its not the guns that cause crime. Google Kennesaw and you'll find its not made up.
Noone ever at any point claimed that guns CAUSE crime. That'd just be daft. I'm sure that most handgun owners are perfectly rational and nice people with zero interest in murdering people or otherwise causing mayhem, and them owning a handgun probably doesn't change that either way.
However, the point that people are trying to make here is that there is no connection between handguns and crimerate. For every armed-to-the-teeth town with low crimerate that you can point to, I can point to two towns with no guns and similar crimerate. For every weapon-free nation that I can point to with low crimerate, you can point to two nations where everyone has a assault rifle, a tank, and probably a ICBM too, with no crime.
The presence of handguns is a risk, simply put - People can handle them carelessly and accidentally shoot a loved one. Two guns on the opposite ends of a crime situation may well escalate into a shootout. If you can buy a handgun, the paranoid schizophrenic across the street probably can too.
There's probably no way to remove the guns from American society, but the point that (I at least) have been trying to make here is that any society would be better off without handguns in general civilian use.
Originally by: Kusha'an
"An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life."
I don't know about you, but a society where people get murdered for insulting someone isn't my idea of utopia.
Originally by: Kusha'an
"Those who cling to the untrue doctrine that violence never settles anything would be advised to conjure up the ghosts of Napoleon Bonaparte and of the Duke of Wellington and let them debate it. The ghost of H!tler could referee, and the jury might well be the Dodo, the Great Auk, and the Passenger Pigeon. Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in history than has any other factor, and the contrary opinion is wishful thinking at its worst. Nations and peoples who forget this basic truth have always paid for it with their lives and freedoms."
-Robert A. Heinlein
Oh wow, look at the totally relevant quote.
Violence solves issues. Noone (in this thread at least) has every claimed that it did not. I'm all for the military use of firearms and weapons in general - Hell, that's what they are there for, and although in a perfect world a military would not be needed, we don't live in a perfect world.
The issue here is the quite frankly moronic idea of putting murder tools into the hands of the general civilian population.
|
Kravick Drasari
|
Posted - 2008.05.30 03:27:00 -
[79]
Meh, I thought this pointless thread died.
---
My cat Putter approves of this post.
Be a Ninja! You know you want too: http://www.animecubed.com/billy/?Kravick |
Surfin's PlunderBunny
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.05.30 03:44:00 -
[80]
Originally by: Batwigg
The issue here is the quite frankly moronic idea of putting murder tools into the hands of the general civilian population.
Sir... I have to conviscate all your murder tools. Please turn in your shoelaces, any blades, forks, spoons, sporks, rocks, pens, pencils, rat poisons, anti freeze, any motor vehicles (cars, motorcycles, planes, boats, helicopters), any tie that's not a clip-on, plastic bags, garden gnomes or anything else that could be used in any way to kill someone.
I'm also going to have to amputate your hands....
() ()
(â;..;)â
(")(") |
Admus
Multiverse Corporation
Cosmic Anomalies
|
Posted - 2008.05.30 06:23:00 -
[81]
Originally by: Surfin's PlunderBunny
Originally by: Batwigg
The issue here is the quite frankly moronic idea of putting murder tools into the hands of the general civilian population.
Sir... I have to conviscate all your murder tools. Please turn in your shoelaces, any blades, forks, spoons, sporks, rocks, pens, pencils, rat poisons, anti freeze, any motor vehicles (cars, motorcycles, planes, boats, helicopters), any tie that's not a clip-on, plastic bags, garden gnomes or anything else that could be used in any way to kill someone.
I'm also going to have to amputate your hands....
For the most part I agree with you. But anti-freeze has an otherwise valuable function in everyday life. An assault rifle was made for one thing and one thing only, and it's damn good at it.
----------------------------------------------------------
"Villains always have antidotes. They're funny that way." |
Keorythe
Terra Rosa Militia
Sev3rance
|
Posted - 2008.05.30 06:48:00 -
[82]
Originally by: Admus
Originally by: Surfin's PlunderBunny
Originally by: Batwigg
The issue here is the quite frankly moronic idea of putting murder tools into the hands of the general civilian population.
Sir... I have to conviscate all your murder tools. Please turn in your shoelaces, any blades, forks, spoons, sporks, rocks, pens, pencils, rat poisons, anti freeze, any motor vehicles (cars, motorcycles, planes, boats, helicopters), any tie that's not a clip-on, plastic bags, garden gnomes or anything else that could be used in any way to kill someone.
I'm also going to have to amputate your hands....
For the most part I agree with you. But anti-freeze has an otherwise valuable function in everyday life. An assault rifle was made for one thing and one thing only, and it's damn good at it.
Valuable everyday life function? Well thats a subjective answer depending on where you live. 
Oh and according to a buddy of mine the "anything that can be used to kill someone" thing seems to be getting bad in the UK. One of the guys mentioned over TS that the cops were giving him a hard time since he had an unsecured screwdriver under his seat. We're still trying to figure if he was pulling our chain.
|
Admus
Multiverse Corporation
Cosmic Anomalies
|
Posted - 2008.05.30 06:52:00 -
[83]
Originally by: Keorythe
Valuable everyday life function? Well thats a subjective answer depending on where you live.
Forgive me, I'm Canadian .
----------------------------------------------------------
"Villains always have antidotes. They're funny that way." |
Surfin's PlunderBunny
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.05.30 07:08:00 -
[84]
Yes, assault rifles are great at their primary function... deer hunting!
() ()
(â;..;)â
(")(") |
Kravick Drasari
|
Posted - 2008.05.30 07:19:00 -
[85]
Originally by: Surfin's PlunderBunny
Yes, assault rifles are great at their primary function... deer hunting!
No thats mini guns. Get it right.
Also mutated anthrax.
---
My cat Putter approves of this post.
Be a Ninja! You know you want too: http://www.animecubed.com/billy/?Kravick |
Kusha'an
RuffRyders
Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2008.05.30 12:30:00 -
[86]
Originally by: Batwigg
The presence of cars is a risk, simply put - People can handle them carelessly and accidentally kill a loved one. Two cars on the opposite ends of a crime situation may well escalate into a pileup. If you can buy a car, the paranoid schizophrenic across the street probably can too.
There's probably no way to remove the cars from American society, but the point that (I at least) have been trying to make here is that any society would be better off without cars in general use by the subjects to the throne.
Originally by: Kusha'an
"An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life."
I don't know about you, but a society where people get murdered for insulting someone isn't my idea of utopia.
Originally by: Kusha'an
"Those who cling to the untrue doctrine that violence never settles anything would be advised to conjure up the ghosts of Napoleon Bonaparte and of the Duke of Wellington and let them debate it. The ghost of H!tler could referee, and the jury might well be the Dodo, the Great Auk, and the Passenger Pigeon. Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in history than has any other factor, and the contrary opinion is wishful thinking at its worst. Nations and peoples who forget this basic truth have always paid for it with their lives and freedoms."
-Robert A. Heinlein
Oh wow, look at the totally relevant quote.
Violence solves issues. Noone (in this thread at least) has every claimed that it did not. I'm all for the military use of firearms and weapons in general - Hell, that's what they are there for, and although in a perfect world a military would not be needed, we don't live in a perfect world.
The issue here is the quite frankly moronic idea of putting murder tools into the hands of the subjects of the throne.
Fixed it for you.
Also, you should try reading the entire post before spouting off about irrelevancy. It makes you look bad when you don't.
Finally, your statement about governments being the only entities that should have firearms - that's just so ignorant that it's irresponsible:
Linkage
----
What part of "shorn't" do you not understand? |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |