but it wouldnt. your death would just be another one at the hands of a lowlife criminal, nothing poetic there. sure he gets a lifetime in jail, but you wont ever see a sunrise again. the world is not as nice and fluffy as we wish it would beSpumantiii wrote:
As much as I agree with what you're saying, If I'm gonna go out, I'd rather it be an example for others rather than a stupid case of violence begets violence. Just like the forefathers of your country, I'd gladly take a bullet if it meant a safer world for others.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
would you really risk being unarmed and at the mercy of some doped up junky trying to get some money for his fix. So he mugs, you, ok. So now he has what he wants hes gonna let you go on your merry way to report the crime? dont be naive. whats that famous saying, appeasement only feeds the aggressors appetite or something like that. I am not willing to put my life in the hands of a criminal just so I dont have to worry about the legal repurcussions. Goddamnit you only get one life in this world and Ill be damned if Im gonna be at the mercy of a mugger.
This coming from "in America you can be what ever you want to be" Gunslinger?GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
nice and fluffy as we wish it would be
Oh dear god that's funny! Seriously, you should do standup or something!
have you ever been outside your house?Bubbalo wrote:
This coming from "in America you can be what ever you want to be" Gunslinger?GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
nice and fluffy as we wish it would be
Oh dear god that's funny! Seriously, you should do standup or something!
Many times, why?
This is only becoming circular because you fail to get the point, and instead get stuck on what you've just posted. If you honestly believe that I'm insulting you, I think you should stand back and take a look at it from a neutral perspective, because I have never once insulted you, no matter how much you want to believe that.Horseman 77 wrote:
This has become Circular, Cancel the insults. Please as it doesn't further your point.
Only if the current prisons exceed their capacity.Horseman 77 wrote:
Here I list the things that happen when you aggressively fight crime and make arrests and some fairly obvious observations about crime
you say are " only in my head "
1.The biggest Common denominator is the criminal. True or False ?
You have to build prisons. True or False ?
Not necessarily.Horseman 77 wrote:
So you have to raise taxes. True or False ?
I'm sure people would rather have prisons in their neighbourhoods than violent criminals on their streets.Horseman 77 wrote:
No one wants them ( prisons ) built in their neighborhood. True or False ?
False. Perhaps where you come from, that would be true, but in Europe, prisoners don't whine like that.Horseman 77 wrote:
Then the people who are in jail say they are being discriminated against. etc. True or False ?
Now if you had comprehended my previous post fully, you would see that I have already accounted for all of those "points". You argue that aggressively fighting crime has too much administrative overhead. Listen, Horseman, the whole point of having laws is that you need them in order for society to function. If you need a quick solution to an urgent problem, this is what you do. I don't see how you can justify keeping violent criminals on the street with saying that it would be too much hazzle to put them in jail. Saying that completely goes against the entire point of having jails and laws in the first place.
If you really think that you can compare knives to marijuana, I don't think that you're even considering the differences. You cannot stab anyone with marijuana. Marijuana does not spawn violent crime. Knives kill people, and are extremely dangerous for police officers. Knives spawn violent crimes.Horseman 77 wrote:
When they made smoking Marijuana illegal, People who smoked it became a new class of criminal.
True or False ?
Honestly, you're comparing a hallucinogenic to an edged weapon. I don't get why you expect me to take that seriously.
No, that's you saying how it will be.Horseman 77 wrote:
address this separately
" At the best it will accomplish nothing " Example .
--Horseman 77 wrote:
Will a Dangerous demented or Criminal type turn in a weapon because it is a crime to carry one?
Yes or No? please be honest!
mikkel wrote:
Use your head. Look at what you quoted.Horseman 77 wrote:
So will a criminal or mentally, dangerously, deranged type turn in their bad knives?
You realize this is just so much fluff, right?It's being criminalised.The link shown http://uk.news.yahoo.com/24052006/344/u … r-way.html explains how people in the uk have got until June 30th to hand any knives over to the authorities without facing punishment for possession.
mikkel wrote:
Those laws will ultimately be there for your protection. It's a lot harder to find Waldo if all the people on the page are wearing Waldo outfits.specops10-4 wrote:
I am lucky to be in the US, soon in the UK they will take away pens and pencils and make everyone use crayons...
All these laws are getting me worried, I really do not care about gun laws or knife laws, but soon all the criminals will have weapons "illegally" while us law abiding people give up our stuff and have little to defend ourselves...
Now who was it again that was making this argument circular? You're asking the same questions over and over, ignoring that they've already been answered.mikkel wrote:
Horseman 77 wrote:
it just dosen't seem to me that the people who pull out knives and threaten others will entertain the notion of turning them in. Normal people don't walk around with a knife, So it will acomplish little. One would think that law makers would have more realistic goals in mind.The point in doing this is that people with knives will be easier to prosecute because just having the knife on you will be a crime in itself. Think two steps ahead.mikkel wrote:
Use your head. Look at what you quoted.Horseman 77 wrote:
So will a criminal or mentally, dangerously, deranged type turn in their bad knives?
You realize this is just so much fluff, right?It's being criminalised.The link shown http://uk.news.yahoo.com/24052006/344/u … r-way.html explains how people in the uk have got until June 30th to hand any knives over to the authorities without facing punishment for possession.
In the short term, and passive "criminals". There's a huge difference, and you really shouldn't blur the lines to make it seem like you're right. If you were, your argument itself should prove that sufficiently.Horseman 77 wrote:
" at the worst it will make more criminals" You already acknowledged this.
Well I'm glad that you can tell me how my mind works. Firstly, as said above, I have not once insulted you, and neither have I implied that you thought yourself to be superior to me. I guess you came by that conculsion yourself.Horseman 77 wrote:
I dislike people who cast about unwarranted insults, I made that clear but I never said or even implied I was Superior to you, you came to this conclusion by yourself. I believe I have yet to insult you.
Honestly, stick to the topic instead of feeling targeted by me spelling out what your arguments mean.
Last edited by mikkel (2006-05-27 00:28:51)
Somewhere sometimes, someone has to do something or nothing gets done. That's the problem. Don't wish it was better. Do something. But don't do guns if you don't have toGunSlinger OIF II wrote:
but it wouldnt. your death would just be another one at the hands of a lowlife criminal, nothing poetic there. sure he gets a lifetime in jail, but you wont ever see a sunrise again. the world is not as nice and fluffy as we wish it would beSpumantiii wrote:
As much as I agree with what you're saying, If I'm gonna go out, I'd rather it be an example for others rather than a stupid case of violence begets violence. Just like the forefathers of your country, I'd gladly take a bullet if it meant a safer world for others.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
would you really risk being unarmed and at the mercy of some doped up junky trying to get some money for his fix. So he mugs, you, ok. So now he has what he wants hes gonna let you go on your merry way to report the crime? dont be naive. whats that famous saying, appeasement only feeds the aggressors appetite or something like that. I am not willing to put my life in the hands of a criminal just so I dont have to worry about the legal repurcussions. Goddamnit you only get one life in this world and Ill be damned if Im gonna be at the mercy of a mugger.
It sounds like you might have given up hope that things COULD be lighter and fluffier
Last edited by Spumantiii (2006-05-27 00:51:20)
some of us that work for a living use them on a daily basisBubbalo wrote:
Because there is a genuine need to carry around knives?
In which case it would be legal. I think you'll find that the laws in the UK are the same as in Australia, where if you are in possession of a knife but have good cause to be, you cannot be charged. If they find you walking down the street with a combat knife under your shirt, go directly to jail.
victim's right, there is a myriad of factors involved, for instance when you seperate the demographics of the US along lines of gun ownership, you'll find that more guns per capita = less crime, you will also find that more guns per capita=rural areas, as is much of Canada. These areas are much more sparsely populated than the urban ones and this contributes heavily to the statistic of AUS and GB having lower violent incidents as most of the crime is concentrated in the cities. The stricter gun laws are found in more urbanized areas. The US is a very tricky demographic to compare to other countries due to the wide variations in population and geography. Unlike Europe, if I drove West for 4 days I would still be in the US, unlike Canada, there is a large urban contingent in spite of it's large land mass (I believe Canada is larger, yet US is more populus). 98% of all handgun crimes are committed with a firearm that was obtained illegally in the first place, firearms are used (in the US at least) in defense 60 more times than attack, and I know several people whose lives have been saved due to the use of firearms. There is a slogan here (since a bunch of whiny libs have tried to remove our right to bear arms) "if you outlaw guns only outlaws will have guns". For that matter, gun control, as practiced by my family (my mother won two florida state championships with a S&W .38 automatic) means "being able to hit one's target. My extended family has one of the most expansive weapons collections spanning most of the last century, directly behind me as I type this is a 400 yr old shield, WW2 Jap noncom sword, a civlil war sword, an Enfield spike (I keep most of my guns at my parent's house) and a dirk from WW1, yet none of my family has ever been involved in a violent crime. Your average thug usually own just one or two small cheap weapons (Davis 25's and such).May I put forth the postulate that England's "safety" regarding banning firearms is more a result of geography. Were England not so small or an island smuggling firearms in might be a different story. Do some more digging around, in many nations anti-weapons laws go hand in hand with martial law, political executions, ethnic cleansing, especially in Africa. Don't just stop at the first study you come across that conveniently fits your predetermined conclusion, funny thing about averages, Lake Okechobee averages 8' deep, but you can still sink your house in it. Trust me, someone will find a way to put you in the hospital or the morgue if they want to bad enough, the question is, how bad do you want the tools to defend yourself. "Hold still and wait for the cops Mr. Rapist" is not necessarily an effective tactic. First was guns, then pointed knives, now all knives, next I suppose will be pointy sticks, then blunt sticks, then livestock, then produce, then water balloons.LT.Victim wrote:
Canada has more Guns per capita then the US, and we dont have neary as many incidents then the US, explain that?Bubbalo wrote:
And you don't think that maybe combatting criminal culture could have prevented anything? Britain and Australia both have less violent incidents than the US, and both have far stricter gun laws. Explain that.
Last edited by kr@cker (2006-05-27 01:26:34)
Hence my comment about combatting criminal culture. Having said that, the crime statistics in Australia/UK put the lie to the idea that guns are needed for protection.LT.Victim wrote:
Canada has more Guns per capita then the US, and we dont have neary as many incidents then the US, explain that?
I lived in Van for 11 years, but I haven't been there in about 8 - but yea East Van was always bad. I suppose its gotten worse.Spumantiii wrote:
Zen, you must never have been to downtown east Van. More shootings and AIDS per capita, hookers per block, killings per shooting, drunks per people, crackshacks per houses. It's the poorest area in canada, and the worst for crime, outside similar parts of TO[CANADA]_Zenmaster wrote:
In Canada, it is extremely rare to see or hear of anyone going out armed for "defense." I go out with just my clothes and my normal wallet, watch, necklace etc., I don't have to change anything. The only problem spots we have here are Edmonton and Toronto, where knife gangs have sprouted much like in Europe.
It seems these kinds of problems are related to population density, and as you get into a larger city, you get more and more problems. Well Canada has such a small pop, that most of our cities and towns don't have these kinds of problems. We do have a growing crystal-meth problem though in all cities and towns.
An interesting thing to note, is that 75% of all property crime in Oregon, a place very much like Canada, (I believe you guys call Oregon the Canada of California lol), anyway 75% of property crime (which is all crime except violent assault, rape etc.), is due to crystal-meth junkies trying to get enough cash for another fix. While this is not related to knife fighting or any of that shit, it is a scary statistic that Meth is taking over North America and destroying families and people, meanwhile the hot topic of the day, is Fox News or CNN talking some bullshit out of their ass about Iraq, or the latest religious schpeel.
I highly suggest checking out the web for accurate information, over what you get on American news channels - most informed Americans actually watch CBC from Canada, and CBC is good but not infallible, and it doesn't cover everything that Americans are interested in. Anyway, I watch PBS Frontline online, Nova and 60 minutes when I can download episodes.
Check this one out about meth though, it was a bit sobering:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/meth/view/
Private warriors and the one on Rumsfeld was really good too. Theres tons more and I'm still making my way through them.
handguns are illegal here in Canada as well, and we share that 49th parallel with you guys.kr@cker wrote:
victim's right, there is a myriad of factors involved, for instance when you seperate the demographics of the US along lines of gun ownership, you'll find that more guns per capita = less crime, you will also find that more guns per capita=rural areas, as is much of Canada. These areas are much more sparsely populated than the urban ones and this contributes heavily to the statistic of AUS and GB having lower violent incidents as most of the crime is concentrated in the cities. The stricter gun laws are found in more urbanized areas. The US is a very tricky demographic to compare to other countries due to the wide variations in population and geography. Unlike Europe, if I drove West for 4 days I would still be in the US, unlike Canada, there is a large urban contingent in spite of it's large land mass (I believe Canada is larger, yet US is more populus). 98% of all handgun crimes are committed with a firearm that was obtained illegally in the first place, firearms are used (in the US at least) in defense 60 more times than attack, and I know several people whose lives have been saved due to the use of firearms. There is a slogan here (since a bunch of whiny libs have tried to remove our right to bear arms) "if you outlaw guns only outlaws will have guns". For that matter, gun control, as practiced by my family (my mother won two florida state championships with a S&W .38 automatic) means "being able to hit one's target. My extended family has one of the most expansive weapons collections spanning most of the last century, directly behind me as I type this is a 400 yr old shield, WW2 Jap noncom sword, a civlil war sword, an Enfield spike (I keep most of my guns at my parent's house) and a dirk from WW1, yet none of my family has ever been involved in a violent crime. Your average thug usually own just one or two small cheap weapons (Davis 25's and such).May I put forth the postulate that England's "safety" regarding banning firearms is more a result of geography. Were England not so small or an island smuggling firearms in might be a different story. Do some more digging around, in many nations anti-weapons laws go hand in hand with martial law, political executions, ethnic cleansing, especially in Africa. Don't just stop at the first study you come across that conveniently fits your predetermined conclusion, funny thing about averages, Lake Okechobee averages 8' deep, but you can still sink your house in it. Trust me, someone will find a way to put you in the hospital or the morgue if they want to bad enough, the question is, how bad do you want the tools to defend yourself. "Hold still and wait for the cops Mr. Rapist" is not necessarily an effective tactic. First was guns, then pointed knives, now all knives, next I suppose will be pointy sticks, then blunt sticks, then livestock, then produce, then water balloons.LT.Victim wrote:
Canada has more Guns per capita then the US, and we dont have neary as many incidents then the US, explain that?Bubbalo wrote:
And you don't think that maybe combatting criminal culture could have prevented anything? Britain and Australia both have less violent incidents than the US, and both have far stricter gun laws. Explain that.
Handguns are rarely found outside urban areas.
The vast majority of gun owners here are responsible registered gun owners, usually with hunting rifles or shotguns (granted our gun registry has not stopped shootings, because they are all with handguns). The police although criticized often do a good job of following up on gun crimes here. I don't remember the last time there was a shooting where the suspect(s) wasn't/weren't found. If you outlaw guns only outlaws will have guns, them and the police that is. As long as the police aren't outlaws there should end up being fewer outlaws. If people in Vancouver want to use a handgun, they join the RCMP or the local police.
lol. And you people that bring guns to clubs? Have fun being busted quick. There was a shooting last week, all are in jail awaiting judgement. That's of the clubs that don't already do all manner of mandatory searching on entry, and at coatcheck. Shootings still happen, but it's a sure way to get caught.
I'm sure many lives have been saved by guns but I would still rather the right people have them, not everyone.
"Trust me, someone will find a way to put you in the hospital or the morgue if they want to bad enough, the question is, how bad do you want the tools to defend yourself. "
The question you should ask is why would anyone want to put me in the morgue that bad, I must have done something..
In the case of attempted rape I would suggest some kind of large animal spray and/or electrical shock combined with a swift kick in the balls.
In addition I don't remember the last time anyone got flamed for karate chopping a guy's ass if he tries something. Martial arts are legal, when not used to assault.
This is assuming handguns would be illegal there, used by police (also assuming you have noncorrupt police where you live) so using these alternative methods is more viable.
Last edited by Spumantiii (2006-05-27 02:33:22)
HAha. now when I check my Karma rcord someones minus me cuz they are a BNP voter!!!!!
THe deppression starts here.......
THe deppression starts here.......
Lol ok i get your point, but i was not saying guns should be banned i meant the government should be more strict on who owns them. Harsher laws on gun ownership would be costly and unpopular,n especially in then us but if it saved just one person a year is that not worth it?yerded wrote:
Think about this:RicardoBlanco wrote:
I'd hate to think how many people are killed in accidents with guns, for that reason alone they should be banned for most people. All the crap about the constitution is so lame, the only reason people like guns is because they are cool and they can blow shit out of animals. Theres nothing wrong with that but guns in america are too easy to get hold of, the government should only allow RESPONSIBLE people to own firearms. Let us not forget how dangerous guns are, one slip and its game over.
a. The number of physicians in the US is 700,000.
b. Accidental deaths caused by Physicians per year is 120,000.
c. Accidental deaths per physician is 0.171. (US Dept. of Health & Human Services)
Then think about this:
a. The number of gun owners in the US is 80,000,000.
b. The number of accidental gun deaths per year (all age groups) is 1,500.
c. The number of accidental deaths per gun owner is .0000188.
Statistically, doctors are approximately 9,000 times more dangerous than gun owners.
FACT: NOT EVERYONE HAS A GUN, BUT ALMOST EVERYONE HAS AT LEAST ONE DOCTOR.
Please alert your friends to this alarming threat. We must ban doctors before this gets out of hand. As a public health measure I have withheld the statistics on lawyers for fear that the shock could cause people to seek medical attention.
Maybe I should close this topic, I have found myself arguing with someone who is Reading and Quoting from
" Where's Waldo "
It has become surreal. Roflmao
" Where's Waldo "
It has become surreal. Roflmao
Amazingly, it was necessary for you to be able to comprehend the concept, which I'm not even sure you have.Horseman 77 wrote:
Maybe I should close this topic, I have found myself arguing with someone who is Reading and Quoting from
" Where's Waldo "
It has become surreal. Roflmao
The mark of a good man is to concede when he has lost. I guess you aren't one of those. It was fun debating with you, although I really wish you could have held your ground a little longer.
Last edited by mikkel (2006-05-27 11:05:17)
America is a big country with a big population and very diverse set of unique problems specific to each location. What works in Canada may not be employable here.Spumantiii wrote:
It has worked pretty well making weapons more expensive here in Canada.
Rather than taking away the right to protect themselves, they simply must look to other methods of self defense. Since wealthy communities are some that have high gun ownership, it proves rich people are less likely to use their weapons for fear of losing material wealth or getting a record.
I do not have a gun "Now 'and don't want one in my house when I move into it ( kids ) but I would not attempt to tell someone else how to think.
I may purchase another in the near future. I have owned many at one time I had 37 and never committed any act of Violence.
lol all you want to The US does not get its Illegal guns from Mexico, where did you hear this?Spumantiii wrote:
The price of legal weapons directly corresponds to the price of illegal weaopns. Where do the black markets get their guns? Mexico? Where did they get them? The US. lol.
The US in not the only supplier of Guns. Taurus, Glock, Heckler koch, Sig, Steyr, etc. I could go an and on What is the point?
It isn't my job to educate. I just want to give my opinion just like I want to hear yours. One of the few pistols I ever purchased was a Colt .45 APC
It cost me $800.00 I can buy an illegal one on the Street for $350.00 I am not quoting Studies, just what I know from 1st hand experience.
I agree with you here. If you ever had to hurt someone it is not a pleasant experience and many sleepless nights are sure to follow.Spumantiii wrote:
I believe in rights. BUT if it were my right to kill someone I still wouldn't.
The term we often use is " stop " we want to stop people from hurting us and ours. If you know a better way we are all ears.
The 2nd Amendment does not cause crime, Criminals cause crime.Spumantiii wrote:
I firmly believe that amendment was for the benefit of American people at one point in history, but look at the problems it causes today?
PS the USA is the only country that hasn't changed it's constitution (for 100+ years) to reflect modern life.
You don't posses a lot of information on our Constitution and Government, it changes all the time constantly evolves and new laws are passed daily.
The fact that Governments can become corrupt and need to be held in check by the very people that they are meant to serve is as true today as it was 200 years ago or 2000 for that matter. This is an unpleasant fact of life like Auchwitz, Dachua, Gullags,* Ethnic cleansing, The Armenians, etc. but again I just want to give my opinion it isn't my job to educate.
Sorry, it is also a first hand experience over here.Spumantiii wrote:
I'm sorry but I just can't find those studies credible.
The "please turn in your weapons " has been done to death here also with predictable results.
not applicable to my argument nor am I a Gun company.Spumantiii wrote:
Cigarette companies also produce studies that prove smoking cannot cause cancer.
We went over the Constitution and Our Laws before and our Constitution is not your strong point, so I will skip it here.Spumantiii wrote:
It was the very cornerstone of your liberty and its attempted infringement actually sparked your Nations birth. over 200 years ago.
If this amendment was ever 'amended' (lol) then the whole legal/illegal weapon schism would not exist, since there would be far less weapons all over the world.
Again The US in not the only supplier of Guns.
Taurus,........................... Brazil
Glock, .............................Austria
IMI, ................................israel
Norinco, ..........................China
Heckler Koch ...................Germany
Uzi,................................ israel
Kalishnokov.................... produced almost Everywhere. What has cuased more trouble than AKs ?
Sig, ................................??
Steyr,..............................?? etc. at least Not in America. I could go an and on What is the point?
and it isn't my job to educate. I just want to give my opinion just like I want to hear yours. And I am not quoting Studies, just what I know from 1st hand experience.
* Sp sorry
Real good points though keep it coming.
Last edited by Horseman 77 (2006-05-27 11:32:01)
The "where's Waldo" Reader checks in.mikkel wrote:
Amazingly, it was necessary for you to be able to comprehend the concept, which I'm not even sure you have.Horseman 77 wrote:
Maybe I should close this topic, I have found myself arguing with someone who is Reading and Quoting from
" Where's Waldo "
It has become surreal. Roflmao
The mark of a good man is to concede when he has lost. I guess you aren't one of those. It was fun debating with you, although I really wish you could have held your ground a little longer.
Debate takes two viable points of view. You didn't bring yours. Get back to us when you do.
Now go find Waldo.
The Distric of Columbia (Washington D.C) has the highest murder rate in the United States and Guess What?
All Guns are illegal in D.C. How could this be if guns are illegal. Criminals cant carry guns and commit crimes with them if they are illegal can they?
Automobiles kill more people and are used in more crimes than guns ever could, why are they not illegal?
A gun by itself has never killed anyone in the history of mankind. For some crazy reason it seems that it needs a persons help to be of any good.
Awhile back a cop was killed by a criminal with a gun in New York City where guns are illegal. This criminal had a rap sheet a mile long and he was on the streets to commit this crime. The mayor of NY will not address the problem of why this guy was let go by the courts to commit this crime but instesd thinks that the gun used in the crime is the real problem. There is nothing that a criminal can do with a gun that is not already illegal. If you have a felony against you in the US then it is illegal to even touch a gun. Why was this criminal with number of felonys even doing on the street to commit this crime? Who Cares lets just take away all the guns from the law abiding citizens so they cant protect themselves.
I have never commited an act of violence in my life and for you people to think I shouldn't be able to carry a gun or a knife is just crazy.
I think Hitler instituted the first Gun Registration and Confiscation. Worked pretty good for what he had in mind for his country and the world.
All Guns are illegal in D.C. How could this be if guns are illegal. Criminals cant carry guns and commit crimes with them if they are illegal can they?
Automobiles kill more people and are used in more crimes than guns ever could, why are they not illegal?
A gun by itself has never killed anyone in the history of mankind. For some crazy reason it seems that it needs a persons help to be of any good.
Awhile back a cop was killed by a criminal with a gun in New York City where guns are illegal. This criminal had a rap sheet a mile long and he was on the streets to commit this crime. The mayor of NY will not address the problem of why this guy was let go by the courts to commit this crime but instesd thinks that the gun used in the crime is the real problem. There is nothing that a criminal can do with a gun that is not already illegal. If you have a felony against you in the US then it is illegal to even touch a gun. Why was this criminal with number of felonys even doing on the street to commit this crime? Who Cares lets just take away all the guns from the law abiding citizens so they cant protect themselves.
I have never commited an act of violence in my life and for you people to think I shouldn't be able to carry a gun or a knife is just crazy.
I think Hitler instituted the first Gun Registration and Confiscation. Worked pretty good for what he had in mind for his country and the world.
The forefathers of our country didn't make a habit of parading naked in front of aggressors to be martyrs for the unarmed cause.Spumantiii wrote:
Just like the forefathers of your country, I'd gladly take a bullet if it meant a safer world for others.
Reasonable laws, not "harsher" laws, need to exist. But if somebody wants to kill someone, they will. No amount of legislation can prevent that. I cannot abide by the liberal "it's worth it if it saved just one person a year" mantra. People. Are. Still. Going. To. Die. Just ask unarmed villages in Africa who are shot up by a local warlord's posse.RicardoBlanco wrote:
Lol ok i get your point, but i was not saying guns should be banned i meant the government should be more strict on who owns them. Harsher laws on gun ownership would be costly and unpopular,n especially in then us but if it saved just one person a year is that not worth it?
yerded wrote:
Statistically, doctors are approximately 9,000 times more dangerous than gun owners.
A gun can't be sued for malpractice. But wonderful, counter with a blatantly one-sided anti-gun website.Bubbalo wrote:
yerded: Poor example, when people go to doctors they are already unwell. Most people are pretty healthy when the get shot.
Can anyone comment on the veracity of this website?
The Ike quote they have on the top of the page ("Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.") is taken out of context just so they can use a popular name for a moral highground, and doesn't even provide a date and to whom it was given. The real quote is (note the decade):
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. This is not a way of life at all in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron." - Dwight D. Eisenhower, from a speech before the American Society of Newspaper Editors, April 16, 1963
But this site defeats itself with one statistic:
Suicide is still the leading cause of firearm death in the U.S., representing 56% of total 2003 gun deaths nationwide.
I own a few handguns. I'm not about to go shoot myself in the head anytime soon. Are you? Is this site saying that statistically, gun-related deaths would have been cut by 56% in the year 2003 if only all firearms were illegal? What flawed logic. And the suicides would never have happened? There's other ways...hanging, stabbing, death-by-cop, poisoning, gassing and jumping, to name a few.
Another statistic here which irks me with its pop psychology:
59% do not believe that "video games can make teenagers violent"
So say goodbye to Battlefield 2 if ICHV ever had their way.
Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2006-05-27 13:59:01)
Horseman 77 wrote:
America is a big country with a big population and very diverse set of unique problems specific to each location. What works in Canada may not be employable here. --You're right there, but there are safer urban areas in Canada where there are guns that has to count for somethingSpumantiii wrote:
It has worked pretty well making weapons more expensive here in Canada.
Rather than taking away the right to protect themselves, they simply must look to other methods of self defense. Since wealthy communities are some that have high gun ownership, it proves rich people are less likely to use their weapons for fear of losing material wealth or getting a record.
I do not have a gun "Now 'and don't want one in my house when I move into it ( kids ) but I would not attempt to tell someone else how to think.
I may purchase another in the near future. I have owned many at one time I had 37 and never committed any act of Violence.lol all you want to The US does not get its Illegal guns from Mexico, where did you hear this?Spumantiii wrote:
The price of legal weapons directly corresponds to the price of illegal weaopns. Where do the black markets get their guns? Mexico? Where did they get them? The US. lol.
The US in not the only supplier of Guns. Taurus, Glock, Heckler koch, Sig, Steyr, etc. I could go an and on What is the point?
--of course it isn't, but look at the money made in the last 25 yrs alone from just American weapons
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/156584 … p;n=283155
It isn't my job to educate. I just want to give my opinion just like I want to hear yours. One of the few pistols I ever purchased was a Colt .45 APC
It cost me $800.00 I can buy an illegal one on the Street for $350.00 I am not quoting Studies, just what I know from 1st hand experience.
-- that's amazing, up here I'd have to pay 1800 and up for a 'safe' illegal handgun (Walther p99), and most already have kills on them
I agree with you here. If you ever had to hurt someone it is not a pleasant experience and many sleepless nights are sure to follow.Spumantiii wrote:
I believe in rights. BUT if it were my right to kill someone I still wouldn't.
The term we often use is " stop " we want to stop people from hurting us and ours. If you know a better way we are all ears.
--Non lethal weaponryThe 2nd Amendment does not cause crime, Criminals cause crime.Spumantiii wrote:
I firmly believe that amendment was for the benefit of American people at one point in history, but look at the problems it causes today?
PS the USA is the only country that hasn't changed it's constitution (for 100+ years) to reflect modern life.
You don't posses a lot of information on our Constitution and Government, it changes all the time constantly evolves and new laws are passed daily.
--unfortunately neither do most Americans. Do you know all that goes on in the senate?
The fact that Governments can become corrupt and need to be held in check by the very people that they are meant to serve is as true today as it was 200 years ago or 2000 for that matter. This is an unpleasant fact of life like Auchwitz, Dachua, Gullags,* Ethnic cleansing, The Armenians, etc. but again I just want to give my opinion it isn't my job to educate.
--I can't possess as much info on that subject as you probably have, but I was a law student, I just missed 2 and hit 4 up there hehe.Sorry, it is also a first hand experience over here.Spumantiii wrote:
I'm sorry but I just can't find those studies credible.
The "please turn in your weapons " has been done to death here also with predictable results.not applicable to my argument nor am I a Gun company.Spumantiii wrote:
Cigarette companies also produce studies that prove smoking cannot cause cancer.
--no but the american gov't produces studies that can get anything they want done. WMDs.We went over the Constitution and Our Laws before and our Constitution is not your strong point, so I will skip it here.Spumantiii wrote:
It was the very cornerstone of your liberty and its attempted infringement actually sparked your Nations birth. over 200 years ago.
If this amendment was ever 'amended' (lol) then the whole legal/illegal weapon schism would not exist, since there would be far less weapons all over the world.
--fair enough. Although I did write a thesis comparing your bill of rights to ours.
Again The US is not the only supplier of Guns.
--http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/story … id=3511776
true, Russia is the other major contributor
and it isn't my job to educate. I just want to give my opinion just like I want to hear yours. And I am not quoting Studies, just what I know from 1st hand experience.
* Sp sorry
Real good points though keep it coming.
Last edited by Spumantiii (2006-05-27 14:24:08)
Hmm. This is definately where I differ in opinion. I'd feel safer having my kid(s) know guns inside and out, with target shooting experience under their belt. That way, guns wouldn't be such a stigma to them that they'd be tempted to smuggle one to school or play with them at a friend's house just to be "cool." I never knew any kid to bring a circular saw or a power drill to class just to be cool. Guns need to be viewed as a tool, not some romanticized forbidden object.Horseman 77 wrote:
I do not have a gun "Now 'and don't want one in my house when I move into it ( kids ) but I would not attempt to tell someone else how to think.
That being said, I would keep my guns under lock and key. Who knows what their friends would do if they came over to my place?
Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2006-05-27 14:29:28)
I'd carry a potatoe peeler if they took away my knife.SuperSlowYo wrote:
man this is too funny... they even want ppl to hand in kitchen knives classic... fear the deadly butter knife larfff
Wow, a society that doesn't trust itself with sharp objects.
Last edited by Major_Spittle (2006-05-27 14:32:06)
I beg to differ, they were very much ready to be martyrs in the face of the imperial English.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
The forefathers of our country didn't make a habit of parading naked in front of aggressors to be martyrs for the unarmed cause.Spumantiii wrote:
Just like the forefathers of your country, I'd gladly take a bullet if it meant a safer world for others.
They also didn't make a habit of running around shooting each other. That came a bit later.
haha thats classic, you americans take the piss, your like 'i own a gun for my protection' You do realise that you are more likly to get killed by your own gun than actually stop a criminal. Here in england we dont need to protect ourselves, our police actually do their jobs and protect us. America is a joke on democracy.specops10-4 wrote:
I am lucky to be in the US, soon in the UK they will take away pens and pencils and make everyone use crayons...
All these laws are getting me worried, I really do not care about gun laws or knife laws, but soon all the criminals will have weapons "illegally" while us law abiding people give up our stuff and have little to defend ourselves...
This knife amnesty is a joke however, criminals wont had their knifes in and only the innocent will. However if the police didnt do anything, us, the public would be on their back complaining and talking about shit that we dont understand (people like that real piss me off), the police are doing all they can after these recent knifings outside schools and i commend their work.
Edit. Their is literally no need to carry a knife anyway. The best alternative is to learn a form of self defence if you realy need to. Btw just so you know i live near swindon, chav capital of wiltshire and im not afraid on the streets.
Last edited by Vilham (2006-05-27 14:44:45)