Pages: 1 … 8 9 10

 

2008-04-17 07:06:09
RAIMIUS
You with the face!
+244|7005|US

Braddock wrote:

I don't envisage a future full of businessmen going to work with samurai swords attached to their belts in case they get mugged anytime soon. I simply do not agree with the concept of giving the weapons to everyone to 'level the playing field' as it were, in countries like the US the homicide rates just don't sell that idea too well tbh. I know some countries like Switzerland go against this but I believe they have other societal factors at play.
States usually don't let people here walk around with katanas either.  However, we do not ban their sale.  There is a difference between usage laws and possession/purchase laws.
[For example: I can legally own a handgun.  However, I cannot go to a gun store and buy one, unless I am over 21.  I also cannot get a permit to carry said handgun concealed until I am over 21 and go through the permit system, which requires background checks, fingerprinting, and a class.  So, in Colorado, usage, possession, and purchase requirements are all different.]
Cultural/social factors have the biggest impact on crime.  From what I have read, arrest and conviction rates play the biggest factor, followed by cultural expectations (i.e. how "violent" the culture is)...somewhere way down the list, the availability of certain tools comes into play, but that affects gun crime v. knife crime type stats more than total crime.
2008-04-17 17:44:09
oldgoat
Alcohol & calculus don't mix. Never drink & derive
+5|6807
If you ban the guns, then all the law-follower-innocent guys will obey and not get some.  but that law isnt gonna stop all the locos and gang members from getting them.  if they want it, they will get it, no matter what a piece of paper says. 


Okay, there is a gang, they think you took some of their crack, and they are launching an assault at your house and the whole neighborhood is getting shot.

1. if guns are banned, EVERYONE WILL DIE! <- FACT

2. if guns are allowed, big fight ensues and most likely the gang will back down against 40 angry old guys with pump action shotguns and sniper rifles hiding in their kids bedroom windows.  the person with the higher ground can see more.
2008-04-17 18:07:58
AussieReaper
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
+5,761|6443|what

oldgoat wrote:

If you ban the guns, then all the law-follower-innocent guys will obey and not get some.  but that law isnt gonna stop all the locos and gang members from getting them.  if they want it, they will get it, no matter what a piece of paper says.
It will make the purchase of guns harder, the punishment for owning the guns harsher, the punishment for selling guns harder and will make the streets safer.

And the "law-follower-innocent guys" at the moment I would be willing to bet most don't own guns.

oldgoat wrote:

Okay, there is a gang, they think you took some of their crack, and they are launching an assault at your house and the whole neighborhood is getting shot.
That's one of the most unlikely scenario's ever described in D&ST, but other than that, if the whole neighbourhood is under attack, law enforcement agencies would soon be on the scene. And unfortunately for the gang, the police are better armed and able to stop this gang, in a gun banned world.

oldgoat wrote:

1. if guns are banned, EVERYONE WILL DIE! <- FACT
No. Not fact. If guns are banned then you would more than likely see less of your attackers with guns. But lets say they are all armed, it would not take long for someone to notice these people have purchased weapons illegally, that they are walking the streets armed, and are a known drug gang that is potentially dangerous. It would be a fairly inept police force that did not keep tabs on a group like this.

And when the police do turn up, I'm sure it's much easier to simply shoot those who are armed, rather than work out who is the bad guys in the middle of an inner suburban gunfight, with civilians caught in the cross fire, who decide they might as well return fire.

oldgoat wrote:

2. if guns are allowed, big fight ensues and most likely the gang will back down against 40 angry old guys with pump action shotguns and sniper rifles hiding in their kids bedroom windows.  the person with the higher ground can see more.
No. If guns are allowed most likely the gang will not back down, because they have a large enough supply of guns and ammo, and knew what to expect. They wouldn't go in with bb guns if they were expecting to meet armed resistance in the form of shotguns and rifles as you describe.

And who in their right mind would keep sniper rifles in their kids bedrooms? Or in their house at all? Only serious gun enthusiasts. And sniper rifles are expensive.

Your also assuming that the street moves uphill, giving the bad guys a disadvantage. It's not unlikely that this imagined street is downhill. If your arming the civilians who are nice and law abiding with sniper rifles, you might as well give the bad guys RPGs. In which case the roads inclination wouldn't hold much sway.

And when the police do arrive in the everybody is armed situation, all your going to see are more dead, in the form of police, civilians and bad guys.

Last edited by TheAussieReaper (2008-04-17 18:18:43)

https://i.imgur.com/maVpUMN.png
2008-04-17 19:26:15
imortal
Member
+240|6955|Austin, TX

TheAussieReaper wrote:

oldgoat wrote:

If you ban the guns, then all the law-follower-innocent guys will obey and not get some.  but that law isnt gonna stop all the locos and gang members from getting them.  if they want it, they will get it, no matter what a piece of paper says.
It will make the purchase of guns harder, the punishment for owning the guns harsher, the punishment for selling guns harder and will make the streets safer.

And the "law-follower-innocent guys" at the moment I would be willing to bet most don't own guns.
That would depend a lot on WHERE you were talking about.  Here in Texas, I would take that bet.

Oh, and here in America, they can't keep drugs out of the country.  Tell me the gangs, who make money by selling those drugs, can't get guns brought in as well.  If you are breaking one law already, then you will not fear breaking two.

TheAussieReaper wrote:

oldgoat wrote:

Okay, there is a gang, they think you took some of their crack, and they are launching an assault at your house and the whole neighborhood is getting shot.
That's one of the most unlikely scenario's ever described in D&ST, but other than that, if the whole neighbourhood is under attack, law enforcement agencies would soon be on the scene. And unfortunately for the gang, the police are better armed and able to stop this gang, in a gun banned world.
Okay, I will grant you that it sounds like a really unlikely scenario.  Silly, in fact. However, it IS possible.  Just think of a situation like post-Katrina New Orleans.

TheAussieReaper wrote:

oldgoat wrote:

1. if guns are banned, EVERYONE WILL DIE! <- FACT
No. Not fact. If guns are banned then you would more than likely see less of your attackers with guns. But lets say they are all armed, it would not take long for someone to notice these people have purchased weapons illegally, that they are walking the streets armed, and are a known drug gang that is potentially dangerous. It would be a fairly inept police force that did not keep tabs on a group like this.

And when the police do turn up, I'm sure it's much easier to simply shoot those who are armed, rather than work out who is the bad guys in the middle of an inner suburban gunfight, with civilians caught in the cross fire, who decide they might as well return fire.
That makes two assumptions.  The big one is that the police will actually arrive.  In a situation that bad, there is the possibility that things have broken down badly enough for a break in public services, to include polifce response.

Second, is the attitude of gang members.  I think (I admit that this is speculation) that they are like bullies; they go after what they feel are easy targets; easy money.  Low risk, high reward.  I can see a gang trying to seriously intimidate an area.  But I can also picture them likely to back down if faced with a seriously credible force. 

TheAussieReaper wrote:

oldgoat wrote:

2. if guns are allowed, big fight ensues and most likely the gang will back down against 40 angry old guys with pump action shotguns and sniper rifles hiding in their kids bedroom windows.  the person with the higher ground can see more.
No. If guns are allowed most likely the gang will not back down, because they have a large enough supply of guns and ammo, and knew what to expect. They wouldn't go in with bb guns if they were expecting to meet armed resistance in the form of shotguns and rifles as you describe.

And who in their right mind would keep sniper rifles in their kids bedrooms? Or in their house at all? Only serious gun enthusiasts. And sniper rifles are expensive.

Your also assuming that the street moves uphill, giving the bad guys a disadvantage. It's not unlikely that this imagined street is downhill. If your arming the civilians who are nice and law abiding with sniper rifles, you might as well give the bad guys RPGs. In which case the roads inclination wouldn't hold much sway.

And when the police do arrive in the everybody is armed situation, all your going to see are more dead, in the form of police, civilians and bad guys.
Your assumptions are once again holding sway.  A hunting rifle can easily become a sniper rifle.  Granted, the really specialized ones are expensive, but a basic one is easy and cheap.  I see no problem keeping a collection of firearms in a home; provided you keep them safely secured to prevent your kids from playing with them.  Millions of people here in the US do exactly that.  And I think I am in my right mind. 

I am not going to argue terrian, but I would bet good money I have a better eye for terrain when it comes to a gunfight.

Again, the police response is dependant on WHERE you are.  Again, here in Texas, I have very little fear about being shot, as an armed good guy, by the police by mistake.  Mainly because of my reaction towards the police.  And if two sides are shooting it out, even our SWAT team would stay back, under cover, until they can sort the situation and find a way of safely taking control.
2008-04-17 20:04:59
oldgoat
Alcohol & calculus don't mix. Never drink & derive
+5|6807
[That's one of the most unlikely scenario's ever described in D&ST, but other than that, if the whole neighbourhood is under attack, law enforcement agencies would soon be on the scene. And unfortunately for the gang, the police are better armed and able to stop this gang, in a gun banned world.]

[And when the police do turn up, I'm sure it's much easier to simply shoot those who are armed, rather than work out who is the bad guys in the middle of an inner suburban gunfight, with civilians caught in the cross fire, who decide they might as well return fire.]



{ And if two sides are shooting it out, even our SWAT team would stay back, under cover, until they can sort the situation and find a way of safely taking control.}

If they stay back, then wont more people get shot since there will be a delay of _ minutes until the swat team gets their plans going.  If the civilians had guns, then they would stay in their houses and shooting from their bedroom windows and the police wil see that and not shoot the people in the houses.  And while the swat team is figuring it out, the other civilians could be picking off more of them to help the swat team get this over quicker.
2008-04-17 20:17:06
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6965|Canberra, AUS

oldgoat wrote:

If you ban the guns, then all the law-follower-innocent guys will obey and not get some.  but that law isnt gonna stop all the locos and gang members from getting them.  if they want it, they will get it, no matter what a piece of paper says. 


Okay, there is a gang, they think you took some of their crack, and they are launching an assault at your house and the whole neighborhood is getting shot.
This ain't war, mate. This is suburbia.

1. if guns are banned, EVERYONE WILL DIE! <- FACT
Funny, I still seem to be alive.

2. if guns are allowed, big fight ensues and most likely the gang will back down against 40 angry old guys with pump action shotguns and sniper rifles hiding in their kids bedroom windows.  the person with the higher ground can see more.
You actually think that?! Wow.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
2008-04-17 20:18:01
Deadmonkiefart
Floccinaucinihilipilificator
+177|6996

Braddock wrote:

I don't envisage a future full of businessmen going to work with samurai swords attached to their belts in case they get mugged anytime soon. I simply do not agree with the concept of giving the weapons to everyone to 'level the playing field' as it were, in countries like the US the homicide rates just don't sell that idea too well tbh. I know some countries like Switzerland go against this but I believe they have other societal factors at play.
Switzerland has societal forces working for them just as the US has them working against them.  The US is a multitude of immigrants, it shares a (practically open) border with Mexico, and it's a very large country.
2008-04-17 20:19:01
Deadmonkiefart
Floccinaucinihilipilificator
+177|6996

Spark wrote:

oldgoat wrote:

If you ban the guns, then all the law-follower-innocent guys will obey and not get some.  but that law isnt gonna stop all the locos and gang members from getting them.  if they want it, they will get it, no matter what a piece of paper says. 


Okay, there is a gang, they think you took some of their crack, and they are launching an assault at your house and the whole neighborhood is getting shot.
This ain't war, mate. This is suburbia.

1. if guns are banned, EVERYONE WILL DIE! <- FACT
Funny, I still seem to be alive.
You will die... eventually.
2008-04-17 22:02:55
RAIMIUS
You with the face!
+244|7005|US

TheAussieReaper wrote:

And who in their right mind would keep sniper rifles in their kids bedrooms? Or in their house at all? Only serious gun enthusiasts. And sniper rifles are expensive.

And when the police do arrive in the everybody is armed situation, all your going to see are more dead, in the form of police, civilians and bad guys.
ROFL...You do realize that one of the primary military sniper rifles from Vietnam through the '80s/'90s was the Remington 700--that's right, a hunting rifle!  You see, hunting rifles and sniper rifles usually only differ in the stock...which only makes it more comfortable to shoot accurately.  ($650 sound rediculously expensive to you?)

"When" the police arrive.  There are areas in the US where the correct phrase would be "IF the police arrive."  In some cities, the police have refused to enter certain neighborhoods...for hours at a time...
2008-04-17 22:10:46
AussieReaper
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
+5,761|6443|what

RAIMIUS wrote:

TheAussieReaper wrote:

And who in their right mind would keep sniper rifles in their kids bedrooms? Or in their house at all? Only serious gun enthusiasts. And sniper rifles are expensive.

And when the police do arrive in the everybody is armed situation, all your going to see are more dead, in the form of police, civilians and bad guys.
ROFL...You do realize that one of the primary military sniper rifles from Vietnam through the '80s/'90s was the Remington 700--that's right, a hunting rifle!  You see, hunting rifles and sniper rifles usually only differ in the stock...which only makes it more comfortable to shoot accurately.  ($650 sound rediculously expensive to you?)

"When" the police arrive.  There are areas in the US where the correct phrase would be "IF the police arrive."  In some cities, the police have refused to enter certain neighborhoods...for hours at a time...
I wasn't saying that the two are different, my point was that not everyone in the US is an avid hunter, with rifles readily available in the event of their neighbourhood coming under siege. There's no point owning a rifle, unless you hunt.

And my second point on the price, is that even for protection who would want a rifle, when they could own multiple hand guns for the same price?

And maybe the reason police choose not enter an area, is because they expect to be shot at, because guns are so easily available.
https://i.imgur.com/maVpUMN.png
2008-04-17 23:36:09
B.Schuss
I'm back, baby... ( sort of )
+664|7131|Cologne, Germany

oldgoat wrote:

1. if guns are banned, EVERYONE WILL DIE! <- FACT
oh, please. We have had that before. If that were true, why has germany ( a country where guns are largely banned ) one fourth of the murder rate per capita of the US ?

The fact is, compared to all other western industrialized nations, a disproportionally high number of people in the US die as a result of gun violence.

What do you think is the reason for that ? The high number of firearms in circulation maybe ? Or are Americans simply inherently more violent than people in other western nations ?
2008-04-18 00:01:41
Commie Killer
Member
+192|6677
You guys are taking his comment about dieing way outta context, is that really necessary.
2008-04-18 10:14:57
RAIMIUS
You with the face!
+244|7005|US

TheAussieReaper wrote:

I wasn't saying that the two are different, my point was that not everyone in the US is an avid hunter, with rifles readily available in the event of their neighbourhood coming under siege. There's no point owning a rifle, unless you hunt.

And my second point on the price, is that even for protection who would want a rifle, when they could own multiple hand guns for the same price?

And maybe the reason police choose not enter an area, is because they expect to be shot at, because guns are so easily available.
True, not everyone is a hunter.  I am not a hunter (venison is good, but hunting isn't my thing).  I do however shoot in competitions.  Rifles are the only way to compete in a 1000m competition!  Rifles have been used in defense.  I would not choose one as a first choice, because of the risk of overpenetration...but some people have used them effectively. 

On price, it can go either way.  Ruger .22LR rifles are about as cheap as any decent handgun gets (usually cheaper).  That R700 I mentioned is significantly cheaper than the pistols most people compete with (although it is a tad more expensive than the Glock I currently compete with).  It really depends on what model you get.  Handguns go from as little as ~$100 to well over $4,000.  Rifles have a similar base price, but can cost over $10,000 at the top end.

Police will generally avoid any area where they feel especially vulnerable.  I'm sure there are areas in Western Europe that are similar.
2008-04-18 17:58:57
Braddock
Agitator
+916|6580|Éire

oldgoat wrote:

If you ban the guns, then all the law-follower-innocent guys will obey and not get some.  but that law isnt gonna stop all the locos and gang members from getting them.  if they want it, they will get it, no matter what a piece of paper says. 


Okay, there is a gang, they think you took some of their crack, and they are launching an assault at your house and the whole neighborhood is getting shot.

1. if guns are banned, EVERYONE WILL DIE! <- FACT

2. if guns are allowed, big fight ensues and most likely the gang will back down against 40 angry old guys with pump action shotguns and sniper rifles hiding in their kids bedroom windows.  the person with the higher ground can see more.
That's a ludicrous US-style example...it has no relation to European reality I'm afraid. If a gun toting gang of crack dealers were tearing up the neighbourhood they would be tackled by the emergency armed response unit and would be destroyed because very few criminal gangs here would be able to match the firepower they have.

One other thing about having very restrictive gun control here is that the guns that are out there are more easily traceable, as a criminal you could end up getting done for every crime the gun was used for and so there is more of a reluctance among many criminals to use a gun unless it's a particularly big job. You can actually see this reflected in a lot of European gangster movies like Bleeder and I Went Down where getting a gun is seen as a big deal...compared with the common Hollywood cliche of guns being easily available at every turn, to the point where the hero will often throw away his gun just because he has run out of bullets.
2008-04-18 19:45:41
beerface702
Member
+65|6983|las vegas
what the hell! I can't beilive anyone replied to my message in such great numbers...i feel this is a milestone in my obscure time at bf2s. I forgot i even posted this! haha

Speaking of swords, my father just got back from a job in okinawa and brought back some gift's for the family. brought home a real nice katana, and  full length samurai sword for me..it was my bday after all. The display has mt. Fuji design embosed with perl..I didnt ask how much the set cost, but it was made in japan from the sticker.

it's dull of course, but a dull katana witha  sharp point is just as deadly with a good thrust to the body, in fact i would rather have a razor sharp katana punch through my body, then a dull one.
2008-04-18 20:06:05
beerface702
Member
+65|6983|las vegas
some pics of sword

https://img2.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/th.a917766ad1.jpg

https://img2.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/th.ea7fe29746.jpg
https://img2.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/th.69a1e23b56.jpg

the sword is pretty heavy actually, not super high quality, but a nice display set to be honest. At least it's not chinese.

Last edited by beerface702 (2008-04-18 20:06:55)

2008-04-18 22:23:37
Reciprocity
Member
+721|6871|the dank(super) side of Oregon
here are a couple pics of my shin-gunto.(taken by the broker before I purchased)

https://i134.photobucket.com/albums/q82/mechanix202/katana3.jpg

https://i134.photobucket.com/albums/q82/mechanix202/katana4.jpg

https://i134.photobucket.com/albums/q82/mechanix202/katana11.jpg

It's such a wonderful and vivid piece of history.  I haven't dated it yet but I'm guessing it was made in the mid to late 30's, maybe early 40's.  It is still sharp as the edge hasn't been ruined by some stupid gaijin with an electric sharpener.  It's heavy and solid and more than capable of decapitating a Manchurian.

Last edited by Reciprocity (2008-12-10 19:17:57)

2008-04-19 01:38:28
RAIMIUS
You with the face!
+244|7005|US

Braddock wrote:

the common Hollywood cliche of guns being easily available at every turn
There you go!  It is mostly a hollywood cliche.
2008-04-19 05:47:09
Braddock
Agitator
+916|6580|Éire

RAIMIUS wrote:

Braddock wrote:

the common Hollywood cliche of guns being easily available at every turn
There you go!  It is mostly a hollywood cliche.
It is a cliche, obviously. But in terms of popular culture within a society it shows the normalisation of guns and their handling. In the two European films I mentioned there are specific scenes in them where the gangsters get guns and actually talk about how big a deal it is to get a gun.
2008-04-19 08:51:17
imortal
Member
+240|6955|Austin, TX

Braddock wrote:

oldgoat wrote:

If you ban the guns, then all the law-follower-innocent guys will obey and not get some.  but that law isnt gonna stop all the locos and gang members from getting them.  if they want it, they will get it, no matter what a piece of paper says. 


Okay, there is a gang, they think you took some of their crack, and they are launching an assault at your house and the whole neighborhood is getting shot.

1. if guns are banned, EVERYONE WILL DIE! <- FACT

2. if guns are allowed, big fight ensues and most likely the gang will back down against 40 angry old guys with pump action shotguns and sniper rifles hiding in their kids bedroom windows.  the person with the higher ground can see more.
That's a ludicrous US-style example...it has no relation to European reality I'm afraid. If a gun toting gang of crack dealers were tearing up the neighbourhood they would be tackled by the emergency armed response unit and would be destroyed because very few criminal gangs here would be able to match the firepower they have.

One other thing about having very restrictive gun control here is that the guns that are out there are more easily traceable, as a criminal you could end up getting done for every crime the gun was used for and so there is more of a reluctance among many criminals to use a gun unless it's a particularly big job. You can actually see this reflected in a lot of European gangster movies like Bleeder and I Went Down where getting a gun is seen as a big deal...compared with the common Hollywood cliche of guns being easily available at every turn, to the point where the hero will often throw away his gun just because he has run out of bullets.
Yes, it is a silly example.   And if you make guns illegal, I am sure they would be as hard to find as drugs are.
2008-04-20 03:03:34
beerface702
Member
+65|6983|las vegas
Reciprocity that is a very nice sword! I have a few but they are fakes...just cant afford a real one..sure would like to one day. How much was this on auction? did you get it on gunbroker? or ebay
2008-04-20 03:51:20
Reciprocity
Member
+721|6871|the dank(super) side of Oregon

beerface702 wrote:

Reciprocity that is a very nice sword! I have a few but they are fakes...just cant afford a real one..sure would like to one day. How much was this on auction? did you get it on gunbroker? or ebay
That one was $1200, but it is an exceptional example.  the blade is pristine, the ito and tsuka(handle and wrap) are original, and the saya(scabbard) has part of the original surrender sticker still on it.  It was purchased from an online site that specializes in antiques and specifically weapons.

A good starter for this hobby would be a late-war non commissioned officer's shin-gunto. like this one:

https://i134.photobucket.com/albums/q82/mechanix202/japan_nco3.jpg

The tsuka is a cast piece of aluminum, made to look like it has same kawa, ito and menuki.  In decent condition they go for between $300 and $1000.

this site is a great place to get an idea of cost.  I would steer very clear of places like ebay and gunbroker until you have a good knowledge base. 

a few things to remember:
-You always ask to pick up a sword that does not belong to you.  It's an insult to the owner and the sword.

-You never ever touch the blade with bare skin, especially fingers.  The oil in your skin will etch into and destroy the finish.

-Never try to sharpen, remove rust, or polish a nihonto.  You dont know how and you will ruin the blade and its value.

-The nakago (bare hilt) of all but stainless steel nihonto will be covered in a patina of rust.  never remove this rust, you will ruin the blade and its value.

Last edited by Reciprocity (2008-12-10 19:16:12)

2008-05-04 10:55:43
Hunter/Jumper
Member
+117|6644
Bottom line. . . .

Poor Government, feigning at effort.

 

Pages: 1 … 8 9 10

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard