Print

[gcskate27]

QUOTE

I think you don't know jack sh*t about firearms

just pointing out the double negative because im an ass...

[damam]

QUOTE(Spency234 @ Mar 8 2005, 06:53 AM)

Sure you may have good morals, but what about that guy you just cut off on the freeway that's having a bad day with a glock under his drivers seat?
. . .
Well that makes it ok right?  Have you ever heard of innocent bystanders?

in america I have roughly a 1 in 50,000 chance of being murdered by a firearm if you take homicides to be purely random.  But we all know they are not purely random.  In actuality, that number is probably lower because I dont go out of my way to make myself more likely to be shot (for example: I have not joined any inner city gangs, nor do I deal coke, etc).  I am comfortable with those odds.

QUOTE

7.7% is not a very high number, and I beleive that a bottle of mace would do the same trick as a handgun.  I'm a little bit partial on this point though because I beleive these perverts really do deserve to get shot.

this number would be higher if more women were like me, and willing to carry a gun.  Im not sure what the stats are, but im willing to bet that women are in the minority when it comes to consealed hand guns.  As for mace, I carry a full canister of bear mace in my car, it doesnt really work on bears, but it does work against most humans.  I say most, because people can gain a tolerance to it.  The other bad point about mace is that their is a lot of collataral damage that can occur when you using it due to even a slight breeze, and it is lethal for infants.  I have a 9 week old daughter, I would never dare use it around her.  Fortunately I live in a country that affords me another means of protecting myself.

QUOTE

This seems rediculous to me.  They aren't showing the crimes that these extra guns ARE comitting.

I agree - lets look at pure crime statistics taken from nationmaster
total crimes per capita
United Kingdom - 86.04 per 1000 people (hmmm guess gun control isnt working to well their)
United States - 81.55 per 1000 people
Canada - 76.89 per 1000 people
These numbers assume that the US and Canada are just as likely to report crimes of course, but really the numbers are negligable.

QUOTE

The question I'm going to throw back at you is what makes us so different?  You say a "peaceful culture" like Canada, but we are literally right beside you.  There has to be a reason there are so many crimes in your country compared to ours.

Why dont you look at the other nation that the US buffers you from: Mexico.
They are world leaders in murders, firearm murders.  Do you have anywhere near the influx migration from Mexico that we do?
Mexico:
6th in the world for murders  (US is 24th)
5th in the world for fire-arm murders (US is 8th)

Also lets look at something a little more intertaining about canada:
Rapes per Capita:
Canada - 0.74 per 1000 people
US - 0.30 per 1000 people
Looks like you Canadian gals could use some concealed hand guns up there, ehhh

[The unProfessional]

QUOTE

My American friends there freaked right out, because I guess you can't do that in the states, you might piss someone off and get shot? I find it difficult to have a good time down there.

For asking girls to come to a party?  Where the hell do they live, Inglewood?  As far as I know, it's perfectly safe to do that here.

In partial agreement with you though, assholes do ruin alot of the fun.

[Ween311]

QUOTE

I'd like to see sources on all of this

It says in her post, she found it at nationmaster.com.  Does she have to do all the work for you?

[damam]

QUOTE(Spency234)

Yeah, thank god you can wave that gun around your 9 month old instead. 

Not sure why you would find that odd.  Its not like im yelling "hee-haw" and randomly shooting it in the air while doing a jig.  To date, I have only used it at the firing range.  But, I reserve the right to protect myself and my daughter if necessary, and right now mace is not a viable alternative as it can kill my daughter.  Ive always carried both anyways, I believe in an escalation of defense rather than a full on show of your hand.

QUOTE(Spency234)

QUOTE

I agree - lets look at pure crime statistics taken from nationmaster
total crimes per capita
United Kingdom - 86.04 per 1000 people (hmmm guess gun control isnt working to well their)
United States - 81.55 per 1000 people
Canada - 76.89 per 1000 people
These numbers assume that the US and Canada are just as likely to report crimes of course, but really the numbers are negligable.
Why dont you look at the other nation that the US buffers you from: Mexico.
They are world leaders in murders, firearm murders.  Do you have anywhere near the influx migration from Mexico that we do?
Mexico:
6th in the world for murders  (US is 24th)
5th in the world for fire-arm murders (US is 8th)

Also lets look at something a little more intertaining about canada:
Rapes per Capita:
Canada - 0.74 per 1000 people
US - 0.30 per 1000 people
Looks like you Canadian gals could use some concealed hand guns up there, ehhh

I'd like to see sources on all of this.

Actually, I did list the source for these in my post: - NationMaster (you even have it in your quote of my post)
here is a link to the Rape statistics in particular
LINK
Canada is 5, US is 9.
NationMasters source for this is "UNICRI (United Nations Interregional Crime and Justice Research Institute). 2002. Correspondence on data on crime victims."
The only real thing I dont like about NationMaster is that it does not do roling averages.  Perhaps it will in the future.

As for the 1998 - I cant seem to find the site where i initially found that (it was a long time ago).  Since I cant find support for it ill concede that point till I can.  Still the stuff I pulled from nationmaster provides ample ammo (pun intended).

QUOTE(Gun Violence: The Real Costs)

Medical costs of gun violence put a terrible burden on health service providers and governments. When indirect costs of gun violence - loss of productivity, mental health treatment and rehabilitation, legal and judicial costs - are figured in, gun violence costs the US over $100 billion annually

this is the best arguement for gun control i have ever read.  but its still not enough for me to give up my gun.

[me_007x]

, I realise that until all the nations come together to work on problems that effect everyone, shit happens.

[source]

http://www.connected...tics/index.html

If anyone reads the link above, I live in the West Midlands.  

[fishlord]

QUOTE(Wong Hung Lo @ Mar 8 2005, 07:25 PM)

I think you are one of those PETA folks talking out of your ass when it comes to the accuracy of a handgun and suffering. Most kills where I live are within 100 yards and my 44 is accurate in 100 yards. All I use is a shotgun and 44 mag with a 7.5" barrel.  It is very accurate and lethal.

[The unProfessional]

QUOTE

So, with 3 times the diversity, I would expect 3 or more times the crime.

I've made that point before and people usually bite off my head for it.  I agree with your post 100%.  The level of diversity instills prejudice that runs so deep, in so many directions, that there is a great deal tension.

Only time will eradicate this prejudice.  As generations grow older and younger, more tolerant generations are created.

I really hate it when people play the race card because it only keeps the cycle going.  But much of the politics, especially on a local/city/state level, are controlled by racial issues.  It's much of why california is in the shitter.

[pepsik]

QUOTE(K98 @ Mar 9 2005, 05:25 AM)

Somehow that second part would be impossible to to ever finish. I for one would never turn in what I have. NEVER.

[me_007x]

QUOTE

Somehow that second part would be impossible to to ever finish. I for one would never turn in what I have. NEVER

That was my point    

[Maximumbeing]

All we are saying...is give peace a chance!

[LenteSubigo]

QUOTE(Maximumbeing @ Mar 9 2005, 08:27 PM)

All we are saying...is give peace a chance!

[Tony42077]

One of my favorite pro-gun statements is "All of you people that don't want guns in your house, put up a sign on your house stating - No guns in this house". the reason why I like this so much, is because it happened to me.

When I was at school, I heard that there was a lot more crime in that area than I was used to (from an all-white low crime suburb). I always wanted a gun, so I got my FOID card and bought myself a gun. Not 2 months after I got my gun, I was awakened by a sound coming from the lower floor. I got my gun, and went downstairs to check it out. Sure enough there was a brother holding one of my PC towers. I told him to put it down. I didn't realize I was in the way of his only exit route. He dropped the tower and lunged at me. I dodged his lunge, and started to fire. As soon as he was shot at, he went for the door. While going for the door I shot him in the legs and lower back several times (small calibur bullets). He went out the door and ran away (with the bullets in his legs - adrenaline is some powerful stuff).

After the cops showed up they took my statement and started to search the local hospitals for him. He was never found, so I don't know how he got fixed up or if he died. If he's alive, I'm sure how he wishes that he didn't rob MY house with every painful step, or roll in a wheelchair.

My point is that with the diversity that is in the U.S., the need for guns varys greatly. I thought that I might need one, and I ended up being right. I am sure glad that the burglar didn't wake me up with a knife to my throat. I don't know if I would have died without my gun, but I wasn't going to take that chance.

[damam]

QUOTE(Arvarden)

Btw Tony Martin served time for shooting an un armed burgular in the back, if he shot him in the face or the chest he could have claimed self defence and he wouldn't have served anytime.

never would have happened in my state.  I have the absolute right to defend my property.  that includes shooting them in the back as they flee.

QUOTE(Arvarden @ Mar 9 2005, 11:11 PM)

Tony, you shot an un armed man?  Are you fucking stupid?

You do know that if this person decides to pay you a visit again he/she will prolly be packing because of your stupid stunt?

Letting joe public aquire fire arms for personnal protection, be it for home use or other is plain lunacy.  Most petty criminals would rather be in and out of your property in a flash without causing harm to the owner and themselves.

If I was a burglar and I knew the home owner had fire arms I would turn up to the job carrying a firearm and if the home owner popped his/her head round the door they can wave goodbye to there face.

if you were burglar, you wouldnt go to the house you knew had a gun.  Why?  their are plenty of fish in the sea most of which are bigger than me.  why put yourself in danger when you can rob my neighbor without any of the risk and get a greater return.  Most criminals would rather move on to another home that isnt protected by any means what-so-ever.  they are looking for easy targets, not a challenge.  houses are a dime a dozen, why choose the one that is protected?  I have those fake secuirty stickers on all of my windows, and i know for a fact that it has worked because my neighbor was robbed.  but before he robbed my neighbor, a lady across the street said that he pulled his car into my driveway first hopped out ran to the door turned around, and then pulled into my neighbors.  And yes, my neighbor did report it, yes the police did show up . . . about 2hrs later, and no the robbers were never cought (he was in a stolen vehicle).
which brings me to my next point
Police are not obligated to protect citizens - they are only obligated to protect criminals.  How screwed up is that.
Warren v. District of Columbia

QUOTE

Two women were upstairs in a townhouse when they heard their roommate, a third woman, being attacked downstairs by intruders. They phoned the police several times and were assured that officers were on the way. After about 30 minutes, when their roommate's screams had stopped, they assumed the police had finally arrived. When the two women went downstairs they saw that in fact the police never came, but the intruders were still there. As the Warren court graphically states in the opinion: ``For the next fourteen hours the women were held captive, raped, robbed, beaten, forced to commit sexual acts upon each other, and made to submit to the sexual demands of their attackers.'' The three women sued the District of Columbia for failing to protect them, but D.C.'s highest court exonerated the District and its police, saying that it is a ``fundamental principle of American law that a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any individual citizen.'' Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C. Ct. of Ap., 1981).

quote taken from this site - has several other examples as well
Just who exactly is supposed to protect us, if not ourself

[Tony42077]

QUOTE(Arvarden @ Mar 10 2005, 11:11 AM)

Tony, you shot an un armed man?  Are you fucking stupid?