Guns, Change the Laws

Discussion in 'Gun Control' started by NYCmitch25, Mar 6, 2013.

  1. stjames1_53

    stjames1_53 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2012
    Messages:
    12,736
    Likes Received:
    51
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Then explain how New York City, which is a gun free city with severe penalties, can have such a high gun crime rate as compared to, say, Seymour Indiana, which allows CCW? Explain why so many cops are constantly shooting disarmed Citizens. If guns are forbidden, how is it that anyone can even get a gun, much less own it illegally?
    If you are correct, then just where are your beloved criminals getting their guns, especially since guns are forbidden? They can't be stealing them from what would normally be considered "lawful" owners, since they are not allowed to own.

    [video=youtube;NWwgrbbT4K8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NWwgrbbT4K8&feature=player_detailpage[/video]

    ...from the drive-by media
     
  2. Greataxe

    Greataxe Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2011
    Messages:
    9,400
    Likes Received:
    1,348
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I have thought things through. Punish the felon. This worked very well 50 years ago. Do you think the underclass that the vast majority of criminals come from are some kind of "supervictims?" Your sympathies obviously are with them, and not law abiding gun owners. If you think poverty (a warped concept of leftists)a a the ease of obtaining a gun is to blame for high crime, then why wasn't crime astronomically higher during the US Great Depression? A typical Welfare Queen and her dependants live far more abundantly, with much better living standards than the typical poor worker from that era. Guns were just as abundant back then, and had almost no restrictions to buy. But I don't think you can put two and two together when it comes to understanding crime, and therefore, can only parrot what the leftist major media tells you---and that is "blame the gun."

    Not all mentally ill can be stopped, but more could have been stopped, like Lanza, Holmes and Loughner if liberal activists had not dismantled the mental healthcare institutions that were more available in the past to lock-up psychopaths like these.

    BTW, I'm not a Nazi, but you are a Leftist---so try showing some pride.
     
  3. nimdabew

    nimdabew Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2012
    Messages:
    604
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Wait... So the gun makes people commit felonies or it just gives people the idea to commit the felony in the first place? I don't understand this line of reasoning.

    Two people that are identical, same situation, but one has a gun and the other doesn't. Why would one commit a felony if they had a gun but the other does not?
     
  4. Small Town Guy

    Small Town Guy Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2013
    Messages:
    4,294
    Likes Received:
    354
    Trophy Points:
    83
    LOL haven't you heard, Cars make you drink and drive, viagra makes you rape, chainsaws make you massacre, etc etc. I know because the internet said so. :wink:
     
  5. nimdabew

    nimdabew Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2012
    Messages:
    604
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Right. I forgot. How silly of me :p
     
  6. Bowerbird

    Bowerbird Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2009
    Messages:
    91,877
    Likes Received:
    73,632
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Proof???

    You make a claim you back it up
     
  7. Bowerbird

    Bowerbird Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2009
    Messages:
    91,877
    Likes Received:
    73,632
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    No but it makes the potential to do so easier - witness the research done which states that

    http://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJM198606123142406

    http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199310073291506
     
  8. nimdabew

    nimdabew Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2012
    Messages:
    604
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Wow. You managed to get a report that is older than I am. I will pick some things out of what you linked.

    ... So the homicides in 1986 (27 years ago), as case studies had one of the following above. I can assume that people "hit or hurt in a fight" includes battered women that had their husbands/boyfriends/whatever picked up by the cops and then released at a later date. Are you really trying to justify more gun control on illegal drug usage, abusive families, and prior artestee homes? I fall into none of those categories yet the way you speak I am going to get shot sometime in the next 70 years because I own a firearm. A person would be able to draw the same conclusions on owning a car and car related deaths.

    I would also like anti-self defense people to stop lumping in suicides with gun deaths. Accidental deaths and homicide are not the same as suicide. One set requires more than one person, and suicide requires all of one person. I would also point out in the article that only 398 homicide deaths were in homes during a 5 year period. In a state with high gun ownership, shall-issue concealed carry, and castle doctrine, this is a pretty low number. Of an approximate population of 1.2 million in 1980, this is a statistically insignificant figure.

    ETA: King County had a population of 1.26 million. The previous figure I had was incorrect at 4.6 million.
     
  9. gamewell45

    gamewell45 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2011
    Messages:
    24,711
    Likes Received:
    3,547
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Its tough to commit a felony using a gun when you don't have one in your posession.
     
  10. perdidochas

    perdidochas Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2008
    Messages:
    27,293
    Likes Received:
    4,346
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    It's pretty simple. The huge majority of guns are not used for crimes. Why ban guns or take away guns when the problem is the misuse of guns by a few people. Why not just harshly punish the misuse of guns. Not even .1% of guns are used for crime.
     
  11. perdidochas

    perdidochas Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2008
    Messages:
    27,293
    Likes Received:
    4,346
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Can you not read simple English? There are 300 million guns in the U.S. Only a minuscule number of them are used in crime (probably less than 30 or 40 thousand).
     
  12. perdidochas

    perdidochas Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2008
    Messages:
    27,293
    Likes Received:
    4,346
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Close to 80% of violent felonies involve no weapon.
     
  13. KatrinaM

    KatrinaM New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2013
    Messages:
    8
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
     
  14. Small Town Guy

    Small Town Guy Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2013
    Messages:
    4,294
    Likes Received:
    354
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Bowerbird has a habit of using antiquated data. There is nothing newer that supports her cause and she doesn't actually read what she googles. I tore her up in another post, she abandons them when cornerd...no cause for concern eh?
     
  15. Small Town Guy

    Small Town Guy Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2013
    Messages:
    4,294
    Likes Received:
    354
    Trophy Points:
    83
    It's tough to defend youself when you don't have one either. Think before replying eh? Oh and are you saying if you had a weapon you would commit a felony, if you had viagra you would rape, if you had a chainsaw you would massacre? Nice comparrison eh?:roll:

    - - - Updated - - -

    Please don't confuse with facts eh?
     
  16. gamewell45

    gamewell45 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2011
    Messages:
    24,711
    Likes Received:
    3,547
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Wouldn't it be nice to eliminate that 20%?? It would be a nice start.
     
  17. Small Town Guy

    Small Town Guy Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2013
    Messages:
    4,294
    Likes Received:
    354
    Trophy Points:
    83
    except you have no proof it would eh?
     
  18. gamewell45

    gamewell45 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2011
    Messages:
    24,711
    Likes Received:
    3,547
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ok Einstein; there would be no need to defend yourself using a gun if there were no guns. You analogy falls way short and makes no sense whatsoever but your new to PF so we'll give you a free pass this time.
     
  19. perdidochas

    perdidochas Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2008
    Messages:
    27,293
    Likes Received:
    4,346
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Weapons includes knives, hammers, etc. as well as guns. Eliminating objects will not stop crime.

    The way I see it, if I have a gun, I have a pretty good shot at defending myself against well over 80% of violent crimes.
     
  20. gamewell45

    gamewell45 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2011
    Messages:
    24,711
    Likes Received:
    3,547
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Never hurts to try. What have you got to lose?

    - - - Updated - - -

    agreed; We are only trying to stop crime involving guns.
     
  21. perdidochas

    perdidochas Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2008
    Messages:
    27,293
    Likes Received:
    4,346
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    A gun allows me, an out of shape 47 yr old, the chance to defend myself against a fit gangbanger. It also allows me a chance to defuse 80% of violent crimes without having to use violence. A gun is one of the few weapons that allows a fight to be stopped without hurting anyone. If I use a baseball bat, I pretty much have to club someone over the head to stop a fight.
     
  22. gamewell45

    gamewell45 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2011
    Messages:
    24,711
    Likes Received:
    3,547
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Highly unlikely you'll become part of the 80% victim of a violent crime, but you might want to get into shape, learn martial arts just in case the ownership of guns becomes illegal. Better to be prepared eh?
     
  23. allislost

    allislost Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2011
    Messages:
    175
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    18
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Brazil

    The total number of firearms in Brazil is thought to be around 17 million[2] with 9 million of those being unregistered.[1] Some 39,000 people died in 2003 due to gun-related injuries nationwide.[2] In 2004, the number was 36,000.[1] Brazil has the second largest arms industry in the Western Hemisphere.[6] Approximately 80 percent of the weapons manufactured in Brazil are exported, mostly to neighboring countries; many of these weapons are then smuggled back into Brazil.[6] Some firearms in Brazil come from police and military arsenals, having either been "stolen or sold by corrupt soldiers and officers."[6]

    http://seattletimes.com/html/nationworld/2001812343_brazil11.html

    RIO DE JANEIRO, Brazil — New legislation passed by Brazil's Congress will give one of the world's most homicidal nations the toughest gun laws in South America. The hitch is that the law would cover legal gun sales, not widespread black-market arms dealing.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_gun_registry

    The Canadian Firearms Registry was part of the Firearms Act and was managed by the Canadian Firearms Program of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP). It required the registration of all restricted and prohibited firearms in Canada. It was introduced by the Liberal government of Prime Minister Jean Chrétien in 1993 and implemented by successive Justice Ministers Allan Rock and Anne McLellan. The net annual operating cost of the program, originally estimated to be $2 million, is reported to be $66.4 million for the 2010-2011 fiscal year.[1]

    Originally the program required the registration of all non-restricted firearms but this requirement was dropped on April 6, 2012 by the coming into force of Bill C-19.[2][3] Bill C-19 also mandated the destruction of the non-restricted records of the registry as soon as feasible.[4] The Province of Quebec immediately filed a request for an injunction to prevent the destruction of the data. A temporary injunction was granted by the Superior Court of Quebec on April 5, 2012 to prevent the data for Quebec residents from being destroyed until legal arguments could be heard.[5]

    The registration portion of the Firearms Act was implemented in 1995 and the deadline for gun owners to register their non-restricted firearms was January 1, 2003.[7] Compliance was a dismal failure: Over 70% of all firearms in Canada were never registered.[8]

    [edit] Debate on the registry
     
  24. KatrinaM

    KatrinaM New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2013
    Messages:
    8
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    In my experience (even when I was on the left), a lot of the left is more concerned with stopping gun ownership and doesn't spend enough time trying to stop illegitimate gun use. You can do this through the founding of organizations to educate the public on proper gun storage (the vast, vast, vast, vast, vast majority of gun deaths are due to accidents due in part to poor storage).

    I am for complete constitutional carry - open or concealed without a permit. Gun ownership and trade without regulation (including without background checks of any sort) or taxation or information gathering. It's a voluntary transaction between two consenting adults that hurts nobody.

    I think I understand where you're coming from on this issue: when people are responsible and educated on proper gun use/gun storage, everything you said makes perfect sense, and I'm sure most gun owners fit that criteria. It's not the responsible gun owners that are of concern, though; they know what they're doing. What concerns me on this topic is that there's no denying that using a gun makes carrying out a criminal act much easier: you can't hold up a store or commit a shooting of any kind without a gun. Considering the problems the country has recently had with mass-shooting tragedies, it seems like something really needs to be done about this, and nobody is entirely sure what. Controlling the use of guns seems like the obvious answer, but it's never going to be that simple. Even if gun owners were willing to sacrifice their rights to some kinds of firearms in order to help solve the problem, there's a decent chance it wouldn't solve the issue. Most people who commit mass shootings are mentally ill, and they have all used guns to commit the shootings. So right there are two things we can consider. Maybe the answer is to prevent mentally ill people from getting ahold of guns? That would probably involve background checks or mental health screenings for people trying to get guns, but I'm not sure that stance has enough popular support to float, and doesn't jive with an unrestricted gun market, which much of the nation (including you) wants. Sometimes criminals use guns of friends and relatives to commit crimes, however, which plays into what you were saying about proper gun storage. If people were educated on how to properly keep their guns (and keep them out of potential criminals' hands), it might pay off as well, but then would the people who needed education on how to store their guns actually seek out that education, or would it have to be required to be effective? And if it was required, wouldn't that necessarily mean that new gun owners would have to register, if just to show that they had gotten informed on proper gun safety and storage?
     
  25. KatrinaM

    KatrinaM New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2013
    Messages:
    8
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Well, for one thing, it makes it a lot easier to commit a felony if you have a gun. It isn't that a gun skews existing morals, it just makes it a whole lot easier for people who have a poor set of morals to do something bad. For example, imagine somebody trying to hold up a convenience store or commit a carjacking without a gun. It would be pretty difficult. Without a gun, they either have to get rather creative, or simply don't do it. And yes, if they didn't have a gun in real life and it was against the law to get one, a criminal would likely just get one via the black market, but in this hypothetical situation, you understand what I'm saying.
     

Share This Page