How do you feel about guns?

A lot of crime is unreported. Would you report to the police that you were unsuccessfully mugged? Yes if you had a clear view of the guys face, no if the guy had two brain cells working and was attacking form darkness, cover, and with a ski mask. At that point there is no point of reporting it. Same with if someone tried to break inot your home. You don't report it nine tenths of the time as they were not successful and you just want to head back to bed. The point with more guns= less crime is that at first there is less successful crime, then less crime. In my opinion less succussful crime is great.

Wow did you come up with that sterotype all by yourself?

Listen I have carried a gun for a long time. I have never once reached for it just becuase someone looked at me funny. I have never used it in even an attempt at suicided, despite depression. I have drawn it only a handfull of times with the intent to use it. I have fired 3 rounds from it outside of a shooting range. Two of those were to put down deer that had been struck by careless drivers and the other was at the dirt in front a bear that was actively coming after me in a threatening manor. I am a typical Gun owner and a typical citizen, I do my best to respect every law, even ones I feel are unjust.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Typitypitypitypical

Wow. Did you come up with that stereotype all by yourself?

Sorry. Couldn't resist.

But in the interest of enlightenment, perhaps you could answer a question for me:

Why won't "typical Gun owners" represent themselves more honestly?​

For instance, if you're "typical", and have only fired your weapon a few times outside a range, and those were for deer, deer, and bear ... why do "typical Gun owners" have such a fascination with the crime and drama campaign that casts them as creepy and frightened? Why waste your time building an image so incompatible with civilized society and then complaining when people call you out on it? It sounds to me like bears are the problem.

Everybody likes to think of themselves as typical, Mr. Scott. At least, under certain circumstances. Would I like to be a typical liberal? If only I could. But neither typical liberals nor I are willing to bend enough to make that wish true. Some other folks who think of themselves as typical: the one who joined a posse and got drunk in response to an escape from a minimum security prison; the one who went shooting in a field somewhere drunk, unable to recall the location or the safety measures taken; the one who drank so she wouldn't shoot me; the one who transported concealed weapons across two state lines to arm the one who drank so she wouldn't shoot me; the one who left his loaded rifle for his five year-old to find and use against a younger, disobedient sibling; the one in the hilarious deer-chasing story; the one who pointed a loaded pistol at me while believing it unloaded (nearly a funny story, complete with ironic timing) ....

My point is that the typical or benevolent we imagine about our own representations includes great diversity. Just as my own liberal politics disdain the general derogatory meaning of the word "liberal" as put forward by American conservatives, so, too, must gun owners come to grips with the fact that there are as many "typical" examples of their ilk as the ilk themselves.

It is, meanwhile, merely ironic that your version of "typical" actually undercuts the "typical" argument put forward by your fellow gun owners.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

"Crime in New York City is the lowest among the 25 largest cities in the United States. Since 1991, New York City has seen a continuous fifteen-year trend of decreasing crime. Neighborhoods that were once considered dangerous are now much safer. Violent crime in the city has dropped by 75% in the last twelve years and the murder rate in 2005 was at its lowest level since 1963: there were 537 murders that year, for a murder rate of 6.57 per 100,000 people, compared to 2245 murders in 1990" (Source Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_New_York_City)

So this trend of lower crime has nothing to do with the banning of guns then?

You also put the cart before the horse; blaming high crime on gun bans, when in fact the gun bans are an attempt to prevent crime. You either don't understand this, or are trying to twist the facts. Neither option is good for debate. You can't expect these measures to work instantaneously, for instance, the UK enacted gun control measures because returning soldiers were bringing weapons home after WW1, and these weapons were being used in crimes. It was a long and gradual process to get our gun crime rate down. This relies on law abiding citizens to put up with the minor inconvenience of background checks before being issued with a firearms certificate, and without one, you cannot legally buy guns or ammunition. The system works, and we have very low gun crime.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

phlogistician:

Actually, the decline in New York's crime rate was due to tough policing during the Giulliani years, an increase in the overall wealth of the city, and a decline in the crack problem.

Moreover, New York City does not have a ban on guns. It is perfectly legal to buy handguns, shotguns, and rifles in New York City, you just need a permit/license.

I should know, being a resident of the city myself.

 

Yes, have, and would do again. The Police need information to solve crimes. That unsuccessful mugging on me might lead them to analyse CCTV footage between this attempt, and a later success. The guy might remove any mask between locations, or travel in a car. These little bits of information could lead to an arrest, so yes, I would always report them, if they could help put a bad guy behind bars. Shrugging it off because I wasn't affected isn't being a good citizen, as I know damned well it won't stop right there.

Nope, again, this has happened, and I reported it to the cops, for the same reasons above; it's the responsible thing to do.

If you licensed guns so only people passing background checks could get to them and ammunition you might be right. But that isn't the system you have, and it's easy for criminals to buy guns;

"According to the 1997 Survey of State Prison Inmates, among those possessing a gun, the source of the gun was from -

a flea market or gun show for fewer than 2%
a retail store or pawnshop for about 12%
family, friends, a street buy, or an illegal source for 80%" (http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/guns.htm)

This needs addressing. I just can't see how responsible gun owners could possibly be against registration and licensing, if it cleaned up the image of guns. Fear this information may aid having their guns taken away adds to the image of gun owners being paranoid.

I'm not against people like you owning guns. I just don't want people like you selling them 2nd hand, where there are no restrictions, and I'd like to see restrictions of the sale of ammunition to license holders only. For me, living in the UK, this is an academic exercise anyway. We have strict gun control, and low gun crime rates. While I feel our recent changes to the law were a knee jerk because of one tragedy, I'm fairly happy with the system. We aren't armed, so our cops aren't routinely armed, and I feel safe.

 

I used the word 'ban' to reflect the attitude of Neildo, who was incorrectly associating gun control with higher crimes rates, when the converse is actually demonstrated by that paragraph.

New York cleaning up is a multi faceted thing, and not just down to gun legislation, true, but it all has an affect. The biggest one being giving people pride. New York has pulled that off really well. It's image has changed as has it's attitude. People who worry about crime and their ability to protect themselves don't sound very proud to me however, they foster distrust, and that is not a good thing.

Anyway, I'm pro-licensing, and not for banning. I used to shoot myself. This point was always ignored by Baron Max, god rest his poor banned soul. Seems people who are pro gun control are labelled gun grabbers, hence the blanket use of the word 'ban' creeping in here and there, ...

 

phlogistician:

http://www.nraila.org/GunLaws/FederalGunLaws.aspx?ID=56

I had meant to add this to my last post. It's relevance to the New York City question is, of course, quite evident.

But yes, there is a difference between those who affirm gun control and gun banning.

 

In the foot?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

One of the problems, of course, and probably the main one, is that you simply can't compare the UK and the USA in this issue ...it's two distinct cultures, two distinct histories.

If you'd like to make a comparison, then check out Washington, DC, which has one of the strictest gun control forms in the USA. The crime rate in Washington is horrendous ...and is much, much higher than in most other cities that have little or no forms of gun control.

Sure it's easy for criminals to buy guns ...they buy STOLEN guns, ILLEGAL guns. And the stats you quoted show that; "...family, friends, a street buy, or an illegal source for 80%"

So, shouldn't the first course of action be to attempt to eliminate that problem instead of "harrassing" the good guys? As I see it, none of the gun control laws/rules that are proposed would do anything to curb the main problem with handgun crime and violence. The "bad guys" do the crime and violence, but since they don't follow the law anyway, what the fuck good is another law or rule?? ....other than to harrass the "good guys"?

Baron Max

 

Max, the USA and UK aren't culturally different at all, they are incredibly similar, in fact, your '2nd Amendment' is based on a British Law (now repealed)!

The guns laws in DC are a response to the crime problems Max, the crime is not a product of it. Wise up.

Criminals wouldn't be able to buy guns if each gun were accounted for, and logged against an owner. It would take time to achieve, but that is not an excuse for doing nothing. Eventually, good law abiding citizens would register, and illegal ammunition would run out, and the only way to buy more would be to pass a background check, and get a license. Might take a few decades, but that's no reason not to try.

 

phlogistician:

You fail to consider the fact that America is filled with a great deal of violent minorities that commit the majority of our crimes, both violent and non. England, faced with a relatively homogenous culture (although this is changing) does not have such a stress.

 

Surely that's in jest, right??

Sure it is ...but it hasn't changed a damned thing since it was instituted. In fact, I think the crime rates have gone up since gun laws were enacted.

Aren't you convienently forgetting major thefts? And I don't mean just one gun here and there, I mean major thefts of shipments of handguns and thefts of stores all over the nation.

Criminals in LA and other major cities are now using Uzi's and such major assault automatic weapons ....those weapons have always been illegal to buy or own, yet they have them! And you think, somehow, that a new law or two will stop that??? How?? How can you think that??

Again, you've convienently forgotten where most of the illegal weapons come from ...theft! Which is already illegal!

What you're proposing is something that seemingly will "punish" the good guys, and you're doing so without any substantial evidence to back up that proposal. Right now, at the present, it ain't the good guys who are committing the violent crimes, yet you're going after that one group in the slim hope that it'll stop the bad guys??? On what evidence do you base that hope? Or is it just that ....hope?

Baron Max

 

Guns are OK for protecting yourself and your family, but one of the original purposes of the right to own them, as a check to government power, is now obsolete.

 

Nonsense. Unless you live in a banana republic.

 

I like Guns.

You have all heard this before, It's not the gun, it's' the persons behind the gun that causes the problem. Then again, would world would be a better place if we did not have them at all, think about it.

 

Somesense. Cops can't be everywhere, and guns work for them.

 

Uh, that's how it is in the states too. There's a background check and in most places, a 10-day waiting period. That's not why gun crime is low in the UK. I thought it's almost impossible to own a gun over there? And hey, keep your big brother cameras outta here. Your cameras are starting to plague the U.S. now.

So only 14% bought them legally whereas the rest bought them illegally off the streets or from a friend. Were those criminals already criminals when they bought em legally? Background checks already happen. Gun registration and licensing won't do a darn thing to stop people buying them that way if they buy em as a regular citizen before turning criminal, heh, and gun registration won't do anything to stop someone buying a gun illegally which 80% of those people did. And yes, the ATF confiscate guns all the time from people. As for paranoid of having them taken during times of crisis when you need em most, just look at Hurricane Katrina where the police and national guard went door-to-door confiscating them from people.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sm5PC7z79-8 (video I'm referring to)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B1Qx0cTze0M (video I found where police slam an old lady into the ground in her own home to get her out)

I was pointing out the one helluva coincidence of cities where there's gun bans/strict control, they usually have the highest crime rates, not to mention they're run by democrats (note: it was Guilliani, the non-democrat that actually cleaned NYC up). If democrats have failed that badly, why on earth would I want to trust them to clean up the place they fail so miserably at and want to disarm me so I can't protect myself in their hellish quagmire of a city? As honorable and idealistic they may be, when they try and put their fantasies into practice, they fail horribly.

Let's say you register your gun. I steal it. What's your registered gun do to prevent me from comitting a crime? How is anyone going to know that I have your gun? I can go commit a crime and people still won't even know that it was your gun that was used in the crime. Once the crime is over, I go home and hide my gun and still nobody knows I even have one. What has that registration accomplished to prevent crime?

Yeah, the world would be a better place without people.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Then I wouldn't have to worry about a criminal using a baseball bat, knife, rolling pin, 2x4, their fists, their feet, a pipe, or anything else to cause damage or threaten me with instead of a gun.

How is that nonsense considering that the police do not arrive until AFTER a crime has been commited?


- N

 

I think guns are barbaric and backwards, it has no place in a modern society. If you want to enjoy the thriller of hunting, get a bow and arrow. Hiding in the trees with a long range rifle equiped with the lastest scope and night vision is not hunting, its shopping. African warriors that walk for miles carring only spears are hunters. Besides the money hunters spend on rifles can buy enough meat for their famaily to last months, instead we have men going hunting with full stomachs. 99% of all the horrible stuff in the society is caused by guns. You have a cocaine stash?You need a gun to protect it. you want to murder someone? You need only buy a gun. You what to invade a country? you need only count your bombs, You want to mistakenly end someones life including your own friends and family? keep a gun in the house. Imagine if everybody could just walk into a gas station and buy a gun, we will then be re-entering the old wild west; the society will be in chaos. In reality guns aren't necessarily the problem with crime and drugs, but they aren't helping either. America, the country with perhaps the highest number of guns of all types and colors also has the highest rate and number of drug trafficking and prisoners in the world. To me guns belog in the middle ages. Back then people carried swords around, today the swords are replaced with guns. Having a gun is indeed every human's right, but since when did the human know what's right? Such is such

 

Guns n Ammo ...

Your are right, they cannot be everywhere. Can you imagine that guns were never invented (Hypothetically) and how this would change the face of our planet? Just a wild thought.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Interesting that you should mention that ...south Los Angeles, Washington, DC, and parts of New York City have much higher rates of violent crime than many of the "banana republics".

So, Spurious, just who is supposed to protect you from that kind of violent crime? The cops can't do anything until AFTER you've been attacked. In fact, in many, if not most, police forces, even if the killer were pointing the gun at your head, the police aren't permitted to shoot him ...they can only wait until you're dead before they can act. Interesting, huh?

Baron Max