Gun control: the results are in?

Discussion in 'Ethics, Morality, & Justice' started by Nasor, Jun 28, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Nasor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,221
    There are a lot of people here in the U.S. that want to impose more stick gun control laws. Many people would actually like to ban handguns altogether. It makes sense that there would be fewer murders if there were fewer guns, but apparently that isn't really the case. Three countries – England, Australia, and Brazil – all recently imposed tough gun control laws, but it didn't have any effect on their crime rates. In Brazil and England, the murder rates actually increased after the gun ban. In Australia the murder rate had been constant for years before the ban, and remained unchanged after the ban. It's interesting to note that in all three countries shooting deaths have indeed gone down, but murders with other types of weapons rose to compensate as guns became unavailable. It would seem that we now have pretty conclusive evidence that gun control laws don't reduce murder rates.

    So why are there still people who clamor for gun control laws? Do they have any reason to believe that the results in the United States will be any different than the results in every other country that has imposed strict gun laws? Are they simply ignorant of the fact that gun control has already failed spectacularly in other countries? I'm sure that there are some pro-gun control people here at sciforums, so I'd really like to hear from them.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Roman Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,560
    Could you show the data for this? I'm curious to see how accurate this is. Your summary seems sketchy to me.

    There are also numerous accidental gun deaths. It would be much harder to commit 2nd degree murder without a gun. "Yeah officer, when my wife refused to give me the remote control, I flipped out and sliced her with my katana. A lot." Naahh....

    It would also be easier to keep gang crime down– easier to confiscate weapons and prevent driveby's. But then, you'd get UK style gang brutality. At least I'm not in the crossfire– crossclubbing seems unlikely.

    I hunt and shoot, and enjoy using firearms. I wouldn't support an all-out gun ban. But handguns have one express purpose– killing people. You can't kill a moose with a beretta, and the way M16 rounds tumble would ruin anything you shot.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Nasor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,221
    I don't have links to the data handy, but it should only take you a few minutes to look it up. The FBI as well as the English and Australian national police forces have all sorts of crime statistics available online, including murder rates going back many years. I know that it's all available because I checked it myself a while ago, but I don't have any of the links handy.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. talk2farley Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    190
    Who has a 9mm handy while watching the evening news? Second degree murder may not require premeditation, but very few crimes of passion are quite so spontaneous as you imply.

    I do agree with the general principle of "gun control." If it were a crime to possess a firearm without a license, the police would have a far easier time investigating and prosecuting gun-related offenses. Regardless of whether or not the crime itself can be proven, the posession of the weapon alone would be sufficient to detain and prosecute a known miscreant. This is the same line of thinking used to bring down otherwise untouchable mafiosi during the prohibition era, via the now infamous income tax evasion charges.

    What irks me are those who would disarm an entire population to forward an overarcing political goal, without concern for the piles of evidence to suggest that firearms have been used to prevent crimes and save lives. The constitution preserves the rights of well-regulated and organized "militias" to keep and bear arms. So, regulate and organize, but don't ban.
     
  8. Neildo Gone Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,306
    One is less likely to fuck with someone if they can get shot in return. Punks that go around and threaten others with guns do so because they know the other person is most likely unable to do anything in return. Everyone should own a gun.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    - N
     
  9. McConnell a buddy of mine used to say an armed society is a polite society. I am inclined to agree.
     
  10. Dreamwalker Whatever Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,205
    But if the punk wouldn´t have a gun, would he threaten people with it? Weapons are only for the weak and scared. If you are serious, use your body to fight, not some weapons that enable every idiot to kill someone else.
     
  11. Asguard Kiss my dark side Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,049
    what types of crimes are we reducing?

    Organised crime?
    Crimes of passion?
    Hate crimes?
    acidental deaths?


    the last include the wife shooting her husband returning home early from his business trip because she thought he was a burgler and the gun was handy

    Crimes of passion will probably NEVER go down, They will always be the same. No Death penelty or gun laws or anything will change that because of the nature of the crime is to grab whatever is handy regardless of the penelty. The best you can hope for is to limit the injurys of the party injured

    As for organised crimes, there are a LOT of factors on this one that need to be addressed

    What about crimes of stupidity, Ie the maniacs who just shoot for the hell of it?
    sounds like this is where gun registration\control would help the best
     
  12. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    35,982
    If fear of one another is the best reason we have to get along, we never should have crawled out of the oceans.
     
  13. Nasor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,221
    This is just silly. If you want/need to defend yourself, use the best weapon available. A gun will almost always be better than simply 'using you body' for defending yourself.
     
  14. Dreamwalker Whatever Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,205
    But the chances are that you will not be attacked if no one has a weapon. When you have a gun, what are the chances the other one also has a gun?
    And what are the chances of being beaten to death instead of being shot? I think if you (and everyone else) only use your body as weapon, there will be less incidents and even less deaths.
    Also, a gun you posses for defence can as well be used for offence.
     
  15. Nasor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,221
    But like I said in the first post, all available evidence indicates that it doesn't matter whether people have guns or not. The murder rates always stay the same or increase after guns are banned. Consider for example the U.K., where last year they had only about 70 shootings but over a thousand murders.
     
  16. Dreamwalker Whatever Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,205
    And I said NO weapons... you know, like guns, rifles, swords, knifes, throwing stars, brass knuckles, razorblades, spears, slingshots, crossbows, bows, katars, axes, daggers, nunchakos....and so on. Just no weapons, only things that belong to your body.
    Don´t you think that murders go down if people would posses no weapons?
    Of course, you cannot ban all knifes, but still there would be fewer weapons. Also, it should be illegal to carry any kind of weapon. I do think that then, the murders will decrease.
     
  17. Nasor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,221
    What chance is a 110 lb. woman ever going to have of “defending herself with just her body” if she's attacked by a 250 lb man?

    Also, it's a bit ridiculous to contemplate banning all weapons. You can easily kill people with steak knives, baseball bats, bricks,, hammers, screwdrivers...pretty much anything is a weapon if you swing it hard enough. What are you going to do, arrest people for carrying a baseball bat if they can't prove that they were on their way to a baseball game? Confiscate people's screwdrivers if they can't prove that they're construction workers? What about running people over with my car, or poisoning people with any number of commonly available chemicals?
     
  18. Dreamwalker Whatever Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,205
    I said that there would be fewer weapons carried around. I know that it would be a bit unrealistic to ban everthing.

    And do you think everyone is just going to use another weapon/alternative? Like: Oh, I have no gun to rob this guy, better get into my car and threaten to run him over...

    But as long as humanity is so insanely brutal, I think we should ban all weapons and issue a hydrogen bomb to everyone as means of defence and offence. I would like to see the results.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    That should teach everyone.
     
  19. Nasor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,221
    Yeah, but these only account for a tiny percentage of all murders. Even though they tend to get all the press coverage, they're basically a non-issue.
     
  20. Persol I am the great and mighty Zo. Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,946
    Lets take a poll. How many people have had crime commited against them? How many violent crimes? What kind of weapons?

    I've had 2 incidents...
    One 'gang' using fists (trying to see how many white kids they could beat up in a night)
    One homeless guy with a knife, trying to steal my bag.

    Most of the people I know have similar 'track records'. It's usually the kids trying to 'prove' something or someone who feels they need what you have. Usually not someone who can legally own a weapon even with lax gun-control laws.

    Yet they commit the crime anyway. I don't care if someone walks up to you with a knife or a gun... if you have no weapon, your reaction is going to be the same.

    The cats out of the bag. People already own guns. We might as well now make sure that the 'right' people have guns.
     
  21. antifreeze defrosting agent Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    494
    guns are for the weak? and lazy. yeah, you could use your body to defend yourself and intimidate others, but that takes exercise. what a hassle, no? besides, no matter how much you tone your abs, you aren't going to stop my remington 870.

    now suppose i am some punk that needs some extra cash for a kick*** tattoo and i do not own a gun. if we get rid of guns altogether, i know that people cannot possibly have them in their homes. i could grab my trusty lead pipe or crescent wrench and feel a good deal safer breaking into a random home in the middle of the night, knowing there isn't going to be a .357 magnum waiting on the other side of the door.

    and if you want to reduce drive-by shootings, you're better off taking away people's cars. ask yourself this question, what would a gun ban really do? take guns out of stores? and do a lot of gangs buy their uzis in retail stores?

    as for reducing accidents, i am interested to see how accidental shootings compare with accidental electrocutions, household grease fires, falling down stairs, etc.

    and if a person really wants to kill another person, taking away guns isn't going to do the trick. there are myriad ways to end someone's life.

    kaboom.
     
  22. Asguard Kiss my dark side Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,049
    "I think we should ban all weapons and issue a hydrogen bomb to everyone as means of defence and offence. I would like to see the results. "

    Some moron would do it
    if there was a button somewhere saying "touch under no circumstances, this will end universe" some idiot would use it

    but thats beside the point

    how do guns get on the black market?
    You hear all the time about police confiscating arsonals of weaponry so how do they get there?

    illegal imports?
    theft?

    So if we tigten border protection and confiscate weapons from EVERYONE eventually there will be none right?

    i mean for christ sake this is an ISLAND with no gun fatorys (could be wrong about the factorys but i dont think there are any) so how hard would it be?
     
  23. antifreeze defrosting agent Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    494
    which island is this?

    you miss the point that has been brought up by several people now; removing guns won't solve the problem.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page