I'm sorry, but I can't take hypocrites seriously (not saying you are specifically). We have far worst problems to deal with before even thinking of firearms as a source of trouble. They're not and the statistics are clear on this.
Baron Max: Good for him! His constituents are obviously smart people. Well, maybe they'll change their tune once the policy starts showing results. Well, if no politician every comes through on a promise, I guess politics is a complete waste of time. You should probably go live in a cave somewhere. In your case, over 60 years. So, hard on crime doesn't work. You agree with me.
http://www.frontsight.com/ The best method for individuals to ... er, help rehabilitate violent criminals.
I've seen several such statistics, and I'm very skeptical of them! If you read and think about it, I think anyone would be skeptical of it. But ...we believe what we want to believe, don't we? How are you going to enforce the laws that you propose enacting? Baron Max
Yeah, the arrest vs. conviction numbers will be down so low that we won't even need cops anymore in Dallas. ...LOL! But we'll have a gazillion suspected murderers and rapists running around the streets just as happy as pigs in shit! Yeah, James, results, huh? And we both know that the numbers/stats don't lie, huh? ...LOL! I don't know, James, we ain't ever tried it! The LA story of the underage killers, however, shows that it does work ...the ones who are scared of getting caught and imprisoned recruit kids who WON'T be imprisoned ....no matter how many murders they commit. Baron Max
First of all you are assuming any method you pick will be reasonably successful. truth is it won't. No matter what you do criminals are going to have guns. Just the way it works. They are gonna have bigger and nastier weapons than your qaverage citizen if there are any gun control laws. Simplest solution: arm beat cops like you would the military and arm everyone else like you would SWAT. Crime will go down eventually and so will overcrowding. Of course, this is too scary for the main public and will never be done.
Baron Max: Won't that be a nice change. Unlikely. I've been trying to teach you that stats do lie, for quite a while now. Remember the old quote about "Lies, damn lies, ..."? Huh? Yes you have. At virtually every election, politicians trot out the "tough on crime" line. Don't they punish adolescents for murder where you live? I find that very hard to believe. TW Scott: Be afraid! Be very afraid! Fear fear irrational all-encompassing fear. Great. Multiply the number of idiots toting guns. That will really help. If they're anything like you, I'd be more afraid of them than of the criminals. Why don't you just go live in a cave somewhere, away from all the scary people?
Yes there are worse problems, but that is not the debate here! If you want to debate relative morality/safety/freedom of various things that cause death, feel free to start a thread about that. Personally, I'd like to see all cases where people die in car accidents investigated as manslaughter cases. I doubt people would be so keen to speed, if they knew that 10mph over the speed limt saw then get a jail term, whereas under the limit saw it written up as an accident and they walked free, for instance. But that is for a different debate.
So your skepticsm leads you to what? A gut feeling that commercial robberies must be fuelling illegal guns more than domestics ones? Yould take no stats over some some stats? Please Max, at lest try and dig up some figures. Simple Max, as you are fond of saying, "criminals don't obey laws", so the responsibility will be on law abiding, gun owning citizens to make the system work. It works by exclusion. If I am a law abidng citizen, with a gun to sell, and you want to buy it, you have to show me your license, which proves you too are law abiding, and the firearm gets transferred to your license from mine. It is accounted for, and the only slight inconvenience is that both parties have to fill out a form or two. No license, no sale. Works pretty well in the UK, but for some reason, you won't accept this demonstration. Probably, because it works.
The laws work so well in the UK that criminals have to resort to re-activating deacts or blank firers. Gun crime is so rare here, deliberate gun homicides are at the same level of incidence as US accidental ones! So the laws DO work. Yes, criminals may get access to guns under any system. It's about mitigating risk, not eliminating it. Just because a system won't be perfect is no reason not to do something. Can I have a chorus of 'and the land of the free!' with that? You really want to live in a paramilitary society? The solution you have posited is ludicrous, really ludicrous, can you really see it happening? Can you really see it _working_? You and Max have so far come up with turning society into a paramilitary dictatorship with Police death squads. I think you both need to go read your constitution again, especially the bits regarding personal freedom, and the pursuit of happiness.
You are the one who touted this figure earlier in the thread, I was merely using your own citation do disprove your misreading of it. Funny, you were originally citing it as a valid reference, and here in the same post you do it again... OK, and you call me dim - Kleck's study does not include non-gunowners in it. Kleck's study is not comparing gunowner-reported crime versus non-gunowner-reported crime... where are you getting this "four times" stat from? Link please? It is true that there are people out there who are irresponsible and itching to use there gun, I will not argue with that. There are many unstable people who probably should not have guns. There are also plenty of responsible gun owners, who are in effect the second line of defense for the public, just take this article for example. I recently read an article where an ex-wife ran down her ex-husband with her car because he had a new girlfriend. This makes her a criminal, so what should we do to take these cars out of criminals' hands? Well, we already have car registration in every state, and you have to pass a driving competency test to get a license... so how the hell did this happen? If I legally sell you a car, how do I know if you're going to run someone down in a fit of rage? How do I know you won't be trafficking drugs? What business is it of mine? What about how many cars are stolen every year? The truth is, no amount of gun registration, licensing or paperwork is going to prevent a damned thing. By the way, I have my concealed carry license and have filled out the background check forms for every firearm I own, except one that I purchased through a private sale. However, for insurance purposes, all of my firearms are photographed and serial numbers are recorded for my own protection. Responsible citizens do not need a law (or a queen) to tell us how to do things the right way. Those stats are easy to achieve when your demographic breakdown is 88% white. A large majority of gun crimes in the U.S. are black-on-black in the inner city. Before you call me a racist, take a step back and analyze my statement... this is not racism, it is a cold hard fact. The gangstas are bringing this country down, NOT the law abiding citizens who own guns. Yes, yes... I know there are white criminals, and I personally know black gun-owners who are fine, upstanding citizens who work for a living. But, I'm talking majorities here. The fact of the matter is: THIS IS A FREE COUNTRY. The only way you can change the gun crimes in this country is to get rid of the constitution and turn this into a police state. I'd rather everyone have guns then just the government. I'd rather die on my feet than live on my knees! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Visit Renegade's BS
Without guns in the hands of private citizens, we'd have no Constitution to read, would we? And we'd be subjects of the Queeen of England. Hmm? Baron Max
If nothing else, this thread should be proof postitive that diplomacy doesn't work and never will work! Yet many, if not most of y'all, tout diplomacy as a way of solving the world's problems. Interesting, ain't it? Baron Max
Oh, so a member of the UK disinformation pool. UK gun murders are lower tha US gun crime, but there is a slight kink in UK numbers, two actually. First UK gun crime has been rising, while US has been lowering. Second UK does not count it as a gun crime untill there is a conviction, meanwhile US counts everything. Not to mention your over all violent crime is skyrocketing. Oh and before you believe any more UK bullshit, weapons enter countries illegally all the time, in huge crates. A few criminals are reactivating guns form police lock up, and few criminals are buying the parts to convetr 7mm blank weapons to real combat capable pieces, but in all reality the vast majority of guns you see in criminal hands are smaggled in from other countries.
I guess both sides are looking for the "smoking gun", huh?? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Thank you, I'll be here all week. Try the salad...
Yeah, SoLIDus, diplomacy at it's best is displayed here, huh? In all it's radiant glory and splendor! ...LOL! The motto or slogan for both sides is: NEVER GIVE AN INCH! Baron Max
Umm, what the heck? The polls even more meaningless now, 28 vs 29? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
"Diplomacy is the art of saying "Nice doggie" until you can find a rock." -- Will Rogers Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
It's interesting to see the composition of the two groups, though.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Um, the Federal Assault Ban has expired two years ago. Only places like California and Massachusetts still have laws like it in it's own state laws. The Assault Weapons Ban is a silly law that only bans semi-automatic rifles based off their cosmetic looks; fully automatic guns have been banned for a great many years. Rifles such as the AK-47 are banned by how it looks. There isn't much difference between an AK-47 and a regular sporting rifle, considering both are semi-automatic. The sporting rifle is actually more dangerous since it's more accurate. Only a fully automatic AK-47 would be different, but they've been banned for a many number of years as already mentioned and that's the only real reason to have an AK-47 in the first place. Why use an illegal inaccurate semi-automatic rifle that's banned by how it looks in a crime when you can use a more accurate legal one? Considering the assault weapons ban only really applies to rifles, and since handguns are the weapon of choice used in most crimes, I'd say the AWB has nothing to do with the drop in crime. - N
