JLP Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 Because they can beat me up - I'll get over that. They can steal my property - that's what insurance is for. They shoot me dead over cash and jewellery - well there is no coming back from that. At the end of the day you're presumably a law obiding citzen - if a criminal wants to commit a crime against you then they are going to do that - when there are guns involved just through the simple fact guns kill people then the chances of that crime esculating from a robbery to a homicide have to dramatically increase. Common sense tells you that. I guess we can disagree here. I'd prefer not to be a victim and place my life or the health of my family at the mercy of a criminal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 Because they can beat me up - I'll get over that. They can steal my property - that's what insurance is for. They shoot me dead over cash and jewellery - well there is no coming back from that. At the end of the day you're presumably a law obiding citzen - if a criminal wants to commit a crime against you then they are going to do that - when there are guns involved just through the simple fact guns kill people then the chances of that crime esculating from a robbery to a homicide have to dramatically increase. Common sense tells you that. Guns are killing innocent defenseless people everyday in places with strict control. Why do you keep saying you will only get beat up. That isnt the case and very wishful thinking. Chicago doesnt allow guns and innocent people are guned down every day. Once you ban guns that crime spreads out across the board. These people will always have guns. Be it from a gun store or steal them or from the black market that you are wanting created like they are 1930's speak easys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLP Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 Well that's simply false. And it's proven to be false. It's not a matter of opinion. For all the arguments you can have against gun legislation that's not one. I can have any argument I want, and I know this particular one to be true through experience. Look at the difference in murder rates between the city of Chicago where there is a handgun ban and the suburbs where handguns are allowed but still heavily regulated. Chicago, where handguns are banned and law abiding citizens are not allowed to defend themselves, has one of the highest murder rates in the developed world. The suburb where I live, while pretty fucking poor and surrounded by even poorer communities hasn't had a murder since the 70's. Gun owners are more likely to get shot than people who don't own a gun. That's a fact. People with pools in their backyard are more likely to have their children drown. People with cars are more likely to get into a car accident. People who don't eat are more likely to starve to death. I'll agree that gun owners are more likely to be shot. If there is a gun on-hand it increases the likely hood that the gun owner can be shot and it also increases the likely hood that the gun owner can protect his life, family and property. Like I said earlier I'd take that risk rather than put myself at the mercy of a criminal who may also be armed. And countries with lower gun ownership usually have lower homicide rates. You're right on this, but I and most other Americans are comfortable with this trade-off. A large percentage of homicides in this country is criminals killing other criminals, to me it's only sad when innocents are killed in the crossfire or targeted when they have no means to defend themselves. http://city.milwauke...011Reportv6.pdf 19. Of the 2011 homicide victims, 76% (65) had a prior arrest and/or citation and of known 2011 homicide suspects 90% (74) had prior arrests/citations. Similar trends are found for nonfatal shooting victims and suspects. http://www.nola.com/...er_victims.html According to NOPD data, 64 percent of murder victims have been arrested for a felony. That story line is not unique to New Orleans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu_Pidasol Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 Guns are killing innocent defenseless people everyday in places with strict control. Why do you keep saying you will only get beat up. That isnt the case and very wishful thinking. Chicago doesnt allow guns and innocent people are guned down every day. Once you ban guns that crime spreads out across the board. These people will always have guns. Be it from a gun store or steal them or from the black market that you are wanting created like they are 1930's speak easys. Abstract - http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/20571454 BACKGROUND: Violent death is a major public health problem in the United States and throughout the world. METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis of the World Health Organization Mortality Database analyzes homicides and suicides (both disaggregated as firearm related and non-firearm related) and unintentional and undetermined firearm deaths from 23 populous high-income Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development countries that provided data to the World Health Organization for 2003. RESULTS: The US homicide rates were 6.9 times higher than rates in the other high-income countries, driven by firearm homicide rates that were 19.5 times higher. For 15-year olds to 24-year olds, firearm homicide rates in the United States were 42.7 times higher than in the other countries. For US males, firearm homicide rates were 22.0 times higher, and for US females, firearm homicide rates were 11.4 times higher. The US firearm suicide rates were 5.8 times higher than in the other countries, though overall suicide rates were 30% lower. The US unintentional firearm deaths were 5.2 times higher than in the other countries. Among these 23 countries, 80% of all firearm deaths occurred in the United States, 86% of women killed by firearms were US women, and 87% of all children aged 0 to 14 killed by firearms were US children. CONCLUSIONS: The United States has far higher rates of firearm deaths-firearm homicides, firearm suicides, and unintentional firearm deaths compared with other high-income countries. The US overall suicide rate is not out of line with these countries, but the United States is an outlier in terms of our overall homicide rate. Andif that doesn't mean much http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/files/2012/12/firearm-OECD-UN-data3.jpg How much more proof do you need that the strict control actually works?? More guns DOES NOT mean a safer environment. The guns you say are your protection are not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steeve Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 You're right on this, but I and most other Americans are comfortable with this trade-off. Fine, now you finally gave me an acceptable argument. You think that it's worth the trade-off. I still find it hard to relate to that. I wouldn't find it worth the extra murders each year so I could play rambo in my backyard. I don't need a gun to feel like a man. Pistols and cowboyhats are for little kids here. I keep guns out of my house to keep my family safe. And if you really think that you need it to defend yourself than maybe aside from the assault weapons they should legalize bazooka's for tanks and torpedo's for the submarines. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLP Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/files/2012/12/firearm-OECD-UN-data3.jpg How much more proof do you need that the strict control actually works?? More guns DOES NOT mean a safer environment. The guns you say are your protection are not. This graph really proves little and under closer scrutiny is a rather weak argument. It's all perspective, notice at the bottom it excludes Mexico from the graph. The USA rates would be dwarfed as well if Mexico were included. The graph is firearm murder rates, so of course the USA has a higher rate due to the higher rate of ownership. I dont have a problem comparing murder rates, but comparing firearm murder rates with dis-armed countries is disingenuous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLP Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 Fine, now you finally gave me an acceptable argument. You think that it's worth the trade-off. I still find it hard to relate to that. I wouldn't find it worth the extra murders each year so I could play rambo in my backyard. I don't need a gun to feel like a man. Pistols and cowboyhats are for little kids here. And if you really think that you need it to defend yourself than maybe aside from the assault weapons they should legalize bazooka's in case you have to defend yourself against the Canadian invasion. And torpedo's for the submarines. Fantastic straw man argument. In an debate, you can tell when you are winning when the insults and straw man arguments come out. When you project on others it's often a look at your own psyche. I do think it's worth the trade off. Rather than be a victim and be unable to protect my home and family I am willing to accept a slightly higher murder rate. I will never be a willing victim. I will never let the fate of my family and property be in the hands of a criminal if in any way I can prevent it. If that situation happens to you and you aren't willing to do whatever is necessary to protect your family and instead leave their lives in the hands of a criminal that's when you are not a man. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steeve Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 I do think it's worth the trade off. Rather than be a victim and be unable to protect my home and family I am willing to accept a slightly higher murder rate. I will never be a willing victim. I will never let the fate of my family and property be in the hands of a criminal if in any way I can prevent it. If that situation happens to you and you aren't willing to do whatever is necessary to protect your family and instead leave their lives in the hands of a criminal that's when you are not a man. It's not a straw man as you clearly confirm that I was spot on with my representation of your position. You accept that it's more of a mental comfort than a rational way to defend your family. As all of the data indicate, the likelyhood of a situation occuring in which your family is harmed by the gun in your house is way higher than the likelyhood of you defending them with it. So it's not a straw man. Maybe you meant a red herring, but it's not even that. I didn't give any argument. All I did is say that I accept your position. If you are aware of all the negative effects that come with loose gun control and you say that you find it worth the trade-off than what can I say? I'm not an American. You can have your guns and your homicide rates. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu_Pidasol Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 So you are going to hang you hat on the fact that Mexico of all places in the developed world has a higher gun reated murder rate than any other developed country in the world? Are you going to gloss over the fact that even if you include Mexico the rate for America is still upwards of 4 times more than any other developed country in the world. The graph is not there for any other reason than to say more guns does not make you any safer, it makes you more likely to be a victim of a gun related homocide. The seperate study information above the graph also indicates why the lack of gun control contributes to the higher homicide rate in Amercia. Homicides in America - 6.9 times higher driven by firearm homicides being 19.5 times higher. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PBR Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 cannot believe this thread is still going strong -- lmao -- your never going to change anyone's mind pro or anti -- all i can say to the us government, obummer or anyone else for that matter --- you want my guns come try and take them, i have no doubt they will take them but only after i take a few of them with me actually liked when the scare first hit -- hell i built and sold 6 to 7 ar15's for double what it cost me to build them -- lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 cannot believe this thread is still going strong -- lmao -- your never going to change anyone's mind pro or anti -- all i can say to the us government, obummer or anyone else for that matter --- you want my guns come try and take them, i have no doubt they will take them but only after i take a few of them with me actually liked when the scare first hit -- hell i built and sold 6 to 7 ar15's for double what it cost me to build them -- lol nobody wants your guns...including "obummer"...but i'm sure you would really shoot him if he came and tried to take them... my favorite thing in the world is people who say "I'D LIKE TO SEE THEM TRY AND TAKE MAH GUNS"....because you'd probably do nothing about it in reality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PBR Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 nobody wants your guns...including "obummer"...but i'm sure you would really shoot him if he came and tried to take them... lol -- you dont know me very well -- i would do it just for target practice Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 you're a 60 year old man who makes skins for people on an online mma game. i know enough. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 Abstract - http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/20571454 BACKGROUND: Violent death is a major public health problem in the United States and throughout the world. METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis of the World Health Organization Mortality Database analyzes homicides and suicides (both disaggregated as firearm related and non-firearm related) and unintentional and undetermined firearm deaths from 23 populous high-income Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development countries that provided data to the World Health Organization for 2003. RESULTS: The US homicide rates were 6.9 times higher than rates in the other high-income countries, driven by firearm homicide rates that were 19.5 times higher. For 15-year olds to 24-year olds, firearm homicide rates in the United States were 42.7 times higher than in the other countries. For US males, firearm homicide rates were 22.0 times higher, and for US females, firearm homicide rates were 11.4 times higher. The US firearm suicide rates were 5.8 times higher than in the other countries, though overall suicide rates were 30% lower. The US unintentional firearm deaths were 5.2 times higher than in the other countries. Among these 23 countries, 80% of all firearm deaths occurred in the United States, 86% of women killed by firearms were US women, and 87% of all children aged 0 to 14 killed by firearms were US children. CONCLUSIONS: The United States has far higher rates of firearm deaths-firearm homicides, firearm suicides, and unintentional firearm deaths compared with other high-income countries. The US overall suicide rate is not out of line with these countries, but the United States is an outlier in terms of our overall homicide rate. Andif that doesn't mean much http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/files/2012/12/firearm-OECD-UN-data3.jpg How much more proof do you need that the strict control actually works?? More guns DOES NOT mean a safer environment. The guns you say are your protection are not. Dont try to add suicide. Gun ban has no effect of them. Check Australia. They rate went up after the gun ban. If you want to blame suicide on something. Blame alcohol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rambo Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 you're a 60 year old man who makes skins for people on an online mma game. i know enough. Old men can be the most dangerous. Especially ones (people in general) that have had near death experiences and play online games - cuz the odds of them being at home are high, so good luck taking anything from there. You're the helpess type. You might as well be from France cuz undoubtedly, you're incapable of defending yourself and would submit to any invading force or country. Don't forget Anders Breviek was a nerd who played World of Warcraft for a living. That guy was the most lethal individual in EU since Hitler. I play an online mma game just like PBR. For one; I'm not answering my door for any unsuspected guest, yet alone a cop or government official. For two; if you attempt to enter my home uninvited, I will expect the worst, and you will be shot. Don't care if you're a 14 year old kid, a cop, Obama, or Jesus himself. You can pry the gun(s) from my cold dead hands. There's millions of Americans who will react the same way. I heard the Texas governer said that any officer that apprehends a citizen for legal possession of a firearm, will be arrested himself and charged with false arrest and lose his job. PBR don't have to worry about the government taking shit... and if they try, I don't blame him for opening fire. They're trying to steal from him. He has every right to defend his home, possessions, and his belongings. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 i'm really helpless. i should pretend to be a gangster online to make myself less helpless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PBR Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 I heard the Texas governer said that any officer that apprehends a citizen for legal possession of a firearm, will be arrested himself and charged with false arrest and lose his job. PBR don't have to worry about the government taking shit... yea rick perry might not be able to make public speeches or gets tongue tied easily but he stands up for our rights and the values this country was founded on -- and understands criminals do not obey laws thus the reason for them being criminals -- at least he understands criminals arent going to be the ones handing over their legally owned and bought guns -- law obeying citizens will be the only ones -- most in this thread say show me were guns help more than harm -- well there is one big fault there being stats are those are kept or searched out like the bad cases -- someone saving the day or saving their family by use of a gun isnt a story or headlining news like someone doing harm or bad stuff with a gun -- one point in case we have stats on every kind of death known to man but no stats on lives saved -- tragedy is news stopping one isnt 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 nobody wants your guns...including "obummer"...but i'm sure you would really shoot him if he came and tried to take them... my favorite thing in the world is people who say "I'D LIKE TO SEE THEM TRY AND TAKE MAH GUNS"....because you'd probably do nothing about it in reality. Yes they do what our guns. Just because they find other ways around coming out and saying it doesnt mean it isnt true. NY has or is trying to pass a law to bans any clip above 7 rounds. Which is all but 3 types of guns. Basically banning 95% of guns. Why is Biden's dumbass telling everyone to buy shotguns? So they can replace the handguns and ar15's he and Obama want to ban. See when the majority of the country doesnt agree with something. You have to be very slick in how you sneak stuff by them. BTW, good luck trying to buy ammo. For some reason it has become like the Holy Grail. You cant find any. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 you're a 60 year old man who makes skins for people on an online mma game. i know enough. Those skins are made of people trying to take his guns. Isnt violent video games why people are killing people? Thats what i heard on the news. It must be true! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rambo Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 BrainSmasher: every time there's a school shooting, or a public massacre, we go through this process. Everybody talks about banning them, the price goes up, and the market runs dry. But nothing ever, and will never happen. Same reason cigerettes and alchohol will never be banned or illegal, despite the amount of people it kills every year. Puts guns to shame. i'm really helpless. i should pretend to be a gangster online to make myself less helpless. Ah yes, proclaiming that I would defend myself against anybody that tried to violate my rights as a human being and the grounds of the constitution that this country was founded on is pretending to be a gangster online. Clever! Don't be scared (of guns) homie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PBR Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 good luck trying to buy ammo. For some reason it has become like the Holy Grail. You cant find any. cause homeland security has purchased almost 2 billion rounds -- they have also purchased 2700 armored vehicles costing around 250k each -- nice way to drain america of more money http://modernsurvivalblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/homeland-security-navistar-mrap-vehicle.jpg We have asked if this has anything to do with then-candidate Obama's proposal for a national security force as powerful as the U.S. Army. In a July 2, 2008, speech in Colorado Springs, Colo., candidate Obama said: "We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded." As Judge Andrew Napolitano, a Fox News contributor, recently opined in the Washington Times, "The historical reality of the Second Amendment's protection of the right to keep and bear arms is not that it protects the right to shoot deer. It protects the right to shoot tyrants, and it protects the right to shoot at them effectively, with the same instruments they would use upon us." No, we are not scanning the sky for black helicopters. But we are concerned about an administration pushing for ever stricter gun control and de facto gun registration in the form of allegedly universal background checks to which criminals and gangbangers won't comply is arming itself to the teeth. If weapons of war don't belong on the street, Mr. President, explain these purchases. cause he knows the most of the military is not going to stand up against usa civilians and will join the civilians side also as most usa civilians know there have been lots and lots of homeland security training exercises lately with armed troops and blackhawk choopers thoughtout major cities -- now exactly why does homeland security need all this stuff all the sudden and been doing so many questionable exercises Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 even the police officers dont want a gun ban. They dont believe in it and they sure as hell dont want to go to someones house and TRY to get their guns. They know how tons of people in the country are. I personally would not shoot them. But i would hide my guns and not turn them in. I live in an area where a large % of the people will give their life to keep their guns and they are not big fans of the government. These people have lived on their own away from "the city" and survived without help from anyone. I wouldnt be one of them but if they tried to confiscate guns. There would be a very deadly war not seen since the civil war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rambo Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 If the government ever tries to take the guns away from Americans, expect the Ron Paul Revolution. We would take up arms and overthrow the oppressors - or die trying. even the police officers dont want a gun ban. They dont believe in it and they sure as hell dont want to go to someones house and TRY to get their guns. They know how tons of people in the country are. I personally would not shoot them. But i would hide my guns and not turn them in. I live in an area where a large % of the people will give their life to keep their guns and they are not big fans of the government. These people have lived on their own away from "the city" and survived without help from anyone. I wouldnt be one of them but if they tried to confiscate guns. There would be a very deadly war not seen since the civil war. I would do everything I could to avoid opening fire on officers or government officials. But if you attempt to use forced entry to get into my home, I'm standing my ground and defending myself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 cause homeland security has purchased almost 2 billion rounds -- they have also purchased 2700 armored vehicles http://modernsurvivalblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/homeland-security-navistar-mrap-vehicle.jpg cause he knows the most of the military is not going to stand up against usa civilians and will join the civilians side Add to that the filibuster today because Obama doesnt want to give his word he wont use Drone strikes on US citizens. Yet we still have tools on here claiming out second ammendment rights are outdated. This is exactly what we have our rights for. Thats what i was getting at. I heard they bought up a ton of ammo too. The best way to ban guns is to go after ammo. Without it all guns are useless. A loophole around the constitution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rambo Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 Obama will be out of office before any nation-wide gun ban is passed. Governers like Rick Perry and Rick Scott would never approve of a gun ban. Texas and Florida would lead the revolution. ...and believe that the Government would use any means necessary to suppress a revolution or internal war. Martial law would be in effect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.