Air guns= Bad??

[Dude67]

Interesting topic, I also have my little story about airguns. Once when I was young (like 10 years ago) I was to a high school budy place and he had an airgun. He was living in a flat an old house, tree or four storie high and he was at the last floor overlooking some other roofs.
He told me he wanted to show me a cool thing and when went to the attic. This attic was full of stuff, even stuff from ww2, from the germans and the us when they liberated our town (old papers, helmets this sort of stuff). Then he bring out this box with his airgun inside, got it out and open the attic windows. He said \"look at this pigeon\", and he shoot at him and took the poor beast head right off... Well I\'m not found of pigeons but I\'m not found of violence neither, I was upset after that and also amazed that a kid like me could have something that dangerous in the hands... We didn\'t stay friends must longuer.

As for the guns thing, I\'m not to found of firearms, I guess you are all sensible people on this boards, but they are some peoples out there that are freaks, I meet I few in my life (alcoo adicts, pills addicts...) and I wouldn\'t like them to own a gun, how can you be sure that everyone owning a gun is a \"good guy\".

 

[BlitzPig Gunner]

Guns Destroyed Nazism and Bushido. Guns keep free people from becoming slaves. Guns are also the reason Americas violent crime rates are dropping while Europe and Aust. are climbing.

A gun cannot be bad, it\'s a tool. A person with a gun can be bad, that\'s why I have a gun of my own. The police respond to crime scenes, not crimes... I recommend the Kimber .45 Tactical, one shot stop every time.

Originally posted by Ogrebane
Well guns in general are bad. ammendment rights or not. Its a cultural thing with you yanks to own a gun I guess. I wouldnt let one near my house.

As to loud music well I love loud music and as long as your resonable about it then crank it I say.

 

[paintingploddy]

I don\'t know where you get your data on crime rates from RedSevenBlue.

I can tell you that what I am seeing has been fairly constant. Here is one newspaper report:
http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/violent-crime-up-in-victoria/2005/08/10/1123353360082.html

Our assault statistics are up to some degree due to a change in approach on domestic assaults removing a lot of discretion. 800% increases are a total fiction - feel free to point me to where your stats come from.

Oh and firearms also created the Third Reich and quite a few other injustices. Your crime rate may be falling in some cities, but it rises in others and when you are so far ahead of us in gun deaths it will be a while before we catch up.

Bugger you made me break my silence. I\'ll try harder to keep silent.

 

[Dragonsreach]

Originally posted by RedSevenBlue
Australia is a good example of what happens when you take away gun rights, violent crimes go up more than 800%!
Your statement is spurious and unsupported by factual data!
While firearm related crime in the UK has increased since the Dunblane massacre, which triggered the \"Prohibition of personal firearms\", by no means is it as widespread or as common you seem to think or infer will happen.
The UK did not have as strong a cultural history of ownership of firearms, but the two major firearms related horrors , (Hungerford & Dunblane) were carried out by people who had legitimate and registered firearms.

Do that in the US, and it will end with a jump up to 2000%!
I can only give one answer to that statement: BOLLOCKS!

 

[DrEvilmonki]

Crime rates are more realisticly tied to economic performance than anything else. New Zealand has laws closely resembling Aussie and UK. Our crime rate has been dropping for the last 6 years (funnily enough during a time of relative prosperity and low unemployment).

WHile you may have strongly held views exposing rubbish doesn\'t give any credence to what you say.

 

[supervike]

Strong gun advocates have been using those misleading crime stats to prove thier cases.

I agree, its too easy to quote statistics (real or fake) and think that proves your point.

 

[dauber22]

1) I used to carry a weapon because I was constantly threatened by the fine, cleancut members of the wrestling and football teams - people the police never bothered because they were upstanding citizens, not useless inhuman hippie slime like myself. When no one else will defend you, you\'d better be prepared to defend yourself.

2) Yes, I believe that because of the potential for misuse of power by the government and it\'s agents that the citizenry should be allowed to keep arms.

3) No, I don\'t believe that that right includes fully automatic military weapons. Nor do I believe it includes artillery, rpgs, mortars or anything wlse of that type.

4) Don\'t get me started on Waco and DON\"T lump it in with the Oklahoma bombers.

5) I am not a cop hater. I have several close friends who are cops. However, I have a very clear understanding of their ablitlty to abuse their power ans authority.

6) I do not own any guns myself. I am not a \"gun nut\". However, I do believe strongly in the my rights as a US citizen and don\'t like to see those right eroded - any of them. If they can take one right away from us, they can take all of them.

 

[Mr.S.Marbo]

Substantial levels of death and injury are associated with firearms.

In the year 2000:
* Suicide with firearms took the lives of 16,586 Americans.
* Homicide with firearms took the lives of 10,801 Americans.
* Unintentional firearm injuries took the lives of 776 Americans.
* 75,685 people suffered nonfatal firearm injuries in the US.
* More than 2,200 Americans aged 18 and under died from bullet wounds, equaling six young people per day.

- Most academic studies conclude that \"storage of a firearm in the home predicts an increased rate of a violent death.\"

- In the 14 deadliest mass shootings committed in wealthy nations during the past 35 years:
*79% of the victims were shot with lawfully held firearms (185 of 233 victims).
*86% of these mass shooting (12 of 14) were committed by lawful gun owners.

- Studies have suggested that:

\"Homicide rates tend to be related to firearm ownership levels. Everything else being equal, a reduction in the percentage of households owning firearms should occasion a drop in the homicide rate\".

- A study that examined the risk factors for violent death for women in the home found that when there were one or more guns in the home, homicide increased more than three times.

- Studies have suggested that \"Having a gun in the home makes it three times more likely that you or someone you care about will be murdered by a family member or intimate partner.\"

- A study has suggested that firearms in the home may be a key factor in the escalation of nonfatal spousal abuse to homicide.

- Violent crime in the UK remained stable between 2004/2005 and 2005/2006. Violent crime as measured by the British Crime Survey has dropped 43% since 1995. In the UK where gun laws are strict and have even become stricter - we have not seen a significant rise in violent crime.

To sum it up the prevalence of firearms makes it much easier for people to die. The presence of firearms in the home substantially increases the risk of death to family members (particularly women). Legal firearms and lawfully held firearms account for the majority of the very worst mass shootings. Legal firearms can end up in the hands of criminals. The absence of firearms does not appear to encourage violent crime.

For these reasons I am glad the UK has very tight gun controls. I am also glad that the majority of idiots I have encountered in my time on earth will not have access to a gun, because quite frankly they cannot be trusted with a knife and fork

 

[philologus]

S. Marbo: I recognize those statistics. They originated from The U.S. govt\'s Centers for Disease Control Oct. 2003 report entitled: First Reports Evaluating the Effectiveness of Strategies for Preventing Violence: Firearms Laws

The report can be read here:
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5214a2.htm

For those who don\'t care to read it; here are some interesting items from said report:


\"In summary, the Task Force found insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of any of the firearms laws reviewed for preventing violence.\"

and:

\"In conclusion, the application of imperfect methods to imperfect data has commonly resulted in inconsistent and otherwise insufficient evidence with which to determine the effectiveness of firearms laws in modifying violent outcomes.\"

It is interesting to note that the CDC head at the time this study was published indicated that it would not be in the public\'s best interest to commission another such study as the conclusions remained the same as all the previous iterations.

 

[airhead]

Statictics can be manipulated to say what you want. Playing with the CDC interactive reporter, Homicide & Police intervention, all races & ages:

Gun Deaths per 100,000 population
Ca= 5.25
DC=27.64
FL=3.93
NY=3.12
TX=4.57

I would expect lower rates in Conceal Carry states than in restrictive states, but they area about the same with NY actually lower than TX & FL and CA coming in higher.

Yet the DC area has some of the most restrictive gun laws and has a rate of over 27.