Firearms & co... hate or love them?

[airhead]

Am I the only one that finds it amazing that in a country that has NO handguns, that they had 14 handgun deaths?

Let us play with the numbers like true spin doctors:

GB
14 handgun deaths with 0 handguns = infinite level of danger from handguns in GB.

US
29,569 gun related deaths (CDC 1994) with 223 million firearms (Source: US Dept. of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics) = .1 death per thousand guns.

Granted that is pure statistical spin, but how many of those 14 deaths were bad guys shooting unarmed victim? How many of those victims wish they had a gun to defend themselves? None, they are all dead.

Am I going to change an ant-gun person to a pro-gun person? Probably not. Am I going to let that same person turn me into an unarmed potential victim? No.

Why do the nuts go shooting up schools instead of courthouses? They know that nobody will or can shoot back in the schools. Gun possession is banned at schools.

 

[vincegamer]

I dunno. My HS had an armed police officer stationed at it. He could shoot back, though he never had reason to.

Also there\'s the occasional suicide by cop case. Last year a man loaded himself up with all kinds of weapons and walked into the Fairfax County Police Department and opened fire - well technically he only got into the parking lot. A femal officer, the only one ever to have top ranks in marksmanship, shot him a couple times before he killed her, and some other cops coming out of the building were able to take him down before he could get in the door.

Anyway, the fact remains that it is much easier to kill someone by gun than by sword. It only takes a second and it can be done on impulse. You have to be really pissed off to kick someone to death.

 

[matty1001]

Originally posted by airhead
Am I going to let that same person turn me into an unarmed potential victim? No.

So is there a certain fear that you could be a gun victim?
Personally (i think Ritual mentioned this earlier on) i wouldn\'t really want to live somewhere where there is a fear of being a gun crime victim.

 

[Orb]

I\'m struggling to find truly independent statistics on crime, but everything I\'ve seen so far from whatever the source, shows gun deaths are significantly higher in the US per capita than other western nations.

We may never find the exact numbers, but we are intelligent enough to see a pattern.

I\'m not disputing violent crime may be higher in the UK than the US, that is likely the case, but to my eyes, the presence and ownership of guns does lead to an increase in homicides.

 

[Evil Dave]

Originally posted by airhead
Am I going to change an ant-gun person to a pro-gun person? Probably not. Am I going to let that same person turn me into an unarmed potential victim? No.

But then again, we Pro-Gun people aren\'t trying to force anyone who doesn\'t want a gun to have one.
The opposite is generally not true.
So in reality who is more fearful?
The pro-gunner who doesn\'t care whether you have a gun or not as long as you don\'t infringe upon his rights to own one,
or, the Anti-gunner who will demand an infringement upon your rights for their perceived safety?

 

[Ritual]

I don\'t know any country where guns are illegal per se. You can own guns here, it\'s only more complicated to get the permit. The result is less guns, since most people don\'t feel they need any. Those who do go through the trouble of getting the permits they need (which involves training). Laws also state how guns must be stored to reduce the risk of gun thefts.

There is no oposition against this situation here. Everyone, more or less, agrees upon this.

 

[philologus]

Originally posted by Orb
I\'m struggling to find truly independent statistics on crime, but everything I\'ve seen so far from whatever the source, shows gun deaths are significantly higher in the US per capita than other western nations.

We may never find the exact numbers, but we are intelligent enough to see a pattern.

I\'m not disputing violent crime may be higher in the UK than the US, that is likely the case, but to my eyes, the presence and ownership of guns does lead to an increase in homicides.

But..If the UK Home Office stats show MORE violent Crime in the UK than US how can an increase in gun ownership be linked to increase in violent crime? The lethality of the encounter, yes. The frequency, No.

 

[Orb]

Originally posted by airhead
Am I the only one that finds it amazing that in a country that has NO handguns, that they had 14 handgun deaths?

Let us play with the numbers like true spin doctors:

GB
14 handgun deaths with 0 handguns = infinite level of danger from handguns in GB.

US
29,569 gun related deaths (CDC 1994) with 223 million firearms (Source: US Dept. of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics) = .1 death per thousand guns.

Granted that is pure statistical spin, but how many of those 14 deaths were bad guys shooting unarmed victim? How many of those victims wish they had a gun to defend themselves? None, they are all dead.

Am I going to change an ant-gun person to a pro-gun person? Probably not. Am I going to let that same person turn me into an unarmed potential victim? No.

Why do the nuts go shooting up schools instead of courthouses? They know that nobody will or can shoot back in the schools. Gun possession is banned at schools.

As i said, i think those stats are suspicious, but most other stats bear out that there are far more gun homicides in the US than elsewhere (in the developed world).

I think there is correlation between gun ownership and a lower rate of violent crime - you don\'t know if if your victim is packing a firearm......can see the logic in that, but that doesn\'t alter the fact that the rate of gun crime is higher.

also it seems unlikely that if your were confronted by an assailant who is armed that you would have time to get to your weapon out before he shot you. That may account for that statistic that for every death from firearms in the US from self defence, there are 100 firearm murders.

Although I\'m sure most of you guys on here are all Wyatt Earp reincarnated!!!

 

[Orb]

Originally posted by philologus

Originally posted by Orb
I\'m struggling to find truly independent statistics on crime, but everything I\'ve seen so far from whatever the source, shows gun deaths are significantly higher in the US per capita than other western nations.

We may never find the exact numbers, but we are intelligent enough to see a pattern.

I\'m not disputing violent crime may be higher in the UK than the US, that is likely the case, but to my eyes, the presence and ownership of guns does lead to an increase in homicides.

But..If the UK Home Office stats show MORE violent Crime in the UK than US how can an increase in gun ownership be linked to increase in violent crime? The lethality of the encounter, yes. The frequency, No.

crossed lines here, or you\'re misinterpreting things......I\'ve actually stated that gun ownership may act as a deterrent to violent crime. But violent crime ISN\'T gun crime. They are different beasts. The gun homicide rate increases with gun ownership

 

[Braveheart712]

Well, I never met a statistic i liked so all you Einsteins help me explain this one...

I agree that in the US we are the leaders in violent handgun related crime. Yep, that\'s us, it\'s who we are and there is no denying it. But it makes as much sence to say \"Guns are bad\" as it does to say \"Soccer is bad\", here is my point.

In the US as well as Europe and the UK have guns and soccer. Gun violence is something that we Americans are good at, but hats off to you guys accross the big pond, you sure no how to get out of hand at a soccer game. To Americans, there is nothing funnier that seeing you Euros get crazy and start rioting over a soccer game. Why? Is soccer bad, just like guns? Should we ban soccer since people die as a direct result of it? Please explain...

Oh BTW, before anyone else brings it up, yeah I know we have Becham and Old Spice here in the US this season, wake me when it\'s over, hell send me the crate and I will ship them back to you!

 

[james sequeira]

You\'ll have to fish Victoria out of the grate she fall down lol

 

[Orb]

stupid argument.

by that argument, we should ban anything that can kill someone. Guns, cars, swimming, forks....if someone has died from it, ban it! Childbirth........get rid of it!

I\'m sure that given the total number of football games (It\'s FOOTBALL!!) played across the rest of the world, week in week out, with million\'s of supporters going to games the number of deaths are miniscule.........would hardly register......And riots? Very rare, very very rare (except Italy)

Edit; I\'d hazard a guess that there are more deaths to American Football players than from football rioting deaths

 

[Ritual]

The soccer (or football as we prefer to call it! lol ) violence is as much a mystery to me as it is to you! And, in Italy where a policeman was killed recently in a riot at a football stadium they are actually considering pretty hard restrictions on football. They might have to play without audience unless the arenas doesn\'t meet certain standards of safety (whatever that means for stopping the violence) and often after incidents the teams whose supporters are responsible get to play without audience.

EDIT: Here I think the whole sum of one person have died in football related violence the last 15-20 or so years (two if you include a Swedish supporter who was killed in another country).

 

[Modderrhu]

Originally posted by Evil Dave
But then again, we Pro-Gun people aren\'t trying to force anyone who doesn\'t want a gun to have one.
The opposite is generally not true.
So in reality who is more fearful?

I\'m anti-gun in that I am not interested in ever having one. I couldn\'t care less if my neighbour has one or not. In fact, he does. But who is more fearful? The person who will entrust their personal safety in a gun, and the person who will blockade their own home. Who is more free? The person who does not live in fear.

I posted South Africa\'s stats above, however accurate they may be, and by some of the reasoning in this thread, I ought to be a gun-toting gibbering wreck. I don\'t choose to have a gun simply because I don\'t want one. My choice is not to give into paranomia, I refuse to be afraid.

My opinion is that a gun is the last line of defence, if it\'s not already too late. My first line of defence is awareness. Awareness of the situation, global awareness, and a certain sensitivity to what many people call \'gut-feel\'.

I\'m not knocking anyone who wants to have a gun, this is just the personal reasoning that works for me.

Edit:

Originally posted by Orb
I think there is correlation between gun ownership and a lower rate of violent crime - you don\'t know if if your victim is packing a firearm......can see the logic in that, but that doesn\'t alter the fact that the rate of gun crime is higher.

The logic I take out of that is that the assailant is more likely to disable to victim more quickly. The assailant would probably have a gun, and be far quicker to use it.

 

[Evil Dave]

Originally posted by Orb
by that argument, we should ban anything that can kill someone. Guns, cars, swimming, forks....if someone has died from it, ban it! Childbirth........get rid of it!

Or, just a thought here, we should hold those responsible for pulling the trigger, rather than trying to blame all evils on an inanimate chunk of metal.

 

[Braveheart712]

I know it is a stupid arguement, that is my point.

BTW, you are wrong, the hooliganism is something that is unique to Europeans sports ( as well as the racist monkey chant in soccer). I am not saying that it is perfect here by any means but by and large US sporting events tend to be much more controlled, but hell if I had to watch a soccer game as opposed to watching good old American football I would go crazy too. The difference here is that we let the players go crazy while we watch. It\'s much more entertaining and it keeps the medical bills down for the fans.

As for you suggest, yeah, ban cars, trains, airplanes, scissors, guns, knives, OJ, ban everything that hurts anything, that makes as much sence as banning guns.

 

[Orb]

Originally posted by Evil Dave

Originally posted by Orb
by that argument, we should ban anything that can kill someone. Guns, cars, swimming, forks....if someone has died from it, ban it! Childbirth........get rid of it!

Or, just a thought here, we should hold those responsible for pulling the trigger, rather than trying to blame all evils on an inanimate chunk of metal.

Hey, if the inanimate chunks of metal weren\'t so readily available, there would be fewer triggers to pull in the first place.

 

[Braveheart712]

Originally posted by Modderrhu
My opinion is that a gun is the last line of defence

Well said, I totally agree.

 

[Ritual]

Originally posted by Evil Dave
Or, just a thought here, we should hold those responsible for pulling the trigger

We do! Of course!

And, for probably the third time in this thread... Guns are not banned! They are only more restricted... and surprisingly this has the effect of less guns in society and less gun crime!

 

[matty1001]

But trains etc arnt designed to kill, hurt, stun ... Guns are. (Or have i got the wrong end of the stick here ??? )