RE: Interesting stats on guns and crime

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: Interesting stats on guns and crime

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Interesting stats on guns and crime

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Interesting stats on guns and crime - 4/21/2007 3:20:05 PM

farglebargle

Posts: 10715
Joined: 6/15/2005
From: Albany, NY
Status: offline

quote:

I would like to hear a compelling reason they should be sold. I have yet to hear one.

Well, FREEDOM AND LIBERTY are built on a foundation of PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERSHIP, so, I would suggest that someone who would restrict anyones right to do with their money what they wish has a problem with our basic foundation as a Constitutional Republic.

You want "Da Gubmint" to tell people what they can own? Move to Cuba or some other Socialist or Communist State.

_____________________________

It's not every generation that gets to watch a civilization fall. Looks like we're in for a hell of a show.

ברוך אתה, אדוני אלוקינו, ריבון העולמים, מי יוצר צמחים ריחניים

(in reply to His1kitten)

Post #: 81

RE: Interesting stats on guns and crime - 4/21/2007 3:23:36 PM

Pulpsmack

Posts: 394
Joined: 4/15/2004
From: Louisiana
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent

Pulpsmack,

The only doubt in my mind is that a gun enables someone to go on a killing spree whereas it would be much more difficult with a knife, the chances of killing 30 people with a knife is non-existent. How does this fit with your defence of gun ownership?

I would say this...

If guns were somehow magically all discovered and destroyed so that these kinds of people could not obtain them legally or illegally, you have not solved the problem, but have displaced it instead. The first thing people would go to is blades. I am positive that somebody who knows how to use a sword is just as deadly, if not MORE so with a sword than a gun, because you don't need to reload a sword after 7-15 attempts at your victim(s). I would be more inclined as an unarmed individual to attempt to grapple with a crazed gunman than a maniac wielding a knife or sword. Moreover, with the proper level of preparation as in the V T case where the doors are chained, the area could be made into an arena of death there would be nowhere to run to. Moreover, the lack of gunshots to broadcast the serious danger to other classrooms would draw more people into harm's way as they come out to see what all the commotion is rather than barracade themselves in or immediatly look for an escape. All the maniac needs for this is a good blade (or set thereof) some lockable chain and whatever practice he put in.

Then there are improvised explosives.

And when all knives, guns, thumbtacks, and baseball bats are somehow accounted for, I (Mr. Hypothetical Maniac) would just put off-road tires on my vehicle and hop the curb on campus to the busiest open space available, and run down everybody I possibly could.

Therefore, the regulation of firearms would not be effective in preventing these maniacs from achieving their objective.

< Message edited by Pulpsmack -- 4/21/2007 3:40:20 PM >

(in reply to NorthernGent)

Post #: 82

RE: Interesting stats on guns and crime - 4/21/2007 3:24:00 PM

MrTime

Posts: 15
Joined: 4/13/2007
Status: offline

America is such a funny place, remotes, guns, SUVs, none of which are neccesary, but try to take them away from someone and see what a stink follows.

I guess as an immigrant I have a view from the outside in.

I really see no need for people to own some of the firearms that are available, unless somebody has been out arming the deer and bear in the woods lately.

I guess it is the just people's way of dealing with things and just having to have these weapons. I can see peoples points in here, both for and against, but it is amazing how one eyed people become when criticized.

(in reply to NorthernGent)

Post #: 83

RE: Interesting stats on guns and crime - 4/21/2007 3:31:27 PM

farglebargle

Posts: 10715
Joined: 6/15/2005
From: Albany, NY
Status: offline

Ok. I'll explain this slowly. ( Cue: Hum "Battle Hymn of The Republic" )

We, as FREE PEOPLE, can own whatever we want. We are not Slaves who need to obey what The State decides is best.

IF we obey any law, it's because we CHOOSE TO. In practice, the GOOD Laws are obeyed because they're GOOD. The Dumb Laws get ignored, because they're dumb.

The RIGHT TO OWN PROPERTY *IS* Freedom.

Because with The Right to Own Property, you can defend your Liberty.

_____________________________

It's not every generation that gets to watch a civilization fall. Looks like we're in for a hell of a show.

ברוך אתה, אדוני אלוקינו, ריבון העולמים, מי יוצר צמחים ריחניים

(in reply to MrTime)

Post #: 84

RE: Interesting stats on guns and crime - 4/21/2007 3:40:00 PM

dcnovice

Posts: 37282
Joined: 8/2/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: subrob1967

Population of the
U.S. 302 Million
U.K. 60.2 million
France 65 Million
Swiss 7.5 Million
Canada 32 Million

Gee, I wonder why our stats are higher than European countries.
Maybe because it's like comparing Watermelons to Raspberries.

For stats to be meaningful, they'd need to be on a per capita basis.

_____________________________

No matter how cynical you become,
it's never enough to keep up.

JANE WAGNER, THE SEARCH FOR SIGNS OF
INTELLIGENT LIFE IN THE UNIVERSE

(in reply to subrob1967)

Post #: 85

RE: Interesting stats on guns and crime - 4/21/2007 3:53:24 PM

NorthernGent

Posts: 8730
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pulpsmack

Then there are improvised explosives.

And when all knives, guns, thumbtacks, and baseball bats are somehow accounted for, I (Mr. Hypothetical Maniac) would just put off-road tires on my vehicle and hop the curb on campus to the busiest open space available, and run down everybody I possibly could.

Yeah, sounds a fair enough point of view to me. From an outsider looking in, I'm struggling to see a good case for banning guns. Individual freedom and responsibility to society need to be balanced, but the argument that say alcohol is in the interests of society, but guns aren't, doesn't seem a balanced argument to me - based on the real consequences of both.

_____________________________

I have the courage to be a coward - but not beyond my limits.

Sooner or later, the man who wins is the man who thinks he can.

(in reply to Pulpsmack)

Post #: 86

RE: Interesting stats on guns and crime - 4/21/2007 3:58:56 PM

His1kitten

Posts: 53
Joined: 4/2/2007
Status: offline

If you need a semi-automatic or automatic weapon for hunting, I would like to know what the hell you are hunting.

One other thing before I leave those of you who....nevermind that, When the constitution was written those people had no idea of what was to come. Think of the weapons that were available then, and what is available now, to any yahoo that feels the need to prove something. I get physically ill when I hear people try to rationalize the ownership of such weapons and the trivialization of the ease of so many people dying at the hands of one person. You can sit there and say that you aren't until you are blue in the face, it won't change the fact in my eyes. Not that you would care.

Have fun.

(in reply to NorthernGent)

Post #: 87

RE: Interesting stats on guns and crime - 4/21/2007 4:03:18 PM

mistoferin

Posts: 8284
Joined: 10/27/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: His1kitten
If you need a semi-automatic or automatic weapon for hunting, I would like to know what the hell you are hunting.

Well personally, I usually use them for hunting deer. The fact that you had to ask the question in the manner you did though tells me that you most likely know nothing about them and are responding from an emotional viewpoint.

_____________________________

Peace and light,
~erin~

There are no victims here...only volunteers.

When you make a habit of playing on the tracks, you thereby forfeit the right to bitch when you get hit by a train.

"I did it! I admit it and I'm gonna do it again!"

(in reply to His1kitten)

Post #: 88

RE: Interesting stats on guns and crime - 4/21/2007 4:15:34 PM

NorthernGent

Posts: 8730
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: His1kitten

If you need a semi-automatic or automatic weapon for hunting, I would like to know what the hell you are hunting.

One other thing before I leave those of you who....nevermind that, When the constitution was written those people had no idea of what was to come. Think of the weapons that were available then, and what is available now, to any yahoo that feels the need to prove something. I get physically ill when I hear people try to rationalize the ownership of such weapons and the trivialization of the ease of so many people dying at the hands of one person. You can sit there and say that you aren't until you are blue in the face, it won't change the fact in my eyes. Not that you would care.

Have fun.

I would say that if you have loads of lunatics running around, then you have a deeper problem than gun ownership, and that the answers lie elsewhere.

Personally, I have no wish to own a gun a) because I don't hunt b) I have no interest in guns c) the strangest one I find is the logic that guns will protect people from the government - the government can get everything they want without resorting to invading someone's home - if I want change, I prefer the ballot box - I'm not of the opinion that a gun will protect my interests.

Having said all of that, I'm not convinced there is a sound argument to suggest guns need to be banned, whereas say alcohol doesn't. Maybe it could be argued that alcohol abuse is self-imposed harm, whereas gun murders are not, and then there is the responsibility to society angle to think about.

_____________________________

I have the courage to be a coward - but not beyond my limits.

Sooner or later, the man who wins is the man who thinks he can.

(in reply to His1kitten)

Post #: 89

RE: Interesting stats on guns and crime - 4/21/2007 4:33:42 PM

Pulpsmack

Posts: 394
Joined: 4/15/2004
From: Louisiana
Status: offline

Have you ever heard of the term trolling?

If you hate guns of any/all/whetever kind and think rationally or irrationally that they should be banned then, so be it. Just say so so that people who are conducting the discussion can put your "contribution" in the right frame of mind when you make your inquiries.

Since you asked for the information, I go out of my way on your behalf to show you various cases where assault rifles have been used in defense life and personal property and then after that I give you some extra reasons that are subjectively legitimate (post 76)

- you conclude with this...

quote:

If you need a semi-automatic or automatic weapon for hunting, I would like to know what the hell you are hunting.

One other thing before I leave those of you who....nevermind that, When the constitution was written those people had no idea of what was to come. Think of the weapons that were available then, and what is available now, to any yahoo that feels the need to prove something. I get physically ill when I hear people try to rationalize the ownership of such weapons and the trivialization of the ease of so many people dying at the hands of one person. You can sit there and say that you aren't until you are blue in the face, it won't change the fact in my eyes. Not that you would care.

Have fun.

If this was your unswayable opinion in the first place, then why did you even bother asking somebody show a legitimate reason to sell the guns? You charge me and others with taking time out of their day to give you legitimate reasons for selling AWs when you knew good and well there was not a damn thing we could say that would convince you anything other than "assault rifles are icky and should be banned". All you had to do was say in your first post "Assault weapons should be banned in my opinion (right or wrong) and I refuse to change my mind. Have a nice day." At least that way everybody could have enjoyed/ignored your input and moved on. So why did you even bother wasting everybody's time challenging them when you had no intention of listening to the information or at least making an argument?

I hope you had your fun trolling.

(in reply to His1kitten)

Post #: 90

RE: Interesting stats on guns and crime - 4/21/2007 4:38:36 PM

mnottertail

Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline

quote:

The only doubt in my mind is that a gun enables someone to go on a killing spree whereas it would be much more difficult with a knife, the chances of killing 30 people with a knife is non-existent. How does this fit with your defence of gun ownership?

anyone can say their own piece----
but I am separating some questions here, and I know what you said was in a context that was separate from my rant, NG.

I own guns because I can.
every human owns some nasty carnal shit in them (even mother teresa did)
Borya's were decent in the field of poison.
Your guy---name escapes me had the propensity to strangle and drop in hogsheads of acid (Swindon massiv) or Jack the ripper-----

'ere's da fing guv'
Deux ex machina-----
so here is a little ubitquious machine that can kill quickly, or kill slowly, and it is not the gun-------

it is the player behind or in front of the machine
so CHO or whoever, kills 32 in a minute or a year............

is it a timing thing?

The Hill----------(the movie) What do you think this is Chicago?

LOL,
Ron

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30

(in reply to NorthernGent)

Post #: 91

RE: Interesting stats on guns and crime - 4/21/2007 4:45:03 PM

mistoferin

Posts: 8284
Joined: 10/27/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent
I would say that if you have loads of lunatics running around, then you have a deeper problem than gun ownership, and that the answers lie elsewhere.

Bingo!

Making gun ownership illegal is NOT the answer. Do we ban things based upon misuse or the number of people who are harmed or killed by their misuse?

Let's say I was a lunatic who was hell bent on mass killing.....and guns were illegal....I could accomplish the task many other ways. Heck, I could accomplish it with something as small as a single match. I might be able to get hundreds, maybe even thousands of people at once, depending on where I chose to light that single match. So....do we ban matches? I mean matches ARE dangerous. Lots of accidents can happen with matches. Look how many times small children find the matches their parents have carefully hidden away and burn houses and apartment buildings down. Campfires are lit with matches....and we all know how dangerous those can be.

So, should be ban em? Sue the companies that make em?

_____________________________

Peace and light,
~erin~

There are no victims here...only volunteers.

When you make a habit of playing on the tracks, you thereby forfeit the right to bitch when you get hit by a train.

"I did it! I admit it and I'm gonna do it again!"

(in reply to NorthernGent)

Post #: 92

RE: Interesting stats on guns and crime - 4/21/2007 4:47:36 PM

MrTime

Posts: 15
Joined: 4/13/2007
Status: offline

This an amusing thread

So far people have been waving their "Rights" and saying we are allowed to own these things because of these.

I still don't know why anyone would NEED (note key word in sentence) an assault style weapon of any sort in a domestic environent.

Please skip constitutional references in responses as they have no relation to the question.

Why do people need this style of weaponry?

(in reply to mnottertail)

Post #: 93

RE: Interesting stats on guns and crime - 4/21/2007 4:51:04 PM

Pulpsmack

Posts: 394
Joined: 4/15/2004
From: Louisiana
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrTime

This an amusing thread

So far people have been waving their "Rights" and saying we are allowed to own these things because of these.

I still don't know why anyone would NEED (note key word in sentence) an assault style weapon of any sort in a domestic environent.

Please skip constitutional references in responses as they have no relation to the question.

Why do people need this style of weaponry?

Hello, Mr Time.

Might I direct you to post # 76 (page 4)... it was written for someone who it seemed had little other interest here than baiting the discussion, but perhaps it will be of use after all.

< Message edited by Pulpsmack -- 4/21/2007 4:53:56 PM >

(in reply to MrTime)

Post #: 94

RE: Interesting stats on guns and crime - 4/21/2007 4:57:43 PM

MrTime

Posts: 15
Joined: 4/13/2007
Status: offline

Still seems like driving a thumbtack with a sledgehammer to me, but that is just my opinion.

I feel that a revolver in the right hands is more effective than an assault rifle anyday, but that is just my training. Some people may need the ability to spray as much ammo as possible in the shortest possible time. I was trained to use as little ammo as possible and make each shot count.

My home is now gun free, as we feel no need for them here, and we are armed in so many more interesting ways.

(in reply to Pulpsmack)

Post #: 95

RE: Interesting stats on guns and crime - 4/21/2007 5:03:11 PM

His1kitten

Posts: 53
Joined: 4/2/2007
Status: offline

I gave my answer, yet you were too caught up in yourself to see. Nothing in your statements gives a legitimate reason for the sale of semi automatic and automatic weapons. You are under the mistaken impression that I say ban all guns, nowhere did I say that. I concede you aren't going to change your mind. Right or wrong.

"When the constitution was written those people had no idea of what was to come. Think of the weapons that were available then, and what is available now, to any yahoo that feels the need to prove something."

(in reply to Pulpsmack)

Post #: 96

RE: Interesting stats on guns and crime - 4/21/2007 5:06:40 PM

mistoferin

Posts: 8284
Joined: 10/27/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrTime
Why do people need this style of weaponry?

I can't answer this question for anyone other than myself. Do I NEED one as in I would die if I didn't have one....certainly not. I choose to use one because they are inexpensive, accurate and effective. Contrary to what I believe is the perception of many people when they hear the term "assault" weapon....my SKS is on the low end of the spectrum of power as far as rifles go....which fits my needs in my particular hunting environment and is an adequate choice for the game I hunt. Also contrary to what I think popular belief is....it fires ONE round at a time....not a spray of bullets as I think so many assume. The difference is that should my aim not be dead nuts on and I require a second shot, with my SKS I don't have to take time to rack in another round and re-aim to get that second round off.....saving time that could possibly allow an injured animal to get away and suffer needlessly.

I will return your question to you this way though....no, I don't NEED to have one....but as a law abiding, responsible citizen....why should I NOT BE ALLOWED to have one?

_____________________________

Peace and light,
~erin~

There are no victims here...only volunteers.

When you make a habit of playing on the tracks, you thereby forfeit the right to bitch when you get hit by a train.

"I did it! I admit it and I'm gonna do it again!"

(in reply to MrTime)

Post #: 97

RE: Interesting stats on guns and crime - 4/21/2007 5:14:50 PM

mnottertail

Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline

well, does there have to be a reason?

How about you spend the next year of your life giving us a compendium of why you like your dick sucked and what your constitutional right is vis a vis your owning a dick--

I understand that some discussion is underway here about the constitutional or humanistic right to own guns, and frankly----I don't give a fuck, I own them and always will, for no reason whatsofuckinever------
not a discussion, a fact..........

not a right or a legislative matter----------fuck you all,
there aint no why and there really doesnt need to be a why, it just is.

I can almost understand why people say that something must be done, but then---------I will say that there was a bunch of short sightedness that led us up to the point of insane people going out and whacking a bunch of motherfuckers (although many of them probably needed whacking) and I feel for you-------but these issues precident and anticedent guns---------------lets start at swords and see how we got here.

Kong Haakon

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30

(in reply to MrTime)

Post #: 98

RE: Interesting stats on guns and crime - 4/21/2007 5:16:25 PM

MrTime

Posts: 15
Joined: 4/13/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mistoferin

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrTime
Why do people need this style of weaponry?

I can't answer this question for anyone other than myself. Do I NEED one as in I would die if I didn't have one....certainly not. I choose to use one because they are inexpensive, accurate and effective. Contrary to what I believe is the perception of many people when they hear the term "assault" weapon....my SKS is on the low end of the spectrum of power as far as rifles go....which fits my needs in my particular hunting environment and is an adequate choice for the game I hunt. Also contrary to what I think popular belief is....it fires ONE round at a time....not a spray of bullets as I think so many assume. The difference is that should my aim not be dead nuts on and I require a second shot, with my SKS I don't have to take time to rack in another round and re-aim to get that second round off.....saving time that could possibly allow an injured animal to get away and suffer needlessly.

I will return your question to you this way though....no, I don't NEED to have one....but as a law abiding, responsible citizen....why should I NOT BE ALLOWED to have one?

roflmao, I have no desire to debate antiquated documents that only hold power when they are being abused by government, or to defend somebodies desires.

I have no need to worry about the constitutional rights of anybody but me and my own.

I am familiar with the SKS, being an ex military person I was trained in the use of most weapons, and some that aren't available outside the compound we were in. Basically, anybody that is worth what they claim can use any type of firearm accurately, just as anybody can abuse a firearm. Privilege is what it all comes down to.

(in reply to mistoferin)

Post #: 99

RE: Interesting stats on guns and crime - 4/21/2007 5:29:41 PM

Pulpsmack

Posts: 394
Joined: 4/15/2004
From: Louisiana
Status: offline

I am not under any such mistaken assumption. Your very first position made it clear you were attacking Assault Rifles.

Moreover, I saw your constitutional argument and if you left it at that I would have been happy to discuss the merits of that argument. It's the whole "prove this prove that, cite this, provide statistics for that" joke with the "ha ha fucker, it doesn't matter what you say... you're wrong" punchline that I don't approve of.

You wish to put it in the perspective of the founding fathers?

Well, they did not have AR-15s then, that's true. However they found all manner of longarms, as well as pistols to be included. They even had more destructive weapons like cannons, and the fledgling navy was comprised of warships from private citizens. They understood all of these weapons and yet, they wrote authoritatively "shall not be infringed" The best firearms of the day were not thought verbotten by the founding fathers.

The whole purpose of the Second Amendment would be to put the people on equal footing with the King's standing army/National Guard when the need arose. The (hypothetical) King's army of today has body armor capable of defeating pistol rounds, as well as automatic rifles. It is possible that the founding fathers had not envisioned the extent of firearms innovation, but it would be foolish to think they couldn't possibly have envisioned evolution of the arms. If it is good enough for the King's infantry, it's good enough for the citizen's safe. If you are able to ban ONE class of firearm, you have defeated the whole Second Amendment.

Ban any longarm with a barrel length less than 16" (NFA ACT)
Ban machine guns (1986)
Ban Assault weapons (1994-2004 and trying again)
Ban any firearm magazine that has more than ten bullets (1994-2004 and I promise VT will rehash this)

Do you understand? It will never stop!

There will always be a "mal-adjusted Korean student" lurking, giving more idiots and special interest groups "arguments" for more and more regulation.

So is that what the founding fathers intended? "When tyrany has struck, excercise your second amendment and raise your single-shot bolt action .22 plinker against the plexiglass shields of your oppressor, as they level their M-249s of oppression!"

"Shall not be infringed" ... they meant it.

< Message edited by Pulpsmack -- 4/21/2007 5:36:06 PM >

(in reply to His1kitten)

Post #: 100

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Interesting stats on guns and crime

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.094