

| AWE HELL NA!!!! | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Nov 28 2013, 10:48 PM (1,941 Views) | |
| Ichigo1uk | Dec 27 2013, 01:10 AM Post #91 |
![]()
Huh?
|
Actually it is the failure of gun control laws that your country is in such a shitty place, and the constitution which gave guns to the citizens. Which during war time is fine, 150 years after, maybe in need of an update there. They got the part about Church and state being separate right at least. -- I presume Illegal guns would include those stolen from owners or from stores. Acquiring a gun illegally is made easier by the fact that the country is filled with guns. - That point applies to first time criminals and the underworld in general. Fortunately acquiring a gun Illegally or Legally is far easier then making a home made explosive large enough to blow up a theatre, let alone getting the large amount of stuff into the theatre or a school for that matter. Wasn't there a sales spike right after the shooting with the AR-15 Bushmaster, obviously it proved it could hit children accurately a redeeming quality you'd want in any gun surely. Now of course the media is to blame in parts, I mean the Media over there from the outside looking in is a cesspool. The parts I refer to aren't the vocalizing of the "special cases", White childern get shot or black guy killed by latino guy. I speak about the part where the serial killers and criminals are praised by the media and given 24/7 coverage like there popstars. "Serial killer A likes his cornflakes with 0.5 grams of suger, and practices shooting people by playing this game, he has 24 friends on facebook and 100 followers on twitter." Then the Mentally Ill or vulnerable people come along, And maybe 1/100,000 think, oh wow that looks amazing look at all the attention that guy got for just killing a couple people. I think I'll pop down to the local gun shop, which gun did he use again, seems reliable." Edited by Ichigo1uk, Dec 27 2013, 01:12 AM.
|
| |
![]() |
|
| ryker | Dec 27 2013, 01:37 AM Post #92 |
|
General
|
Your point would be valid if stolen guns contributed to a major ammount of illegal firearms. The fact is that almost all illegal fire arms are done through the following methods: 1) One of the most common ways criminals get guns is through straw purchase sales. A straw purchase occurs when someone who may not legally acquire a firearm, or who wants to do so anonymously, has a companion buy it on their behalf. 2) Another big source of illegal gun transactions where criminals get guns are sales made by legally licensed but corrupt at-home and commercial gun dealers. 3) Then the third major contributor is illegal gun dealers through the black market. It may be just a movie but the lord of war is actually very interesting with several parallels to illegal gun trade. Making the purchasing process harder for law abiding citizens will do NOTHING to stop the majority of illegal guns. Taking guns away all together from law abiding citizens would only solve two of the above issues (SOME straw trades and corrupt legal gun shops). Even eliminating these two however, would only only make the third method mentioned boom. I don't understand what why it is such a hard concept to grasp! Making something illegal will only stop a law abiding citizen from getting it/doing it. It does nothing for someone who is not a law abiding citizen. Until someone can figure out THAT issue I will listen but all everyone wants to do is fight the WRONG war. That being said, your comment about this country sucking... I won't argue that point. I agree with that statement more and more every day. |
| my name is ryker | |
![]() |
|
| Ichigo1uk | Dec 27 2013, 04:12 AM Post #93 |
![]()
Huh?
|
Why do 1 and 2 strike me as being a problem caused by the legal sale of guns. My argument isn't about making law abiding citizens work harder to get a gun, It about not selling them in the first place. 1 and 2 probably contribute the lion share of Illegal guns. Just because 1 and 2 disappear doesn't mean 3 distributes the same volume of guns as 1,2 and 3 did combined. I'll add numbers in, pretend there a sample of 100 people, it only to describe the point i'm making vs your idea. Before :- 1 - 67 2 - 24 3 - 9 After :- 1 -0 2 - 6 (They'll probably be a couple flogging old guns) 3 - 24 Before 3 had 9% of the "market share", after it had more then 80% of the "market share" How ever the market shrunk by 70% The overall picture would be gun's are harder to obtain, those that really want them will get them via 3, most will not go to the trouble of doing such a shady deal. Human's are lazy after-all. |
| |
![]() |
|
| ryker | Dec 27 2013, 06:08 AM Post #94 |
|
General
|
Ok, I realize this is a cherry picked statistic, but that being said, it still serves its purpose. Please explain the following. http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/02/12/U-N-Maps-Show-U-S-High-In-Gun-Ownership-Low-In-Homicides Why is it that areas with high ownership of guns (have to be registered to show up in this statistic, therefore means they are legal), have a lower homiside rate than areas with little to no legal gun ownership? On the inverse, areas with little to no legal gun ownership, have a higher rate of homicide? |
| my name is ryker | |
![]() |
|
| Incog | Dec 27 2013, 08:30 AM Post #95 |
|
CHEERIO!
![]()
|
I definitely think that there's a correlation between firearms in households and lower crime rates. What criminal is going to break and enter into a home when he knows that the guy in the house probably has a gun and it'll be completely legal for that guy to shoot at the criminal if the criminal is in his home? However, as goodspeed says, what leverage does that give the police over citizens? I think that police have leverage over citizens in that they're professional, they have numbers and resources. In France for example the police have guns and criminals mostly don't; yet criminals completely disrespect the police anyway. That's because any police officer who actually uses his gun, even in self defense, will probably be prosecuted for it and everyone will go batshit crazy. It's kind of disgusting really, but criminals in France have free reign to do whatever the fuck they want and get away with it. When our home got house jacked (with everyone still in it, mind you), the police pretty much knew who the thieves were (they were going to steal our car and do rodeo with it), yet they didn't do jack shit about it. The thieves just walked away. In fact most petty criminals don't ever get anything more than a slap on the wrist for the shit they do. Fucking France, it's become quite the shitty country. Kind of sad being French today. |
|
Black tulip Tribute to the the greatest of the great. | |
![]() |
|
| Ichigo1uk | Dec 27 2013, 01:18 PM Post #96 |
![]()
Huh?
|
That just show's that 3rd world country's have a higher rate of homicides. (90% of people with mental health in developing countries will not receive help) (Russia's also a place with mental health issues) Northern Africa, India to japan, United kingdom and Portugal all ignore that rule, which is about half of the low homicides by the way. Unfortunately comparing a 1st world country to a 3rd world country in Homicides is somewhat stupid on there part. It ignores education, law enforcement and infrastructure of the country. |
| |
![]() |
|
| ryker | Dec 27 2013, 03:35 PM Post #97 |
|
General
|
And if you want to include other info.... 1)1 Over the past 20 years, gun sales have absolutely exploded, but homicides with firearms are down 39 percent during that time and “other crimes with firearms” are down 69 percent. 2) A study published in the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy discovered that nations that have more guns tend to have less crime. 3) The nine European nations with the lowest rate of gun ownership rate have a combined murder rate that is three times greater than the nine European nation with the highest rate of gun ownership. 4) Almost every mass shooting that has occurred in the United States since 1950 has taken place in a state with strict gun control laws… With just one exception, every public mass shooting in the USA since at least 1950 has taken place where citizens are banned from carrying guns. Despite strict gun regulations, Europe has had three of the worst six school shootings. 5) The violent crime rate in the United States actually fell from 757.7 per 100,000 in 1992 to 386.3 per 100,000 in 2011. During that same time period, the murder rate fell from 9.3 per 100,000 to 4.7 per 100,000. 6) Approximately 200,000 women in the United States use guns to protect themselves against sexual crime every single year. 7) Overall, guns in the United States are used 80 times more often to prevent crime than they are to take lives. 8)The number of unintentional fatalities due to firearms declined by 58 percent between 1991 and 2011. 9) Despite the very strict ban on guns in the UK, the overall rate of violent crime in the UK is about 4 times higher than it is in the United States. In one recent year, there were 2,034 violent crimes per 100,000 people in the UK. In the United States, there were only 466 violent crimes per 100,000 people during that same year. Do we really want to be more like the UK? 10) The UK has approximately 125 percent more rape victims per 100,000 people each year than the United States does. 11) The UK has approximately 133 percent more assault victims per 100,000 people each year than the United States does. 12)The UK has the fourth highest burglary rate in the EU. 13) The UK has the second highest overall crime rate in the EU. 14) Down in Australia, gun murders increased by about 19 percent and armed robberies increased by about 69 percent after a gun ban was instituted. 15) The city of Chicago has some of the strictest gun laws in the United States. So has this reduced crime? Of course not. As I wrote about recently, the murder rate in Chicago was about 17 percent higher in 2012 than it was in 2011, and Chicago is now considered to be “the deadliest global city“. If you can believe it, there were about as many murders in Chicago during 2012 as there was in the entire nation of Japan. 16) After the city of Kennesaw, Georgia passed a law requiring every home to have a gun, the crime rate dropped by more than 50 percent over the course of the next 23 years and there was an 89% decline in burglaries. 17)The governments of the world slaughtered more than 170 million of their own people during the 20th century. The vast majority of those people had been disarmed by their own governments prior to being slaughtered. |
| my name is ryker | |
![]() |
|
| ryker | Dec 27 2013, 03:45 PM Post #98 |
|
General
|
Applying your own numbers does not mean that it is accurate. I can do that to :) In an unnamed city somewhere there were 2 gun violence homicides/100,000 people with no gun control bans. A gun ban was put in place and the death number rose to 34 gun violence homicides/100,000 people over the next 5 years. The government realized they made a mistake and released the gun ban and over the course of 3 years the death number fell to 10 gun violence homicides/100,000 people. made up numbers do nothing... You can't say this is what would happen IF this happened. Truth is, we really don't know until we do a study to get numbers. Numbers can be cherry picked and misinterpreted, but they are at least something. |
| my name is ryker | |
![]() |
|
| Ichigo1uk | Dec 27 2013, 04:32 PM Post #99 |
![]()
Huh?
|
The numbers were to describe a point, you must of read over that, I'll have to embolden it next time. It was in opposition to you saying that the banning of the first 2 would make the 3rd boom to the same amount as all 3 (You said no change) Once again I think your arguing a different point from mine. I'm arguing that easy access to guns has fucked up your country beyond repair by introducing gun control to late with 300 million guns owned legally across a country of 317 million. (Obviously there's enough to go round that a cease on not selling guns anymore shouldn't matter, gun nuts are allowed to buy multiple guns) Only about 100 million of those are handguns...(there's probably a-lot of shotguns, but semi auto's are abundant.) Handguns are less lethal but serve the purpose of protection, and yet are only 33% of the market. Shotguns are far more lethal at a closer range and will kill or maim the victim of the gun far worse. Excessive for protection. Semi-autos are the american wet dream, kill multiple people... err I mean robbers and thieves and rapists from any range. Fucking monumentally stupid for protection. Couple that with the fact that the country's education and mental health care and a few other factors like the silly culture are in there and you have a trigger happy society that uses guns for crime, which is also a-lot easier then using baton's and knifes. Your arguing that banning gun's would increase the crime rate (especially crimes with guns, go figure.) But would more lives be saved - criminals included. While there are means to protecting yourself non lethally from rape or assault (running is a lot more viable if your not having to count for the possibility of being shot in the back.) House alarms and camera's help prevent or assist in the conviction of theft's. But Criminal's aren't going to hand in there guns, that's just silly talk. To introduce a gun control that'd work your government would have to crackdown and search houses. Introducing a gun control law isn't bad, it's because the country is hanging onto a constitution with a law that allows for the ownership of firearms, which was acceptable for war time. Gun's have be distributed legally for years where they didn't need to be. Gun crime is high, because gun's are widespread a moron could work out that taking a gun to a gun fight is a good idea over a knife. Likewise taking a gun to a crime in the USA is probably a decent idea. http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/09/13/2617131/largest-gun-study-guns-murder/# http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/18/gun-ownership-gun-deaths-study America might be the only country in the world that believes fighting fire with fire is a good idea. I personally use a fire blanket. |
| |
![]() |
|
| ryker | Dec 27 2013, 07:08 PM Post #100 |
|
General
|
You do realize that shot guns/HP rifles are used primarily for hunting and recreational purposes right? Most people I know have guns. They are for hunting deer, turkey, quail, pheasant, etc. I actually know very little people who own assault rifles, and the majority of gun violence is NOT related to an assault rifle. Most are actually related to hand guns. Shot guns, HP Rifles, and assault rifles are harder to conceal. The problem, once again, is the media. They only cover the things that are out of the norm. The problem with gun control laws, is that they have people in government who have no idea about anything with guns making them. Do you really think Obama has an idea about guns? I don't know if he has ever fired a gun in his life. |
| my name is ryker | |
![]() |
|
| Ichigo1uk | Dec 27 2013, 07:15 PM Post #101 |
![]()
Huh?
|
In a poll i stumbled across earlier I think it was a 2008 poll. 67% said they owned a gun for defense 66% for recreational I don't see a difference You buy a gun for recreational purposes, that gun is just as useful on people. The problem with your gun control laws is that you have a gun association that uses most of it's money for lobbying. No decent ones will get through anyways. |
| |
![]() |
|
| ryker | Dec 27 2013, 09:40 PM Post #102 |
|
General
|
That pole is probably spot on but somewhat misleading. what it should say is recreational first and if needed, protection. I have no desire to use mine on any human being, or on any living thing other than for hunting (I eat what I kill). But I wouldn't hesitate to use one to protect my family from any threat either.
Edited by ryker, Dec 27 2013, 09:41 PM.
|
| my name is ryker | |
![]() |
|
| ryker | Dec 27 2013, 11:36 PM Post #103 |
|
General
|
But those french women!!!!!!
|
| my name is ryker | |
![]() |
|
| ryker | Dec 28 2013, 07:31 AM Post #104 |
|
General
|
Holy crap... Note to self, don't drink beer and type on a forum at the same time. I am done arguing on this thread after that one. No argument I bring forth from here on out has any credibility after reading this several hours later... |
| my name is ryker | |
![]() |
|
| Incog | Dec 28 2013, 07:46 AM Post #105 |
|
CHEERIO!
![]()
|
the people are somewhat fine. The problem is that everyone has a shitty mentality. The French can be stout of heart but they choose not to be. twats |
|
Black tulip Tribute to the the greatest of the great. | |
![]() |
|
| Jam | Dec 29 2013, 06:16 PM Post #106 |
![]()
Fruit Based Jam
|
Shot yourself in the foot? |
| Long live Carolus | |
![]() |
|
| ryker | Dec 29 2013, 07:57 PM Post #107 |
|
General
|
I prefer the term stuck my foot in my mouth :) After reading that several hours later, I realized if you don't take it in the context it was meant to be, that it sounds like I am talking about MY pole rather than the pole ichy was referring to... awe well. |
| my name is ryker | |
![]() |
|
| The_Fry_Cook_of_Doom | Dec 30 2013, 02:12 AM Post #108 |
|
:OOOOOOOOOOOOMAAANN
|
I liked the 'I eat what I kill' part best. It really brought me back to |
| |
![]() |
|
| ryker | Dec 30 2013, 06:23 AM Post #109 |
|
General
|
Yeah, at the time of the writing of it, I had no idea that it could sound like that. I thought of editing it to say the same thing without the possibility of it sounding sexual but I figured I shouldn't take that away from anyone. |
| my name is ryker | |
![]() |
|
| gs | Dec 30 2013, 05:58 PM Post #110 |
![]()
Slow down
|
i'm talking about organized crime not about your average thief, burglar, robber, or whatever. nothing is scarier than someone with a gun who has nothing to lose and those are the kind of criminals who have nothing to lose. people in organized crime won't be targeting you so you have nothing to worry about there. besides, if they were targeting you them having guns would be the least of your problems. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · General chat · Next Topic » |
| Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
4:49 PM Jul 13
|











4:49 PM Jul 13