8 stabbed at grocery store, co-worker arrested

[lazs2]

nashwan... are you saying that I could not get a handgun within a couple of hours or days in your country or get a shotgun and saw it off?

Same question for angus.    

If the answer is that, of course I could (and I could) then you have to ask....  What has the ban accomplished?   If there never were many homicides and now that you have banned conceallable or home defense ones and there are just as many or more homicides... what have you accomplished.

If law abiding citizens obey the law... that is easy to understand.  It criminals obey it.. that is different... why do they?   Because they agree with you that it is a good thing?  hardly... the ban has to carry heavy penalties in order to cow the criminal into obeying.    You could just have well as just put in the penalties and left out the ban.... Heavy penalties for gun crime but no ban on guns..

instead...you have burglars ransacking a persons house while they hide in a locked room shaking like a leaf under their bed hoping that someone will save them.

We still say... no thanks to that situation and the flawed thinking that caused it.

Sooo... If I wanted to knock off my rival gang leader in ice bear country of limeyland... are you guys saying I couldn't get a handgun or saw off a shotgun and do it any time I liked?

lazs

[Nashwan]

Processing increases profit, because you take a kilo of something expensive, cut it with something very, very cheap, and you have two kilos of "drugs". That's why they do it.

There could be several middle men in the transaction.

There will be middle men in the transaction for guns, too, in exactly the same way as for drugs. The importer cannot know and deal with the street level criminals all over the country who would want guns, anymore than he can know and deal with the drug addicts who want his drugs.

If a robber in Glasgow wants a gun, how can he deal direct with the importer? The importer can't exactly advertise, he might be based hundreds of miles away, the two have never met, and don't know each other.

If the importer is so well known that street level criminals all over the country know how to contact him, then the police will know him too.

This is exactly the same situation as the drug trade, where the importer sells to a few high level middle men, they sell on to lower level dealer, all the way down to the street dealer.

According to the Economist in 2004, wholesale price for multi-kilo loads of cocaine (ie direct from the importers) was £15 - £30,000 ($30 - $60,000) a kilo.  Heroin importers sell a kilo for £15 - £20,000.

Guns moved on this basis would simply be too expensive for 99% of criminals, and only usefull for a very few in very high profit crimes (eg drug dealing, major robberies)

[lazs2]

nashwan... the difference is that there is not an inexhaustable supply of cocaine hidden away in closets in every city in england... coke is perishable also and used up.

There is more than an adequate supply of firearms in england to supply your normal crime and homicide with guns needs for the next few centuries.

Again... are you saying that I could not get a firearm with little or no trouble in your country if I wanted one to commit a murder or gun crime?

If I can still get one with little trouble then the ban didn't work.... If I can get one but don't.... the ban didn't work but the penalties did.

lazs

[Nashwan]

nashwan... are you saying that I could not get a handgun within a couple of hours or days in your country

Yes.

or get a shotgun and saw it off?

A shotgun would be somewhat easier, but shotguns have never been that popular, probably because they are too bulky (even sawn off) and have very poor range (especially sawn off)

If the answer is that, of course I could (and I could) then you have to ask.... What has the ban accomplished?

Well, the answer is no you couldn't. But what do you mean by the "ban"?

Handguns have needed a licence for a very long time, they still need a licence. They've just been moved from class 1 to class 5 (same as machine guns)

As to what that achieved, it was a PR move in the wake of Dunblane, the supporters of that would point to the fact there hasn't been another Dunblane, the opponenets would say there wouldn't have been anyway.

If there never were many homicides and now that you have banned conceallable or home defense ones and there are just as many or more homicides... what have you accomplished.

The reason Britian didn't have a huge increase in homicides the way the US did is that action was taken to restrict the supply of guns in the early days, as they were starting to become a problem.

The thing is, if handguns had to be hand made, and cost about £10,000 each, there wouldn't be a problem, and likely no laws to address that problem. It's only because guns are cheap to make, and thus likely to become common (as they have in the US) that there is a problem. They are too likely to fall into the wrong hands (read crack addict) when there are so many available.

If law abiding citizens obey the law... that is easy to understand. It criminals obey it.. that is different... why do they?

Because they have no choice. Because the law on the supply of guns is well enforced, and there's little money to be made breaking it, so guns are hard to come by. Criminals do not chose to obey the law about carrying guns, they are made to by the fact guns are hard to come by, which means they are too expensive for most criminals.

You could just have well as just put in the penalties and left out the ban.... Heavy penalties for gun crime but no ban on guns..

So a heavy penalty on murder will stop murder? Doesn't seem to work, does it?

The thing is, criminals wouldn't be criminals if they were overly worried about getting caught. In the US system, guns are freely available, but criminals are not allowed to have them. They ignore that law, as is to be expected from criminals.

In the UK system, guns are highly regulated, so criminals find it very difficult to get guns. It's not a matter of choice, it's a matter of availability.

instead...you have burglars ransacking a persons house while they hide in a locked room shaking like a leaf under their bed hoping that someone will save them.

As you do in America, where people fear the burgular is carrying a gun.

We still say... no thanks to that situation and the flawed thinking that caused it.

We still say your situation is flawed, and the figures more than back that up. We still say that the thinking that having both sides in a crime armed is better than having neither side armed is a bit silly, to say the least.

[Charon]

Major drug dealers no doubt do smuggle guns, as they need them to protect themselves from other drug gangs. But smuggling guns to sell to common criminals just isn't worth while.

Most likely so. And the guns would be smuggled, IMO, not as a major product but as a value added service.

The problem with that is the FBI breaks down murder rates by community type. At its best, the US murder rate approaches the British average. Even small towns in the US, 10,000 or less population, have a higher murder rate than the UK including the big cities.

And some communities with a population of 150,000 have a lower/or equal murder rate to Iceland. I have been in the UK on several occasions, both in London and the countryside, and there is no comparison to how the population is distributed. You can drive 30 miles from many big cities in the US and not see a farm or anything that approaches open space.  Just fairly dense communities ranging in population from 10,000 to 150,000 or better -- that whole urban sprawl, megalopolis thing. In the UK the transition from urban to rural seems to happen almost immediately. In the US there will be suburban communities linked to these urban areas that have poor neighborhoods (or are generally poor overall) comprable to those neighborhoods in the inner city, including links to the same gangs that sell the same drugs and fight the same street wars.

Take Joliet ILL, about 30 miles out of Chicago. Half of that town is upscale, $400K plus suburban homes, the other half is a high crime make sure you don't take the wrong turn low income housing area. You have some communities a similar distance like Elgin that have a high percentage of poverty with high crime, while 5 miles away is a community like East Dundee with virtully no crime. Just like in chicago where on one side of the street by the United Center (where the Bulls play) you have projects and on the other side you have million dollar homes. Drive 10 miles or so out of the urban megalopolis sprawl and you find communities that haven't had a murder (except for DUI) in decades.

You can't just "average out" crime in the US or use generic figures. I have yet to hear a criminal gunshot, including the five years I spent living in Chicago itself not all that far from some iffy areas. There are some neighborhoods where I would be sleeping in a bathtub if forced to live there.

Even if you exclude all drug related murders in the US (although including those carried out by addicts to fund habits), the US still has a much higher murder rate than the UK including drug murders.

First, are we taliking firearm murders here or murders in general? Second, I would like to see your statistics on that. It is not uncommon for gang members (or urban wanna be gangsters) to kill others for non drug related reasons (a girlfriend, a revenge killing, someone flashed the wrong sign, a pair of tennis shoes or an iPod, disrespect at a party, etc.) -- are these counted as "drug" murders? Are we really doing an apples to apples comparison? Similarly, as noted earlier, what percentage of the US population lives in what would be considered a major urban area (megalopolis) compared to the UK? I would think population density plays a role in crime. I mean, look how far the UK is lagging behind Iceland, and Iceland seems to have far more liberal firearm laws.

The USDOJ's National Criminal Victimization Survey says that in 17.5 of domestic burglaries, the householder was asleep at the start of the burglary, in another 11% the householder was carrying out "other activities at home". There's another 20%+ covered by "don't knows" and "other" that would also have a percentage at home.

I wonder if this includes the growing trend (even seeing some media coverage) of drug dealers breaking in to opposing drug dealers to rob them. Or, rapes that also include a robbery. The other type of home invasion that occurs with any regularity is against the elderly, who can't defend themselves and are seen as easy targets. I actually had that happen in my very hi-rise in Chicago against an elderly copuple. Of course, in Chicago you can't really own any handguns for self defense. So the elderly couple couldn't have done what this guy did:

Man, 83, discusses shooting at home

By PATRICIA MEADE

VINDICATOR CRIME REPORTER

YOUNGSTOWN — Walter Swita used a German Luger 9 mm pistol he brought home from World War II to shoot an intruder he suspects robbed him a few weeks ago.

The intruder, Benjamin Brooks, 44, of East Philadelphia Avenue, died Sunday at St. Elizabeth Health Center. Swita shot him in the head and chest around 10:30 p.m. Friday.

Brooks, whose record included robbery and breaking and entering, lived around the corner from Swita.

"Watch out for the blood on the rug," Swita, 83, said as he welcomed a reporter into the living room of his South Avenue home Monday. "That's his blood. I hit my head on the TV stand when we fell."

The elderly man's 80-year-old two-story house is in the middle of a commercial district that features bars, eateries and other businesses. As a safety precaution, he's considering cutting back or removing a large bush that obscures his front porch.

"I think he's the one who attacked me about six weeks ago in the back yard," Swita said of Brooks. "He smashed me hard in the face and when I fell down he looked through my wallet and took $60."

Changed a few habits

Swita said he started carrying his German Luger after the attack, not sure whether the vintage pistol would even fire. He said he served in General George Patton's 3rd Army but didn't shoot at anyone. He repaired tanks and Jeeps.

After the first robbery, Swita, who lives alone, began parking across the street when he returned home, not in his rear yard driveway. He'd hide the pistol against his leg until he was safe inside.

Swita said that on Friday night, a man he'd seen hurrying up East Philadelphia grabbed him around the neck as he reached the porch and unlocked the door. The elderly man said he fired two shots at the intruder and they fell to the floor.

His account

Swita, "shaking like a leaf," said he sat down to call 911 to report the shooting. The call taker asked if the man who'd been shot was breathing. Swita said he told her he didn't care.

He assumed the intruder would die because of the shot to the head. He doesn't expect to be charged with any crime, reasoning that he just defended himself in his own home.

"Was I scared? You bet, both times, whoof!" Swita said, exhaling as he recalled the frightening encounters. "You don't know what they'll do to you. A witness said there were two [other] guys waiting on the sidewalk and they ran when they heard the shots."

Swita figures Brooks would have let the two men in to ransack the house.

Swita said he never married and retired in 1984 from the William Pollock Company as a lay-out man for steel ladles. He dotes on a sister who lives in Poland, takes her to play bingo every evening.

The night Brooks was shot, Swita was returning from his sister's.

A lot of people have told Swita that he should move but he says he's got 80 years of junk in the house and will likely stay. He wants his Luger back from the police, though, for protection.

"Plus, it's probably worth $1,500."

Charon

[Nashwan]

There is more than an adequate supply of firearms in england to supply your normal crime and homicide with guns needs for the next few centuries.

No, there isn't. If there were, criminals wouldn't have such difficulty getting real guns. Most of the handguns seized by the police wouldn't be air pistols converted to fire 22 LR. And the police would actually seize more guns.

Again... are you saying that I could not get a firearm with little or no trouble in your country if I wanted one to commit a murder or gun crime?

Yes.

Don't believe what alarmist press might tell you. Remember these are the same people who have claimed Russian suitcase nukes can be purchased on the black market. It simply isn't true.

[lazs2]

nashwan... the problem with not ever being around guns is that you don't know anything about em.

I could make a firearm in the garage for about 10 bucks.   Your own country made submachine guns in WWII for what would be about $30 in todays dollars

I could saw off a shotgun in 10 minutes and it would be extremely conceallable and very deadly at the ranges that most shootings take place.

A homemade shotgun takes about an hour to make with no firearms parts.  Two pieces of pipe, a pipe cap and a soldered nail or sharpened cap screw.

You are simply lucky that your population is so much less diverse and so much less of a vibrant society.  It won't last.   Most other peoples know how to get and/or manufacture weapons...

I would guess that... even tho guns are freely available here... that maybe 5% of the kids in the U.S. have actually made a home made firearm at one time or another.  

lazs

[Charon]

We still say that the thinking that having both sides in a crime armed is better than having neither side armed is a bit silly, to say the least.

Except that the criminal usually is "armed" -- a 200lb, 20-year-old  hard muscled thug who has been involved with violence since he was old enough to fight over lunch money, including a stay or two in jail or prison can easily take my property, beat me to death, rape my wife... whatever he decides to do (I'm just a soft, middleaged guy). Probably without much more trouble than the 80-year-old guy noted above. Now, if Comic Book Guy tries to assault me I'll kick his ass.

The reality is that criminals look for the easy meat, handgun or no handgun. If you are armed, they tend to go somewhere else since they are not ideological in their violence. They have no intention of dying over a DVD player, but they might not bat an eye over killing you for one if the risk is low enough. Hard target vs easy meat. If neither has a firearm then a whole bunch more of us just fell into the easy meat catagory.

Charon

[Angus]

I could also run out of the house NOW, and saw of my shotgun, in 5 MINUTES.
It's still bulky and only 1 shot. At anything beyond 20 yards it's becoming a nuicance rather than a lethal weapon.
You guys miss something. The thing that sticks is here:
Where it is hard to aquire hanguns gun crime rate is lower.
And Charon:
"And some communities with a population of 150,000 have a lower/or equal murder rate to Iceland."
Firstly, how do they do with gun crime.
Then, oh, really, - source?
Thirdly, how do communities with that number do in AVERAGE?
Fourthly, try comparing it with Iceland ex-Reykjavik area. (The whole country aside for the SW corner). It'd be a bit tough beating the 0% in several categories.
But that's just an odd island, definately benifiting from arming up a bit better yes?

A much better comparison, is agin US vs Schengen area.
The population is roughly the same. Schengen has more immigrants, a bigger link to both muslim states and the former eastern block which partially also has joined the EU, the unemployment is probably more, as well as GNP may be a tad lower. I presume that level of education is a tad higher, and aquiring a handgun is in almost every case & place more difficult than in the USA.
So, Gundead, Murdered, Armed robbings, and Raped, how does it shine?
In short, you normally have to look for certain patches in that area to rank to USA average. Or, look for patches in the USA for ranking country stats of countries within the area (Which is what you did).

Then
"a 200lb, 20-year-old hard muscled thug who has been involved with violence since he was old enough to fight over lunch money, including a stay or two in jail or prison can easily take my property, beat me to death, rape my wife... whatever he decides to do "

He could probably do that to me as well. Unless I catch his neck with a bull-grip or show him the business end of my un-sawn shotgun, - don't need a Makarov, - he might not notice it

(Of course wife could be quicker getting the Baikal 12" )

[Charon]

You guys miss something. The thing that sticks is here:
Where it is hard to aquire hanguns gun crime rate is lower.

Really?

Switzerland and the gun (BBC Article)

Guns are deeply rooted within Swiss culture - but the gun crime rate is so low that statistics are not even kept.
The country has a population of six million, but there are estimated to be at least two million publicly-owned firearms, including about 600,000 automatic rifles and 500,000 pistols.

This is in a very large part due to Switzerland's unique system of national defence, developed over the centuries.

Instead of a standing, full-time army, the country requires every man to undergo some form of military training for a few days or weeks a year throughout most of their lives.

Between the ages of 21 and 32 men serve as frontline troops. They are given an M-57 assault rifle and 24 rounds of ammunition which they are required to keep at home.

Once discharged, men serve in the Swiss equivalent of the US National Guard, but still have to train occasionally and are given bolt rifles. Women do not have to own firearms, but are encouraged to.

Few restrictions

In addition to the government-provided arms, there are few restrictions on buying weapons. Some cantons restrict the carrying of firearms - others do not.

The government even sells off surplus weaponry to the general public when new equipment is introduced.

Guns and shooting are popular national pastimes. More than 200,000 Swiss attend national annual marksmanship competitions.

But despite the wide ownership and availability of guns, violent crime is extremely rare. There are only minimal controls at public buildings and politicians rarely have police protection.

Mark Eisenecker, a sociologist from the University of Zurich told BBC News Online that guns are "anchored" in Swiss society and that gun control is simply not an issue.

Some pro-gun groups argue that Switzerland proves their contention that there is not necessarily a link between the availability of guns and violent crime in society.

Low crime

But other commentators suggest that the reality is more complicated.

Switzerland is one of the world's richest countries, but has remained relatively isolated.

It has none of the social problems associated with gun crime seen in other industrialised countries like drugs or urban deprivation.

Despite the lack of rigid gun laws, firearms are strictly connected to a sense of collective responsibility.

From an early age Swiss men and women associate weaponry with being called to defend their country.

Perhaps there is something more at work than just the ready, common persence of firearms?

"And some communities with a population of 150,000 have a lower/or equal murder rate to Iceland."
Firstly, how do they do with gun crime.
Then, oh, really, - source?

Now, there may be some fraction of a percent difference or such, but then it's hard to see if the data is a fully comprable. I would say close enough.

http://www.city-data.com/city/Naperville-Illinois.html

Thirdly, how do communities with that number do in AVERAGE?
Fourthly, try comparing it with Iceland ex-Reykjavik area. (The whole country aside for the SW corner). It'd be a bit tough beating the 0% in several categories.
But that's just an odd island, definately benifiting from arming up a bit better yes?

 
You guys keep failing to realize that population density, economic strata (apparently Iceland it's fairly uniform overall with few factors that noramlly promote crime) even how things like how illegal drugs are distributed (controlled organize crime vs. factional street games) have an impact on gun violence. You cannot compare Iceland to the US. I think you can compare Iceland to Switzerland though, where gun ownership is common.

Charon

[lazs2]

charon is doing an excellent job of myth dispelling....  I would only add that I have read most of the info he is putting out there... it is nothing new.

angus... what ranges do you think American gun homicides happen at?  would you be surprised that they mostly happen at less than 10' ?

As charon has pointed out... there are parts of the UK with higher gun crimes and homicides than places in the U.S.   In the U.S.    the cities with the highest amount of gun crime and homicide are the ones with the most strict gun control while.... next door.. where the gun laws are more lax... the gun crime is low.

I am glad that you are young and strong but would chide you for being so selfish as to say.. "I can take care of myself so the hell with the old and the infirm and the women"

The fastest growing group of new gun owners is women here... followed by the elderly.

lazs

[Maverick]

Angus, I loved this part of your post.

I could also run out of the house NOW, and saw of my shotgun, in 5 MINUTES.
It's still bulky and only 1 shot. At anything beyond 20 yards it's becoming a nuicance rather than a lethal weapon.

It's total and grade a bovine excrement. Keep it up, I'm sure the gardeners in your area can use the fertilizer.

Shotguns, including open choke (plain bore) are deadly well out past 20 yards. A cut down shotgun is no more bulky than a bat and far deadlier.

[lazs2]

mav... I am sure you are aware... a 10" long double barrel shotgun is very easy to make and conceal and much more deadly than any handgun at close range.

angus and nashwan seem to get their  firearms experiance from hollywood.

[Angus]

Originally posted by Maverick
Angus, I loved this part of your post.

I could also run out of the house NOW, and saw of my shotgun, in 5 MINUTES.
It's still bulky and only 1 shot. At anything beyond 20 yards it's becoming a nuicance rather than a lethal weapon.

It's total and grade a bovine excrement. Keep it up, I'm sure the gardeners in your area can use the fertilizer.

Shotguns, including open choke (plain bore) are deadly well out past 20 yards. A cut down shotgun is no more bulky than a bat and far deadlier.

Depends on the ammo. Oh, we don't have buckshots or slugs...
 I've shot Ptarmigans at all sorts of ranges, with everything from no3 with 42.5 grams to 36 grams 9 (clay pigeon) at very varying distances, cleaned them up, cooked and eaten, - so I bloody well know where and if yu find the lead in them, or if they got hammered without penetration.
I've shot plywood, metal, old machinery, plastic, concrete, sheet metal, beforementioned ptarmigans, ravens, seagulls, Cats (Yes, cats) with all possible ranges and ammo from BB to 9. In short, I'm bad
The fertilizer is yours. And if you like, I can measure my gun as a minimum. We can then compare how much the difference it is with a little .45, as well as the lethality and penetration at 20 yards, - or do you want 50?
Boil it down to this: Even if you can saw of a shotgun it is nowhere as conceilable, as flexible, as useable (rounds) nor as leathal (exceptions VERY close up) as a Glock, S&M, 357, .45 or whatever.
May the grass grow!

[Angus]

Originally posted by lazs2
mav... I am sure you are aware... a 10" long double barrel shotgun is very easy to make and conceal and much more deadly than any handgun at close range.

angus and nashwan seem to get their  firearms experiance from hollywood.

I once eliminated a colony of Seagulls from the land.
I used up so much ammo that I had a remark from the tax about it.

The only Hollywood ammo I ever used was when I fired the M1Garand

Edit: 10" is for girls
And long barrel is hard to hide.
And double Barrel only has 2 shots.
Not the choice of a thug who wants either lots of deads or lots of people held frozen.