Gun owners and non-gun owners...

[lazs2]

mt... i don't know what the blip is due to and don't make any claims to.   You are the one who is stupid enough to find some kind of cause and effect relationship in an anomoly.    The thing that is not debateable is that the more guns and the more easy access to them in a state the less crime.    The more oppressive the gun laws the more increase that state has in crime.    I could very easily say that the fact that the country has gotten more strict gun laws like triggert locks and regetration hassles etc.... is the reason that crime is up "cause and effect" as you say but.... I'm not prepared to do that .......   yet.

curval.. admittedly... I don't know anything about your tax structure.   How does your govenment  get paid?   How are sevices paid for?   basicly.... How are you taxed?    
lazs

[GtoRA2]

When you go shoot in the middle of no where, lol where is that? Know of anyplace withen two hours of the bay area?


Hey what club where you in!

[midnight Target]

mt... i don't know what the blip is due to and don't make any claims to. You are the one who is stupid enough to find some kind of cause and effect relationship in an anomoly. The thing that is not debateable is that the more guns and the more easy access to them in a state the less crime. The more oppressive the gun laws the more increase that state has in crime.

Stupid is as stupid does. Maybe you should go back to reading comprehension class. My post was all about the lack of cause and effect evidence.

And speaking of evidence, you continuously claim that less restrictive gun laws lead to reduced crime. ......

Prove it.

[Curval]

Originally posted by lazs2
curval.. admittedly... I don't know anything about your tax structure.   How does your govenment  get paid?   How are sevices paid for?   basicly.... How are you taxed?    
lazs

Virtually everything that is consumed, on this island is imported from overseas.  When goods arrive on-island they are assesed "duty" on the value paid in the country of origin.

Boil it down and what do you have?  A consumption based tax system.  If you buy it..you pay tax on it.  The tax, or more accurately "duty" is hidden in the cost of that good on its pricetag.
EVERYTHING is expensive obviously.

This is how most of the government revenue is earned.  There are a few others:

Tourists are assessed an arrival tax of $60 per head on cruise ships...$40 departure tax on air passengers.  Hotels charge an occupancy tax..which is paid over to government also.

There are also real estate taxes, which are based on a set ARV (annual rental value) figures, on a square foot basis of ownership.

High net worth people who buy houses here must pay a fee to government of 20% of the value of the home.  (Many thanks Ross Perot, Michael Douglas, Michael Bloomberg etc.)

On the corporate side there is an annual government fee to be paid...and payroll taxes.

No income tax...corporate or personal.

[H. Godwineson]

There are a few questions I'd like to ask of our anti-gun friends.  

1.  Do you believe citizens have a right to use deadly force in defense of family and self?

2.  Do you believe the use of violence in defence of one's self is anti-social?

3.  Would you consider the inclination to use deadly force against a violent attack to be a "natural" instinct?

4.  Would you be content to submit passively to a violent assault or rape?

5.  Do you consider a violent attacker's right to life to be the same as your own?

6.  When you become a senior citizen, will you be content to allow violent criminals to determine not only where you will live, but HOW you will lead your life?

7.  Do you seriously believe that the present benevolent attitude of our government will endure indefinitely?  Is there any chance of it morphing, over time, into repressive, genocidal dictatorship?  Do you think you will be able to recognize that change when it comes, creeping up on us a step at a time?

8.  If our government should, someday, become repressive or genocidal, will you consider it your task to resist, violently if necessary?  Or will you leave that to someone else?  How would such resistance, necessary tho it may be, be possible if the citizenry has been disarmed?

You have a responsibility to defend yourself against crime and oppression, whether you are willing to admit it or not.


Regards, Shuckins

[lazs2]

Ok... thanks... not a very workable solution for here tho I don't think.   I think you probly end up paying more of your income (having less to spend) than we do it would appear.    I certainly wouldn't mind a tax on all consumables with the IRS out of the picture.   I think if people seen a more direct cause and effect relationship they might be less likely to vote in expensive programs.
   
lazs

[easymo]

Source: Texas Department of Public Safety, Uniform Crime Reports (UCR).
Year Number Rate per 100,000 Number Rate per 100,000
1980 869,439 6135.7 77,866 549.5
1981 891,549 6042.4 78,443 531.7
1982 962,260 6297.5 88,101 576.6
1983 928,827 5907.1 80,536 512.2
1984 964,014 6029.2 80,732 505.0
1985 1,075,656 6570.9 90,052 550.1
1986 1,235,834 7408.2 109,927 658.9
1987 1,296,829 7724.3 105,980 631.3
1988 1,345,688 8019.6 109,534 652.7
1989 1,346,846 7926.8 111,870 658.3
1990 1,329,339 7825.9 129,345 761.5
1991 1,356,451 7818.0 145,718 839.9
1992 1,245,897 7056.5 142,353 806.3
1993 1,160,932 6438.5 137,428 762.1
1994 1,079,340 5873.0 129,842 706.5
1995 1,064,362 5684.5 124,263 663.7
1996 1,091,878 5708.3 123,218 644.2
1997 1,064,914 5478.2 117,087 602.3
1998 1,009,868 5110.7 111,577 564.7
1999 1,009,253 5035.2 112,436 561.0
2000 1,032,670 4952.4 113,605 544.8
2001 1,098,738 5152.3 122,073 572.4
Overall Crime Rate Violent Crime Rate[list=1]
[/list=1]

Concealed carry law passed in 1995.  If the list thing dosent work, the number on the far right is what you are looking for.

[easymo]

Taiwan (where gun possession is a capital offense) has a higher murder rate than the U.S.; and why is South Africa's rate twice that of the U.S., despite some of the world's strictest anti-gun laws?

 I dont belive there is any relationship between gun laws, and crime rates.  It only matters to the individual, if he finds himself/herself in desperate need of a weapon.

[Airhead]

Originally posted by Toad
..and extending this logic, the First Amendment Free Speech protections should "be confined to the technology available in the late 1700s".

Right?

Toad, do great minds think alike or WHAT?? I come up with a great idea and you come in and bolster it!

The two worst things that have happened to America are automatic weapons and mass media being used by political candidates. I think it would be great if we limited freedom speech to print media and soap boxes and banned ALL "free speech" lies told by snake oil sales people on television and radio ads.

[lazs2]

well... there is some merit to your idea on free speech airhead.. I don't read newspapers or watch TV news so I really don't see why anyone else needs to...  I also think such behavior is the cause of a lot of problems in the world today.
lazs

[midnight Target]

Thanks easymo,

Looks like the rate dropped pretty steadily starting in 1992.

I agree, doesn't seem to be any correlation with the concealed carry law.
Probably due to the economy.

[Airhead]

lazs, that's Toad's idea which on the surface seems silly, but actually has some merit. How "progressive" has progress been? Our elected officials are voted in based upon who can take the most bribes, which buys the most airtime and affords the nastiest, most devious political consultant who puts together a 60 second TV byte attacking his opponet, making knowingly false and misleading accusations of graft and/or miscreant moral conduct, all to lead to the final seven syllable slogan that, no matter what it says- "blah blah BLAH blah blah blah blah"...or "blah blah BLAH? blah blah blah blah"...or, my favorite, "blah blah. Blah blah BLAH blah blah."- it's all horseshit perpertrated by media hype and a population that is a combination equal parts self absorbed, equal parts apathetic and equal parts stupid.

I mean, who needs to look at THAT crap every November? The modern day politician believes we are only one or two more rules and laws away from forming a perfect Utopian society, and THEY are the only ones qualified to lead us so boldly into the future. Take them off TV and put on more cool movies like Flying Tigers or Flying Leathernecks or A Clockwork Orange. They are all a bunch of damned liars anyway.

Toad is right, our founding fathers never could have dreamed politics would sink to such depths any more than they ever thought we'd have 30 round magazines on a "defensive" weapon. Rolling back technology as it applies to our rights is not a bad idea. Once again, Toad and I are in agreement.

[midnight Target]

Accidental Gun Death Rate

Aged 1 - 5

California
2.21e-6

Texas
4.19e-6


hmmmmm?

[midnight Target]

Originally posted by H. Godwineson
There are a few questions I'd like to ask of our anti-gun friends.  

1.  Do you believe citizens have a right to use deadly force in defense of family and self?

2.  Do you believe the use of violence in defence of one's self is anti-social?

3.  Would you consider the inclination to use deadly force against a violent attack to be a "natural" instinct?

4.  Would you be content to submit passively to a violent assault or rape?

5.  Do you consider a violent attacker's right to life to be the same as your own?

6.  When you become a senior citizen, will you be content to allow violent criminals to determine not only where you will live, but HOW you will lead your life?

7.  Do you seriously believe that the present benevolent attitude of our government will endure indefinitely?  Is there any chance of it morphing, over time, into repressive, genocidal dictatorship?  Do you think you will be able to recognize that change when it comes, creeping up on us a step at a time?

8.  If our government should, someday, become repressive or genocidal, will you consider it your task to resist, violently if necessary?  Or will you leave that to someone else?  How would such resistance, necessary tho it may be, be possible if the citizenry has been disarmed?

You have a responsibility to defend yourself against crime and oppression, whether you are willing to admit it or not.


Regards, Shuckins

I'm not anti-gun, but I'll play.
 
1. Deadly force is predicated on the percieved harm. No real yes or no answer there. If you feel your life is in danger then sure.

2. Violence is always antisocial. This does not mean that is is always avoidable.

3. Against a violent attack? I think it is natural to do whatever is necessary to survive. That may or may not involve deadly force.

4. No... duh!

5. Yes, I'm not God, nor can I decide who has a right to live or die. This has no bearing on the level of protection I might provide myself or my family though.

6. They do that now. I don't want to live in high crime areas, do you? What's your point?

7. Nothing is indefinite. I would die to preserve my freedoms, and I will continue to advocate for them.

8. Too silly

[lazs2]

mt... what are you saying?   that 4.1 out of 6 accidental deaths of children in texas are from firearms?   that 2.2 out of 6 in california are?  I couldn't follow your stats.

In any case...I don't think that accidents or even murder rates should have anything to do with my second amendment rights..  they are legal issues on a case by case basis.

guns prevent over a millon crimes a year.  if cost of life and crime are your only prerequisits for gun laws then you out to get out and abolish a bunch right now.   The sooner yu get on it the more good you will do... If not for me....

do it for the children.
lazs