Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Vulcan on August 25, 2004, 07:31:09 PM
-
Looks like we don't need to be armed to the teeth to get crime down, whats your excuse? :D
Crime rate down - Police Commissioner
26 August 2004
Reported crime dropped by 4.7 per cent in the year to June, while the rate of resolved crime increased from 43.7 per cent to 45.1 per cent, Police Commissioner Rob Robinson said today.
Statistics released today showed a drop in the crime rate of 6.5 per cent per 10,000 people, he said in a statement.
It was a struggle to find anything negative in the figures, which came on top of a downward trend for several years.
The resolution rate was the highest in 20 years, Mr Robinson said.
Perhaps the most pleasing result had been in Counties Manukau, which recorded the largest drop in overall crime of 16.5 per cent, followed by Central (Palmerston North, New Plymouth and Wanganui and rural areas) with 12.8 per cent, Auckland City 11.8 per cent and North Shore Waitakere with 5.3 per cent.
"The three Auckland district results reflect a major turnaround in the battle against crime in the most populated region in the country," he said.
Dishonesty offences were down 6.7 per cent, largely due to a reduction in offences of car conversion and theft, and fraud. While the number of dwelling burglaries was up slightly, the overall burglary rate per 10,000 people was down 2.2 per cent, continuing a downward trend.
Recorded sexual offences dropped 4 per cent, while recorded violence dropped 1 per cent, halting a run of violent offending increases during the previous three years, Mr Robinson said.
The 46 murders recorded during the year were the lowest number since 1998 and compared to 57 the year before.
"While these are significant events, New Zealand is fortunate these numbers are as small as they are," the statement said.
An apparent increase in drugs and antisocial offences of 2.9 per cent was the result of reclassification of liquor ban breaches. Adjusting for that, drugs and antisocial offences were down 6 per cent.
Slightly more than 5000 liquor ban breaches were recorded, reflecting significant use of liquor bans by local authorities.
Non-cannabis drug offences increased from 3088 to 3978, an increase of 28.8 per cent, driven by the increased manufacture, use and policing of amphetamine type substances including methamphetamines.
During the year, 190 clandestine laboratories had been closed down.
-
They must have made gun ownership mandatory then?
-
Mexico has no crime because guns are illegal.
-
no need of guns unless your job asks for it, all the rest is about insecurity.
A Gun is a tool, not a necessity Nuke.
-
Ohh....to live on an island...(sigh...)
-
Originally posted by NUKE
Mexico has no crime because guns are illegal.
Hehe, Mexico just defines "crime" differently than we do. ;)
-
Vulcan.....
Heres our excuse, these facts must have went under you radar.
It has been reported everywhere today that mexico has shipped 10 percent of its people to America, all poor and needy.
It is expected another 2+million by next summer.
Much of the drug trade is south and comes here causing at least 3,4 problems. We have huge gangs the pc people wont lets us do anything about, and our leaders both dems and repb. high and low are to chicken to go against the pc people.
Now wasnt that easy? Oh and here a tiny bit more.
2 congressmen from colorado , 1 from each party, has said from there info they believe 1000 terrorists have come thru mexico and canada and are in colorado now.
1 senator and the district attor. of texas said from there info they believe 20000 terrorist have crossed the border and are in the border states this year.
All the border states except calif. are giving this warning.
now that is the tip of the ice burg and you think us lawful types should have a 9 iron to protect us lol.
Not me I am to chicken.
Tell you what SLO, come on over I take you for a walk down rosecrans blvd, say about 7 00 pm. I will bring my unnessassary gun and you bring your 9 iron. We will see who lives the longest you or me. Thing is we will both die.
-
So you are saying that it is because you are forbidden to have an object that your crime rate is so low? Imagine if all those sheep were armed eh?
I don't think you can compare the U.S. to your allmost a country.
lazs
-
I seem to recall you commenting on Austrailian gun laws and using that to back up your arguments. Now you can't so you immediately refer to it as an "almost a country".
lol.
:rolleyes:
-
Where did I compare australia to the U.S.? please find that... while you are looking for the evidense of me being a biggot...
you make a lot of accusations of who I am and what I say but don't back em up.
I will say that one reason to even mention australia or england over nz tho is because in the former you have a gun culture that has a dramatic ban of firearms. It is somewhat logical to look at before and after stats. To simply look at nz's crime rate is fine but if there were no gun laws that would account for a rise or fall then it is not germain to the topic.
You might as well give the number of sheep as a cause.
are there less firearms in nz this year than last or more? how many times wiere they a factor in defense against crime or used to cause crime? To simply take the stats from some lightly populated island and say "see... they are forbidden the right to defend themselves and look how happy and crime free their country is".
lazs
-
Where did I say you compared Austrailia to the US?
You used Austrailia as an example of gun control not working as crime went up after the ban.
In NZ's case crime is down despite a lack of guns, yet your answer is "You aren't a real country".
That all.
As far as the bigot thing goes, I quoted the examples that gave me that impression in that thread. You chose to ignore them and then brought up your girlfriend and your grandchildren as examples of why you can't be biggoted.
That simply doesn't wash. It is the old "I have a black friend" argument.
Your attitude towards women is effectively biggoted.
How does your girlfriend and grandaughter feel about the fact that you want to roll back hundreds of years of progress and make them totally subservient to men, at least as far as their ability to vote goes?
-
curval.. you are being obtruse... it is a british thing I think...
I have only ever used australlia and england in a logical manner... pre and post dramatic and draconian gun bans. very simple really.
do I think and island is capable of having small crime rates even if they don't have firearms? yes.. I think it is poissible.
you have never once shown an example of me saying anything showing that I wish any minority to be treated differently because of their race.
I asked you to after you accussed me of it but you declined. None of your examples had anything to do with biggotry.
Is there such a thing as gender biggotry? It is difficult to keep up with this stuff. Is it still ok to say men and women are different from each other?
lazs
-
Oh... my girlfriend sees the loigic of my thinking and my grand daughter is too young. I think they would laugh at you for calling me a biggot tho. I believe having relatives and girlfriends that are of a minority is somewhat different than merely saying that "I have black friends". it is not even an arguement... it is an obviopus fact about my life that anyone who is around me will see. It is something I live on a daily basis.
what is your claim to being unbiggoted? that you want to give special rights to those who are inferior to you and incapable of making it on their own?
lazs
-
You are the one being obtuse .
I had already provided examples of your "not so subtle" remarks from that particular thread.
You chose then, and continue to, ignore them.
As far as the "gender bigorty" goes....I just checked. Chauvanism is defined as bigotry.
You don't just think we are different...you want to remove basic rights, such as the vote. THAT is chavanism and therefore bigotry.
You asked for proof...you now have it.
-
websters..... "chauvinism (sh÷v nizm) n.1. zealous and aggressive patriotism or blind enthusiasm for military glory. 2. biased devotion to any group, attitude, or cause. [186570; < F chauvinisme = chauvin jingo (after N. Chauvin, a soldier in Napoleon's army noted for vociferous patriotism) + -isme -ISM]"
don't see bigot in there anywhere..
but...Ok... if there is such a thing as a gender bigot then I probly am one. But....
That is not what you said is it? You were talking about race. You can not give me one example of me asking for people to be treated differently based on race.
perhaps we need to define bigotry and racism? since it is you who wish to treat people differently based on race... It appears to me that you are the biggot and not me.
The only meaningfull definition of biggotry would be the willingness to treat people differently (under the law) based on race.
lazs
-
"Whites have more to fear from blacks with guns than vice versa... more than twice as much in fact.. "
Care to comment on the quote above?
-
Thank you for the opportunity.... yes, I am happy to comment on the quote.
FBI stats for 2002 show that in homicide rates.... 14% of all the whites that are murdered are murdered by blacks.
The exact same table for 2002 homicide rates shows that 7% of all blacks murdered are murdered by whites.
this equates to whites being TWICE as likely to be murdered by blacks than blacks being murdered by whites.
it is merely the stats taken from the FBI crime stats site for 2002 and was first linked by nashwan soo....
if you see bigotry or racism there then it is nashwan or the FBI that is to blame.
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
2. biased devotion to any group, attitude, or cause."
don't see bigot in there anywhere..
You aren't looking hard enough.
Now get out your Websters Thesarus and check out bigotry.
-
"bigotry n.At one time or another, every race and religion has been the object of bigotry: prejudice, intolerance, bias, narrow-mindedness, closed-mindedness; racism, discrimination, unfairness. "
kinda vague.
but... what about that makes me guilty of bigotry?
It would apear that you are the one guilty of bigotry since it involves ALL races and has to do with discrimination and unfairness... both of which I believe you have been guilty of with your advocating special treatment for some races.
lazs
-
It would be biggotry to say that the reason crime is so high amongst blacks is becuase they are an inferior race and they do not have as high mental or moral functions as white people.
That is a blatently racist statement.
Pointing out that the crime/murder/gun violence/children born out of wedlock/poverty/drug use/etc. rates are higher among blacks than white is not racist. It is a fact.
And until people like the bleeding hearts and the NAACP pulls their heads out of their tulips and sees that, the underlying problems that are the cause will never be addressed. Or fixed.
For the billioneth time. Guns do not cause crime. Poverty, lack of education, lack of a family structure, lack of hope, drugs...these cause crime. Crime which will occur whether or not there are guns.
And guess what, if you live in a homogenous society with without these problems, you are not going to have the same rate of crime.
I'm sorry, but when people use guns as a scapegoat because they either don't or can't take the time to address the underlying problem, it shows them to be either disengenious, ignorant or lazy. Or all three.
-
I am with Laz and Dune on this one.
Numbers are not racist as long as the people gathering them have no ajenda. I do not think the FBI has a racist ajenda.
-
Numbers are not in and of themselves racist, I will grant you that.
Using numbers to point fingers at one specific race as being the cause of all the crime in ones country, without taking into account all of the underlying socioeconomic reasons for those statistics is, however, very much racist.
As Dune so eloquently put it:
"Poverty, lack of education, lack of a family structure, lack of hope, drugs...these cause crime."
So, why are those stats even mentioned in this context of "Whites have more to fear from blacks with guns than vice versa... more than twice as much in fact.. " ?
Ask yourself that.
-
Because looking the presence of guns in relation to crime without looking at those is just as bad as looking at the numbers without the cause of the numbers.
Want to reduce gun crime? Reduce the reasons people committ them. Don't get me wrong, there is a portion of the population that is going to commit crimes no matter what you do. They lack some part of themselves that the rest of us have. It has nothing to do with race. It just is. However, if the population that surrounds them is living in conditions that make them susceptible to their influcence, the crime rate amoung that segment of the population will be higher.
Saying you're fighting crime by removing guns is the same as saying you're fighting cancer by giving the victim make-up. On the surface it make look better, but the underlying cause is still there. And the patient is still dying.
Why do we ask that you look at Switzerland as an example of a country that is armed to the teeth and yet has a low crime rate? Because it is a homogenious society without many of the ills that plague more diversified countries like the US or the UK. Countries like New Zealand or Switzerland would have similar crime rates no matter if there weren't any guns or each person over 5 owed 6 of 'em.
But if you take a country like the UK or Australia and remove guns, are you dealing with the underlying problem? Of the Jamacian gangs or the unflux of the Asian drug trade? Nope. So their crime rates rise or stay the same becuase only the law-abiding citizens have given up their guns.
But guns are big and scawy. And it's so much easier to blame them for the problem than to actually fix it. Fools.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
"bigotry n.At one time or another, every race and religion has been the object of bigotry: prejudice, intolerance, bias, narrow-mindedness, closed-mindedness; racism, discrimination, unfairness. "
kinda vague.
but... what about that makes me guilty of bigotry?
It would apear that you are the one guilty of bigotry since it involves ALL races and has to do with discrimination and unfairness... both of which I believe you have been guilty of with your advocating special treatment for some races.
lazs
Odd...my thesarus has one more word in it....chauvinism. Not vaugue at all.
I'm sorry, but when and where have I EVER advocated special treatment for some races?
-
my comments on black and white murder rates were in response to michell moores bowling for columbine where he portrayed whites as murdering KKK types who only had guns so that they could murder blacks and portrayed blacks in detroit as peaceful carnival goers when they visited canada. He also tried to prove that whites were perfectly safe roaming the streets of sout central los angeles.
the stats show that blacks have 15 times more to fear from each other than from whites and that they kill whjites at twice the rate that whites kill blacks. Unlike dune.... I have no real answers as to why this is true but suspect that he is on the right track.
lazs
-
Laz
Maybe you should be really long winded in all your posts now so you can avoid the PC police!
:D
-
GTO... drawing em out is half the fun...
lazs
-
Originally posted by Dune
Because looking the presence of guns in relation to crime without looking at those is just as bad as looking at the numbers without the cause of the numbers.
Want to reduce gun crime? Reduce the reasons people committ them. Don't get me wrong, there is a portion of the population that is going to commit crimes no matter what you do. They lack some part of themselves that the rest of us have. It has nothing to do with race. It just is. However, if the population that surrounds them is living in conditions that make them susceptible to their influcence, the crime rate amoung that segment of the population will be higher.
Saying you're fighting crime by removing guns is the same as saying you're fighting cancer by giving the victim make-up. On the surface it make look better, but the underlying cause is still there. And the patient is still dying.
Why do we ask that you look at Switzerland as an example of a country that is armed to the teeth and yet has a low crime rate? Because it is a homogenious society without many of the ills that plague more diversified countries like the US or the UK. Countries like New Zealand or Switzerland would have similar crime rates no matter if there weren't any guns or each person over 5 owed 6 of 'em.
But if you take a country like the UK or Australia and remove guns, are you dealing with the underlying problem? Of the Jamacian gangs or the unflux of the Asian drug trade? Nope. So their crime rates rise or stay the same becuase only the law-abiding citizens have given up their guns.
But guns are big and scawy. And it's so much easier to blame them for the problem than to actually fix it. Fools.
Holy moly I completely agree. Good post.
...and woe to all those thousands of "terrorists" coming up from the border to Colorado--their only safe haven will be Boulder. The rest of us are armed to the teeth; that is, what's left after the Texans are done w/ 'em. Welcome to the West.
h
-
Originally posted by Dune
But guns are big and scawy. And it's so much easier to blame them for the problem than to actually fix it. Fools.
It was a good post, other than the last word. You see the problem is that the US is NOT fixing the underlying problem. Instead you arm yourselves to the teeth, hide behind the guns and point fingers at the stats and say "look at those darn Jamaicans, Asians, etc etc messing up our nice white country."
-
I agree the US is not fixing the problem. Which was my point. Just as other countries are dealing with an influx of either a criminal element which is able to find a foothold in the poorer areas.
And this also has nothing to do with arming ourselves to the teeth for protection. This is about something we considered to be a inalienable right. It's ours. And we react just as we would if someone tried to take away our right to free speech because someone is misusing it.
And you're falling into the same old trap. I say that there is a problem in our countries that you don't see in places like Switzerland. And your response was to imply that I was bemoaning the loss of my "lilly white" societ. Dammit, that isn't the point. I'm saying look here. Here is a problem. And it's worse in this segment of society. Why? It isn't a lack of intellegence or work ethic or ability. So then what is it? Does there need to be a complete change in ideas? In cultural attitudes? I am not saying I have the answers. But I know where the problem is and where it isn't. The problem is in the homes and neighborhoods and schools and hearts and minds of people who don't think they have a chance, or have been raised in a world that idolizes gangsters and pimps and drugs and the thuglife. It's in a society, regardless of color, that leaves it's kids to be raised by grandparents. And doesn't want to learn. Doesn't believe they could suceed at anything. That's where this problem is. It is a societal ill. The problem is not a piece of steel. It is not the device they use to project hate and hopelessness and anger and dispair. It is what causes those emotions to be there in the first place. Because if you take that gun away, the emotions will still be there. You will have solved nothing. Nothing.
We are not fixing the problem. Because that would mean taking a hard look at it. Making sacrifices. More things than I have time to type.
But in the meantime, we are going to rail against those who would punnish us, law-abiding citizens, rather than fix what's wrong.
-
http://www.imagedump.com/pics/113018.jpg
-
Originally posted by Dune
And this also has nothing to do with arming ourselves to the teeth for protection.
Damn, musta left my [sarcasm] tags in the wash.
h
-
Vulcan,
They just don't understand what it must be like to live a daily life without fear. Where the only metal detectors are at airports,your kids can still walk to and from school on their own and you only have one lock on your front door.
...-Gixer
-
Originally posted by Dune
Because looking the presence of guns in relation to crime without looking at those is just as bad as looking at the numbers without the cause of the numbers.
Want to reduce gun crime? Reduce the reasons people committ them. Don't get me wrong, there is a portion of the population that is going to commit crimes no matter what you do. They lack some part of themselves that the rest of us have. It has nothing to do with race. It just is. However, if the population that surrounds them is living in conditions that make them susceptible to their influcence, the crime rate amoung that segment of the population will be higher.
Saying you're fighting crime by removing guns is the same as saying you're fighting cancer by giving the victim make-up. On the surface it make look better, but the underlying cause is still there. And the patient is still dying.
Why do we ask that you look at Switzerland as an example of a country that is armed to the teeth and yet has a low crime rate? Because it is a homogenious society without many of the ills that plague more diversified countries like the US or the UK. Countries like New Zealand or Switzerland would have similar crime rates no matter if there weren't any guns or each person over 5 owed 6 of 'em.
But if you take a country like the UK or Australia and remove guns, are you dealing with the underlying problem? Of the Jamacian gangs or the unflux of the Asian drug trade? Nope. So their crime rates rise or stay the same becuase only the law-abiding citizens have given up their guns.
But guns are big and scawy. And it's so much easier to blame them for the problem than to actually fix it. Fools.
Why not look closer to home and compare crime rates of Canada vs US. Canada has strick gun control and a low crime rate, what are the stats on Canada's crime rate and use of guns compared to the US?
Face it, US is a mess with easy access to firearms and probably the worst crime rates in the developed world. Funny how your always talking about freedom, but are you really? Seems yours is the most violent society in the world.
...-Gixer
-
They just don't understand what it must be like to live a daily life without fear. Where the only metal detectors are at airports,your kids can still walk to and from school on their own and you only have one lock on your front door.
That is so much BS, I do not live in fear, I do not know anyone who does.
I guess if your trying to fool yourself about life in the US your doing a good job.
-
What is really funny is the amount of assumptions people like lazs make to back himself up with little relevant knowledge of the subject. For example, lazs, you have assumed there are no gangs in NZ, where gangs are quite a problem, then theres the Mexican thing, I don't know if you're aware but NZ has one of the largest Pacific Island communities in the South Pacific (ie Samoans, Tongans, etc).
NZ also takes a lot of refugees every year. Our Asian population is quite high, we know have a growing polulation of Somali's, and the middle-east uptake has been rising as well.
Despite what you assume, NZ isn't just a bunch of sheep-shagging middle aged white males.
Firearms are not "forbidden" in NZ, you just have to prove you a) need one b) understand the risks and responsibilities of owning a firearm c) are sane and not likely to use a firearm to commit a crime.
Its quite amusing to watch you flop around these ideas lazs. You just don't seem to have any concept of the rest of the world. You can't wrap your head around the fact that other countries aren't as far gone as the US and seem to struggle with the idea of not needing to walk around armed to the teeth.
I on the otherhand understand why the US citizen needs guns, and that the really is no turning back from the path you guys have chosen.
-
Originally posted by Gixer
Vulcan,
They just don't understand what it must be like to live a daily life without fear. Where the only metal detectors are at airports,your kids can still walk to and from school on their own and you only have one lock on your front door.
...-Gixer
Oh frikkin Puhleese. I really hope you too have left your sarcasm tags at home because if not you are truly full of it. I'm not even sure WHERE my house keys are and I leave my truck keys in the truck. And it has been like that since I moved here 10 years ago. Don't give me any of that "fortress home" BS.
My kids walked to school when they were here and kids still do that today.
Where the F you live that you can spew such idiocy?
h
-
Flame bait
-
If it helps to reinforce your imagination, go right ahead and believe that.
-
Originally posted by Gixer
Vulcan,
They just don't understand what it must be like to live a daily life without fear. Where the only metal detectors are at airports,your kids can still walk to and from school on their own and you only have one lock on your front door.
...-Gixer
Hmmm...that's how me and my family live right now. And my location is in the US. How is that possible?
Growing up, we didn't even lock our doors, and this applied to when we used to go away for the weekends. We never locked the doors at all.
And your excuse for writing this is because some other guy wrote something you didn't like? OK.
-
Personal attack
-
Dune
You don't need to imagine anything to make those comments Gixer made.
Anyone could come to the same conclusions just by reading what some Americans have posted in the gun threads over the years, ie...guns reduce crime ...we need guns for protection because of blah blah...
Any member of the public who carries or keeps a gun for protection and isn't in law enforcment is in FEAR of something. It's that simple.
Quote:
"New Zealand or Switzerland would have similar crime rates no matter if there weren't any guns or each person over 5 owed 6 of 'em"
You may know about Switzerland but you know bugger all about NZ. Give every NZer 6 guns and the violent crime stats would go through the roof.You would just be arming the nutters and scumbags and we have got our share of them.With the firearm rules that are in place here they havn't got access to the guns that they would have in the US.
That doesn't mean the rules are overly restictive,there not. There's somewhere near a million guns in public ownership for a poulation of 4 millon.
Excel
-
Originally posted by lazs2
You say you have gangs but that you don't need guns to defend against them and then you say that you can have guns if your royals say it is ok? you are the one all over the map. What is your minority population?
You just won't let up on this whole Royal vs. peasant thing will you lazs.
What about your own country's reaction to gun violence? Let's see, one of your "royals" Ronald Regan gets shot. What is the very first thing that YOUR government does?
Pass the Brady Bill (http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/usr/wbardwel/public/nfalist/brady_act.txt)
Why the question about minority population? Oh, nevermind...I think I know.
:rolleyes:
-
Personal attack/Flame bait
-
curval... I didn't bring up minorities... I was told that there was a large minority population in nz... I was asking for clarification.
but why do you see racism in everyu thing people say?
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
I was asking for clarification.
Why?
-
Originally posted by Excel1
Give every NZer 6 guns and the violent crime stats would go through the roof.You would just be arming the nutters and scumbags and we have got our share of them.With the firearm rules that are in place here they havn't got access to the guns that they would have in the US.
That's the point I've been trying to make, Excel1 - the same thing applies to Britain. If your comments are addressed to Lazs, be prepared to repeat it 500 times - and he still won't get it. :rolleyes:
Lazs! Ya big sausage! ;)
-
Why? A person says that they have a very large population of minorities and have no problem and I ask what the number is and ...
you ask me why? If I were to say that we have less children under 6 killed accidentaly by firearms than by drowning in 5 gallon buckets.... you might ask me for numbers eh?
if you say that you believe michell moore that whites are hunting down blacks and killing em with guns then I might ask what numbers of whites are killing blacks with guns and what number of whites are being ki8lled by blacks? get it?
I don't know what if there is a large population or not in his country... I don't know what he considers "large" give me the numbers and I can get a better handle on it.
lazs
-
beetle... ohn but I do get it... euros don't trust themselves or their fellow man... it is a class thing left over from centuries ago... that is why the queen still shows up for parades and such.
No... I get it... I just don't live in fear of my fellow citizens like you euros do... I do take a cautious approch towards the sociopaths and drug addicts but no more so than I "fear" driving on the freeway.
If I never "need" a gun.... fine. great... in the meantime.... I will enjoy em.
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
beetle... ohn but I do get it... euros don't trust themselves or their fellow man... it is a class thing left over from centuries ago... that is why the queen still shows up for parades and such.
No... I get it... I just don't live in fear of my fellow citizens like you euros do... I do take a cautious approch towards the sociopaths and drug addicts but no more so than I "fear" driving on the freeway.
If I never "need" a gun.... fine. great... in the meantime.... I will enjoy em.
lazs
Lazs- I was agreeing with the point made by Excel, who is in NZ. NZ is not part of Europe, in case you didn't know. In fact it's more distant from Britain than any other country.
-
The lower crime rates in New Zealand compared the US, argument , I think is spurious. NZ is an island state with 3.8m people a long way from anywhere. A far more apt comparsion would be to look a state in the union with a similar size and population, semi rural with a few cities and people of mostly of European descent. I dunno Kansas or North Dakota or somewhere like that. I suspect a crime rate similar to NZ would cause the citizens of said states to go running to the gunshop to buy more ammo because of course they already have plenty of guns. Many states like that in the US have tiny crime rates neither caused by guns or lack thereof.
If you just wanted to cause an argument of course then go ahead. :lol
This from Demaw I found funny.
2 congressmen from colorado , 1 from each party, has said from there info they believe 1000 terrorists have come thru mexico and canada and are in colorado now.
1 senator and the district attor. of texas said from there info they believe 20000 terrorist have crossed the border and are in the border states this year.
I find it a little difficult to believe that 20000 jihadists swanning about the lone star state would go unnoticed, even in a state as big as Texas. That all sounds a bit like the old conspiracy theory that the UN are massing a huge army in Mexico ready to invade. :rofl
What some politicans will do to get votes.!
-
You keep saying things like "really funny here... I don't understand your little island". Of course you don't. NZ actually consists of two main islands (North & South) plus Stuart Island, making a total land area which is bigger than America's 8th largest state which, as you know, is Colorado. In fact NZ is two thirds the size of California.
Just think, if the annual wrangling over the water supply that takes place in CA every summer were to lead to CA breaking up into two separate states (as has been suggested in the past), then by his own definition Lazs could find himself living in a tiny little state called Shasta! :lol
-
Off topic
-
cpxxx
LOL the UN DOES have an Army in Mexico and it is already invading! It is called the "mexican population"!
:D
Those numbers seem a tad far fetched to me as well, but I am sure the terrorists have used the lack of border control to come into this country. Hell if I were them I would.:D
-
Off topic
-
Off topic
-
Off topic
-
Ok... so nz is allmost as big as colorado... which I can drive through in an easy tank of gas. Split California in half... OK... makes no diff to me. Would give the Republicans 28 electorial votes tho and take the same amount from the democrat socialists.
curval... I probly am a racist by your defenition... I think that all races should be treated equally under the law.
I also believe that no data should be destroyed or ignored simply because it has to do with one race or another.
but... I do say that you have the right to live in fear of firearms... you should live on some tiny little island where they are banned and hope that the bad guys obey the ban and that you never need more than a 9 iron to defend you and yours and...
That you or your children never take an interest in firearms because.... you can't have em.. neeener neeener neener.
lazs
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
Ok... so nz is allmost as big as colorado...
No, it is bigger.
-
WOW! bigger than one of our ski resorts... that is impressive! allmost the population of one of our cities too I bet.
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
WOW! bigger than one of our ski resorts... that is impressive! allmost the population of one of our cities too I bet.
lazs
The population of NZ is slightly less than CO. Given that NZ and CO are of similar size, this means that the population density of these two places is roughly the same. Total population of NZ is on a par with the population of America's second largest city, Los Angeles.
-
Originally posted by beet1e
The population of NZ is slightly less than CO. Given that NZ and CO are of similar size, this means that the population density of these two places is roughly the same. Total population of NZ is on a par with the population of America's second largest city, Los Angeles.
True, but we get over 22 million visitors to the state annually compared with NZ's 1.6 million. We also have some 40,000 immigrants moving to the state on a yearly basis (these are actual foreign immigrants, not folks moving from another state). We have about 41.5 folks per sq. mile tho that figure is rather misleading since we have 75% of all land over 10,000' in the USA so most folks are concentrated on the eastern slope of the Rockies (what we call the Front Range). Roughly 4.2 million in the state.
The point? It's not really comparing apples and apples. Like some of the places in NZ once you get away from the population centers it is pretty wild country. I live in a town of 2000 at 9k' surrounded by mountains. You can walk to the west of us and not hit a phone for a week.
Owning weapons here is part of the culture and something I'm happy to live with. We have a law here called the "Make My Day" law--a tribute to Clint Eastwood's depiction of the "Dirty Harry" character. If a unwanted person passes your threshold uninvited for whatever reason, you are then legally free to take him out.
Guess what? Crimes of burglary went down by 35% the next year. An additional 25% by the next year. A crime must be committed here for the cops to come. By then it is too late. I'd rather the proactive defense than the submissive any day.
One cannot rely on their Gov't to protect them. And that's as it should be (tho Bush thinks differently). You might not understand it but there it is.
An interesting website:
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/cri_mur_cap
h
-
Originally posted by Horn
True, but we get over 22 million visitors to the state annually compared with NZ's 1.6 million. We also have some 40,000 immigrants moving to the state on a yearly basis (these are actual foreign immigrants, not folks moving from another state). We have about 41.5 folks per sq. mile tho that figure is rather misleading since we have 75% of all land over 10,000' in the USA so most folks are concentrated on the eastern slope of the Rockies (what we call the Front Range). Roughly 4.2 million in the state.
The point? It's not really comparing apples and apples.
I agree. I wasn't drawing a comparison, I was merely describing the demographics of New Zealand in terms that Lazs would understand.
Horn, are you anywhere near the Three Sisters Wilderness area? I've been up there. :aok
-
Originally posted by beet1e
Horn, are you anywhere near the Three Sisters Wilderness area? I've been up there. :aok
No, isn't that in Oregon?
I'm dead center in the middle of Colorado. Next to the "real" South Park. :)
http://www.vtinet.com/14ernet/buena/buena.htm
h
-
Originally posted by Horn
No, isn't that in Oregon?
Doh! You're right - Oregon. I spent a couple of months working for AMS in Golden - right off Exit 263 of I70, just before it starts uphill.
-
Interesting site horn... note the burglaries per capita. Beetle thinks I am paranoid and that he is much safer in england? If I lived in new zealand ... I might want a gun to fend off the more than double the burglars of the United states per capita...
lazs
Map & Graph: Crime: Burglaries (per capita) (Top 100 Countries)
View this stat: Totals Show map full screen
Country Description Amount
1. Australia 22.13 per 1000 people
2. Dominica 18.62 per 1000 people
3. Denmark 18.49 per 1000 people
4. Finland 16.87 per 1000 people
5. New Zealand 16.62 per 1000 people
6. Estonia 16.52 per 1000 people
7. United Kingdom 13.91 per 1000 people
8. Poland 9.44 per 1000 people
9. South Africa 9.22 per 1000 people
10. Canada 9.11 per 1000 people
11. Iceland 8.57 per 1000 people
12. Montserrat 8.56 per 1000 people
13. Switzerland 8.25 per 1000 people
14. Slovenia 8.24 per 1000 people
15. Czech Republic 7.24 per 1000 people
16. United States 7.23 per 1000 people
17. Hungary 7.13 per 1000 people
18. France 6.16 per 1000 people
19. Ireland 5.87 per 1000 people
20. Netherlands 5.64 per 1000 people
21. Bulgaria 5.23 per 1000 people
22. Slovakia 4.69 per 1000 people
23. Portugal 4.68 per 1000 people
24. Zimbabwe 4.39 per 1000 people
25. Latvia 4.20 per 1000 people
-
Originally posted by lazs2
Beetle thinks I am paranoid and that he is much safer in england?
Well, let me remind you of what you said when you visited London, unarmed: A fellow flight sim guy took me to a bar in a seedy part of london that was supposedly risky.. I felt about in as much danger as I would at a church bingo nite...
You said it in this thread (http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=65269). And yet, within the security of your hovel, you feel the need to sleep with a loaded .45 by the bed.
:confused:
-
Off topic
-
gixer... so you live in "fear" then?
no, of course not. seatbelts and helmets are just safety gear that you wear just in case... just like firearms are to me and most sensible students of human nature. I no more expect to need a firearmn than I expect to need a seatbelt or helmet or safety glasses or steel toed boots... but.... It should be my choice and not the governments.
beetle... my comment about london meant that the guys there just didn't SEEM to be very tough to me... the accent to me is kinda funny and non threatening. I am sure that if I lived there and didn't die of depression from the weather and filth I would become more cautious.
lazs
-
Oh.. and according to the site... this is the total for all crimes per capita.. new zealand and united kingdom lead the U.S. by a sustantial amount. the U.S. is more like canada and the netherlands... the rate doesn't really drop off till you get to a country where everyone is armed like switzerland.
Dominica 112.79 per 1000 people
2. New Zealand 108.12 per 1000 people
3. Finland 102.15 per 1000 people
4. Denmark 93.64 per 1000 people
5. Chile 90.00 per 1000 people
6. United Kingdom 86.04 per 1000 people
7. Montserrat 83.49 per 1000 people
8. United States 81.55 per 1000 people
9. Netherlands 80.84 per 1000 people
10. South Africa 80.02 per 1000 people
11. Canada 76.89 per 1000 people
12. Germany 76.02 per 1000 people
13. Norway 72.60 per 1000 people
14. France 62.67 per 1000 people
15. Seychelles 53.39 per 1000 people
16. Hungary 44.80 per 1000 people
17. Estonia 41.03 per 1000 people
18. Czech Republic 38.19 per 1000 people
19. Italy 38.03 per 1000 people
20. Switzerland 37.02 per 1000 people
21. Portugal 35.96 per 1000 people
22. Slovenia 34.93 per 1000 people
23. Poland 32.80 per 1000 people
24. Korea, South 31.95 per 1000 people
25. Mauritius 29.69 per 1000 people
lazs
-
Oh... and car thefts per capita....
Country Description Amount
1. Australia 7.04 per 1000 people
2. Denmark 5.98 per 1000 people
3. United Kingdom 5.63 per 1000 people
4. New Zealand 5.56 per 1000 people
5. Norway 5.13 per 1000 people
6. France 5.01 per 1000 people
7. Canada 4.97 per 1000 people
8. Italy 4.20 per 1000 people
9. United States 3.95 per 1000 people
10. Ireland 3.78 per 1000 people
11. Spain 3.34 per 1000 people
12. Finland 3.15 per 1000 people
13. Portugal 2.61 per 1000 people
14. Japan 2.43 per 1000 people
15. Malaysia 2.41 per 1000 people
16. Netherlands 2.37 per 1000 people
17. South Africa 2.33 per 1000 people
18. Czech Republic 2.32 per 1000 people
19. Poland 1.76 per 1000 people
20. Estonia 1.64 per 1000 people
21. Mexico 1.51 per 1000 people
22. Bulgaria 1.49 per 1000 people
23. Lithuania 1.44 per 1000 people
24. Iceland 1.37 per 1000 people
25. Switzerland 1.27 per 1000 people
Top Graphs
# Richest
# Most Murderous
# Most Populous
# Most Militaristic
# Most Taxed
# Poorest
# Longest Living
# Most Generous
# Most Educated
# Most Athletic
# Largest
# Most Corrupt
# Most Trigger Happy
More Stats
Click on a region to zoom in and then mouseover to view country names. Show map full screen
Legend: Top Mid dle Bot tom Ne gat ive
7.05 2.34 0.01 -7.05
Regions
# Africa
# Asia
# Europe
# Middle East
# North America
# Oceania
# South America
# Southeast Asia
26. Uruguay 1.19 per 1000 people
27. Slovakia 1.11 per 1000 people
28. Dominica 1.03 per 1000 people
29. Germany 1.00 per 1000 people
-
Which site did you get those stats from?
...-Gixer
-
Why use Vancouver Laz, why not Toronto? It is the largest city and has the most diverse ethnic population, also it receive more immigrants than any other city or province for that matter.
Seems perfect to prove your rants.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
Oh... and car thefts per capita....
Country Description Amount
1. Australia 7.04 per 1000 people
Holy crap :eek:
I'd better think of a way to get a 50 cal mounted on the back of the wife's Hyundai quick smart for those dangerous runs to blockbuster!!
I'll just stick to the trunk monkey for my Astra Trunk Monkey (http://media.trunkmonkey.com/video/suburban/Monkey5-high.mov) :D
Tronsky
-
Howdy Beetle...
Sorry all my bad ...I didnt mean 20000 in Texas It was 20000 spread out amoung all border states. They are settling in med.and small cities. They range from doctors to day labors.
Would it be wrong to say New Zeland is safe now because of Americas guns awhile back or did russia win in that theater to?
Is it an honest thing to do always comparing America to such little countries population wise?
When a liberal doesnt have a reasonable response to a debate,they will do 1 of three things....the first is call you a racist, what are the other 2 things?
-
Off topic
-
Originally posted by beet1e
That's the point I've been trying to make, Excel1 - the same thing applies to Britain. If your comments are addressed to Lazs, be prepared to repeat it 500 times - and he still won't get it. :rolleyes:
Beet1e my post was addressed to Dune. If lazs didn't like it then thats his tough cheese and I really don't give a fig what he beleves anyway, so I won't be doing any head banging -500 posts lol
Excel
-
Originally posted by lazs2
beetle... my comment about london meant that the guys there just didn't SEEM to be very tough to me... the accent to me is kinda funny and non threatening. I am sure that if I lived there and didn't die of depression from the weather and filth I would become more cautious.
LOL Lazs! :lol
...and they call me Ol' Shifty! :p
Yes, you would be dead from depression this year for sure. But the beauty of Europe is that there is so much diversity within a three hour plane ride.
Your car thefts per capita is a bit misleading. What it does not show is that the US has only 5% of the world's population, but about 40% of the world's vehicles, or vee-hickles as you guys call them. I bet demaw1 says "vee-hickle". :D And because much of America is spread out into lots of little hick towns, it's too far for a career thief from a big city to travel to steal from one. And in the hick towns themselves, everyone knows everyone else - close knit communities, so perpetration of an anonymous theft would be more difficult. And can you imagine an opportunist thief driving all the way from Oakland to Dixon to do over your EC?
Demaw said Is it an honest thing to do always comparing America to such little countries population wise?
When a liberal doesnt have a reasonable response to a debate,they will do 1 of three things....the first is call you a racist, what are the other 2 things?
[/b] Dunno Demaw, but Lazs does it all the time. I don't know what your second question is about.
Gixer - a 4-point harness - one with the round buckle in the middle? Some years ago I used to fly a K21 glider, and it had a five point harness. As well as the two lap and two shoulder straps coming into that buckle, there was an additional strap which went round the bollocks! No idea how that would work out in the event of a crash. :eek:
-
gixer... I rode Harleys for 20 years and never wore a helmet. I never got a scratch on my head but I suffered numerous lower limb injuries and "pavement rash" I wore helmets at the drags and autocross and dirt bikes... it should be the choice of the person doing the activity so long as he doesn't endanger others.
I got the stats from a stat generator that was linked in this or the other thread... nationmaster.com
excel... to bad you don't care what I say... my guess is that you don't care what anyone says or what the facts are.. People do not go insane and start killing others when they are allowed to own firearms... just as they don't start running over people on purpose the minute they get behind the wheel of a car...
not to say that neither of those things happen but... if they do... it was gonna happen anyway no matter what.. the nut would use something else if cars or guns weren't available to him. Your opinion of your fellow man is not surprising considering your inability to reason.
lazs
-
beetle... that is silly about the car thing... are you saying that most cars are stolen by professionals and that they won't go into rural areas? how does that work for nz and australia? they have less density than the U.S. but higher car theft rates.
If you think I was being shifty about the londoners then you don't recall the context of my statement or.... it is you who are being shifty. The context was about the viciousness and toughness of criminals in parts of the U.S. either way... as I get older it won't matter how swishy they are... I will need a gun to defend against them... it is a twofold threat... when you get old they criminal sees you as an easy mark and..... you are. if.... you are unarmed.
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
beetle... that is silly about the car thing... are you saying that most cars are stolen by professionals and that they won't go into rural areas? how does that work for nz and australia? they have less density than the U.S. but higher car theft rates.
Not sure about NZ, but the OZ population is concentrated around the coastline. The non coastal areas of OZ are largely desert - with at least 6 named deserts, which are uninhabited.
Your assessment of OZ's population density fails to take account of this.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
gixer... I rode Harleys for 20 years and never wore a helmet. I never got a scratch on my head but I suffered numerous lower limb injuries and "pavement rash" I wore helmets at the drags and autocross and dirt bikes... it should be the choice of the person doing the activity so long as he doesn't endanger others.
lazs
I rode bikes for 15 years, always wore a helmet. Didn't need the law to make me do it. Crashed a couple of times a year but got away with only a numb spot on my knee and a thumb that doesn't work as well as it used to. But one day I clipped a car and smacked my head on the curb. Saw stars a bit but rode home after arguing with the driver as to whose fault it was. Without the helmet I'd be dead or a basket case. To me a helmet is like a safety catch on a gun. It only has to save your life once but you always need it.
-
Helmets. Yep, you're a fool if you ride without one.
But should your government make that choice for you?
Therein lies the true question of all threads like this one.
-
Originally posted by Excel1
You may know about Switzerland but you know bugger all about NZ. Give every NZer 6 guns and the violent crime stats would go through the roof.You would just be arming the nutters and scumbags and we have got our share of them.With the firearm rules that are in place here they havn't got access to the guns that they would have in the US.
Couple of points. First off I appreciate the faith you have in your fellow Kiwi's. It's very refreshing.
Secondly, I won't bother getting in a discussion about how it would be illegal for the nutters and scumbags, who are probably felons anyway, to posses the firearms in the first place. I'll also skip going into the fact you're on an island so the criminal element's ability to smuggle guns in is much less than it is here. Which, of course, just means that the only people who are unarmed are the law-abidding civilians.
However, this belief that fear is behind the desire to own guns would be laughable if it didn't show such a glaring lack of understanding. After all, to make a statement like that, I would hope the speaker is just spouting off to try and come up with something that supports his point. After all, someone couldn't be that foolish to really believe? Could you?
I mean really, I own over 20 guns and yet live without fear. I must be a mutant or something according to you all. I live in the 5th largest city in the US and it has a fairly decent crime rate. Much of it due to improvrished minorities (many of them illegal aliens) and the drug trade (meth and pot are huge here). Yet I don't live in fear. I guess I just haven't been paying attention. Instead of using my guns to shoot and hunt and mess around with, I should have been holed up in my house with a loaded CZ75 and waiting in paranoria. I must apologize to our gunless friends for screwing up their stereotype. So sorry.
I don't live with any more care and concern than anyone else with half a brain does in a big city. It's just that, unlike you all, if someone did try and do me harm, I could do more about than run crying like a little girl or drop to my knees and beg for mercy.
And I like it that way.
-
Originally posted by Toad
Helmets. Yep, you're a fool if you ride without one.
But should your government make that choice for you?
Therein lies the true question of all threads like this one.
As long as hospitals are required by law to treat ALL emergencies then yes, the Gov't. (me) has the right to require seat belts and helmets.
-
Kinda circular logic there isn't it?
How about we don't require hospitals to treat folks that don't wear seat belts in cars or helmets on bikes?
What then? Should the government still decide?
Which of course leads to....... why should the government force a hospital to treat all emergencies? Shouldn't that be the hospital's decision?
-
Originally posted by Toad
Helmets. Yep, you're a fool if you ride without one.
But should your government make that choice for you?
I don't know about helmets, but I thought it was state law (in many states) for seatbelts in cars to be used.
Dune - "I don't live with any more care and concern than anyone else with half a brain does in a big city. It's just that, unlike you all, if someone did try and do me harm, I could do more about than run crying like a little girl or drop to my knees and beg for mercy." Read excel's post again. He's saying that the gun laws in NZ are such that scumbags can't get guns. Therefore the chances of running into an armed scumbag are greatly reduced. Hence, an armed response is unwarranted - if running into an unarmed scumbag.
I see enough scumbags. Fortunately, none is armed.
-
Originally posted by Toad
...... why should the government force a hospital to treat all emergencies? Shouldn't that be the hospital's decision?
And how would a hospital determine who to treat? Extent of injury? Ability to pay? Race of the patient?
-
Originally posted by Gixer
Which site did you get those stats from?
...-Gixer
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/cri_mur_cap
...and Beetle in CO you must wear a seatbelt inna car but don't hafta wear a helmet onna bike. Go figure.
h
-
Originally posted by Airhead
And how would a hospital determine who to treat? Extent of injury? Ability to pay? Race of the patient?
My guess is that decision would rightfully be made either by the owners of a private hospital or the Board of Trustees of a "public" one.
Why should the government mandate it? You don't want them in your bedroom, right? But we spend gazillions of dollars on AIDS and AIDS related illnesses. How about every state pass a law requiring mandatory condom use with random checks by the local police? Like with primary seat belt laws?
Nope, you don't want the feds in bed with you but you don't mind them in someone else's hospital.
Funny how that works. The government should always be involved with regulating "that other guy".
-
Originally posted by beet1e
I don't know about helmets, but I thought it was state law (in many states) for seatbelts in cars to be used.
All 50 states (plus the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico) have mandatory seat belt laws. 11 states (plus the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico) have "Primary Belt Use Laws". These laws enable law enforcement to stop drivers, or set up checkpoints for no other purpose than enforcing seat belt laws. In the other states, they'll ticket you for seat belt IF they find that in the course of stopping you for some other infraction, a Secondary Belt Use law, I guess.
Regarding motorcycle helmet laws, Colorado, Illinois, Iowa, and New Hampshire don't have helmet laws. The rest have a hodgpodge. Some require them, some require them for riders under certain ages, etc., etc..
Irregardless, if some fool wants to die, who am I to stand in the way of algae removing itself from the gene pool? If they want the wind in their hair and the pavement in their skull, that's a choice they make.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
gixer... I rode Harleys for 20 years and never wore a helmet. I never got a scratch on my head but I suffered numerous lower limb injuries and "pavement rash" I wore helmets at the drags and autocross and dirt bikes... it should be the choice of the person doing the activity so long as he doesn't endanger others
lazs
Funny how Harley guys prefer not to wear helmets, must be the attempt to try and keep up with the tough guy rebel,born to be free image. Thing is Harely's are such a slow arse bike im not sure if I'd feel the need for one either.
Sports bikes and speedway, now thats a different story. Even a bug hurts at those speeds.
By the way where did you get those stats? Reason being my girlfriend is a trainiee cop and she laughed when I told her. And is getting me some stats from the police.
Do you have some stats like violent crime per captia, or crime involving guns per captia? Murders? Didn't think so.
...-Gixer
-
Originally posted by Gixer
Do you have some stats like violent crime per captia, or crime involving guns per captia? Murders? Didn't think so.
...-Gixer
Yes, it's in the link I provided above. Twice now.
There's a "murder" category and then, "murder w/ firearms."
h
-
Mr. Toad - so noted, but even in America the government sticks its neck out. Take drug abuse. No stopping it, but heroin/cocaine are "Class A" drugs, whose possession is banned across America (& the UK). Neither you nor I approve of nanny government, but it exists on both sides of the pond. Granted, Blair's govt. represents regulation gone mad, and has inspired a damaging era of political correctness, so things are probably worse here. I've got to the stage where I just ignore laws I don't like, and use my own judgement. Eg. a 50mph speed limit along a mile long stretch of dual carriageway (divided highway) near here, which has no side roads or residential access. Bollocks to that: I do 80 along there. Also, a mandate from Whitehall telling teachers like my brother how to conduct lessons: My bro filed it in a rectangular receptacle.
Gixer said "Thing is Harely's are such a slow arse bike im not sure if I'd feel the need for one either." Yep, I never see Harleys doing more than about 30mph. Most of the time, they're idling in traffic, with their engines popping and farting - the same way the engines on a twin engined prop plane always seem to pop and fart soon after being started. Did you know that Harleys sold in Britain have a "restrictor" in the inlet manifold? A friend of mine had a Harley and knew of this mod, and took his to a dealer to have it removed. He showed it to me. It's a diamond shaped piece of metal with a hole in the middle which restricts the inflow of fuel/air mixture. End result: 15% more power with the thing removed. Maybe the NZ Harleys have a "restrictor"?
-
Originally posted by beet1e
I've got to the stage where I just ignore laws I don't like, and use my own judgement.
OMG!
Beet's turning into Yank!
This'll be Beet showing up a con in a year or two:
(http://www.angelfire.com/ny4/KevsGifsGalore/WesternGifs/YosemiteSam1.gif)
-
Beetle
Yep you win the bet I do call them veehickle. When I buy a new one I put a bullet hole in the hood at the drivers side so the south of the border types think twice before trying to take it.
-
Off topic
-
Originally posted by Toad
OMG!
Beet's turning into Yank!
ROFL! erm...
Excel - Lazs is OK, but he's more fun in person. I tend to agree - he does make up the "facts" as he goes along. :lol
And now... a large white and orange bird awaits - to take me to the sunnier climes to be found in the land of 1300 year old cathedrals. So, jusqu'ą vendredi, mes amis!
-
Originally posted by Dune
Couple of points. First off I appreciate the faith you have in your fellow Kiwi's. It's very refreshing.
Secondly, I won't bother getting in a discussion about how it would be illegal for the nutters and scumbags, who are probably felons anyway, to posses the firearms in the first place. I'll also skip going into the fact you're on an island so the criminal element's ability to smuggle guns in is much less than it is here. Which, of course, just means that the only people who are unarmed are the law-abidding civilians.
However, this belief that fear is behind the desire to own guns would be laughable if it didn't show such a glaring lack of understanding. After all, to make a statement like that, I would hope the speaker is just spouting off to try and come up with something that supports his point. After all, someone couldn't be that foolish to really believe? Could you?
I mean really, I own over 20 guns and yet live without fear. I must be a mutant or something according to you all. I live in the 5th largest city in the US and it has a fairly decent crime rate. Much of it due to improvrished minorities (many of them illegal aliens) and the drug trade (meth and pot are huge here). Yet I don't live in fear. I guess I just haven't been paying attention. Instead of using my guns to shoot and hunt and mess around with, I should have been holed up in my house with a loaded CZ75 and waiting in paranoria. I must apologize to our gunless friends for screwing up their stereotype. So sorry.
I don't live with any more care and concern than anyone else with half a brain does in a big city. It's just that, unlike you all, if someone did try and do me harm, I could do more about than run crying like a little girl or drop to my knees and beg for mercy.
And I like it that way.
Dune, I don't have complete faith in all of my countymen and with good reason. A post I made earlier in the year will clue you in.
http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=1193834#post1193834
If that url worked you will see that I'm not opposed to people keeping guns for protection if they they think they need too. Don't get me wrong, the vast majority of NZers don't need too, they are more likely to be struck by lightning every day for a week than experiance what I have.
I'm not a fan of gun regulations that go to the extreme of restricting sane law abidding people from using guns for sport.. hunting..plinking or just collecting them, thats fine too.
The gun regulations here give us the freedom to do these things while at the same time they do a more than fair job of keeping the guns out of the hands of the nutters and scumbags.
If there's any confusion over the defination of nutters/scumbags let me clarify what my definitions are:
A nutter would include someone who uses a ChiCom AK47 to slaughter a dozen people because the voices told him to do it or because he was just having a bad day. That happened here some years ago.
There's no guarantee that something like that won't happen again but the regulations bought in since then lesson the chances.
Scumbags, sick.. vicious..remorseless muthas who commit the worst of crimes. Imo they should be drowned at birth. It's a shame maternity hospitals don't have crystal balls to check to see how juinor is going to turn out.
No system is perfect but the balance between firearm regulations and freedoms in NZ is about right at the moment i.e We have got our cake and we are eating it.
Quote:
However, this belief that fear is behind the desire to own guns would be laughable if it didn't show such a glaring lack of understanding. After all, to make a statement like that, I would hope the speaker is just spouting off to try and come up with something that supports his point. After all, someone couldn't be that foolish to really believe? Could you
............................. ............................. ............................. .................
I didn't say fear was the reason people want own guns.Thats your interprertation of what I said.
I said any member of the public that's not in law enforcement and keeps or carries a gun for protection is in fear of something.
You will note that I used the word protection. And I don't make a distinction between people who buy a gun soley for prtection and the hunter who keeps a loaded 12 gauge under his bed just in case.
I know that thats not a popular comment to make but I'm just saying it the way I see it.
Excel
-
gixer.. helmets and Harleys... Harleys are not little neon rockets that are no fun unless you are revving 12 grand and on the edge of death... depends on what you ride a bike for... some would ride for the solitude and freedom and unimpaired view of sight and sound not the risking death at every turn or going 170 mph.
A helmet takes away from the enjoyment of the ride... simple as that. You will find that most serious injuries to bikers are to their limbs.
Airhead... it is quite simple really... all people are required to have insurance . The insurance will cover their costs and you won't be charged for their freedom.
excell and beetle it is you who are making up facts... you are the ones who claim you know how your own people will act if they are given the human right to defend themselves and their family. We have plenty of scumbags here that are unarmed because of the increased penalties that crime using a gun incurs.
but... show me some data that I have made up? The data shows that you are more likely to be a victim of crime than an American... the data shows that 2-3 million crimes a year are prevented with firearms every year in the U.S. You are not as safe and have no way to defend yourself or family besides....
but.. beetle lived here.. How many times was he accosted by armed scumbags? How often was he a victim of a person who nutted out and shot everyone in sight?
If you fear your neighbors having firearms then I would submit that it is you and not I that lives in "fear".
lazs
-
Off topic
-
Originally posted by lazs2
excell and beetle it is you who are making up facts... you are the ones who claim you know how your own people will act if they are given the human right to defend themselves and their family. We have plenty of scumbags here that are unarmed because of the increased penalties that crime using a gun incurs.
but... show me some data that I have made up? The data shows that you are more likely to be a victim of crime than an American... the data shows that 2-3 million crimes a year are prevented with firearms every year in the U.S. You are not as safe and have no way to defend yourself or family besides....
but.. beetle lived here.. How many times was he accosted by armed scumbags? How often was he a victim of a person who nutted out and shot everyone in sight?
If you fear your neighbors having firearms then I would submit that it is you and not I that lives in "fear".
lazs
I'm not making anything up. I commented on the gun control situation and its effects in NZ as I see it. And I do live here, have done all my life. I have been around guns since I was a kid so I do have an interest in the subject. If you choose not to beleve what I said then thats up too you.
I didn't say you made up data.
But you are selective with the facts. If it doesn't support your argument you dismiss it. A case in point would be the first post in this thread made by Vulcan. It's an ironclad fact that the crime rate is down here and it didnt take an armed public to achieve it.
NZers as a general rule don't need too use their guns to protect themselves from criminals.
I don't know what the crime rate here is compared to other countries but the NZ position on the statistics you posted seems too high to me. A small country with a small population is relativly easy too police, and the police here are effective.
Just about anyone who has a firearm will use it to defend themself and their family if the situation warrants it.
And in case you have forgotten we do have guns here, lots of them, and plenty of people have them for sporting and recreational use.
So you are barking up the wrong tree there.
Knife versus Knife , gun versus gun would constitute self defence but the other guy better be the aggressor if you win.
I get on fine with my neighbors but I am wary of armed trespassers on my property after a couple of incidents in the past.
Excel
-
Off topic
-
Yes... your crime rate is down... what other way does it have to go? You are about number one after all. Ours is down too... ours is down more in states that allow the concealed carry of firearms by its citizens.... which brings me to ask...
What data do you have that supports your fear that all of your fellow nzers would go insane if allowed to have freedom? How do you force yourself to go out in public around these people or share the road with them? Oh wait.... you yourself are armed to the teeth... which brings up the question...
What makes you so special? Why should you have a gun and not your neighbor... judging on your attitude as expressed in these threads... You are the last person I want to be armed.
lazs
-
Personal attack
-
Personal attack
-
Off topic
-
Off topic
-
Since Laz wimped out, anyone else want to compare Toronto's crime rate to a comparable American city?
-
Off topic
-
Originally posted by lazs2
Yes... your crime rate is down... what other way does it have to go? You are about number one after all. Ours is down too... ours is down more in states that allow the concealed carry of firearms by its citizens.... which brings me to ask...
What data do you have that supports your fear that all of your fellow nzers would go insane if allowed to have freedom? How do you force yourself to go out in public around these people or share the road with them? Oh wait.... you yourself are armed to the teeth... which brings up the question...
What makes you so special? Why should you have a gun and not your neighbor... judging on your attitude as expressed in these threads... You are the last person I want to be armed.
lazs
I think you don't really care about freedoms in countries outside your own. I think the real reason for your stance is because you can't stand the fact that people can live normal lives
without the need to tool-up for protection, because that exspsoses your own fears and insecurities.
Your concern for my neighbors is touching, but they do have firearms. As farmers they do have a need for them.
Excel
-
Laz's have you been in the military?
...-Gixer
-
excel.. It was not I that claimed a low crime rate. It was the original poster who claimed that nz's crime rate was down despite not haveing any guns at all... then... it turns out that nz has about the highest overall crime rate in the world and all this with basicly a rural community/country that typicaly would have a very low crime rate.
Thjen... you claim that everyone would go nuts if they had firearms but that you and all your neighbors have guns because "they need em" but but apparently only those out in the country need em or... people who live in the country are exempted from your firearms turn people into nuts theory?
gixer.. no. I have never been in any military.
lazs
-
torque... I have no idea of what torontos crime rate is nor do I have enough data to compare it to U.S. cities to find a "comparable" city.
I have been to both seattle and vancouver and they appear to be pretty comparable. They are even pretty close to each other and both have the same depressing weather.
What parameters would you use for comparing an American city to toronto?
lazs