Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Kats on October 22, 2000, 02:53:00 AM
-
I read the other one and hope that my friends south of the border realize that most Canadians do not support the new laws attested by the fact that most of the Provinces have publicly stated that they will refuse to enforce them. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
I'd like to point out a few FYI's about this issue and would hope that the readers realize that this is not an "us vs. them" issue. We are all on the same team here as citizens of our respective countries.
Don't be a sucker!
The issue of gun control is a tool used by government to show the populace that they are taking measures to fight crime. This is fantasy, and only shows their frustration. It costs money to increase police forces and build more jails. OTOH, gun control makes you look like a hero and you get to charge taxes in the form of registration fees.
Do your homework
The British gun crime statistics are a scam. Gun related crimes in Britain that are pleaded down are not included in the gun crime statistics whereas in the US they are. This is a huge discrepancy. Furthermore, unsolved crimes in Britain within a certain vicinity are categorized as a single crime by a single person. This further pads the statistics and IMO borders on fraud. The reality is (and I can back this up with independent research) that gun crimes in Britain are actually rising with the tighter controls. As a matter of fact, most studies show that armed crimes rise proportionally with the introduction of gun controls.
Think for yourself
Do you really want to let your local government off the hook on the issue of crime control by allowing them to brag about the false security of tighter gun controls? Who are we making the streets safer for by taking guns out of the hands of the law abiding majority?
I applaud the average guy for wanting gun control because he/she feels the world would be safer - I'm on your side for safer streets. I'm only suggesting that your reasoning might be flawed. Again I have to ask, Who are we making the streets safer for by taking guns out of the hands of the law abiding majority?
I think gun laws should be geared towards saftey and storage. This is sorely lacking IMO, yet no one ever talks about this in the media (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif)
[This message has been edited by Kats (edited 10-22-2000).]
-
<Salute>
-
We've been through this before.
Please, don't try to revive a dead horse. It's been flogged and it's rotting.
Pro gun people will say "if ye don't own a gun, yer not a citizen but a subject", "dudes, ya gotta defend yerself against criminals who have guns", "dammo, it is my right", "it lowers violent crimes", "it deters" and anti gunners will say "it adds more violence", "easily accessible guns means much easier access on the black market" etc etc etc ad nauseum.
Just let it die. Yer preaching to the choir anyhow, since 90% of the US Ah crowd are republican pro gunners.
------------------
StSanta
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://www.angelfire.com/nt/regoch/sig.gif)
-
Sorry about that Santa, I read the "O club" for the first time yesterday.
[This message has been edited by Kats (edited 10-22-2000).]
-
Heheheh oops forget smilies in post.
I dinnae mean to tell you what to talk about man (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif).
Just meant to communicate that the subject sort of has been discussed, and that people are now firmly entrenched taking opportunity shots at each other (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
------------------
StSanta
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://www.angelfire.com/nt/regoch/sig.gif)
-
Quick shoot Santa!!!
-
Bummer when someone independently hits on the truth huh Santa. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
The horse "might" be dead but the anti's are still claiming it's running at a full gallop and hitting MACH 2 besides! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Mav
-
And, and this is amusing, so are the pro gunners (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif).
YEEEHAW, hi ho SILVER!
------------------
StSanta
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://www.angelfire.com/nt/regoch/sig.gif)
-
Just say no.
-
Kats.. you from wpg/mb/ca ?
!
I agree Kats.. storage is the problem.
Less Columbine or "we wuz partyun and he done killed himsulf" stupidity.
The bill in Canada is a Tax Grab with a crime "reassurance" thrown in.
Regards,
Snoopi
>
-
Statistics will always be flawed, warped, or adjusted to suit any argument.
Do we need gun control laws? Yes.
Are these new laws on the way sensible? No.
Just another tax grab by a corrupt government. (I consider all canadian government parties corrupt) I agree that new laws should center on safe storage and use, and send all money to law enforcement instead of government coffers.
Just a pings thoughts on the matter.
-
Hey snoopi, that's where I'm from. Drop me an email.
Ok, more stuff to chew on suckers (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
January 16, 2000 London Times:
Killings Rise as 3 Million Illegal Guns Flood Britain
Heheheh, that's more guns in 1 year that used to be sold legally in Britain (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) On a side note armed crimes rose 10% in 1997 and even worse now. Keep in mind (as I mentioned in the first post) that the British government obscures their data by using conviction data instead of arrest data for their stats. This hid about 150,000 weapon assaults.
So here's the new idea by the British home office. Preventive Detention IE, detention of individuals based on the risks they present, rather than whether they have ever been convicted of an offense. Brilliant (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif). I never liked the presumption of innocence thingie anyhow hehehehehe (sarcasm btw).
This is what happens when government disarms the populace. Now you have to look for the government to protect you......at any cost.
Last thing to chew on. Dr. Phillip Cook, an anti gun researcher, reluctantly and independantly confirmed a study by Drs. Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz that showed:
2.5 million or more crimes each year are not completed in the United States because of the possession of a firearm by the intended victim.
-
Kats,
Just a friendly heads-up.
Nothing drives the anti-gun liberals out of a discussion topic faster than proveable fact.
If you wish to carry on a "give and take" discussion with them, you'll have to stick to pure speculation, wishful thinking and unsubstantiated opinion.
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
A word on hand gun safety.
First of all, let me say I don't like guns. I would like to see all of them dropped into the ocean. But this Pandora box, was opened a very long time ago. They are a reality. Being an American, I have felt that I should have one around for home defense.
The problem for me, was that I had 3 kids. (grown now). If you lock your firearm away, in a safe. You might as well have saved the money you spent on it. Odd,s are, by the time you dig the thing out. What ever you needed it for, is over.
My solution for this problem, was a the 1911 Colt auto. I found that my children could not work the slide, due to the stiffness of the return spring. By the time they were big enough to work it, They had been well trained in gun safety. I would test this with them from time to time. By handing them a very, very carefully unloaded weapon, and having them try to work the slide back. When they reached an age where they could do it (about 12 years old) They received a lecture, that lasted about a week, on gun safety.
I dismissed the choice of revolvers out of hand. Most don't have a safety of any kind. and are point and shoot affairs.
Another advantage of the .45 cal. APC. Is that it is a fat, slow moving, slug. Its not going to go through 3 walls and, kill the guy next doors cat, like a magnum might. Yet it is a proven cartridge, having been used successfully, in combat, thousands of times over decades.
There is no perfect solution, of course. But, a loaded, unchambered, .45 is the best one I could come up with.
-
If you wish to carry on a "give and take" discussion with them, you'll have to stick to pure speculation, wishful thinking and unsubstantiated opinion.
Whereas Toad has no appreciation of statistical inaccuracy, and if he finds a snippet of information on the net, the figures therein are irrefutable and are the absolute truth about the issue at hand (if it 'proves' his point).
He's also infallible and will always form an opinion based on facts - a good example is the 'Kosovo II' topic.
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
I hope you aren't reffering to my statistics as "snippets on the net".
April 1, 1996 edition of London's Daily Telegraph:
An unnamed retired senior officer at Scotland Yard revealed that "there are a series of tricks that render the [crime] figures a sham." As an example he noted that "where a series of homes in a block of flats were burgled they were regularily recorded as one crime"
Guns & Violence: The debate before Lord Cullen. By Richard Munday & Jan Stevenson.
The true British homocide rate has been camouflaged. The figures have been pruned by using the final disposition of cases rather than the arrest data.....reducing recorded homocides by as much as 25%
My other quote about the 3 million guns illegally entering Britain is from the January 16th edition of the London Times
My points regarding preventive detention come from a consultation paper issued by the Home Office in July of 1999 entitled Managing Dangerous People with Severe Personality Disorder: Proposals for Policy Development
The October 20, 1999 edition of the British Medical Journal denounced these proposals by saying it would create:
a system of locking up men and women who frighten officials. The governments proposals masquerade as extentions to mental health services. They are in fact proposals for preventive detention...They aim to make judges more amendable to imposing discretionary life sentences. They are intended...to circumvent the European Convention on Human Rights.
The rest of my comments are referenced as to the source.
[This message has been edited by Kats (edited 10-24-2000).]
-
I have one more question, after reading through this thread it came to me. Our countries in NATO spent trillions of dollars in the cold war creating weaponry of mass destruction that could reduce our world to rubble many times over, all in the name of detante.
Isn't this really the same issue? Do you think it would have been a good idea for NATO to disarm in the interest of safety?
[This message has been edited by Kats (edited 10-24-2000).]
-
Kats - you prove my point about statitics - they have to be looked at critically rather than taking them as gospel truth.
Regarding gun-related crime in Britain, it has long been a problem that there has been some 'manipulating' of data for political reasons. You're naive if you think it doen't occur in this US or anywhere else. Also consider that 59% of incidents involve air-weapons. They are still treated the same as crimes that involve a rifle or semi-automatic pistol or any other gun.
I really think only a very tenuous comparison can be made between the nuclear 'deterrent' and the view that guns in the home somehow disuade a potential burglar. Both cases are superficially similar, but that's about as far as you can take it.
[This message has been edited by Dowding (edited 10-25-2000).]
-
"I think gun laws should be geared towards saftey and storage. This is sorely lacking IMO, yet no one ever talks about this in the media"
I agree. Where there are guns, safety has to be hammered on constantly because where there are guns, there are accidents.
I carry a gun every day, but I never bring it into the house. It stays locked in the trunk of my car. I know enough about me to know that I couldn't live with myself if one of my kids got hurt or killed with it.
BTW, I heard that recently, for the first time ever, police in Nottingham? England are now carrying guns. If this is true, I wonder what that portends?
-
Gunthr - I haven't heard anything about that, and I would think it would make all the news services if it was true. I think you refer to the Armed Response Units that we've had for decades.
-
Good! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) I'm glad isn't true. <S>