Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Charon on June 08, 2007, 09:03:18 PM
-
Shooting competitions took place across the whole of Switzerland over the first weekend of June, including in Überstorf, in canton Fribourg. Around 2,000 people from the region took part. In Switzerland as a whole, the number of participants was around 146,000. The annual event mixes sport and competition with a party atmosphere. (Photos and text: Christoph Balsiger, swissinfo)
http://www.swissinfo.org/eng/multimedia/index.html?siteSect=15002&sid=7893720&gallery=y
(click on photo for the next)
My god. Many even have real, selective fire assault rifles (unlike those hum drum semi-autos Brady tries to pass off as assault rifles over here). They drink beer and play cards with a rifle beside them at the table. The blood must flow in the streets. YOU CAN ONLY TRUST THE POLICE WITH GUNS! Where's the Swiss Bloomberg, the Swiss Daley, Feinstein and Brady, oh my. Why don't Swiss guns magically make people do bad things they wouldn't otherwise do like the American guns?
A PARTY atmosphere? A party from hell, no doubt. You can't have fun with firearms. THE ONLY THING ASSAULT RIFLES AND PISTOLS ARE GOOD FOR IS KILLING!!!! :mad: :mad: :mad:
Charon
-
Decadence! :mad:
-
:rolleyes: :D
-
loosely quoting machiavelli here "the swiss are fully armed and fully free" these words were put to paper some five hundred years ago and they are as true now as they were then.
-
Originally posted by Charon
My god. Many even have real, selective fire assault rifles (unlike those hum drum semi-autos Brady tries to pass off as assault rifles over here).
They also have tweezers, toothpicks, and corkscrews in the stock.
-
The Swiss populace has military training, and even those that are retired or are on reserve status are armed to the teeth.
They haven't had to fight a war in more than two centuries and they have one of the lowest crime rates in the western world.
The Swiss have obviously never studied the enlightened and progressive policies of the People's Republic of California. Therefore, one can only conclude that they are uncivilized.
-
Yes but... Look at all the slaughter of innocents that happens in switzerland every year by full auto weapons.. it rivals the slaughter that we have here from full auto weapons.
No sane person needs a full auto weapon.. not when it causes this kind of horror.
It is fortunate that only a million or so full auto weapons exist in America... multiply the death toll full autos in America cause buy 50 or so if the people who want full autos were allowed to have them!
lazs
-
the "neutral" swiss have to be well armed, they need to protect all the nazi gold left in their country.
-
maybe because the crime rate is so low they dont feel the need to carry a gun regularly.
But should they ever feel the need.
they are readily available to them
-
I thought the Swiss were only armed with army knives and watches :huh
-
Every able bodied male in Switzerland spends time as part of the Swiss Armed Forces. About one third of the total male population is excluded for various reasons from the armed services, and these either serve in Civil Protection or Civilian Service to meet their obligation.
You can pull a straight 300 day conscription, or be part of the reserve forces and train three weeks every year until age 30.
On May 18, 2003, Swiss voters approved the military reform project "Army XXI" to drastically reduce the size of the Swiss Army. Starting in January 2004, the 524,000-strong militia was pared down to 220,000 conscripts, including 80,000 reservists. They have 1,579,921 (yr 2000 est) military age and fit for duty males available for activation if need be.
The swiss keep their rifle (usually a Sturmgewehr 90 or F bellybutton 90) and uniform at their residence with 50 accountable rounds in a sealed tin.
They can mobilize a very large number of trained soldiers in a very short period of time if they saw a need.
-
My god......FULL AUTO WEAPONS ARE SO TERRIBLE. Yeah there so bad that the military has gone away from them on the average soldier. Any one who needs gun control can go to Europe. Retards are trying to ban 50 cals now too. A 50 BMG to my knowledge has never even been used in a serious crime in the states. The Brady's can pry my guns from my cold dead fingers.
CFYA
-
Yea..................but how do they stack up in the sand dune jumping and cafe touring fields? :D
-
Well, their flying ain't half bad either...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JR5bDfD5XV8
-
ferndale.. that pic was taken during the shootfest? 160,000 people participating and you never seen a gun? you asked if they owned em?
The info is incorrect? they don't have full auto rifles and carbines at home?
That beetle guy used to post dumb stuff like that.. pictures of his travels in a planet warming jet.. resteraunt guides.. that sort of thing.
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
ferndale.. that pic was taken during the shootfest? 160,000 people participating and you never seen a gun? you asked if they owned em?
The info is incorrect? they don't have full auto rifles and carbines at home?
That beetle guy used to post dumb stuff like that.. pictures of his travels in a planet warming jet.. resteraunt guides.. that sort of thing.
lazs
They have them AT home in locked containers. The gun is most likely government property and for military use only. They're not gun nutters -> nobody carries in normal life. Just like down here.
-
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
They have them AT home in locked containers. The gun is most likely government property and for military use only. They're not gun nutters -> nobody carries in normal life. Just like down here.
Not so on the military use only government property thing according to this article, it sounds like they practice with them regularly and even keep them when their service is done if desired (conversion from full auto to semi required.)
http://www.nationalreview.com/kopel/kopel103001.shtml
-
Originally posted by Ferndale
I read AKIron's article. ^ Yes Switzerland does have a low crime rate, but I don't think it's because of an armed populace. There are other factors which have a bearing. Here are some that spring to mind.
- No poverty. Sure, not everyone is of equal wealth, but no-one lives below the poverty line.
- Ethnic mixing - probably much less than in some other countries. No racial/ethnic tensions.
- Low unemployment
- No social underclass
- High rate of adult literacy
I also did not see hordes of kids arsing about on the streets in the evenings - now that I could ascribe to the compulsory military service!
The picture was taken in the middle of last month, before the "shootfest". I was in the area bounded by Basel, Zurich, Sankt Gallen and Schaffhausen - the far north of the country near the German and Austrian borders. I was outdoors most of the time, and never heard a single gunshot. [/B]
Won't argue that the factors you cite contribute to low crime rates and yet the Swiss remain very heavily armed by European standards. I guess you might attribute that to them seeing themselves an island in a sea wherein crime (European wars) may visit their door at any hour.
-
Originally posted by AKIron
Won't argue that the factors you cite contribute to low crime rates and yet the Swiss remain very heavily armed by European standards. I guess you might attribute that to them seeing themselves an island in a sea wherein crime (European wars) may visit their door at any hour.
In years past perhaps, but I figure the Swiss retaining their large armed militia and compulsory service has more to do with their social and national identity these days than any threat, real or percieved. It part of what makes them Swiss (along with their international banking), similar to how America relates to it's "Wild West" period.
-
I have no doubt that there are those in Switzerland who would like to see the Swiss disarmed. Some because they believe (foolishly imo) a civilized society doesn't need firearms and some for reasons more sinister. However, one can only speculate about their prevailing national attitude towards guns.
A disarmed society is ripe for the pickin' both from within and without. Those who believe the days are long past of harvesters like Hitler are burying their heads in the sand.
-
I gotta ask something. Who here believes that a society which bans private gun ownership, discourages childhood military/war play, tolerates but ridicules their own weak military, will have the resolve to stand up and fight when needed? I think you're out of touch with reality.
-
I gotta ask something. Which European society has banned private gun ownership? Who is out of touch with reality?
-
Originally posted by Viking
I gotta ask something. Which European society has banned private gun ownership? Who is out of touch with reality?
European societies aren't the only ones that may have to defend themselves against enemies foreign and domestic but since you asked, both England and Germany immediately come to mind as being so restrictive on gun ownership as to have effectively banned them. Of course others (non European) like Australia and Japan aren't even pretending to allow this liberty.
-
Originally posted by AKIron
I have no doubt that there are those in Switzerland who would like to see the Swiss disarmed. Some because they believe (foolishly imo) a civilized society doesn't need firearms and some for reasons more sinister.
It all depends on history & culture of a country. There is not one rule what works for
all countrys. What works in switzerland may not work in germany or
elswhere.
I live 100m close to the swiss border on teh german side,
i can tell you, swiss people are different in so many things! ;)
-
Originally posted by AKIron
European societies aren't the only ones that may have to defend themselves against enemies foreign and domestic but since you asked, both England and Germany immediately come to mind as being so restrictive on gun ownership as to have effectively banned them. Of course others (non European) like Australia and Japan aren't even pretending to allow this liberty.
Yes the Australians aren't allowed to have guns:
(http://www.gateway.net.au/~buffalo/images/safari0111.jpg)
(http://www.gateway.net.au/~buffalo/images/Oe015.jpg)
In Japan also:
(http://www.doha-2006.com/upload_iis/Images/Japanese-woman-10m-air-360.jpg)
- Yoko Minamoto, Japan's premier female sports rifleman.
Owning shotguns and hunting rifles is legal in Japan.
I won't even comment on England and Germany, your claim is just too … out of touch with reality.
-
Japanese gun regulations explained by a Japanese gun owner:
"There are many people who believe that Japanese shooters at Olympics
are policemen or soldiers of Self-Defense Force. Some other people believe
that Japanese citizen cannot own guns and people who enjoy shooting have to
rent guns at shooting range, and some other people believes that legal
gun owners must keep guns in lockers assigned for them at shooting ranges.
So, I decided to write short introductory article about gun ownership in Japan.
In Japan, the kind of guns owned by civilian are as follows.
Air Rifle
Hand Rifle
Rifle
Air Pistol (limited to 500 people for sports shooting only)
Pistol (limited to 50 people for sport shooting only)
Shot gun
The purpose to own guns is limited to two, i.e., hunting or sports shooting.
It means we cannot own guns for defense purpose.
The procedure to own the gun is as follows.
Of course, people who use guns in their work (policemen, soldiers, etc.)
don't have to follow the following step for guns used in the job.
The terminology about 'air gun', 'air rifle' follow Japanese custom.
Participation in a lecture at nearby police station
------------------------------------------------------
This is a requisite condition for anyone who tries to own gun.
You go to the police station which is responsible for your address area, and
apply for the lecture on gun regulation for beginners. In case of Tokyo,
entire districts are divided into four blocks, and the actual place to have
the lecture is one police station in the block.
The lecture for beginner is held once in a month, I think.
The lecture starts at 9:00 in Saturday morning, and written examination
follows after lunch. To 20 questions, you have to give at least 14
correct answers. When I had this lecture, two or three people did not
pass among 32 or 33 attendance. This performance was high because usually
80 % of attendants pass the examination. After passing the examination,
a certificate is given and its copy must be submitted whenever you do some
application afterwards. The certificate is valid three years. It means,
after the valid date of the certification, you have to attend a lecture
for gun owners to get the new certificate. This time, no examination is
done.
Air rifle, hand rifle, and shot gun
-------------------------------------
Once you get the certificate of the gun regulation lecture, there are two
different paths depending on what you want to own. Note that you cannot
apply for usual rifles nor pistols at this stage. To own them, you need
further qualification.
A. Air rifle or hand rifle.
People who are not familiar with gun confuses air rifle from
'air soft gun' (or simply 'air gun') which uses plastic bullet and
whose barrel does not have rifling.
In fact, recently it was reported on TV that some members of AUM camped
near by Mt. Fuji and did some military training using 'air rifle' of
AK 47. This report was not correct. What they used must be air soft
gun shaped like AK 47 or model gun of AK 47.
Hand rifle is unique to Japan. It is actually air pistol, but long
sleeve covers the barrel, and long stock is attached to the grip.
In Japan, ownership of pistol (air or not) is restricted because of
their small size which enables covered transportation. Therefore,
hand rifle was introduced for people who plan to own air hand gun
eventually.
If you want to own air rifle or hand rifle, you can go to a gun shop
with certificate to show to clerks, determine which gun to buy, ask
clerks to write a paper which describe the detail of the gun, and name of
the shop. When you buy a gun not from a shop but from a current owner,
the same paper is needed.
You must be at least 18 years old, or, you need to be over 14
years old and have recommendatory letter from an organization which
governs all official sports organizations.
B. Shot gun.
Prior to go to gun shop, you have to take practical shooting course,
followed by examination. To apply for it, you have to submit a lot
of papers to the police, and it takes a few months until you get the
approval because you and your family who live together are examined.
After the approval, you have the course at a shooting range and pass
it (it is quite easy). Then, you go to a gun shop, determine the gun
to buy, and ask clerks to write the paper.
You need to be at least 20 years old.
After applying for any gun, usually it takes about one month until you get
permission. When you get notification from the police about permission,
you go to the police station to receive license booklet, take it to the
gun shop and receive the gun. Then within two weeks, you have to go to
the police station again with the gun to have it inspected and stumped on
the license.
SB - Small Bore rifle (0.22 caliber, rim-fire)
------------------------------------------------
Since using of 0.22 caliber rifle (both rim-fire and center-fire) for
hunting is prohibited in Japan (probably small animals suitable as targets
of 0.22 caliber live not far from where people live), the only permitted
purpose to own it is for rifle shooting sports. The step to own Small Bore
(rim-fire) rifle is as follows.
A. Become a member of a branch of National Rifle Association of
Japan, then become a member of N.R.A.J. itself.
I my case, I became a member of Setagaya (one district in Tokyo) area
at first, which means automatic membership of Tokyo branch of N.R.A.J,
then had to wait one year until I was allowed become a member of N.R.A.J
it self. But this term differs with branches.
If you want to just enjoy air rifle, and have no interest in participating
in national wide shooting meet, to stay just as Tokyo branch's member
saves membership fee.
B. Participate in a few hour's lecture by N.R.A.J., and get certification.
C. Participate in at least two shooting meet per year before you apply for
SB.
D. Get certification of skill of shooting.
In case of shooting in Standing position, the score of criteria is
300 for S60, and 200 for S40. It is quite easy.
E. By satisfying above A,B,C,D, then you can apply for SB to N.R.A.J.
What you get if you pass the examination is recommendatory letter that
you are suitable for shooter of N.R.A.J., and have potential to become
a shooter for higher level competitions like Olympic.
F. Submit above letter as well as many other papers to the police station.
Like the case of shot gun, it takes a new months until the police
issues a permission to take shooting course in practice.
G. Take a practical shooting course at a shooting range, and get a
certification.
H. Apply for a gun to buy.
LB - Large Bore rifles (center-fire)
--------------------------------------
There are two purposes you can use LB, one is sports shooting under
control of N.R.A.J., and the other is hunting.
A. For rifle shooting as sports, the requisite to apply for it are
as follows.
a. It is over one year since you have owned a SB.
b. You have already participated in 2 shooting meet per year with SB.
You apply for recommendatory letter to N.R.A.J., and follow the similar
steps (without practice course in a shooting range) as SB.
It looks only bolt action rifles can be allowed.
B. For hunting purpose, you must have continuous 10 years' history to
have own shot gun or SB. You simply apply for a gun to the police
station.
Air pistol
------------
The requisite condition to apply for air pistol is almost the same
as SB except that certification of more skill in shooting is
required (in case of AR S60, score of over 510).
Since the number of owners of air pistol is limited up to 500,
you usually wait one year or more (it means you wait someone
fails to update the license) until you get recommendatory letter.
After getting recommendatory letter from N.R.A.J, follow the same
procedure as other kinds of guns to apply for the license.
Pistol
--------
To apply for pistol, you need quite excellent skill of air pistol
(in case of AP60, score of over 555) to apply for pistol.
This time, the number of people is limited to 50, but because of
so hard criteria, I heard two years ago that only 30 people owned it.
Permission for ammunition
---------------------------
Anybody can buy bullets for air rifle, hand rifle, and air pistol without
restraint. For ammunition which contains powder, you have to get
another paper from the police.
On the permission paper, based on which kind of guns you have, the kind
of ammunition gun shops can sell to the owner of guns are listed as well
as total maximum amount. This paper is valid for one year, and, if my
memory is correct, the maximum number of ammunition the police allow to
a paper is 4,000.
Because of the law, the maximum number of ammunition you can keep
at home is limited to 800, and you must keep them in a specially designed
locker which is different from gun locker."
-
"Updating the license
----------------------
The license of gun is a booklet like passport.
Your name, photograph, address, birth date, license booklet No. and its
issue date, etc. are in the first page.
Then pages for up to 12 guns follow (so, if you own more than 12 guns,
you have several license booklets).
In the last page, there is a holder to insert the permission paper to buy
ammunition.
The license for each gun is valid three years (more correctly, until
the third birthday after you get the license).
It means, if you have three guns which you owned in three continuous years,
you have to update the license of different gun every year. If you have
three guns owned in the same year or owned in interval of multiple of three
years, you can update them in the same year. Here, 'year' means not
calendar year, but a interval between two birthdays of the owner, i.e.,
if you buy two guns, one a day before the birthday and the other one day
after the birth day, their licenses are updated in the different years.
To keep the license, following things must be cleared.
A. Requisite to update license.
There's no condition to update the license of air rifle, hand rifle,
and shot gun. But if you have not used them in the past three years,
license can not be updated.
To update the license of SB and LB, you have to show stump you got
at rifle shooting meets. Though one of conditions that N.R.A.J.
issues recommendatory letter for SB and LB is that owner should
participates at least two formal shooting meets per year for EACH gun,
in realty, it is not checked by the police strictly.
To update license of air-pistol or pistol, it is strictly examined
whether you participated in enough number of shooting meets, and score
at them were enough to qualify the ownership.
B. Annual gun inspection.
Usually in spring, there's a day of annual gun inspection (the date
differs with police stations). You bring not only all guns but also
a paper to report the number of times you used gun (for practice,
shooting meet, hunting) as well as the number of bullets you consumed.
C. Certification of a lecture which is valid at the time of update.
To update of the license, valid certificate of gun regulation lecture is
necessary. It means you have to attend the lecture every three years.
Others
--------
A. There are many kinds of papers which you submit to the police at
various opportunities. The following is a list of them (not all of
them are needed every time).
o Application for ownership
o Application for license update
o Application to buy ammunition
o Paper to return expired paper to buy ammunition
o Signed paper that gun shop or ex-owner agrees to sell a gun to you,
which contains detailed description of the gun
o List of your family who live with you
o Abstract of your family register
o Past 10 years' record of your address, job, crime, and guns
you ever own
o Doctor's certification that you are not a user of drugs, and
satisfies some other physical conditions.
o Certification of gun lecture (for beginners, or for owners)
o Certification of practice course at a shooting range
B. If you have some crime history, using knife or guns, you cannot
apply for gun ownership for some amount of years.
Also, if you live with dangerous people, like member of Yakuza,
it may happen application is rejected.
C. In Japan, most policemen are transferred every several years to avoid
their adhesion with residents. In case of a policeman who is
in charge of handling gun ownership, he is transferred every two years.
D. Because only one policeman works for gun ownership in each police
station, I experienced several times that he was absent for criminal
investigation. What I do when I have some business about gun ownership
is to call him in the morning to check his convenient time, then
go to the police station. So, it is often necessary to take
annual leave of a day or half just to submit papers.
I hope some reformation about this inconvenience.
E. The most popular accident caused by legal gun owner is to shoot the
colleague mistakenly at hunting.
In total, 10 to 20 accidents on legally owned guns happen every year.
N.R.A.J is proud of its record of no accident at shooting meets.
F. The number of owners of shot gun and air rifle are, if my memory is
correct, around 35,000 respectively, whereas owners of rifles are 1/10
of them.
G. Guns must be kept in your house in a specially designed locker.
One exception is pistol (not air pistol) which must be kept in a locker
of the nearby police station.
You must keep key of the locker in a secret place (your family should not
know it), and even if policemen comes to your home for inspection,
only owner should show guns.
He can reject to show guns if policemen come without prior notification.
It is to avoid an incident that guns are stolen by 'false police'.
H. To do hunting, you need another license for it.
Issuing of hunting license is under control of Governor of each
prefecture.
The first course for beginners is followed by written examination
follows like that for gun ownership. License is valid for 3 years.
I. When you apply for a gun, you specify its purpose (target shooting, or
hunting). You cannot use a gun for hunting if its purpose in the
gun's license is "target shooting"."
-
Private gun ownership is not legal in Japan except as noted here: http://yarchive.net/gun/politics/japan_gun.html
How can i take you seriously if you're going to claim the Japanese are allowed to own guns?
Australia is almost as bad and Australians are not allowed by law to defend themselves with any type of firearm.
England and Germany are almost as bad and I bet if I took the time I could some other European countries that are as restrictive.
Sheep to the slaughter.
-
Are not shotguns and rifles guns?
-
Originally posted by Viking
Are not shotguns and rifles guns?
Look at the restrictions on them and the effort required to obtain. I haven't looked up stats on ownership in either Japan or Australia but I'd bet they are both extremely low due to the effective ban.
-
How can I take you seriously when you post a link to a site that proves the Japanese are allowed to own guns? :lol
-
Originally posted by AKIron
Look at the restrictions on them and the effort required to obtain. I haven't looked up stats on ownership in either Japan or Australia but I'd bet they are both extremely low due to the effective ban.
LOL Are you serious?! They have to attend one lecture and one safety course before buying their first gun. Their gun regulations are simpler than most countries car license regulations. Are you suggesting that we are not allowed to have cars in Norway just because getting a car license is a 6 month affair of safety courses, tests and red tape? :lol
-
Wow, amazing what you can find with google.
C. Firearms and suicide
In Belgium 7 people commit suicide every day.
There are 24 suicides per 100.000 inhabitants.
This suicide figure is amongst the highest in the world, and EG 2,4 times higher than the
number of suicides in the USA (where there are at least 4 times more firearms).
http://home.scarlet.be/guncrime/wapenbezitcriminaliteitEnglish.pdf
Maybe they should ban those waffles? ;)
-
And what has that got to do with you being completely out of touch with reality with regard to "gun bans" in Europe, Japan and Australia?
Very poorly executed bait and switch: F-
-
Originally posted by Viking
And what has that got to do with you being completely out of touch with reality with regard to "gun bans" in Europe, Japan and Australia?
Very poorly executed bait and switch: F-
Bait and switch huh? You took my question to be about Europe which it was not specificially. You want to claim that Japan and australia haven't effectively banned private ownership of guns then we just don't have any common ground about which to discuss this subject. You want to pursue this antagonistically you'll have to engage someone else because I'm not up to it, sorry.
-
As of July 2006 there were 2,165,170 registered firearms in private ownership in Australia. That's one firearm for every 10 citizens. One in every 20 adult Australian citizens is a gun owner.
(http://www.ssaa.org.au/newssaa/political%20archive/graphs/LicenseesRegisteredFirearms.jpg)
Reality check Mr. Iron … reality check.
-
Holy wall of text Viking.. All you had to quote from it is this sentence:
It means we cannot own guns for defense purpose.
-
Your point?
-
Self-defense is the reason for owning guns that applies to everyone, not just sports or leisure. Self-defense is a more essential right than the right to plink tin targets or strutting your stuff in exchange for a token.
The point is that guns are entrusted to people for those things, but not to protect their lives. That's ironic, borderline absurd in a very fundamental way.
-
Originally posted by Viking
Your point?
the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
every one has the right to self defense, even if their govt says no.
anything else is gun baning.
-
Originally posted by moot
Self-defense is the reason for owning guns that applies to everyone, not just sports or leisure. Self-defense is a more essential right than the right to plink tin targets or strutting your stuff in exchange for a token.
The point is that guns are entrusted to people for those things, but not to protect their lives. That's ironic, borderline absurd in a very fundamental way.
While I agree with you in most respects that everyone should be allowed to own guns (being a gun owner myself) I disagree that the Japanese and Australians are “not allowed to own guns”. They clearly are allowed to own guns. I will however agree that their restrictions on gun ownership is unnecessarily strict and counter to my sense of freedom. Gun ban means just that … a ban. To my knowledge there are no western or democratic countries that have banned private gun ownership.
If AKiron had used a different term say “ridiculously strict gun control” I would have agreed with him, but instead he insisted on exaggerating and claiming that the populations of Japan and Australia did not have any guns and were defenseless. While I agree that they are defenseless I agree for a different reason: Even an armed population cannot stand against a modern army. However if you break into a house in Australia you run a 1 in 20 odds of the owner having a gun. I wouldn’t like those odds if I was a burglar.
-
Originally posted by john9001
the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
every one has the right to self defense, even if their govt says no.
anything else is gun baning.
Nope. Anything else in gun control. Gun banning is just that … a ban on guns, meaning no guns are allowed to be owned for any reason. Get your definitions right.
-
We haven't had a gun control debate around here lately.
-
The free swiss, you know, the ones who have every place filled with guns..
They're so free that for example car racing is banned in that country totally. That's right, banned.
That's why many formula1 drivers live there as a taxhaven. Their profession is against swiss law so by law they can't be taxed for their profession. They do the job always out of country so the government doesn't mess with them.
-
The motor-racing ban in Switzerland was lifted a week ago. There's speculation of F1 races being held there now.
-
LOL, nice point. Up here in Iceland you cannot buy a handgun or an automatic rifle bigger than .22 though.
Was going to mention Norway anyway ,- as a retired soldier or a member of the National Guard, you are allowed to keep you assault weapon or?
-
I was replying specificaly regarding the Japanese paradox of allowing firearms, but disallowing their using them for the really important, fundamental need. So fundamental that it made politics happen, all the way back to the time of things like Hammurabi.
About the futility of standing with better odds rather than worse ones.. is that just the scandinavian cynicism showing thru or what?
Really, 'dying on your feet' isn't just a fancy saying. And should you prefer to die on your knees, why deny others the right to do otherwise? You (not you) are going to die/fail anyway, as you (you) say, so what's the difference, right?
And if you do allow people to own firearms, why would it be a stretch to let them carry them?
What is the difference between trusting a person with a firearm that's shot in the privacy of a home where no witness can attest to the ethics of its use (I presume such is the case in the countries you mentionned, like australia etc), and one that's more likely shot in the presence of other people (like in the US)?
-
I took the time to read the entire letter posted by the Japanese citizen about firearms ownership in Japan.
Total number of gun owners in Japan is around 50,000, if I'm interpreting his data correctly. That number includes those owning co2 pistols and rifles, target pistols, shotguns and centerfire rifles.
His English was a bit confusing at times. Some statements are quite revealing nonetheless: Ownership of "air pistols" is limited to 500 people; ownership of pistols for target shooting is limited to only 50 people (probably the Olympic team hopefuls.) Out of a nation of 80 million.
The amount of ammunition that can be owned is limited. There is a ton of paperwork involved in every step of gun and ammunition purchasing and ownership, much of it frivolous. In addition, he states that the owner must do two things on an annual basis: take his gun in to a police station for an inspection; give an account of each and every round he fired during the preceding year.
Lastly, he stated that guns cannot be owned for self-defense.
So, one can say that gun ownership is legal in Japan....but beyond that the analogy begins to break down.
-
I wasn't aware that there was an analogy at all.
-
Originally posted by Angus
LOL, nice point. Up here in Iceland you cannot buy a handgun or an automatic rifle bigger than .22 though.
Was going to mention Norway anyway ,- as a retired soldier or a member of the National Guard, you are allowed to keep you assault weapon or?
Yes I have all my gear and my AG-3 at home with 100 rounds of ammo. In addition to my Mauser rifle and shotgun of course. I used to have an MP-5 submachinegun and a .45 pistol, but I sold them after only 7-8 months of use due to too little time to use them at the range to justify owning them. I was getting tired of blasting holes in paper anyways, hunting is so much more rewarding. :)
-
Out of curiousity, do you snipe birds for instance? And what do you use?
-
Originally posted by Viking
The motor-racing ban in Switzerland was lifted a week ago. There's speculation of F1 races being held there now.
I'm sure that's because armed militia revolted and overcame the government?
-
More likely the government wanted to tax the driver's profession.
-
Originally posted by Angus
Out of curiousity, do you snipe birds for instance? And what do you use?
Nope I do not snipe birds if by that you mean shooting them with a scoped small-game rifle like a .22 LR. I have thought about it though, but for now I only hunt with the shotgun (old Russian side-by-side I bought off my dad). The Mauser is an M98 "heimeværnsmauser". It’s a K98 re-chambered to the .30-06 round and used by the Norwegian army after WWII. I haven’t gotten around to scoping it yet, but I have to if I'm going to hunt seals this autumn.
-
Ok then... I have no problem with your-0-peeean gun control so long as I am able to carry concealed any type of handgun I want. and.. every other adult who is not insane can too.
And why not? In the US there are no problems with concealed carry holders. Why would anyone want to restrict them?
If your-0-peeans are so much smarter and fairer and better than Americans then they should trust their fellow citizens even more with firearms.
beetl...errr.. "ferndale" I can take a picture of any US city and you will not see firearms in the crowd.. there will be firearms.. you just won't see em.
When there is a riot you will see em.. when a concealed carry holder or citizen uses em the 1-3 million times a year to stop crimes you will see em but... not in a random picture unless you are very lucky.
you euro girls are so funny... with your womanly gun control and socialist governments... your secularist panic over death... why not just crawl back into the womb?
lazs
-
Objectively, one must wonder about the sexual predilictions of some of the Euro-posters on these boards, for they're always talking about grabbing our "guns."
-
Originally posted by Shuckins
Objectively, one must wonder about the sexual predilictions of some of the Euro-posters on these boards, for they're always talking about grabbing our "guns."
Objectively speaking that parallelism is entirely in your mind. Now what does that tell us? :D
-
Sounds like the Japanese gun laws exist to foster Olympic shooting sports only, judging from those stats, and the particulars quoted.
Its "effectively" a ban, any other definition is grasping at semantics.
You can say the old Soviet Union didnt have a ban on guns because of "civilian" Olympic shooting teams too I guess, but it don't float. Its a ban.
Less so in Australia, they can at least own hunting rifles.
-
MrRipley....what I'm saying is that you guys need to grab your own guns.
Oh...wait...you're already doing that....
My bad. Pray....DO carry on.
:D
Regards, Shuckins
-
Originally posted by Shuckins
Objectively, one must wonder about the sexual predilictions of some of the Euro-posters on these boards, for they're always talking about grabbing our "guns."
How many gun threads have been started by European posters? The truth of the matter is that it is American posters that whine about how other Americans want to take away their guns. Then some express ignorant views about gun control in other countries, European countries in particular. The European posters then usually enter the fray.
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
Objectively speaking that parallelism is entirely in your mind. Now what does that tell us? :D
Yes, but then again sometimes a gun is just a gun, like Freud would have said. ;)
Originally posted by Squire
Sounds like the Japanese gun laws exist to foster Olympic shooting sports only, judging from those stats, and the particulars quoted.
In the case of handguns that is obviously true. The Japanese gun owner even said so.
Originally posted by Squire
Its "effectively" a ban, any other definition is grasping at semantics.
On handguns yes.
Originally posted by Squire
You can say the old Soviet Union didnt have a ban on guns because of "civilian" Olympic shooting teams too I guess, but it don't float. Its a ban.
The citizens of the USSR were allowed to own hunting rifles and shotguns. Military buffs should be aware of this since it is common knowledge (even made the movies) that the famous Soviet sniper Vasily Grigoryevich Zaytsev learned to shoot as a child.
Originally posted by Squire
Less so in Australia, they can at least own hunting rifles.
So can the Japanese. Did you even read what the Japanese gun owner wrote?
-
Ahheeheehee!
My humor must be too subtle. I poked fun at the boys and one of them took me seriously. :rofl
Regards, Shuckins
-
I never take you seriously Shuckins. ;)
-
I'm on my first real vacation in two years. Ah'm a bit giddy! :D
-
lol Have fun! :aok
-
Ya, I did.
Did you?
"Air" guns (which aren't firearms, period), and some long excarerbated process down the road, a very small # can actually shoot some rifles if they belong to all the right groups ect ect ect...
Its effectively a ban.
I bet North Korea has a "free shooting society" too if you asked the govt spokesmen. :rofl
-
Originally posted by Squire
Ya, I did.
Then perhaps you should be more worried about your apparent failing eyesight.
Here, I’ll re-post the important sections and cut out anything that can confuse you:
B. Shot gun.
Prior to go to gun shop, you have to take practical shooting course,
followed by examination.
After the approval, you have the course at a shooting range and pass
it (it is quite easy). Then, you go to a gun shop, determine the gun
to buy, and ask clerks to write the paper.
You need to be at least 20 years old.
When you get notification from the police about permission,
you go to the police station to receive license booklet, take it to the
gun shop and receive the gun. Then within two weeks, you have to go to
the police station again with the gun to have it inspected and stumped on
the license.
SB - Small Bore rifle (0.22 caliber, rim-fire)
------------------------------------------------
A. Become a member of a branch of National Rifle Association of
Japan, then become a member of N.R.A.J. itself.
B. Participate in a few hour's lecture by N.R.A.J., and get certification.
C. Participate in at least two shooting meet per year before you apply for
SB.
D. Get certification of skill of shooting.
In case of shooting in Standing position, the score of criteria is
300 for S60, and 200 for S40. It is quite easy.
E. By satisfying above A,B,C,D, then you can apply for SB to N.R.A.J.
What you get if you pass the examination is recommendatory letter that
you are suitable for shooter of N.R.A.J.
F. Submit above letter as well as many other papers to the police station.
G. Take a practical shooting course at a shooting range, and get a
certification.
H. Apply for a gun to buy.
LB - Large Bore rifles (center-fire)
--------------------------------------
There are two purposes you can use LB, one is sports shooting under
control of N.R.A.J., and the other is hunting.
A. For rifle shooting as sports, the requisite to apply for it are
as follows.
a. It is over one year since you have owned a SB.
b. You have already participated in 2 shooting meet per year with SB.
You apply for recommendatory letter to N.R.A.J., and follow the similar
steps (without practice course in a shooting range) as SB.
It looks only bolt action rifles can be allowed.
B. For hunting purpose, you must have continuous 10 years' history to
have own shot gun or SB. You simply apply for a gun to the police
station.
Now this seems fairly easy. Shotguns within a couple of months of red tape, and one safety course. Small bore rifles after a year or so of practice in their national gun club. Large bore rifles after another year.
-
Originally posted by Viking
Nope I do not snipe birds if by that you mean shooting them with a scoped small-game rifle like a .22 LR. I have thought about it though, but for now I only hunt with the shotgun (old Russian side-by-side I bought off my dad). The Mauser is an M98 "heimeværnsmauser". It’s a K98 re-chambered to the .30-06 round and used by the Norwegian army after WWII. I haven’t gotten around to scoping it yet, but I have to if I'm going to hunt seals this autumn.
SEAL KILLER LOL
Anyway catching geese off guard is quite rewarding...once you have them in the kitchen, and a .22 magnum is well enough, but it's okay to use a 223 too or something even bigger, just pick the bullets well so you have something to eat :D
Do you hunt reindeers too round your place?
-
Originally posted by lazs2
Ok then... I have no problem with your-0-peeean gun control so long as I am able to carry concealed any type of handgun I want. and.. every other adult who is not insane can too.
And why not? In the US there are no problems with concealed carry holders. Why would anyone want to restrict them?
If your-0-peeans are so much smarter and fairer and better than Americans then they should trust their fellow citizens even more with firearms.
beetl...errr.. "ferndale" I can take a picture of any US city and you will not see firearms in the crowd.. there will be firearms.. you just won't see em.
When there is a riot you will see em.. when a concealed carry holder or citizen uses em the 1-3 million times a year to stop crimes you will see em but... not in a random picture unless you are very lucky.
you euro girls are so funny... with your womanly gun control and socialist governments... your secularist panic over death... why not just crawl back into the womb?
lazs
Here is something to ponder on.
Imagine a town in the USA, of say 10.000 people where there is imminent danger and only one way out, and there may not be space for all. You have very little time for evac. Will you see chaos? And will you see firearms?
-
Originally posted by Viking
As of July 2006 there were 2,165,170 registered firearms in private ownership in Australia. That's one firearm for every 10 citizens. One in every 20 adult Australian citizens is a gun owner.
Good luck Viking, no amount of proof will sway this crowd.
Technically they are in fact right you know, it IS illegal for a private citizen to own any form of gun down here.
A gun being an entirely differant thing than a rifle, shotgun,pistol, revolver or other smallarm .
(couldn't help it, my uncle was artillery, wouldnt have a bar of anyone referring to a mere rifle as a gun)
-
Originally posted by Angus
SEAL KILLER LOL
Anyway catching geese off guard is quite rewarding...once you have them in the kitchen, and a .22 magnum is well enough, but it's okay to use a 223 too or something even bigger, just pick the bullets well so you have something to eat :D
Do you hunt reindeers too round your place?
Lol, yeah the Seals are considered pests here since they attack the fish farms along out coast. There’s even a bounty on them, not much of course, but it pays the ammunition and some of the traveling expenses. Note to the Americans: If we had dolphins we would kill them too! :D
No I don’t hunt reindeer here. If I did the Same would be hunting ME. They own most of the reindeer herds. It would be like me coming over to your farm and shooting at your cows.
-
Originally posted by Bluedog
Good luck Viking, no amount of proof will sway this crowd.
Technically they are in fact right you know, it IS illegal for a private citizen to own any form of gun down here.
A gun being an entirely differant thing than a rifle, shotgun,pistol, revolver or other smallarm .
(couldn't help it, my uncle was artillery, wouldnt have a bar of anyone referring to a mere rifle as a gun)
Hehe, good point. ;)
-
Originally posted by Viking
Yes, but then again sometimes a gun is just a gun, like Freud would have said.
Sigmund Freud: "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity."
-
Looking at his from Lazs again:
"you euro girls are so funny... with your womanly gun control and socialist governments... your secularist panic over death... why not just crawl back into the womb?"
I actually think this is a reverse. You're a scared person youself, and to the extent that you probably have to have a gun under your pillow to feel better. And if you have a criminal record and lived up here, the authorities would not allow you to have a gun at all.....in any case not a handgun.
And Viking...also a bounty on seals here I belive, but hte reason is ringworm.
-
Originally posted by Angus
Looking at his from Lazs again:
"you euro girls are so funny... with your womanly gun control and socialist governments... your secularist panic over death... why not just crawl back into the womb?"
I actually think this is a reverse. You're a scared person youself, and to the extent that you probably have to have a gun under your pillow to feel better. And if you have a criminal record and lived up here, the authorities would not allow you to have a gun at all.....in any case not a handgun.
And Viking...also a bounty on seals here I belive, but hte reason is ringworm.
I have no reason to be scared. Never had a brake in our any other crime comment against me our my family. Do I feel the need to carry a gun NO. Do i feel that having a gun is better than not having a gun YES. Your talking about culture differences. Yall like to throw stones we TEXANS like to chunk .45's. If you were a burglar and knew every house you broke into was a armed grandmother would that be a bigger deterrence than a over weight cop at the donut shop?
Come on, yall are disarmed for a reason. We stand for a individuals rights and the right to bare arms makes us unlike any other country in the world. Remember that the only person that can save your life is yourself.
-
Hmm....love to ship a few hundred-thousand of our gang-bangers to one of the "gun free" European countries and see how long it remains "non-violent."
I'll guarantee that you haven't seen anything like them since the 1940s.
By the way...the shootings of firefighters during the LA rights was not done by law-abiding gun owners. They were done by the same criminal elements mentioned above.
As to New Orleans....well...the criminal element had its way unless opposed by gun-toting, law-abiding citizens.
Dem Cajuns shoot back. Sho.
-
the guy you are looking for is crumpp and HTC PNG'd him for making too much sense. I have lost contact with him but I'll email him for you and ask.
-
Colombia definitely has more gun crime than the U.S.
Related to the drug culture and the gangs that control it....as it is in the United States.
Of course, the Colombian government could get the violence under control by passing a few laws and confiscating the criminals' guns...
....and search every plane, train, automobile, and ship that enters the country....as well as guarding every mountain path and goat trail that crosses its borders into other nations to prevent the unlawful entry of firearms.
Yep, that's the ticket. If that doesn't work, Colombians who are sick of the violence could emigrate to a more peaceful country or city.
Belfast isn't too bad these days....now that the British Government and the I.R.A. are playing kissy-face.
-
Originally posted by Ferndale
No, some countries never became armed in the first place, which is not the same as being "disarmed"
i can't think of one, can you help me out here.
-
Thanks Storch!
-
I email him too every now and then, reminds me that we were having a big BoB debate, where he made no sense at all :D
-
no matter what... you can't tell me that I will never be attacked or need a firearm. No matter what... firearms stop 1-3 million crimes a year here.
I don't care if your countries allow you to have some kind of rifle or shotgun.. You can't travel with one.. it is not something you can put on the nightstand of the motel you are staying at... It is not something you can carry around with you.
Beet.... er...ferndale.. how many firefighters and citizens were killed in our riots and how many rioters/looters... I like the odds.
Do what you like in england... I wouldn't want to live there no matter what... it would be in my short list of 10 countries I would avoid living in... a shame really since they do speak a form of english.
lazs
-
nice barb lazs
-
Ferndale ... how many times do I have to tell you? Do not upset the colonials! :D
-
A handgun works best for me in most cases... you guys are welcome to carry whatever you like... none of my business.
I don't believe it is anyones right to tell me what kind of firearm I can own. I am living under far too many restrictions as it is. All brought on by womanly democrats. I am not interested in what people from decaying socialist countries have to say about the whole thing... I can pretty much guess anyway... it will be some womanly crap about saving us from ourselves and "for our own good".
So again.. how many firemen died from being shot in riots and how many scumbag looters died?
lazs
-
are you saying that the guys who shot at the firemen were doing so legally with legal firearms?
They are criminals... they don't care what laws you pass... they don't care what laws they break... they don't care what you want or if you are right or wrong.. they only understand a gun pointed at them.
If there is shooting or people wanting to harm me.... I want a gun to protect myself. You make it so that there can never be another gun in the world and there will never be a chance that a bad person will overpower an innocent and then we can talk about it again.
But... do what you want. be sure to wear that seatbelt tho huh? I mean... there is a one in a million chance it might be of use to you so don't forget to buckle up... make sure that fire insurance is paid up to ya hear?
so how many firemen were killed by guns? by handguns? by legal guns of any kind? How many rioters on their way to loot and pillage and kill were killed or chased off?
seems guns were a plus.
lazs
-
oh.. seems beet lied about the french riots...
http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2005/Paris-Riots-Worsen7nov05.htm
ten firefighters were shot... not in the US... but in france .
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/11/04/world/main1009957.shtml
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/07/international/europe/07france.html?ex=1289019600&en=e7e867f571abceac&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
when the shooting starts.. I don't care what the laws are and if the shooters are breaking the law or not.. I want a gun to defend me and mine.
you of course, can continue to bury your head in the sand.
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
I can pretty much guess anyway... it will be some womanly crap about saving us from ourselves and "for our own good".
Yea....until the crap gets real deep, then it will be "Save us please"............as usual.
-
Originally posted by Jackal1
Yea....until the crap gets real deep, then it will be "Save us please"............as usual.
"as usual"?, refresh me on this, when did i ask to be "saved"?
-
:cool:
-
Don't belive we had anyone shot in the country for a couple of years now.
As for murder rate, I think this year still stands at zero.
Utopia?
-
Utopia would be that zero crime rate in addition to a guarantee of gun ownership being uninfringed and as unrestricted as in the US.
-
Plus, free beer, no politicians and women who never ask about "our relationship." :D
-
Governments don't make men equal...guns do.
-
Don't belive we had anyone shot in the country for a couple of years now.
As for murder rate, I think this year still stands at zero.
Utopia?
We have plenty of midsized towns in the US with a comprable population to Iceland and with a similarly impressive lack of violent crime crime. Utopia isn't all that hard to find even with broader freedoms to get int he way.
Charon
-
oh this is good... lambchop and ferndale and beetle all defending each other...
like sybil.
So now we say that ten firemen were wounded by firearms in french riots. and... one was stabbed. I don't want to be shot or stabbed or beaten or have my stuff burned... I want to shoot anyone who tries.
It is funny.. no matter what the laws.. the government can't protect you.. you are kidding yourself and just saying...it is relatively safe here so I will probly get away with not ever needing a gun.
angus says that restricted guns make his country a safe one with no murders... sortal like some north dakota counties... in population, ethnic mix and crime.
What we need to look at is gun laws anywhere that decreased murder and serious crime... what gun law has ever done that? well... none have.
I can however point to some lessening of gun restrictions that have reduced serious crime. I can point to the 1-3 million crimes a year here that are prevented with firearms and the little town that has an ordinance that says everyone MUST have a firearm and their reduction in crime.
lazs
-
Angus, Iceland may be murder free...but your population is very small, isolated, and largely homogenous. Those three factors in combination normally produce a low-crime rate.
In addition, things are not exactly perfect in the area of social behavior. Doesn't Iceland lead the world in alcoholism and teenage suicides?
Regards, Shuckins
-
angus... what gun laws in your country do you think are responsible for the low murder rate?
What gun laws are responsible for your high drunk and suicide rate?
Very restrictive gun laws do seem to increase suicide... take japan for instance...
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
angus... what gun laws in your country do you think are responsible for the low murder rate?
What gun laws are responsible for your high drunk and suicide rate?
Very restrictive gun laws do seem to increase suicide... take japan for instance...
lazs
For starters, the fact that the murder rate is that low where the gun laws are that strict rather suggests that the law are working.
Or do you suggest that ample availability of handguns in our country would perhaps improve this further?
As for suicides, well hurrah, you've been trying to do some homework. Okay, it's high. It's actually a worldwide thing, when you enter the dark northern zones, the suicide rate goes up respectively. Our country follows the pattern of the latitude, but with an abnormality, - our suicide (and depression) rate is quite a bit lower than to be expected. Go to 66°N in Norway, Russia or even Canada, and you'll see worse figures. Do you suggest that ample availability of handguns in our country would perhaps fix that?
As for Japan, - that's Japan and the Japanese. They don't need guns for suicide, - au contrare. But the guncrimes (as well as capital crimes) are way lower than in the USA. Well, that's the Japanese....
Oh and Shuckins, - we're not that isolated, - however enough for the gun law to work. In the USA, how would you expect that total gun freedom in one state would not "leak" into another one.
And finally, we have guns. I have 3. Just no assault weapons and handguns. And the law is all about keeping them safe and in the right hands. I plan for more :D Suggestion for a Sniper rifle?
-
try to keep up angus.
What was your serious crime/homicide rate before all your gun laws and which gun laws reduced said rate?
lazs
-
For starters, the fact that the murder rate is that low where the gun laws are that strict rather suggests that the law are working.
As I have posted in the past, on this very subject with you, there are plenty of communities within the US that have a comparable population to your country and a comparably low homicide rate even with our "lax" gun laws. That would suggest that the gun laws issue is irrelevant compared to other factors. Just as it is irrelevant with suicide rates. I have no more to fear in my community than you do in yours, but should I lose the luck lottery I can potentially even the odds on an armed criminal or a vicious, prison-sculpted unarmed criminal or a group of unarmed criminals without having to rely on the scoped hunting rifle in the tight confines of my house that I don't have in the first place because I don't hunt.
Frankly, in the majority of neighborhoods even in a city like Chicago I have little extra to fear statistically. I would not be found hanging out on the corner with my gangbanger friends to be caught up in a driveby because I disrespected some thug or invaded someone's drug distribution turf. Roughly 80+ percent of all firearm crime is criminal on criminal, in about 5 counties that have a major urban population center in a pattern that dates back to the earliest immigrant/urban days like found in the movie "Gangs of New York." Just a haves vs have not, land of opportunity, ghetto dumping ground kind of thing that's a bit hard to turn around these days.
But, it would really suck in a permanent way to be on the wrong side of those odds -- as unlikely as it is.
Charon
-
charon... I am sure glad you are on my side on this instead of against me.
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
try to keep up angus.
What was your serious crime/homicide rate before all your gun laws and which gun laws reduced said rate?
lazs
We never did get armed that well, - the gun laws sort of came along with the economical potential of buying them.
And of course the law workd better because of our "isolation", - gun running up here is not easy. I really always scratch my head about why the US has it different between states that are not seperated by anything except the law.
And Charon:
"As I have posted in the past, on this very subject with you, there are plenty of communities within the US that have a comparable population to your country and a comparably low homicide rate even with our "lax" gun laws."
Of course there are, but you will find NONE of them with the same diversity. We are, after all, a COUNTRY. We have our spectrum of folks, we have our culture, and we actually have a lot of emigrants.
As for our pattern of the guncrime, there is some candy there. Such as the country's first gun-armed bank robbery made by a US citizen(as well as hijacking a car and driver, - he got caught!), 2 gun-dead in a stretch killed in a crime of passion (the shooters both shot themselves thereafter), and the latest gundead was killed by a smuggled handgun. (kids).
The total amount of guns may not be up to the quantity of the U.S., but there are many guns about. Our diversity is the ban of handguns. And the law seems to hold nicely, - with an economy-boom, increased population, and lots of immigrants, the guncrime percentage sticks to the flatline. Aint that nice ;)
-
Of course there are, but you will find NONE of them with the same diversity. We are, after all, a COUNTRY. We have our spectrum of folks, we have our culture, and we actually have a lot of emigrants.
Nationality:
noun: Icelander(s)
adjective: Icelandic
Ethnic groups:
homogeneous mixture of descendants of Norse and Celts 94%, population of foreign origin 6%
Wow Angus. You got me there. Iceland is a real melting pot. Let's look at the US.
According to the Census Bureau's 2005 American Community Survey the US population is as follows:[7]
White American, 74.7%, or about 215.3 million (the definition of White includes European Americans, Middle Eastern Americans (e.g. Arab Americans, Iranian Americans), Central Asian Americans, and Hispanic Americans who reported as White in the 2000 Census)
Black or African American 12.1% or 34.9 million
Asian American 4.3% or 12.5 million,
American Indian 0.8% or 2.4 million
Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander 0.1% or 0.4 million
Some other race 6% or 17.3 million
Two or more races 1.9% or 5.6 million
[Note: even the "white" catagory includes everything from Arabian to hispanic descent]
The homicide rate in Iceland is 1 per 100k with a roughly 300,000 total population.
The City of Plano Texas, with a population of 250,096 has a homicide rate of 0.8 per 100k. Texas is, of course, the home of stringent gun control in the Icelandic model as we all know.
What about its diversity? The racial makeup of the Plano is 78.26% White, 5.02% African American, 0.36% Native American, 10.18% Asian, 0.04% Pacific Islander, 3.86% from other races, and 2.28% from two or more races. Hispanic or Latino of any race were 10.07% of the population.
Ann Arbor Michigan, with a population of 343,400 was actually 0 in 2005. Again, plenty of guns around. 74.68% White, 8.83% Black or African American, 0.29% Native American, 11.90% Asian, 0.04% Pacific Islander, 1.21% from other races, and 3.05% from two or more races. 3.34% of the population were Hispanic American or Latino. Because of the pull of the university, the city has one of the highest foreign-born population percentages in the state sitting at 16.6%. Oddly though, Detroit, in the same state, had a rate of 39.3. Hmmm.
Our diversity is the ban of handguns. And the law seems to hold nicely, - with an economy-boom, increased population, and lots of immigrants, the guncrime percentage sticks to the flatline. Aint that nice
Lets compare ICELAND and DETROIT specifically to show how the whole gun thing is probably all that sets the two apart.
Diverse population
Iceland
homogeneous mixture of descendants of Norse and Celts 94%, population of foreign origin 6%
Detroit
As of 2001, the City of Detroit had 81.55 percent African Americans, 12.26 percent white, 0.33 percent Native American, 0.97 percent Asian 0.03 percent Pacific Islander, 2.54 percent from other races, and 2.32 percent from two or more races. 4.96 percent of the population was Hispanic or Latino of any race. The city's foreign-born population stood at 4.8 percent. The Detroit suburbs in Oakland County and Macomb County are primarily white. Oakland County is among the most affluent counties in the nation. Of the African-Americans who live in the metropolitan area, about 70 percent live within the Detroit city limits.
Population density per km2
Iceland = 2.8
Detroit = 2,646.7
Economy
Iceland
The economy of Iceland is small but well-developed, with a gross domestic product estimated at US$10.57 billion in 2005 (and a per capita GDP of $38,100, which is among the world's highest.)[1]
Detroit
n March 2007, metropolitan Detroit's unemployment rate was 6.5 percent.[54] In the city, the unemployment rate was 14.2 percent at the end of 2005, leaving Detroit with more than one-third of residents below the poverty line.[55] Parts of the city have abandoned and burned out shells of buildings. The city has struggled to obtain funding to demolish blighted properties and the homes... Detroit still has the highest percentage of people living below the poverty line (one-third). The unemployment rate of 6.8 percent trails only hurricane-paralyzed New Orleans.
Percapita GDP = $29,465
Yeah, obviously the only difference between Iceland and the US as far as homicide rates are concerend are the gun laws. Other than that, you could step of the plane from Iceland in Detroit or LA or NY or Chicago and hardly know you left home.
Charon
-
:rofl
-
So may I assume that by slackening our gun laws as well as allowing handguns would lower our crime rate even further?
And may I also assume that that would be the case in the homogenous as well as homogenetic U.K.?
You're comparing a country to a city. How about finding a city of 200.000 and comparing it to...Reykjavík? Or comparing our country to a whole state or zone in the USA? Or comparing the USA as a whole to a country like Britain? Or comparing Detroit to Glasgow? or Hamburg?
As for the "melting pot", your stats shot the current figure of foreign citizens. They were at only 2.6% in 1999. Those who come are mostly labour folks from countries low in economy, mostly Eastern-Europeans and Asians. In my town, the figure is between 10 and 20%, in some towns immigrants are half the population. And in some areas you will not find a foreigner.
As for the population density, some 90%+ (out of memory) of the population live in clusters (towns or the city). The rural areas have very low density and little population and most of the country is absolutely unpopulated.
Now, to the homicide rate, and capital crime. I tried to find some stats, but the bureau of statistic doesn't bother to list capital crime as a seperate. But I know it is very low indeed, and in almost if not all categories even way lower than in the UK, which in the capital department is much lower than the USA.
Apples to apples, and oranges to oranges.
-
Originally posted by Angus
You're comparing a country to a city. How about finding a city of 200.000 and comparing it to...Reykjavík?...Apples to apples, and oranges to oranges.
He compared about a quarter of a million people to a quarter of a million people...
The rural areas have very low density and little population and most of the country is absolutely unpopulated.
Hey! The USA's rural areas have low population density too! As a matter of fact, I can't think of one rural area in my state that has the population density of say, Manhattan.
-
So you do support my suggestion of comparing our country to i.e. a whole state. Or comparing your country to another big country? Or a Metropolis to Metropolis.
One thing about Detroit, - it actually has a lower percentage of foreign born population than we do. So much for that....
Then on to crime comparison. It's not just murder...
(our stats AFAIK list murder and manslaughter (That includes careless driving for instance) under the same figure), - you can also look into % in jail, % rape, and %armed robbery.
While no nation has clean hands, out of the western nations the USA sticks out as the king, while being the one with most of armament in the circuylation. So which way is it to be, is it the social sector, or is it the availability of deadly weapons?
I sort of think it's both. The weapons don't mix well with a troublesome society.
-
"Hey! The USA's rural areas have low population density too! As a matter of fact, I can't think of one rural area in my state that has the population density of say, Manhattan."
Come on, you can do better than that.
Our unpopulated area is basically the middle chunk of the whole country. Fly the country across, and on 80% of the stretch there is absolutely nobody.
The population, in short, is not as scattered as you might think. Come to think of it, it's actually quite comfortably scattered most of the time.
Then on some stretches, you have to drive 100 km to find a little town where a big part of the population are foreign labourers, then another 100 km where the case becomes the same. But again, they can't buy guns, cos they don't have an Icelandic passport :D
-
Originally posted by Angus
" But again, they can't buy guns, cos they don't have an Icelandic passport :D
i don't have a Icelandic passport and i can buy a gun.
-
Originally posted by Angus
Come on, you can do better than that.
Our unpopulated area is basically the middle chunk of the whole country. Fly the country across, and on 80% of the stretch there is absolutely nobody.
Apparently you have not been to Oregon.
(http://www.skidmore.edu/~m_bohene/OregonPopulationDensity.gif)
That dark green in the NW corner is the Portland metropolis is easily 80% of the population of the state. Go to the SE quarter and you can be very alone.
Of course, I was pointing out that rural means low population density.
-
forget it.. they will never get it.. they have lived under socialism and have been fed propoganda about America for too long. They don't know anything about handguns or living in a diverse society.
A lot of em will learn soon enough tho. England is upset (read other threads) about third worlders coming to england and not observing tradition... not speaking the language and... bringing crime.. They may have to rethink guns soon enough.
lazs
-
Then on some stretches, you have to drive 100 km to find a little town where a big part of the population are foreign labourers, then another 100 km where the case becomes the same. But again, they can't buy guns, cos they don't have an Icelandic passport...
One thing about Detroit, - it actually has a lower percentage of foreign born population than we do. So much for that....
You see, thats just it... foreign laborers, as in people with jobs. Also, I personally don't believe that being foreign or being of a particular race etc. is itself some sort of genetic driver for crime. But, it does tend to lead to a community of us vs them, when you concentrate such people in a urban ghetto without local economic opportunity or access to a quality education and then have mainstream society ignore them (and, of course, blame the results on guns instead of failed social policies). Look at the phenomenon of "snitchin'." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Snitchin' In these communities the career path of drug dealer, gangbanger and prostitute become mainstream choices. Minimum wage as a day laborer competing against illegals or the flashy thug lifestyle of drugs, cash and bling -- which to choose?
You completely ignore the economic differences. In fact, I should have stated earlier that the US, with a population 100 times that of Iceland, has entire urban ghettos with the populaion of Iceland.
Economy
Iceland
The economy of Iceland is small but well-developed, with a gross domestic product estimated at US$10.57 billion in 2005 (and a per capita GDP of $38,100, which is among the world's highest.)[1]
Detroit
n March 2007, metropolitan Detroit's unemployment rate was 6.5 percent.[54] In the city, the unemployment rate was 14.2 percent at the end of 2005, leaving Detroit with more than one-third of residents below the poverty line.[55] Parts of the city have abandoned and burned out shells of buildings. The city has struggled to obtain funding to demolish blighted properties and the homes... Detroit still has the highest percentage of people living below the poverty line (one-third). The unemployment rate of 6.8 percent trails only hurricane-paralyzed New Orleans.
Per capita GDP = $29,465
Now, lets put 1/3 of Iceland's population out of work, house most of that 1/3 tightly in a city like Reykjavík and then make most of those people the outsiders -- the foreign labors for example-- give them a subsistence level handout and promptly ignore them like they don't even exist. I would imagine the crime rates, including violent crime and firearm crime even with your restrictions (criminals don't obey laws), would change somewhat dramatically, IMO.
As noted, the US is 100 times the size of Iceland, and the US even has a higher per capita GDP. But, there are areas with far greater and far less population densities. In a city like Chicago, there can be a tremendous economic disparity between communities (in the same city) separated by a two-lane urban street. Million $ condos on one side, a housing project on the other and the police in the good community keeping the bad people out instead of trying to reduce crime in the bad communities themselves. There are areas of the US where crime is far less and areas where it is far greater. Iceland represents the equivalent of an upper middle class US suburban community from an economic standpoint. Good for you. The average American would have no more to fear walking down a street in 99 percent of the US than the average Icelander at home. Most violent firearm crime is criminal on criminal, in improvised urbanized areas, and generally confined to about 5 counties each containing a major metropolitan area.
Or comparing the USA as a whole to a country like Britain?
I have done this several times before and the same general theme is at work there. In fact, you have heavily participated in some of those (reference this thread, starting page 3 for my specifics and we can both save some time):
http://forums.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=183162&referrerid=5405
and here's another
http://forums.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=200488&referrerid=5405
In some communities in those countries you can see very much the Detroit factor at work (if not more so, in a few), and at work as a growing trend as society changes and the US urban ghetto model becomes more common (taking dubious credit for it starting here first, not its spread by any means). I predict (not really going out on a limb here) that we will see far more similarities between the US and Britain, France etc in coming decades as these differences decrease -- stringent firearm laws or not.
Charon
-
charon... I am sure glad you are on my side on this instead of against me.
The sad thing is Lazs, it tends to be a fact free debate. I state the facts well in writing because that is a natural skill set I have and that's how I earn a living -- analyzing issues and and communicating the result.
Unfortunately, that process is generally shut off where the 2nd is concerned. I didn't create these facts and many, many have tried to get them in the public domain regularly for years. For my part, I have written numerous letters to the editor -- all fact based and referenced, most short and to the specific editorial format required for such pieces, only to see them ignored. Instead we get 11 emotional appeals to "save the children" not only lacking facts but often filled with inaccuracies and one or two letters from bubba gun nut along the lines of: "I lik shoutin my GUNS!!! Take em away and I Killz uz!!!"
And it's not just me. I know of several oped writers in the Chicago area who do a fantastic job (which you can see because they post their pieces on AR-15.com), but somehow their well considered letters never get printed by the Trib or Sun Times either. Hmmm. By the same paper that will post it's own perspective pieces on such issues as a copy and paste (literally) from a Web page on Brady.org.
The only saving grace today is forums like this to bypass the gatekeepers. I think, actually, that it is starting to work. That and calling state officials every month over the latest hysterical legislation coming down the pike (with help from the Web for the call to action) and all the other crap you have to go though in Ill to have a common but individually held right. We have recently been counter protesting against Rev, Jesssy J who has decided it's easier to lead a protest outside a local gunshop than outside a local gang leader's house asking HIM to stop the crime and violence, or to confront the community over issues like "snitchin'"
I missed the counter protest yesterday, but instead I did buy a gun, a nice $80 MN 91/30 :) I will likely get the sweet XD-45 I handled there as well. I't good to still live in America, at least as long as it lasts.
Charon
-
beetle/ferndale/lamchop (and any other personality waiting to get out and agree with itself) democracy can, and is usually, socialism.. democracy needs to be tempered with a very strong and complete bill of rights in order to not be as bad as tyranny. I fear unfettered democracy.
charon... I might add that I am glad that the left is so lame in their arguements. I tend to put the facts in my arguements to but can't help throwing in the barb or getting lazy in the expansion of the ideas... I guess I have been doing it too long.
That is why I am grateful for your type of addition to the thing. I think we need every type we can get (except possibly lefty style exaggeration) on our side. My style may sway some.. yours another.
fortunately... the left is a broken record and full of exaggeration, hysteria, and a total lack of understanding or experiance on the subject. They don't know an M1 from an M14.
Also.. their dishonesty helps us... look at beetles pathetic pretending to be other people for instance.
lazs
-
Originally posted by john9001
i don't have a Icelandic passport and i can buy a gun.
Don't be silly. Not if you live here. Neither can the polish or the chinese guy who work in the meat packing plant.
But I can go to the USA and buy myself a nice .45 without having a US passport. Even more hardware.
-
yes you can because here we don't fear tools. well except in the blue states there they fear the people.
-
Short one here.
If a "socialist" environment puts crime at rest while yer factbook puts the lifestandards as rather high, and while many less folks are in jail than in the USA, ain't that good ?
:D
-
Originally posted by Angus
But I can go to the USA and buy myself a nice .45 without having a US passport.
... and wonder where the OMGHUGE American gun crime is.
-
Well, some of it is here:
Assaults: 2,238,480
Car thefts: 1,147,300
Drug offences: 560.1 per 100,000 people
Murders: 12,658
Murders (per capita): 0.042802 per 1,000 people
Murders with firearms: 8,259
Murders with firearms (per capita): 0.0279271 per 1,000 people
Rapes: 89,110
Rapes (per capita): 0.301318 per 1,000 people
Population in prison: 0.7%
So here comes the poser. If there were less firearms in circulation and the claims that firearms decrease crime, where do you think the stats would go to. Is the USA so different from the rest of the western world?
-
Car thefts: 1,147,300
:eek: There were 1,147,300 cars stolen at the point of a gun?:eek:
-
LOL
A country is only a utopia if you can carry weapons around???
Do you guys realise how stupid that is?
ITS REALLY STUPID.
-
no. everyone knows utopia is where grown men wear shorts to work.
-
Originally posted by LambChop
- could be avoided, if you would stop shooting your mouth off. :mad:
Is that what you told Tomato? You would blame lazs so easily for calling you for exactly what you are, and use it as an excuse to post more of the garbage that got you banned multiple times already.
Get a clue.. there's probably better things for you to do than parade your BS to get a rise out of the Lazs and AWMacs of this forum.
Curval - A Utopia allows you to do anything, no matter how trite or essential. That includes guns.
-
lol
I assume then that there would be guns in a utopia for shooting holes in paper or possibly garbage (actually would there be any garbage in a utopia?). There shouldn't be any need for a gun for defense in a utopia.
Making holes in paper is certainly a noble pursuit.
:rofl
-
No less noble than any other form of sportsmanship or craftsmanship, like running after a bag full of air and cheering everytime it gets past an imaginary rectangular boundary of some sort.
I doubt you do none of these sorts of things, and that you wouldn't if you lived in a Utopia.
The only unquestionably noble pursuit is of human progress to release mankind from its poverties: of being restrained to this single planet, of depending on others to sustain ourselves materialy, of the undisciplined mind that wastes its limited time to live on junk or to suffice itself with mediocre or minimal progress, etc.
Somewhat like striving to make Utopia happen, or get as close to it as we might. That would start with surviving to strive for it, which wouldn't happen if you were a Tibetan monk walking across an empty stretch of land with a Chinese bullseye on your head, etc.
-
what is wrong with making holes in paper? or tin cans or bad guys for that matter? Is it any less noble than smacking a little ball around with a club trying to knock it into a hole? A gun can put meat on the table or stop any kind of tyranny.. that seems fairly noble.
I have heard some here say they can defend themselves with golf clubs or cricket paddles but to hunt with them seems a little less than noble.
beetle/ferndale/lambchop... I am making you be dishonest?
lazs
-
Nothing wrong with it...I'm just "surprised" it is a prerequite for a utopian society.
-
I don't believe in a utopian society.. don't even want one really. there would be no room for any of us in one.
lazs
-
Originally posted by LambChop
- could be avoided, if you would stop shooting your mouth off. :mad:
Voted lamest statement on the BBS 2007........even for the Beetlings of this world. :aok
-
I think the most obvious thing that gets overlooked by the pro gun control folk is the scale of the actual problem. There is a focus on gun crime in the US media that goes beyond just "bad news sells." For example.
The nutjob that killed the five Amish school kids received 24/7 media circus coverage for at least two weeks. It not only included the facts of the crime but days of editorial focus on the issue. A few months ago a man in a nearby community set fire to a house and killed I believe it was 4-5 children. It barely made the local daily papers like the Trib, and then only for a day. Same impact on socitey, far different coverage.
The Cho guy at VT got his 24/7 media circus -- exactly like he planned. He even sent a press kit to NBC. No calls for sensible restrictions on the 1st amendment though. Regardless, as horrific as his crime was, and leaving aside the concealed carry debate and "find your victims here" zones it was also ignored that factually, arson is the primary mass killer and alcohol and motor vehicle do a pretty good job as well. In fact, firearms are fairly low on the list for professional mass killers -- terrorists -- if they can access any number of better methods.
The reality in America is, if you are not involved in urban criminal activity your personal risk from firearm violence is very small. Just look at the statistics with an open eye.
5 per 100,000 - not 5 per 100 or 5 per 1000 even. Would you feel any safer, realistically, if it was 2 per 100,000 or 1 per 100,000? Especially since, at least using Chicago PD info, AT LEAST 3 of those 5 are criminals killing criminals.
Risk by comparison x 100,000:
firearms - 5/2
Automobiles - 14
Tobacco - 650
Alcohol - 150
Heroin - 80 (fully banned, btw)
Cocaine - 4 (fully banned, btw)
And then there is Working for a living - 4. It's actually safer to be a criminal than to work for a living in the US :)
And Curval,
Bermuda may indeed be a utopia, but apparently crime, including firearm violence, is on the rise. Criminals are even smuggling in guns. Another utopian model in the region to look at with similar gun laws is Jamaica. Jamaica used to be as tranquil as Bermuda -- where the economic disparity was overlooked and the racial divide was not as important -- but a tipping point was passed in the 1970s and society changed. The have nots woke up.
You are likely very comfortable with the social stability in Jamaica today, where the social norms are respected and cultural stability helps circumvent some of the economic disparity. As long as there are enough jobs, and there is enough connection to tradition where people know their places in society -- all is swell -- but for the occasional stolen scooter. There of course is the promise that if things turn bad, only the police will have guns and the police will be on your side. You better hope that is true, because I bet you have an awful lot of cool expensive stuff in your house and a pretty wife that a criminal element would like to get their hands on if given the chance.
Of course, if things ever got that bad I imagine the white flight to other English speaking countries from the bankers and other haves would keep the airlines hopping for months.
BTW, here is a good article on some of these issues:
Probably in no other country is the devastation caused by restrictive firearm laws more evident than it is in Jamaica. Much of the criminality present today can be traced directly back to the Gun Court Act of 1974, intended to "take guns off the streets, out of the hands of criminals, and to lock up and keep gunmen away from decent society."
Instead, it has accomplished exactly the opposite. The Gun Court took guns only out of the hands of Jamaica's law-abiding, leaving them at the mercy of the criminals and the state. The abject failure of the Gun Court Act to achieve its stated purpose was pointed out in the Gleaner on February 1: "Twenty-seven years after the Gun Court was established as a division of the criminal justice system illegal guns remain a plague on society."
http://www.nationalreview.com/kopel/kopel091001.shtml
Charon
-
Charon,
I didn't claim that Bermuda was a utopia....it certainly isn't. There is no such place on earth.
I was merely commenting on Moot's suggestion that there could not be a utopia without guns.
Jamaica's real troubles began as a result of becoming Independent, something I pray never happens here.
-
It's not guns per se so much as something as idealized as 'utopia' by principle allowing for everything from furry sheep to fembots to guns or whatever it is that floats your boat.
Utopia showed up in this topic from Angus.. I certainly don't believe in it either, nor that guns would be the end all be all of such a world or a symptom of it.
-
Personally,
I don't think the US or most any place qualifies as a utopia for a variety of reasons. One man's utopia is another's hell.
I enjoy firearms from both a collector and hobby/shooting standpoint. I ultimately still appreciate the fact that it does give the people some final measure of power against the government that is "nice" to have. And, even though I will likely never need to use a firearm for self defense, should I have to it leaves the final control over my life and death in my hands.
I've seen nothing that even remotely convinces me that firearm bans work, or impact crime in any measurable way. I can look at other bans to see how easily they are bypassed by criminals, and look at data from cities, regions and countries that have various levels of restriction that indicate the common cliche -- criminals don't obey laws -- is true. If a criminal wants a gun, a black market will supply one. I see a lot of politicians that blame the tool -- the gun -- for their crime problems becasue that is a lot safer, and a lot easier, than trying to address the actual social cause of the criminality. All of this at the expense of people like myself.
Lately, I've watched some of those prison documentaries where they go into a maximum security wing and show the types of personalities and what daily life involves, etc. I have absolutely no doubt that should I encounter one of these individuals, the ONLY protection I would have that would give me ANY chance would be a gun. Even if he had a gun (in fact, I would likely have most of the advantages in that situation).
These criminals are closer to animal predators than human beings. They will kill without giving it a second though. They have a level of raw physical visiousness that would be stunning in an attack. They work out heavily, they are tough, they have been part of dozens of fights. It would likely be a one-punch fight. Finding one in your house in the middle of the night would be no different than finding a rabid wolf in your house.
Now, as I noted it is very unlikely that I will have to defend myself from a criminal. Firearm violence is demonized far out of proportion to actual risk. Home invasions are somewhat rare here outside of those that are drug crime related (though one just happened in the upper scale "handgun free" suburb of Wilmette). I have managed to avoid making wrong turns into bad neighborhoods for decades, including years spent living in Chicago. I was mugged once, just for kicks I believe, when I was leaving a seedy bar all drunk, but the odds of a battery incident are about 1 in 100 or so and I should have been more on my game in the first place.
But, if a violent, life or death self defense confrontation was to take place on my property, or if we slipped into a period of civil disorder (not something that I feel is entirely unlikely) then the ability to protect myself and my family is one that I feel is important. In fact, it's criminal that law abiding people in the urban hell holes usually find themselves entirely at the mercy of the criminal elements, with virtually no ability to level the playing field given the usual handgun restrictions found in the same urban areas.
Firearm ownership for self defense is a luxury where I live, somewhat, but how many of us would live in one of these inner city hell holes and not want very strongly to have a pistol in the nightstand drawer?
Charon
-
...I just wanted to point out that this is a thread about Switzerland, if the title is to be believed, and what you describe here ^ is just about as diametrically opposed to Switzerland as it's possible to be. Earlier in this thread, I remarked that it is possible to pass between "gun crazy" Switzerland and across the border into "guns forbidden" Germany, and not even realise it. I visited both countries recently, and also France and Austria within the same trip, and felt completely safe. I saw very little evidence of crime in the regions I visited. Indeed, I saw that a great many cyclists would leave their bikes unattended without locking them in any way, and would even leave their personal belongings in the paniers. I didn't see a gun the whole time I was there, except police at border checkpoints.
That is true of 99.9 percent of "gun crazed" America, as I pointed out. As I noted, there is no statistical reason to live in fear unless you are a gang banger or a street thug living in a really bad community in major city in one of about five counties in the US. I don't see guns except at the range. I have left my garage door up all night in the past, and except for a friendly note from the police nobody else seemed to notice. I wasn't all that panicked when I found out. My community isn't super great, but no real problems. I could move into a community with twice the crime rate and not worry all that much. I might be more concerned about keeping the doors locked. There are only a select number of neighborhoods, even in a city like NY, LA or Chicago, where that would be different.
And, I imagine you find select neighborhoods throughout Europe where you find a different way of life. I know that is the case in the UK, and France and Germany. In some, homicide -- even firearm homicide -- matches the per capita US urban experience and I believe more will in coming years. I also know that in Amsterdam the longevity of an unlocked bike is not all that great (yet I never felt particularly threatened while I was there). While I might have less to fear from firearm homicide in other countries compared to the tiny amount I have to fear from that today in the US, I would likely have more petty crime to deal with - the home Invasion and Chav thing (though I imagine the real threat from those is also somewhat reduced past the media hype).
Ultimately, firearm ownership is a final control over my life and limb should something rare happen. Since life and death is all or nothing, it's an important issue for me but not one I worry about. You cannot concealed carry in Illinois, but if you could I doubt I would make the effort.
I have far more to fear from a receptionist after too many jello shots than I do from firearm violence. I have had friends killed by alcohol. Friends killed by cars. Friends killed by alcohol and cars. Family killed by the pharma/medical industry. Firearm violence doesn't register, and I'm hardly unique there. Can it happen -- yes. Is it likely, or even a part of general daily life -- no.
Charon
-
so what beetle/lambchop/ferndale is saying that it is the people not the guns.
good.. we all agree. also, as charon points out.. no matter how nicey nice... a mob is not human... no civilization there at all. I have seen mobs and want no part of em but if one comes to me... I want to be armed.
lazs
-
Originally posted by Squire
Sounds like the Japanese gun laws exist to foster Olympic shooting sports only, judging from those stats, and the particulars quoted.
Its "effectively" a ban, any other definition is grasping at semantics.
I think Japan's views on gun control (be it a ban or not) is more cultural than some liberal politician screaming about the evils of owning a gun.
ack-ack
-
According to the statistics, it's still a lot more likely than in guns crazy Switzerland, or guns forbidden Germany.
Define "a lot." I'm a lot more likely to be struck by lightning than hit by a meteorite, but I'm not going to worry all that much about either. Since I'm not a criminal, there is about a 2 in 100,000 chance of me being killed by a firearm. I'm statistically a lot more likely to be killed by any number of daily activities. I should be living in terror each time I strap on the seat belt to go for a ride...but I don't. Taking a shower carries its own risks. Working with power tools. To me, 2 in 100,000 is nothing to worry about. I wouldn't imagine I would feel any safer if it were half that, or any more at risk if it were double or triple that. The overwhelming majority of people living in the worst neighborhoods will still die from some other cause than a gunshot wound, though they may regularly get beat up, robbed and suffer other mistreatment.
Charon
-
Gun forbidden Germany? Not compared to Iceland, since the hunters are allowed pistols for a quick deal with a wounded boar.
(Was once hunting, the arms were a 30.06 and a .357 for the finish :D)
What sticks out is that gun control is meant as gun CONTROL. The whole point is getting guns from getting into the wrong hands, - and at the wrong time. And it seems to be working okay in some countries, and some not.
So what baffles me is why so many of the US folks on this board are basically mocking people from other nations for their gun laws, while "the others" have a much less problem with both guncrime, and crime in general.
This is commonly referred to as "throwing stones out of a glass house".
On the flip side, once you have everything flooded with weapons, and any looney able to pack a punch, then getting the control is perhaps impossible.
-
Originally posted by Ack-Ack
I think Japan's views on gun control (be it a ban or not) is more cultural than some liberal politician screaming about the evils of owning a gun.
ack-ack
only samurai are allowed to carry swords.
-
lets get things in perspective...
lambchop/beetle/sybil also believes in man made global warming and going to all manner of expense and big goverment regulations to prevent it... he believes that every human should wear a seatbelt in any car and the government should force us... He believes it is important to force people to wear helmets on bikes. He has fire insurance on his home and more than likely some kind of earthquake or meteorite coverage..
all.... "just in case"
Even tho he is far more likely to have need of a firearm than any of those things in his lifetime.
lazs
-
Originally posted by Angus
What sticks out is that gun control is meant as gun CONTROL.
No, it is meant as personal freedom control. In this case means control over the people and the intention to disarm and put individuals at the whim of others. Government control over it`s population...totaly.
If you will look back in history at some of the biggest CFs of countries/governements/totalitiarism gaining complete control over it`s population with bad intent, then compare it to the chip, chip, chip of what`s being attempted here today and has been for a while, you will see a trend and a pattern.
I`m just waiting for the "A VW in every household statement."
I can understand why you don`t understand. :)
-
What sticks out is that gun control is meant as gun CONTROL. The whole point is getting guns from getting into the wrong hands, - and at the wrong time. And it seems to be working okay in some countries, and some not.
In the US, gun control is a political tool to appear to be doing something about inner city crime, while allowing the politicians to totally deflect any discussion of actually addressing the difficult tasks of poverty and a lack of opportunity in these communities. Firearm crime is by and lage not a national issue in the US, not a state issue and not even a broadly city/town issue (with a few exceptions like Detroit). It's a specific community issue, most apparent in large urban areas. It's just easier and safer for politicians to ignore the big, hard problems and concentrate on the inanimate boogie man.
"the others" have a much less problem with both guncrime, and crime in general.
Not so. Countries with a growing inner city poverty/cultural sift problem are starting to have exactly the same issues -- bans or not. As far as crime in general is concerned, Great Britain, as an example is eclipsing the US easily in a variety of low-violence categories and catching up in serious violent crime. There are communities that are more dangerous than places like Washington D.C. (for exactly the same reasons and in exactly the same patterns). But there is far less urbanization in the UK in general which provides a natural limiter for the time being. Of course these statistics and specific examples have already been posted a number of times and even linked to in this thread. Perhaps one day you will actually read them. Iceland doesn't have a gun crime problem because it is generally well off broadly across society. It lacks a concentrated urban population. There is high employment and a unified community spirit among a like minded and largely homogeneous population. That is the key to your success. You could give every adult a handgun and I seriously doubt you would have blood flowing in the streets.
On the flip side, once you have everything flooded with weapons, and any looney able to pack a punch, then getting the control is perhaps impossible.
The last time I checked heroin and cocaine were not produced anywhere in the US. They are banned in all 50 states and throughout the North American continent. Yet, criminals move mountains of these drugs in everyday. Criminals don't obey laws. If there is a need, a black market will develop. Banned items are profitable. Criminals get what they want, and guns are/would be no exception unless you can tell me how they would magically be different.
Charon
-
Hey Charon
I tend to disagree with you here:
""the others" have a much less problem with both guncrime, and crime in general.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not so. Countries with a growing inner city poverty/cultural sift problem are starting to have exactly the same issues -- bans or not. As far as crime in general is concerned, Great Britain, as an example is eclipsing the US easily in a variety of low-violence categories and catching up in serious violent crime. There are communities that are more dangerous than places like Washington D.C. (for exactly the same reasons and in exactly the same patterns). But there is far less urbanization in the UK in general which provides a natural limiter for the time being. Of course these statistics and specific examples have already been posted a number of times and even linked to in this thread. Perhaps one day you will actually read them. Iceland doesn't have a gun crime problem because it is generally well off broadly across society. It lacks a concentrated urban population. There is high employment and a unified community spirit among a like minded and largely homogeneous population. That is the key to your success. You could give every adult a handgun and I seriously doubt you would have blood flowing in the streets.
"
Issues:
1: The UK has a long way to go before catching up. In the big crime (more important) it has a very long way to go.
2: Of course there are worse communities worse than Washington DC. Take Bogota. Now find me something in the "old" western world outside the USA.
3: Give every adult a hangun up here, and trust me on this one, you will have gundead people. Actually the last victim here fell for a handgun (smuggled) and in that specific case, it had to be a handgun (conceiling issue).
I know lots of people I would NOT trust for a gun, especially not a handgun. Luckily they don't have any ...
-
11: The UK has a long way to go before catching up. In the big crime (more important) it has a very long way to go.
2: Of course there are worse communities worse than Washington DC. Take Bogota. Now find me something in the "old" western world outside the USA.
Check the links I posted. You were actually participating in the discussion at the first link.
The same disparity can be seen in the UK. While the country as a whole has a low rate of murder, there are areas where the murder rate is high. In Glasgow, Scotland, the murder rate is 5.9 per 100,000 (cite). In London, by contrast, it's 2.1 per 100,000 (cite). In the Manchester metro area, it's 10 per 100,000. And in the Manchester neighborhoods of Moss Side and Longsight, and in the Manchester suburb of Hulme, the murder rate is a monstrous 140 per 100,000 (cite)-- which is considerably worse than Washington, DC, America's most murderous city.
Charon
-
And that brings you where in comparison to the USA?
Detroit?
39.3 vs Whooping Manchester's 10, Glasgow's 5.9, London's 2.1, Iceland's 1-2...?
Of course, if you go down to absolutely bad areas, you can find a high percentage. If my wife get's tired of me and kills me, we have a 25% murder rate that year in the house.
Apples to apples please.
The challenge remains, to find a country from the western world (W of the curtain of old) that has worse guncrime or just crime stats than the USA. Not a block in Birmingham, but a country.
-
Of course, if you go down to absolutely bad areas, you can find a high percentage. If my wife get's tired of me and kills me, we have a 25% murder rate that year in the house.
Apples to apples please.
The challenge remains, to find a country from the western world (W of the curtain of old) that has worse guncrime or just crime stats than the USA. Not a block in Birmingham, but a country.
Our crime occurs in the same "bad areas." There is no firearm violence epidemic outside those bad areas. We just have more of them. My daily life is no more fearful than yours. I live here. Have for 40+ years. We have a population of 300 million. We have a far more diverse population than most of Europe. We have greater economic disparity, with urban crime patterns that date back to the 1800s. We have a different urban/rural dynamic. These are facts. I have pointed this out all before in threads you apparently fail to read, even when you are participating in the discussion -- even in this thread. It's like talking to a brick wall. I have specifically noted the differences between the UK and the US. Look at the population of the top 10 cities for both. Look at rural vs urban density statistics. Why don't you find me an apples to apples comparison in all of these areas to the US for a change? I'm tired of being the only source of facts in this discussion. Back up your opinion with something more than a gross statistical generality. It's your turn.
Charon
-
Here's a summary on the key apple to apple difference - street gangs. These are the source of most of the firearm homicides in the US. And, it's a trend that is catching on in Europe. Only a matter of time, and the results of increased violent and firearm crime are being tracked today.
Street Gang Violence in Europe
Levels and descriptors of violence among European street gangs are summarized from studies reported primarily under the aegis of the Eurogang Program initiated in 1997 and continuing still. European gang violence is placed in the context of its American counterpart, of European non-gang youth violence, and of the definitional and structural components of the Eurogang Program. European gangs in over a dozen countries reveal a wide pattern of violent behaviour and levels of violence that are far greater than among non-gang youth, but largely less serious than in the USA. Some of these latter differences may be attributable to the recentness of the European gang development, the lower levels of firearms availability, and lower levels of gang territoriality in Europe.
You'll note the three factors to the US lead in serious violence:
*Recentness of the European gang development
*Lower levels of firearms availability (Oh my gosh... but wait... see below)
*Lower levels of gang territoriality in Europe
If you read the actual study itself:
http://books.google.com/books?id=trTHT_qv-osC&dq=street+gangs+us+europe&printsec=frontcover&source=web&ots=ZC0PC_IGsg&sig=XU1HbUS_YEBs0aQFAMzpd8wDsLo#PPP1,M1
It not only provides a solid accounting of how these gangs have developed in the US, but why and how and why they are developing in Europe. While the firearm part above has been true in these early stages, the study also notes that "Firearms, once rare enough to be a valued commodity in the gang "treasury," have become far more accessible and at the same time far more lethal. Thus gang rivalries have become more serious with shootings by any one group at another, more readily and normatively more demanding of a like response. More firearms are now carried on the person, rather than stashed away in a safe place meaning that more events, more crime scenes, more parties, and more confrontations involved the immediately available gun."
Here is how the Manchester police deflect attention away from their inability to deal with the actual criminals, while focusing their efforts on the guns these criminals use. Even though firearms are banned pretty heavily in Europe the criminals managed to find a way exactly as we have described earlier. In fact, I was a bit dismissive of Lazs manufacturing firearms claim, but not so:
"Following the tragic shooting of Jessie James we must now begin the process of tackling the source of the guns that find there way onto the streets of Manchester and the UK. That is why I have invited Detective Chief Inspector, Paul Savill to present to Euro MPs the problems we have with the influx of weapons, in particular from Lithuania and Germany.
“There is a serious problem at the moment regarding the control and acquisition of guns. The differing rules in each member state mean that countries like the UK, which already have strong arms control laws, are suffering from a growing weapons trade in the rest of Europe.”
“Smugglers are bringing guns into the UK from other European countries. The guns, which were originally made to fire blanks or CS gas, are then being converted and sold on to criminal gangs.
“We have to act now and ensure that these deadly weapons are taken off our streets so that they can not be used to kill more innocent children like Jessie James.”
http://www.arlenemccarthy.labour.co.uk/ViewPage.cfm?Page=20557
In the UK, only criminals can have blank pistols modified to shoot real ammunition. And this...
The National Criminal Intelligence Service - one of the participants at Friday's summit - has alerted police forces to the ingenuity with which Eastern European gun manufacturers have disguised their products.
A gun made to look like a mobile phone has been found in London.
Others designed as key rings are intended to avoid airport security.
Guns resembling screwdrivers, cigarette packets and pens have all turned up in the UK. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2644233.stm
And this...
AS Britain struggled to understand yet another brutal gun murder in the wake of the Harvey Nichols horror, a former armed response officer told us of the ease at which guns were being smuggled into the country.
Roger Gray, who worked with SO19, the armed response unit of the Metropolitan Police, revealed guns were coming in to the country through sea ports, in luggage and lorries.
The smuggling of the weapons, some of which he said were manufactured in India and China, others sold in Eastern Europe, was made easier due to easier communications and international travel connections.
Mr Gray, who has written the book Armed Response about his experiences in the Met, described Britain's borders as "porous to say the least".
"Buying weapons in Europe and bringing them into England is not really a problem, bringing them in to the Kent Cinq Ports is even less of a problem," Mr Gray said.
"It is very easy," he added
Ban all you want. If a criminal appreciates the value of a firearm the criminal will get that firearm. The potential victim is just out of luck.
-
when MS13 and al qaeda start fighting over territory, you will see real gang street action.
-
Charon, when you pull the nose a tad further away from the porridge, you might actually see the plate.
USA = 3/4 of homicides performed with a gun, mostly handguns.
UK = 1/4 of USA homicides. Murders with firearms of my stats page: 62 against 8.259 (Population comparison is roughly 1 to 5 so those 62 would be 500, so 500 against 8259).
rough figures, but look at http://www.nationmaster.com
So, the brickwall answers. I think you CAN NOT claim that European crime rate will go down with a better access to deadly and conceilable arms. Europe as a whole, and even the UK is more densely populated than the USA, and very mixed as well. European population is also larger than the US. Note that I assume that Europe and the USA are the closest to compare. Streetgangs are everywhere, problem is that yours are and have always been (notably in the famous time of the Chicago typewriter :D) much better armed. Getting a gun in the USA is no problem at all for any idiot. Getting a gun in Europe is a different issue, harder, and more expensive.
So, since the Euros, - or Brits, - do much less of shooting each other, as well as killing each other and robbing each other etc as the US do, - with noticably more difficulty in aquiring arms, - how on earth do you expect anybody to belive that increased free-floating arsenals will improve it further?
Still a wall.....
-
charon.. I can make a firearm with the things I can buy at any hardware store. It would take hours or days depending on how complex or disguised I wanted it to be but it would be deadly.
angus... you are the one not seeing the plate for the porridge... what gun laws reduced a homicide rate anywhere in the world... does it really matter what weapon was used in a homicide. If england had 100 murders a year before the draconian ban of firearms and half of em were by firearms.... if they then banned firearms and had 100 murders a year of which only one or two was with a firearm.... how is that better for the people murdered?
If citizens were made helpless in their homes at the same time.... how is that better in any way?
Same for here.. what firearms law has ever made for less homicides here? Where has a gun control law been passed where there was a drop in crime?
But even that is not the case... freedom does not work that way. Freedom is too important to take away because it may inconvieniece a few or cost a few bucks or even... get someone killed. If a few have to die to have freedom for the remainder then it is worth it.
lazs
-
Lazs, as usual, you're wrong.
"angus... you are the one not seeing the plate for the porridge... what gun laws reduced a homicide rate anywhere in the world... does it really matter what weapon was used in a homicide. If england had 100 murders a year before the draconian ban of firearms and half of em were by firearms.... if they then banned firearms and had 100 murders a year of which only one or two was with a firearm.... how is that better for the people murdered?"
Okay, this year, we haven't had a homicide. how's that?
We haven't had any guncrime so far this year, how's that?
The Brits have 1/4 of your homicides, how's that?
How about looking into the percentage of the people not killed at all??????
(BTW look in the Brit thread if you want to make claims that they're not good enough of a melting pot to cause trouble)
So, build yer gun, nobody can stop that, but up here we can stop you from getting a .45 in a momentary flick :D
-
Originally posted by Angus
Okay, this year, we haven't had a homicide. how's that?
We haven't had any guncrime so far this year, how's that?
The Brits have 1/4 of your homicides, how's that?
My God Angus you live in Iceland. The world will eventualy catch up to you in time. It`s slowly happening almost everywhere. When the time comes, you or no amount of freedom taking, silly ***, ulterior motive laws will or can stop the guns from coming.
The only things gun control laws do is take personal freedom from the population, put the general population at the mercy of those wishing to do harm and make the puppets easily to handle.
-
there are no criminals in iceland, because there is nothing worth stealing there.
-
Originally posted by john9001
there are no criminals in iceland, because there is nothing worth stealing there.
I want to go get me some Polar bear meat before global warming gets em. :)
Come on boys...grab them Colts and let`s ride.
Whiskey for my men and beer for my hosses.
:rofl
-
Angus, supposing you had a valid point about guns being such a bane on Americans, you would still have to refute the 2nd amendment, and the imbalance its absence would cause in the constitution.
Can you do that? In respect with the Founders' perspective and intentions? If you can't, then what does arguing it anyway as you have accomplish? I'm not raggin, it's an honest question.
What are you proposing should be done?
-
Originally posted by Jackal1
I want to go get me some Polar bear meat before global warming gets em. :)
Come on boys...grab them Colts and let`s ride.
Whiskey for my men and beer for my hosses.
:rofl
Jackal, I think you're ok, so please don't show off the empty brain cells.
Iceland= no polar bears any more. Actually because now the driftice doesn't get here any more.
We however have hunting rifles, (including me) and horses.
Hence, for this:
"The world will eventualy catch up to you in time. It`s slowly happening almost everywhere. When the time comes, you or no amount of freedom taking, silly ***, ulterior motive laws will or can stop the guns from coming."
We already have guns. Just not any silly clot, and no handguns. As for the "unstoppable thing to come" it is as you are preaching both doomsday and surrender at the same time. "IT HAPPENED TO US; IT WILL HAPPEN TO YOU", What? Oh everything flooding with guns. Well, excuse me, we are not shooting each other, and I rather hope we won't be in the near future.
As for just "us" here, I was rather keen on the European community, Britain in particular as a comparison. So:
"The Brits have 1/4 of your homicides, how's that?"
Hows that?
And John:
"there are no criminals in iceland, because there is nothing worth stealing there."
Yeah. Look at the world stats, including economy, then read about the private-jets owning elite group located here, and some of the richer persons in the world. Small and well-off states have lots to loot, just high security and little escape :D
(No money in Monaco or Luxemburg either I guess, and no loot in the Vatican :D)
And finally the answer for Lazs:
"angus... you are the one not seeing the plate for the porridge... what gun laws reduced a homicide rate anywhere in the world"
Answer being several if not most Western countries of old, apart from the USA. Many of those who have almost a complete recipe for a high killing rate (multi national, unemployment, multy religion, multi culture, economical differences etc).
And Moot:
"What are you proposing should be done?"
In the USA? No answer there. All overarmed anyway.
In Europe? Keep the pressure up, and don't listen to these silly Yanks that tell you that trying to keep guns out of any John's hands is both pointless and futile.
-
Charon, when you pull the nose a tad further away from the porridge, you might actually see the plate.
You only provide gross statistics that lack analysis. You seem to think every country in the world is virtually identical in culture, economic disparity, urbanization patterns, etc. In fact, you at one point claimed Iceland was the model of a diverse population when in fact it is 94 percent homogeneous. I really don't think I'm the one failing to look beyond my personal horizon on this issue.
Streetgangs are everywhere, problem is that yours are and have always been (notably in the famous time of the Chicago typewriter ) much better armed. Getting a gun in the USA is no problem at all for any idiot.
No, as the study points out the rise of American style street gangs is a new development in Europe -- not so in the US. The pattern is largely linked to the multi-ethnic US urban population and has been in place, more or less, back to the 1800s. This has been a very American, and largely unique phenomenon in a world that otherwise has had a lot more pogroms than melting pots. These criminal communities are quite different from casual "gangs of toughs" looking to knock a few heads after a football match or the casual individual robbery criminal. The study goes into quite a bit of history where gangs are concerned both in the US and Europe.
"The Brits have 1/4 of your homicides, how's that?"
And they always have, pretty much, even when firearm ownership was as wide open in the UK as in the US.
By the late 19th century, England had gun laws that were far more liberal than are found anywhere in the United States today, yet almost no gun crime, and little violent crime of other sorts. (An 1870 act, which was seldom enforced, required the payment of a small tax for the privilege of carrying, not simply owning, a gun.)
How do you explain that when firearm laws were equally lax, England still had less violence and fewer firearm homicides?
As for the "unstoppable thing to come" it is as you are preaching both doomsday and surrender at the same time. "IT HAPPENED TO US; IT WILL HAPPEN TO YOU", What? Oh everything flooding with guns. Well, excuse me, we are not shooting each other, and I rather hope we won't be in the near future.
It may never happen in Iceland, for a variety of reasons. But it is clearly happening in the UK and seems to be building in other parts of Europe. See my earlier quotes and links. Firearms are a tool, the factors that lead to their use by criminals are socio-economic in nature. A lot of the traditional inner city conditions that have lead to a higher rate of violence in US urban communities are clearly and readily developing throughout Europe. In some cases that manifests itself in something like the Tube bombing. In other cases, less ideological and more financial, it manifests itself in violent black market (drugs, for example) business operations where violence simply goes with the trade.
You see guns as the problem with US crime. I see things like this...
The Education Week report shows Detroit's public high schools will graduate only 25 percent of their students. Cleveland, Ohio, and Baltimore, Maryland, will graduate less than 35 percent; Dallas, Texas, New York and Los Angeles, California, about 45 percent. In fact, 10 of our nation's biggest cities will graduate fewer than half their students. This is nothing less than a national crisis.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/06/19/Dobbs.June20/index.html
Charon
-
man my head hurts. Be nice if the darwinism effect happens more often.
-
Originally posted by Angus
We already have guns. Just not any silly clot, and no handguns.
........and no freedom of choice to do so if you so wish. That`s the point.
As for the "unstoppable thing to come" it is as you are preaching both doomsday and surrender at the same time. "IT HAPPENED TO US; IT WILL HAPPEN TO YOU", What? Oh everything flooding with guns. Well, excuse me, we are not shooting each other, and I rather hope we won't be in the near future.
I`m not exactly sure how you reason things. I don`t believe in a totalitarian government in any shape or form. We have the freedom of choice at the moment. We are trying to keep it and personal freedom in general.
When you come up with silly ***, ulterior motive laws such as handgun bans, you have instantly created a potential for another illegal market. Take it to the extremes and you have the potential of turning law abiding citizens into law breakers according to the books. When government oversteps it`s bounds with the very people it is supposed to represent..you have big trouble right here in River City. :)
"The Brits have 1/4 of your homicides, how's that?"
The way of the world is catching up slowly. Overall pulse rate and lifestyle have a big input also. When you try to compare apples to oranges you have taken yourself out of the ball game.
Granted , it is safe to say that Iceland will not have a big push for the illegal sales from around the globe anyways soon. Nor will it have the big push for anything from around the globe. It is one of those places most don`t even consider.
The point is if you are such a peacefull, fun loving, touchy feely people in general..why are you denied the possession of handguns? Would owning a handgun turn you into something you are not. Buy a Colt and you would say
" Hey ..let`s go cap someone"?
What`s your government`s fear of you having the right to own a handgun?
-
angus.. I see you are unwilling to answer the simple question... what country passed a gun law that made it's people safer and less likely to be murdered or become a victim of serious crime..
What country and what law?
lazs
-
Uhm.
Iceland, and the gunlaw?
(when you are cruising at almost 0% you cannot do better.)
-
Charon. A short one here:
" When you try to compare apples to oranges you have taken yourself out of the ball game."
So it's more compareable to use Detroit vs. Iceland rather than some zone of the USA?
Or a row of blocks in Manchester?
UK vs USA not comparible?
Getting away from comparison (since as far as I understand from you nothing in the world can be compared with the USA), you still deal with the question whether more firearms in circulation in i.e. European countries would increase serious crime. When some characters on this board start booing at the Euros for trying to hold the arms at bay, I still belive that is based on ignorance, - the effort is good and working. So it raises my temper a bit, - sorry. (BTW your inputs IMHO are well speculated)
And Jacka1:
"........and no freedom of choice to do so if you so wish. That`s the point."
Can't have a handgrenade or an assault rifles either. Oh, the Humanity ....
-
I can get hand grenades if I wanted them, doesn't mean I would use them as something other than big fireworks. - Me
Guns are not the problem, it's not using them correctly. Guns have several purposes:
1. Self Defence (someone comes at me, I will shoot him)
2. Aquiring Food (I will hunt for my food)
3. Defence of Your Nation (I will shoot terrorists, it will protect many more lives)
4. Sport Shooting (just a way to get better)
Gun control doesn't work, because it only harms the honest man. If a criminal wants a gun, he will get it illegally or make one, anybody can do it. (I know how to make the gun, the powder, and the bullet from common household and warehouse parts). If a man doesn't have a gun, he can't defend against one who does very well. I personally wish the American West would return, as back then people who did wrong were punished, not sent to a cell with free satellite TV and free food. That is why we have so much crime, because criminals ain't punished. They know they probably will spend a few years in jail, and get out on parole.
-
So it's more compareable to use Detroit vs. Iceland rather than some zone of the USA?
Or a row of blocks in Manchester?
The part that you seem to be utterly unable to understand is that the "row of blocks in Manchester" is directly comprable to exactly where the same issues exist in the US. Detroit is a disaster and an extreme example to be sure, but even there not EVERY street is a warzone by any means. If your view on the US is based off of popular TV shows then the confusion is understandable. They tend to portray a reality that doesn't exist, by and large, from a shows like CSI Miami to Friends, for that matter.
Outside of these "rows of blocks" there is no fiream problem to speak of in the US. Most Americans will go through life, and by most, actually, the vast majority, without ever encountering a firearm in a hostile situation. Period. Chicago doesn't have a firearm crime problem, areas like the specific neighborhood of Englewood, in Chicago, have a crime problem. Nothing more than a directly comprable "row of blocks" to the Manchester "row of blocks." That is reality.
Even in those bad "rows of blocks" you are far more at risk from a receptionist having too many jello shots behind the wheel of her car than you are from firearms -- UNLESS YOU ARE A GANGBANGER OR WANNA BE. The blood simply does not flow in the streets. Even the accidental "crossfire" shootings are not all that common.
The US currently has more dangerous "rows of blocks" because, as noted in that study you fail to read, the social dynamics have been quite different for many years. Our streetgang issue has been somewhat unique (at least among 1st world nations). That is changing. The UK and other parts of Europe will start to have more of those "rows of blocks." This is not MY opinion, but that of law enforcement and researchers in Europe itself. You can still debate the issue of firearm laws, but the SOURCE of rising crime in Europe is pretty clear. You are arguing with them, not me.
UK vs USA not comparible?
You still failed to answer how when the firearm laws in the US and UK were virtually identical the US still had a higher incidence of homicide, including firearm homicide. You have failed to show how the gross differences in demographics, population densities and urbanization patterns between the two countries is somehow unimportant with only firearm availability being a useful point of reference. Again, not My speculation but that of researchers who analyze crime. If you can't address these significant and well documented differences as part of your argument, then you're just being stubborn with a largely emotional argument and it's not worth the time to continue the debate. You offer nothing but speculation based on several gross statistics with no analysis for any socitial difference that may occur between the two countries.
Charon
-
Charon, you were comparing the UK of old to the UK of today. After all, the Brithish were very British and are still ..British.
What I feel that you and some others are failing to see is that the USA cuts out from other western nations in the statistics of serious crime and guncrime, while being better armed.
There are IMHO maybe these possible answers for "why"
1. Cultural difference.
2. Economical difference
3. Homogenetic difference
4. Religional difference
5. Situational difference
6. Legal environment
6b. Accessability to leathal weapons.
As for the reality, I have no doubt that most of the US is a very nice place to live and peacefully and unfearfully so. However, the stats are now so nice.
I have never been in the USA. But a lot around in Europe, as well as many of my friends either resided in the USA or are/were from there. And I watch very little TV by the way.
Will be back later....got to get the multi-national melting-pot of a household under control.
-
Originally posted by Angus
Charon. A short one here:
" When you try to compare apples to oranges you have taken yourself out of the ball game."
The quote button at the top of the page would be of good use. That`s what I stated, not Charon.
So it's more compareable to use Detroit vs. Iceland rather than some zone of the USA?
Nope.
Iceland is rather out of the loop at this time......in nearly everything pertaining to the world.
Or a row of blocks in Manchester?
Nope.
UK vs USA not comparible?
Nope. .......and all of the above were explained if you can just figure out who said what. :)
When some characters on this board start booing at the Euros for trying to hold the arms at bay
I haven`t seen any Euros making any effort to hold arms at bay.
the effort is good and working.
The effort being forced upon them by government is slowly beginning to bite them in the rear...as has already been stated and shown.
So it raises my temper a bit,
For some strange reason it usualy does to those who have already had their freedom of choice taken away by their government.
A variation of the Stockholm syndrome maybe?????
-
Oh dear, how intelligent.
So I am probably right analyzing your opinion about that nothing in the western world is comparable to the USA, and therefore the USA has the peak in robbery, homicide and people in jail. Furthermore, the rest of the western world needs to slacken their weapon laws and increase the distribution of conceilable arms in order to lower their crime rates. Any attempt to do otherwise is absolutely futile, since the evolution cannot be stopped, and one should never fight what cannot presumably be stopped.
To the last of all things one should try to compare crime rates in the UK to the USA, since the UK has no comparison with mixture of cultures, religions, urban areas and unemployment. Same goes to the rest of "Les Euros"
Agreed?
-
europeans don't need handguns, they would just hurt themselves.
-
Ever met any?
-
And Jackal, at least this one is from you:
"
For some strange reason it usualy does to those who have already had their freedom of choice taken away by their government.
A variation of the Stockholm syndrome maybe?????"
Where does the freedom of choice cross with the freedom of choice?
I would love to have a handgun, but at the same time, I wouldn't trust half the household for it. So, there is a balance somewhere. No Stockholm syndrome (some refer to it as Helsinki syndrome and actually the meaning of it is sideways to this discussion, - hostage getting to like the one who is holding him, - you should have used master and dog perhaps, hehe) , but from my point of view, a question of common sense, based on knowing your turf.
Personally I rather choose to have less arms in the pool, while it means to me that my personal hobby of having some and shooting will suffer for it.
I love to have that choice, and I still have it while you don't :p
There is one heavy point here, while I am not claiming that gunlaw like ours would cure things in the USA, the feedback is that it's uncompareable and pointless anyway. Well, maybe you should not be the ones to give advise, and instead be glad that there are no Detroits all over Euroland?
-
To the last of all things one should try to compare crime rates in the UK to the USA, since the UK has no comparison with mixture of cultures, religions, urban areas and unemployment. Same goes to the rest of "Les Euros" Agreed?
Nope, little in common where urbanization and ethnic community patterns were concerned -- but that is changing. There have been plenty of facts provided to support my position, plenty of your personal opinion to support yours.
When gun laws were the same between the US and Britain, why did the US still have a higher level of homicide and firearm homicide?
BTW, that report you fail to read, yet again, clearly states why the US and Europe are different where gangland crime is concerend. It clearly talks about the emergence of US style gangs (thats part II, page 135). "Gangstas or Lager Louts? Working class streeetgangs in Manchester (P153)" is very specific. The gangs in Britain chapter (P154) is particularly focused on the recent rise in US style ethnic gangs and the extreme violence that goes with them.
But again, you're not arguing with me on these issues. I just base my opinions on other peoples' facts. You can argue if guns laws speed up, slow down or have no effect on the process, but not the process itself.
Charon
-
instead be glad that there are no Detroits all over Euroland?
Plenty of time for that. Though the strong Islamic flavor that is present with some of these community shifts will bring with it unique issues to the European experience.
Charon
-
Originally posted by Angus
So I am probably right analyzing your opinion about that nothing in the western world is comparable to the USA
If you are refering to the subject at hand, at the present time, that is correct. No way around it.
If you are trying to be flip..........you missed. :)
Furthermore, the rest of the western world needs to slacken their weapon laws and increase the distribution of conceilable arms in order to lower their crime rates.
I wonder why you would say that. Maybe because it has worked everywhere it has been done?
I would love to have a handgun
Bingo! :)
No Stockholm syndrome (some refer to it as Helsinki syndrome and actually the meaning of it is sideways to this discussion, - hostage getting to like the one who is holding him
Actualyit is "relate to", but you get the drift , just not the point.
When you are at the will of others and have had your freedom and freedom of choice taken way.....you are the hostage.
I`d like to go back just a bit. What is "your" definition of "assault rifle". Not your governments or mine, but yours.
-
angus.. thank you again... I can always count on you to help my side of any debate.. people will start to think you are a shill or made up personality by me tho..
You now claim that the only place in the world where a gun control law has worked to lower homicides is iceland where your strict gun control laws (you don't say which one) has reduced your homicide rate from near zero to...
near zero.
Which is, coincidentaly the number of times gun control laws have stopped homicide and serious crime rates world wide.
lazs
-
Charon, try to imagine an amalgam of nations able to exist outside the USA without the serious crime rate to compare. It does indeed excist, and I do indeed ponder on why.
France and their pockets of Algerians are one thing for instance. I do wonder what that would boil into if they lived in Dallas and were armed to their teeth, but in France it's mostly violence and riots.
(Actually I went through a "snare" from those in Lille, France, but they were not armed and me was more grizzly :p )
As for the Gun control law Lazs, I would start with Iceland, and then count onwards down a long list of countries. I am serious, and I admire many nations for what they're doing, such as the British and the Germans. And seriously, our country is full of people who have nothing to do with a gun in their drawer. (no need anyway).
The whole point is to avoid a vicious circle, and I say again that you have no business to mock the effort.
But, alas, USA is so special that it can not be compared with any other western nation regarding stats.
-
"i have no need for a gun, my government told me so"
-
Originally posted by Angus
Charon, try to imagine an amalgam of nations able to exist outside the USA without the serious crime rate to compare. It does indeed excist, and I do indeed ponder on why.
France and their pockets of Algerians are one thing for instance. I do wonder what that would boil into if they lived in Dallas and were armed to their teeth, but in France it's mostly violence and riots.
(Actually I went through a "snare" from those in Lille, France, but they were not armed and me was more grizzly :p )
As for the Gun control law Lazs, I would start with Iceland, and then count onwards down a long list of countries. I am serious, and I admire many nations for what they're doing, such as the British and the Germans. And seriously, our country is full of people who have nothing to do with a gun in their drawer. (no need anyway).
The whole point is to avoid a vicious circle, and I say again that you have no business to mock the effort.
But, alas, USA is so special that it can not be compared with any other western nation regarding stats.
when I was in the navy wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy yyyyyyyyyyyyy back in 1977 a group of us were exiting a bar in ville franche on the cote d'azur. as we exited we were assaulted by a pair of arabian looking miscreants one of them throwing high bruce lee type kicks. one of them kicks hit one of our party alas poor hadji, only to find his leg gripped and pushed to the full reach of the 5'11" assaulted mans arm. while he was thusly exposed another member of our party punched the assaillant repeatedly in a tender and now exposed area. his co-assaillant thinking that fleeing was now in order bolted. the one we captured received a good ol' south florida asswhipping and we took his belongings for good measure. my point is you guys are whimps therefore your criminals are whimps just not as whimpy as the rest of you. any one of our highschool chongas can single handedly whip a whole nation of you euros if you allowed her time to redo her make up and get something to eat.
you have no basis from which to compare.
-
Originally posted by storch
when I was in the navy wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy yyyyyyyyyyyyy back in 1977 a group of us were exiting a bar in ville franche on the cote d'azur. as we exited we were assaulted by a pair of arabian looking miscreants one of them throwing high bruce lee type kicks. one of them kicks hit one of our party alas poor hadji, only to find his leg gripped and pushed to the full reach of the 5'11" assaulted mans arm. while he was thusly exposed another member of our party punched the assaillant repeatedly in a tender and now exposed area. his co-assaillant thinking that fleeing was now in order bolted. the one we captured received a good ol' south florida asswhipping and we took his belongings for good measure. my point is you guys are whimps therefore your criminals are whimps just not as whimpy as the rest of you. any one of our highschool chongas can single handedly whip a whole nation of you euros if you allowed her time to redo her make up and get something to eat.
you have no basis from which to compare.
Comedy gold. :rofl
-
Charon, try to imagine an amalgam of nations able to exist outside the USA without the serious crime rate to compare. It does indeed excist, and I do indeed ponder on why.
I have actually spent some time in that amalgam of nations. London and Birkhamstead in the UK; Stuggart; Paris; Tempara, Finland; Amsterdam, Tornoto; Montreal. I have also lived or spent considerable time (months or more) in Chicago, LA, New York, Las Vegas, Old New Orleans -- numerous cities, towns and rural areas. I can honestly say that outside a handful of neighborhoods the streets of Chicago or about any other place in the US are every bit as safe as any of the others in the Western World.
I lived in a so so neighborhood of Chicago (OK but a few blocks away from not so OK) and in five years don't recall hearing a gunshot. Had only one real mugging I am aware of in the immediate area -- no gun involved. There were likely more low order crime I wasn't aware of but no gunplay. On one side of a street would be a housing project and on the other $ million condos -- don't cross the street.
I have walked through all of those US cities at night in not only in the best but "average" to "getting a little nervous - pay attention "neighborhoods without fear of anything but perhaps casual low to non violent crime like you would find in any of the European cities. No more or no less concern. Try to imagine that reality.
As I have said before, the US, its counties, states and cities, towns and suburbs don't have a firearm violence problem per se. Various neighborhoods, mostly in large urban areas, do. This is largely related to streetgang violence. Over 80 percent (well over, as I recall) of both the victims and the people shooting them have past criminal records. If you are not part of that world you are fairly immune from any concern.
Charon
-
France and their pockets of Algerians are one thing for instance. I do wonder what that would boil into if they lived in Dallas and were armed to their teeth, but in France it's mostly violence and riots.
That could never work as a comparison. The setting and cultures and history (chicken and egg themselves) are completely different.
-
angus... so you admit that you can't give me a country that has passed a gun law that has reduced THEIR homicide rate and serious crime rate?
All gun laws do is make decent people helpless against the scum.... including their own governments and pompus self rightious people like yourself.
lazs
-
Don`t bother the guy. He`s researching "asssault rifle". :D
-
Originally posted by john9001
"i have no need for a gun, my government told me so"
ROFL I prefer not to need a gun. Would suck bigtime if I had to.
-
What sucks worse is needing one and not having one.
-
yep suave... not only not having one but being denied one by the very people you need one for in the first place.
It always amuses me to see the lefties here all say that the might of the entire US military (or soviet for that matter) with the backing of most of its people... can't possibly win in the long run against a few thousand terrorists who have no modern ordinance or even aircraft...
Yet... they say that an armed population of 80 million gun owners.... more than half the adults.. couldn't stand up to a few million military and police who wouldn't have their heart in slaughtering their fellows.
lazs
-
The reason for gun control is mostly not for protecting the citizens, but the government against an armed revolt.
-
I pack a weapon everyday. I feel naked without one. I 15 year old is the same way. Are we freaks? No. Are we Criminals. To some on the fringe left maybe. Do I hunt. Yeah. Go to hell PITA. Do I feed my family on the meat we kill. Dam right. Do I own 50 cals. Yeah 2. One for the left hand and one for the right. I am a regular RAMBO. I am a law abiding citizen that pays taxes and even on time. I have 2 SUV's that burn alot of gas and stink up the world. Which has not been proven that I am destroying the world. I have 100 head of cows that fart and increase the Methane content in the air. I eat beans and fart, are the fringe left going to off me because I fart. To quote my 15 year old. WHATEVER!!!
-
Originally posted by lazs2
angus... so you admit that you can't give me a country that has passed a gun law that has reduced THEIR homicide rate and serious crime rate?
All gun laws do is make decent people helpless against the scum.... including their own governments and pompus self rightious people like yourself.
lazs
I would say that it applies to most of W-Europe, which in return has much less homicide and serious crime than the USA.
Clear enough?
-
Well Angus we just can't win. We opt to have less division between "haves" and "havenots" and doing so we are "commies" and as a result we don't need guns to defend ourselves in our homes and thus we obviously are sissies. Sucks to be us. :D
-C+
-
Originally posted by Charge
Well Angus we just can't win. We opt to have less division between "haves" and "havenots" and doing so we are "commies" and as a result we don't need guns to defend ourselves in our homes and thus we obviously are sissies. Sucks to be us. :D
-C+
you nailed it.
-
not at all clear angus... name one of those countries that passed a gun law that reduced their homicide and serious crime rate. What was that gun law? Was it a handgun law or a machine gun law? shotguns? what?
It isn't just guns but... even the commies here don't want to live like your-0-peeans.
lazs
-
You're talking about something you do not know to well, and I restate, that we can have guns.
Gun control is all about trying to keep them (in quantity) out of the wrong hands. In the USA that has failed, in Euroland less so.
What am I to expect from you anyway, since your main point about problems is that either they don't exist, or it's pointless struggling against them, - i.e. drugs, crime, environment.....
If you have mice in your barn, what to do?
-
I bet I know more about it than you do.... many countries in your-0-up and other primitive areas have had their citizens armed and then passed gun laws.
Which of these gun laws has reduced the homicide and serious crime rates?
or...do some peoples simply have lower homicide and serious crime rates no matter what? just as some countries are so depressing and without hope that they have higher suicide rates.
lazs
-
Well, since you amreegans choose to shoot, kill and rob each other much more that the O-up-eans, I was rather betting on it happening because your baddies are better geared for it, than that the population was worse people. But I don't want to play wrestling & insult with you, in this manner:
"many countries in your-0-up and other primitive areas "
DOH:furious
-
of course you don't know.. that does not seem to have any effect on you spouting off about guns in America or anywhere else tho.
In America there are whole areas that have the same population and makeup of whole your-0-peeeean countries and... have guns and... have the same or lower crime and homicide rates... granted.. when a homicide is commitied it is often with a firearm... who cares? like the man said.. "would you rather they be thrown out the window?"
our minorities commit more than half the gun crime. we accept this. we do not punish everyone because of a few. not quite yet on this at least..
I would bet that in your country there are a few... more than a few pissed off people who whould love to have a gun and think that you are a meddling sob.
When I was in canada one time.. I had forgoten and had a ruger 38 4" in the car... when the friends of my brother found out... grown men..loggers...came from miles around just to fire a few of the 50 rounds I had...
It was enough to make you weep... grown men never having fired a handgun and unable to do so because of worthless laws and the nannies like you who just "feel better" telling others what to do.
They knew nothing about hand guns except what they seen in the movies.. I shocked them by hitting a 5 gallon pail at 100 yards... they thought it was impossible to hit anything 20 feet away with a handgun..
like I said... it was enough to make you weep.. a whole generation deprived.
lazs
-
yeah...that's the mark of a responsible gun owner, forgetting about your firearm in your car.
any stories about forgotten firearms and toddlers...just for balance?
-
I forgot my toddler at a friend's house and had to return to retrieve her once but I never forget my firearm. will that do?
-
Lazs:
"It was enough to make you weep... grown men never having fired a handgun and unable to do so because of worthless laws and the nannies like you who just "feel better" telling others what to do."
YEAH :D
(I fire my 12" with one hand, do you think I can handle it? Also, when I first fired a M1, I didn't notice the punch. Same with the Ruger I fired the other day). Well, the Government tell me I can't so I can justkeep practicing and dreaming, but guess what, I'm happy about it.
-
As for the worthless law, don't get into a stats contest with Canada either. Funny isn't it?
-
As for the worthless law, don't get into a stats contest with Canada either. Funny isn't it?
But the thing you still fail to cover, is why were the homicide rates greater in the US even when the UK (or Canada) had as liberal, or more liberal firearm laws? Same laxness, differnt homicide rates.
Why is there no rash of bloodshed in Switzerland, with far more firearm's in home than in Germany?
Why are there no drive-by shootings in my neighborhood, or the vast majority of the US, but select neighborhoods where there are? The gun laws are the same for both.
Charon
-
Originally posted by Angus
(I fire my 12" with one hand, do you think I can handle it?
i don't know too much about guns, what's a 12"?
-
Charon, you bet on the social structure as the only thing to blame, hence no direct compareability right?
(a bit like Michael Moore when he compared the USA to Canada?)
I put my money on the mixture, i.e. weapon availability (how easy it is to get one, esepcially one you can keep in your pocket) AND the neighbouthood/atmosphere/moment/, - just name it. When you have (hot headed) fools with guns, you may expect to see some blood and therefor ++++
As for Switzerland (I was there and got promptly sweeped on the way in from Germany!), they don't have much slackness in law enforcement. But somehow (by the ways of the law etc?) crime seems to rely very little on guns.
-
Originally posted by john9001
i don't know too much about guns, what's a 12"?
It's a Shotgun.12 gauge. Standard meanhorn.
-
torque... I may have forgotten that the gun was in the car because it was in a spot not in open view and...
To be more accurate about it... it was more that I had forgotten that I had entered a strange land without handguns than that I had forgotten I had a handgun.
As for toddlers... children should be taught to not touch firearms without an adult to supervise. People leave all manner of dangerous objects within reach of toddlers.
angus...you still have not answered the simple question... at what point.. what gun law in canada reduced it's homicide and serious crime rate?
lazs
-
oh, a 12 gauge. my daddy bought me one of them when i was a little kid.
-
Canada?
I was referring to Europe mostly, only know that Canada has for some reason much less serious crime than the USA. Now fill me in on gun ownership and rules and I'll give you my thought on it :D
On the flip side, would you think that European major crime rate would get less (and thereby increasing the distance from the USA) if every Tom, Dick and Harry had a "little" arsenal. ??
-
Originally posted by john9001
oh, a 12 gauge. my daddy bought me one of them when i was a little kid.
What do you use today for hunting birds? Bofors 40 mm?
-
the only thing to blame
I'm not an absolutist by any means. I believe gangbangers have easier access to guns in the US, but I don't believe they would be at a loss to substantially make up that should far greater restrictions be put in place. They have no trouble doing so with substances like illegal drugs. Guns are, if anything, much easier to smuggle than drugs due to their physical properties even if they weren't already present by the millions.
I do believe that the presence of self defense firearms helps keep down the spread of crime outside of the primary gangland operating areas. The criminals themselves agree that they fear an armed victim more than the police. Casual robberies, even if they involve a firearm, seldom involve a shooting. They typically occur in areas where the victim is unlikely to be armed. Home intrusions are virtually unheard of, perhaps because a lot of people who don't carry a concealed firearm on the street have one in the nightstand. In any case, they primarily only shoot other criminals that are similarly involved in the dangerous but lucrative illicit drug trade. There is no reason to shoot a casual mugging/robbery victim, or in many cases to use a gun and in many cases a knife would be optional since the goal is to target the weaker members of the herd. Gangland turf wars require a different level of force, and one that is typically only experienced by those "in the trade."
I think that politicians that concentrate on the guns vs. the social issues are taking the easy way out, and a way that will not substantially impact the danger or quality of life in those worst of neighborhoods. They lack the courage and leadership to take on human problems, and find blaming the gun and not the trigger puller to be the easy and politically safe way out.
Charon
-
Well, that's what politicians do....
Anyway, the problem in the USA is IMHO inverted to Europe, and therefor tougher to deal with. If possible at all.
-
angus... if your-0-peeans again allowed their people to be armed... yes... every tom dick and harry... whatever that means... sounds kind of class warfare to me tho...
If they did allow the peasants to be armed again... there would be no more homicide or serious crime... there would be a decrease in the number of burglaries and strongarm crimes.
What would be the difference? you only have people obeying the draconian and tyrannical rights violation gun laws because of the penalties... just make the penalties for GUN CRIME as high or higher than you do for a poor citizen to defend himself or even touch a firearm of the wrong type at the wrong time.
It is more than a debate...you are the enemy. a human rights violater of the worst sort. You feel you have the right to take away your fellows right to defend themselves from tyrants both inside and out.
I am guessing that I could find more than a few people in your country who feel that their right to own firearms.. their human right to defend themselves... is being violated... just because you are happy with the laws does not give you the right to have them.
lazs
-
Another angle on it, from another thread:
Any word spoken, in class, in the lunchroom, or on the campus, that deviates from the views of another person may start an argument or cause a disturbance. But our Constitution says we must take this risk, and our history says that it is this sort of hazardous freedom--this kind of openness--that is the basis of our national strength and of the independence and vigor of Americans who grow up and live in this relatively permissive, often disputatious, society
-
Lazs, your text is rather angry, so what are you going to do next, shoot me?
Firstly:
"angus... if your-0-peeans again allowed their people to be armed"
Get it through your thick skull that we are indeed armed. I have 3 guns in the house, while our country somewhat seperates itself with a ban on multi-round conceilable weapons.
"If they did allow the peasants to be armed again"
Call me a peasant and I'll name you Charlotte. On farms in general, even up here there is a firearm. Again, a person can have a weapon. Just need a license for it. In the rest of Europe you may in many a country get your hands on a handgun, but you will need clearance for it.
Here:
"It is more than a debate...you are the enemy. a human rights violater of the worst sort. You feel you have the right to take away your fellows right to defend themselves from tyrants both inside and out."
Human rights? Pardon me, but the whole point of the law, - regarding crime in this regard, is to keep the silly folks from killing and robbing each other. (etc). As far as now, the silly O-peans are doing very much better at this than your neighbours.
And what human rights are you talking about? Oh, the horrible law of not anybody being able to get his hands on a handgun to defend himself? OK, go to Germany, - handgun permission possible. Oh, the humanity, - I just returned from jail from petty drug-running, and I can't buy a gun?
Get this into your head. If you live in Europe, and have a clean record, you can have weapons. Varies with countries and persons involved. The base is gun control, an attempt to keep weapons in the right hands. While the effort is very understandable, the result will never be perfect. However, you have to be brain damaged to come to a conclusion like this being a human violation of the worst sort. I suggest that you go and see the doc immediately.
-
Originally posted by Angus
And what human rights are you talking about? Oh, the horrible law of not anybody being able to get his hands on a handgun to defend himself?
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." (Second Amendment to the Constitution.)
If you live in Europe, and have a clean record, you can have weapons.
Of what type? Under who`s control? Define weapon. ( I know , I know...you are still working on the "assault rifle" thing I asked a couple of times.)
If you don`t have a clean record you are not worried about it anyway. Silly *** laws is not of your interest.
The base is gun control, an attempt to keep weapons in the right hands.
And the left hand ..and pockets, boots, etc, but mostly away from those who would have need of personal protection and of course those pesky types who might attempt to interfere with a totaly out of control and totalitarian government. Those crazy rebelious types are nearly as silly as those wacko guys that wote the constitution of the U.S.
I just returned from jail from petty drug-running, and I can't buy a gun?
If you can`t, then it`s no wonder that you went to jail for petty drug running to begin with. This would mean that you are not too bright in the connection department. Since you would not be at all concerned with any laws that would pertain to the average, law abiding citizen, I don`t see where there would be any problem buying a gun.
Now with the right "gun control " laws in place it would be a complete reversal of the above. Take handgun ownership prohibited areas for instance, a law abiding citizen would be in a real pickle of a decison making when it came to personal freedom to protect himself and family against the aforementioned people.
I do admit though that "hangun prohibited" law areas are a great plus for a certain class of people. Take for instance if you are a pro robber, stickup artist, murder, bank robber, the above mentioned drug dealer or professions of those types. At least some attempt by the government has been made to protect these types from pesky citizens. What kind of world would it be for your average stickup artist or bank robber if the average law abiding citizen is allowed to carry some defense against those in your trade? Sheesh!!
While the effort is very understandable
Yes....if you happen to be in the business of producing total rule over your kingdoms popualtion.
This just in!!!!!!!!!! The professional criminal is not realy into going to great effort to abide by anyone`s laws, no matter how totaly ridiculous they are. A great plus, once again, if you are in that line of work.
-
LOL, Jackal, you can read but no comprendo.
(I have never been in jail, my record is clean, so I can have guns you see.)
Bottom line of the whole poddle is that those countries with their gunlaws (and another constitution BTW, you speak as the USA had the first parliament in the world), have less weapons in the wrong hands, as well as a lower rate of homicide and armed robberies. No way of getting around that one.
Type of weapon allowed depends, since weapons are basically used for hunting, the hunting gear is most of the stock. Pistols are allowed in the hands of German hunters, - you will understand why if you go boar hunting (I have). So, the "lack of freedom" is perhaps the difference of needing a license and the necessary terms for one. Oh, how bad.
BTW, do you think that a drivers license is a bad thing?
-
Originally posted by Angus
BTW, do you think that a drivers license is a bad thing?
yes, it is just one more way for the government to have control over it's people.
-
Hmm. Is your humour to subtle for me or are you just plain nuts?
-
you don't need a license to operate a car only the skill to do it, a license does not give you the skill. Witness all the unskilled drivers crashing into each other.
A license might mean something if it was as hard to get as a pilots license. But, like all license it is still a way for the govt to raise money and have more control over the people. The job of all governments is to control people.
-
Originally posted by Angus
BTW, do you think that a drivers license is a bad thing?
licenses are but a way for the government to tax and control the populace. it's not a good or a bad thing merely a vehicle by which the society has permitted themselves to be governed with.
-
Originally posted by Angus
LOL, Jackal, you can read but no comprendo.
(I have never been in jail, my record is clean, so I can have guns you see.)
Geeeez Angus..you are not that dense. OK... I will do it simply and apply as needed.
Special Angus addition below. :)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If can`t, then it`s no wonder that went to jail for petty drug running to begin with. This would mean that are not too bright in the connection department. Since would not be at all concerned with any laws that would pertain to the average, law abiding citizen, I don`t see where there would be any problem buying a gun.
Now with the right "gun control " laws in place it would be a complete reversal of the above. Take handgun ownership prohibited areas for instance, a law abiding citizen would be in a real pickle of a decison making when it came to personal freedom to protect himself and family against the aforementioned people.
I do admit though that "handgun prohibited" law areas are a great plus for a certain class of people. Take for instance if you are a pro robber, stickup artist, murder, bank robber, the above mentioned drug dealer or professions of those types. At least some attempt by the government has been made to protect these types from pesky citizens. What kind of world would it be for your average stickup artist or bank robber if the average law abiding citizen is allowed to carry some defense against those in your trade? Sheesh!!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Simple tools for above reference use for the challenged.
Suggested dealer names: Cool Breeze - Comeandgetit - Whiteline - Big Capper - Snoottootandshoot - Igottarod - Streetgunner - IgonnacapUsucka.
:)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Special features added after original release publishing.
so I can have guns you see.
Yes, as long as the local Barney Fife doesn`t hold any personal or unwritten prejudice against you...................or .
( Judge, jury, prosecuter and overall King in general) It`s sham. It`s been done before to allow discrimination at will against any group, race or person. It`s see through.........if you open your eyes.
Even if you are smooching ole Barney`s backside like a pro, you can still not know the joy of a Colt owner.......................a nd are certainly not allowed to run with any sharp objects. Government knows what is best for you, even if you do not like it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Bottom line of the whole poddle is that those countries with their gunlaws have less weapons in the wrong hands
I would consider the "wrong hands" to be that of the non-lawabiding criminal.
The only given and estimated known on any figures would only include the law abiding ownership numbers. It would be a flat out, glaringly evident lie for any government or agency to declare otherwise. Why? Once again a little hint.......the non-law abiding or criminal population are not affected by the gun laws or any other laws regulating, or in this instance, dictating over the average citizen. No one, no government, agency or or nanny organization has or can even estimate how many guns of any kind or owned by the criminal population. What is a given is that the laws restricting or banning handguns for instance only concerns those who wish to abide by the laws. In other words to take away the one thing that can protect Joe Straightshooter from Joe Idontdolaws when he practices his trade.
This makes for some real neat stuff if your bag is that of the criminal. It also makes things just peachy keen looking on paper in those places when publishing time comes for the gun crime statistics. It`s a real "Look how our gun ban and restriction laws are working" soap box and testament..............unless of course you happen to have anything resembling a thought process of your own.(Governments hate thinkers when it comes to gun bans. they would like to ban the independent thought process)
If you have disarmed the average citizen and taken away his tools of self defense against the criminal element who uses a gun in his trade, then the criminal is almost insured by the government that he will not have to have much wear and tear on his main tool. Certainly you will have lower violent shooting stats...........DUH. It becomes a tool of threat in most cases that is almost guaranteed to be your free ticket to success. Of course we realy wouldn`t want to coincide that with numbers and estimates of monetary value and currency that was lost by the average citizen due to the prohibiting of any kind of defense against such crimes. It would make the government and it`s "we know what`s best for you" laws appear in a bad light. Then those lower shooting and death rates that were put on the books by the violent criminal against the undefended population can be justified and accepted. What`s a few Dads, Moms, Uncles, Brothers, Sisters, Cousins, Friends, etc. , etc. lives lost that could have been prevented if these governments could only trust their general population. Who knows......they might just reach the over the top point in population laws and rules that rule and dictate the people and a revolution or some such sillyness might happen. Wouldn`t that make an otherwise, in total control, government look silly?
No way of getting around that one.
No, not unless that useless thought process keeps getting in the way.
BTW, do you think that a drivers license is a bad thing
I will ponder that one. I will use the time to consider my answer while you come to a final conclusion on the "assault rifle" definition you are researching.
:)
-
"Yes, as long as the local Barney Fife doesn`t hold any personal or unwritten prejudice against you"
? Explain please. I'm not that dense you see :D
Anyway dense enough for declaring this:
"Once again a little hint.......the non-law abiding or criminal population are not affected by the gun laws or any other laws regulating"
As absolute rubbish, since criminals in countries with rather stiffer laws (such as up here) are having trouble with arming themselves. There are always some arms around, but not much. I know it is hard to understand for you since your reality is different. Can't help you about that though.
Example:
"pro robber, stickup artist, murder, bank robber,"
Not much of them here I'm afraid. The first armed bank robbery in the country was made by an American who got caught the day after. The last one was made by a junky with an axe, he was caught within 15 minutes.
The murderers usually become ones after a scruffle, so it's a thing like a fist or a knife that usually is the weapon. No gun victim for years now, but oddly the last one was from a handgun. There was this guy running around with a rifle the other day, but since that could be seen from a mile away, he had the SWAT in his driveway before he could say "Amen".
As for the pesky citizens they don't have assault rifles like you can buy on the gunfairs in Oklahoma, nor do they have automatic handguns. But they do have automatic shotguns and non-automatic rifles, as well as automatic light rifles (up to .22 magnum lever operated as well).
Bottom line again, it is much more unprobable that a criminal in Europe is armed than in the USA, and as well it is much more unprobable to find oneself on the receiving end of a bullet, or looking into a barrel.
It's reality.
On the other side, if you break into a house with evil intentions, even mine, (you can walk in, I don't know where the key is anyway), you may just as well find yourself looking into a barrel, muhahahaha.
What is this about an assault rifle anyway? I am looking for a decent sniper rifle to drop them geese at 250 yards or more.
-
angus... I guess that yes... if you tried to take the guns I use away from me... I would have to shoot you.
If you take handguns away or guns that are useful against tyrants then you are taking away my right to defend myself. I am saying that your laws take away guns that your citizens could use to defend themselves.
Are you saying that there is not one person in your country who wanted to own a handgun and carry it? Are you saying that none of these persons were ever in a situation where if they had had a handgun they could have prevented harm to themselves or others?
You are lucky to have such a small country with a tiny population... many parts of the US have similar makeups and crime rates but.. the difference is... we have much more freedom in owning firearms.
So.. my question remains... how are you safer? what gun law was passed in your country that caused a drop in homicide and serious crime?
simply put.. so even you can understand... What was the law....what was the homicide and serious crime rate before the law and what was the rate after the law was passed?
Why should you have a gun and not someone living in a city? Who is smart enough or psychic enough to decide who needs a firearm and who does not?
Are you not playing god when you decide that a person does or doesn't need to defend his life or property or those of his fellows? Who gave you that right? It is immoral. Our founding fathers knew that as did britans but... in england they were too wussy or not smart enough about it and when they recognized the right to be armed they made it useless by making it a privlidge passed out by government instead of a right of the people.
we are just one of the few countries who have done it right in our constitution.
I do not know how the swiss have it spelled out in theirs.
lazs
-
Have you been to Switzerland? Man, they're a bit stiff and promptly swept me on the way in. But I already said that.
Murders are few, however mostly with firearms. They are still lower than in my country. Which brings me to a point you are not expecting, and yet maybe?
Our guncrime is practically at 0%. Armed assaults and robberies are also very very low, and mostly something as a spur-of-the-moment thing with a weapon out of the kitchen drawer. Anyway, guncrime = 0%.
So, how about letting a slack on the gun culture? Well, IMHO it cannot improve things, it simply doesn't get any better than nil. And there is many a fool around here that should not carry a gun.
I would love to have a handgun., and so would many of my gun-interested friends. We evaluate that to the possibility of handguns getting common in circulation, and we all (so far) agree upon that we'd rather give it up.
So, I promptly sacrifice my "freedom" of having a handgun to the FREEDOM of not having to worry about people unexpectedly poking a gun in my face, or shooting me.
-
what angus is saying.
Angus,"there are no criminals in iceland, we are all happy people,we don't need handguns, america should be like iceland"
-
I really don't care how they handle gun control in Iceland. It's none of my business, so there's no need for me to comment either way.
I hope they will extend the same courtesy to the USA.
-
Well same to Europe, so I wish some on this thread would stop booing on them for trying to keep less blood running.
And twisted John:
"what angus is saying.
Angus,"there are no criminals in iceland, we are all happy people,we don't need handguns, america should be like iceland""
Actually we measure as the happiest population in the world, but I would take that with a grain of salt.
However, if you want a place where you're NOT likely to be shot, you should come over here :D
-
I'd wager most people posting here from the US are as unlikely to be shot as you are Angus.
The big cities have the high homicide rates. The smaller cities and rural areas do not.
-
Originally posted by Angus
"Yes, as long as the local Barney Fife doesn`t hold any personal or unwritten prejudice against you"
? Explain please.
What part don`t you understand?
As absolute rubbish, since criminals in countries with rather stiffer laws (such as up here) are having trouble with arming themselves.
Talk about your rubbish. Having trouble arming themselves my aching back. You know not of what you speak. Exactly what are you basing that little gem of a theory on? There are very, very few places around the globe that you cannot obtain gun more than easily.....unless of course you are a law abider. Then if you are under bans , heavy restrictions, etc. you are at the mercy of the attacker if and when the time comes because you can`t be trusted by those in power. You might get a little cocky and get out of hand. You don`t have a clue what is going on in the criminal world.............other than "My Government tells me so". they know what`s best for you . :)
There are always some arms around, but not much.
LOL Plenty enough to be easily had if at any given time someone wish to put the hurt on someone else......especialy since they have had any chance of defense taken away from them.
Not much of them here I'm afraid.
:rofl
The murderers usually become ones after a scruffle, so it's a thing like a fist or a knife that usually is the weapon.
Well I certainly hope that someone in power up that way is on top of this and immediately proposed knife/fist bans.
No gun victim for years now, but oddly the last one was from a handgun.
The shooter law enforcement or one of those non-existent type? :rofl
There was this guy running around with a rifle the other day, but since that could be seen from a mile away, he had the SWAT in his driveway before he could say "Amen".
Can`t have that. Want us to look into sending some of our Ninja garbed ATF guys up?
As for the pesky citizens they don't have assault rifles like you can buy on the gunfairs in Oklahoma, nor do they have automatic handguns.
I am still waiting on your definition for "assault rifle". I am patient , but it seems like your research has bogged down.
But they do have automatic shotguns and non-automatic rifles, as well as automatic light rifles (up to .22 magnum lever operated as well).
I assume you are referring to semi-auto.
Bottom line again, it is much more unprobable that a criminal in Europe is armed than in the USA, and as well it is much more unprobable to find oneself on the receiving end of a bullet, or looking into a barrel.
Those unlucky one`s that do end up on the receiving end probably take great comfort in their death knowing that their government took away any chance of defense against their attackers. They are just stat spoilers anyway.
It is not at all more unprobable that a criminal is unarmed anywhere if they are armed. It is a given that it is not only probable, but a fact ,that if your right to like defense has been taken away by a governing body you are at the total whim of the armed attacker......and you will be looked down upon for being a stat spoiler.
It`s reality.
As long as you are not the one laying in the casket and believe your governing body has a right to totaly dictate over your life and defense of that life. Then again you are really pushing things because you happen to be one of those mishappen, unlucky goofs that was at the wrong place, at the wrong time and ran into one of those uncharted/unstatable criminals who just as soon take your life as not. Don`t those guys ever read the laws? If they did they would know that the government is doing their absolute best to protect them from ending up accountable at tally time.
There should be a law put in force in such places that prohibits you from standing in the direct line of fire from an unstable`s gun fire. The nerve of some citizens to waste the criminal`s ammo and then go on to mess up the stas. Sheesh!
On the other side, if you break into a house with evil intentions, even mine, (you can walk in, I don't know where the key is anyway), you may just as well find yourself looking into a barrel,
As you are fumbling around in the dark locating and getting a general direction of the intruder, if he just happens to be one of those " a few , but not many" types.....close your eyes so the flash will not blind you as your are going down. Those criminals refuse to go by the laws. Just unfair to those of you that have been left without the tool to equal the chances of survival. there ought to be a law................
What is this about an assault rifle anyway?
I don`t know. I am still awaiting your research into your definition of such.
I am looking for a decent sniper rifle to drop them geese at 250 yards or more.
Uh Oh.............now you are going to have to add another one to the research definition list.
If I am getting close to the type of firearm that you are talking about, I might as well get it off my chest and confess to being guilty of owning such a thing at one time.
A custom built benchrest rifle. Remington 700 action, Douglas bull barrel, 6 to 18 Redfield scope (Oooh how I wish they still made them scopes. I could then become a star gazer:) )
Canjar double set trigger...........fitted, relieved, floated, glass bedded. Accuracy to the point of shame.
Of course that was then. I have since cleansed myself of such an evil contraption. :)
It went almost everywhere I did in a vehicle for a long period of time. Made so much cash with that thing that I still have feelings of guilt. :) Did support my family though two really bad winters though. Shameless, I`m telling you.
I tell you what. I may have sold that thing just in the nick of time before I ran upon a circumstance by accident and been tempted to do something really stupid with it...............like save a few innocent lives. Take for instance if I had been unlucky enough to have ran upon and incident such as the big bank robbery shootout that happened in California. You know the guys with the full autos that we peons can`t possess without selling our sole, but those guys can...because they are criminals and or not bound by such sillyness....... not to mention the full body armor they had.
Since that rifle went in the vehicle most everywhere, and I had happened to be in such a situation, I could have and most definitely would have, sat at a comfortably safe distance and popped those exposed melons in a very short time and at will.
Wheeeeeeew.....lucked out on those accounts. Someone so equipped in such a situation would have saved a few innocent folks from being on the recieving end of those hits.
Then there would have been ruckus. Such a thing would have left the highly educated and misguided gun ban /gun control freaks totaly without proper media stats.
If there had been a law prohibiting those criminals from being in possession of such firearms at the time all this could have been avoided....right?
No wait..............those laws would only apply to the law abiding portion of society. The criminals are not hampered by such things.
It`s a good thing too. If the average, law abiding citizen were allowed to have such things in their possession at will then those morons wouldn`t have lasted long enough to do all that damage.
It just wouldn`t be fair to the career criminal.
-
angus... since you can't give me an example of any gun law anywhere reducing homicide or serious crime... or... suicide...
I will just have to assume that you don't really like guns and handguns in particular.
you say that you and your fellows would love to own handguns... you are unable to show anywhere that prohibiting handguns reduces homicide or serious crime... you do talk of your fellow citizens as "fools"
maybe you are right... maybe you are the one country in the world with people too stupid to own certain types of firearms.. what with all those "fools" and such running around... good thing you have a smart government and nanny citizens to make sure you don't harm yourselves.
lazs
-
Flip the side.
Find me a nation low in crime and show me where an increased arsenal will gradually lower crime rate of particularly the violent side.
The bottom line remains, - you are much more likely to be shot, murdered, robbed, raped and so forth, in the country of many-guns, than in petty OOO-rope.
These are the stats, not speculations.
p.s. As for suicide, it's very fast with a handgun. Don't even need a toe to pull the trigger.
-
Originally posted by Angus
Snip~
The bottom line remains, - you are much more likely to be shot, murdered, robbed, raped and so forth, in the country of many-guns, than in petty OOO-rope.
These are the stats, not speculations. ~snip
Depends on who has the guns.
In this CASE (http://www.international.ucla.edu/africa/article.asp?parentid=11069) , I'd wager that if the victims had firearms, there would be a lot less people killed.
I'd also wager that the victims would have loved to have something to fight back with right before their death.
-
Depends?
These are overall statistic. The difference is actually quite great.
-
angus... I can name one country where more handguns, concealed carry, decreased homicide and serious crime and that would be.. The USA.. in states that passed right to carry laws the homicide and serious crime rate went down.
Soo.. I can name one where crime went down by adding guns with only one law.. it is still up to you to name a law that reduced serious crime and homicide.
you have been duped by your leaders.. or... you know better but think that your fellow citizens are "fools" and fear them more than you fear your government.
I certainly would not like to live in a place like that. If I did tho... I sure would be glad that the US was the only superpower and not soviet russia for instance.
lazs
-
Originally posted by Angus
The bottom line remains, - you are much more likely to be shot, murdered, robbed, raped and so forth, in the country of many-guns
Not if the government does not take away the right of the citizens in that country to to own and carry.
Self defense is a really neat thing if you are the unlucky one to be in such an instance it is called for. Without it you are at the whim of your attacker.
-
Ahem. Read again. This was a simple factum. And your point is that trying to remove the guns would increase the distance, - which is something I pointed out that I did not have a solution for.
As for this rubbish here:
"Talk about your rubbish. Having trouble arming themselves my aching back. You know not of what you speak. Exactly what are you basing that little gem of a theory on? There are very, very few places around the globe that you cannot obtain gun more than easily.....unless of course you are a law abider."
I know of what I speak, and for myself it took a very short time getting guns for the sole reason of myself being in the books as a law abiding citizen. Thinking of my next gun now. Will be a rifle.
-
Originally posted by Angus
I know of what I speak, and for myself it took a very short time getting guns for the sole reason of myself being in the books as a law abiding citizen. Thinking of my next gun now. Will be a rifle.
So........how many Colt or other brand pistols are you going to pick up while you are there?
-
Cannot get a handgun, cannot get an assault rifle, no grenades and machine guns, however rifles and shotguns.
BTW, still have not found my housekey, but no sweat, the thugs around here are few and not armed :D
-
Originally posted by Toad
I'd wager most people posting here from the US are as unlikely to be shot as you are Angus.
The big cities have the high homicide rates. The smaller cities and rural areas do not.
Wrong I'd say. The possibilities of getting shot up here are practically zero, while you do have posters on this forums that have been shot.
However, there are definately areas in the USA where you are less likely to be killed than in some areas in Europe, - or up here.
It's just the total that sucks. Stays as a fact.
-
Originally posted by Angus
Cannot get a handgun
Thank you kindly. :aok
cannot get an assault rifle
How do you know that? Did you finish up the research without letting me in on it?
-
oops
-
Wrong I'd say. The possibilities of getting shot up here are practically zero, while you do have posters on this forums that have been shot.
Who would that be? Personally I know 3 people who have died alcohol related deaths and not a single individual involved in firearm violence.
It's just the total that sucks. Stays as a fact.
As I posted on page 4.
The reality in America is, if you are not involved in urban criminal activity your personal risk from firearm violence is very small. Just look at the statistics with an open eye.
5 per 100,000 -- not 5 per 100 or 5 per 1000 even. Would you feel any safer, realistically, if it was 2 per 100,000 or 1 per 100,000? Especially since, at least using Chicago PD info, AT LEAST 3 of those 5 are criminals killing criminals.
Risk by comparison x 100,000:
firearms - 5/2
Automobiles - 14
Tobacco - 650
Alcohol - 150
Heroin - 80 (fully banned, btw)
Cocaine - 4 (fully banned, btw)
And then there is Working for a living - 4. It's actually safer to be a criminal than to work for a living in the US
Now if you're an overly hysterical person then those odds might terrify you. Of course, you should be absolutely terrified about getting in a car on a Saturday night. Personally, I spent years in a huge city with a crime problem and was living there when Chicago got the homicide capital of America and never walked the streets in fear or heard a gunshot.
How much time have you spent in America, Angus? You seem to have a CSI Miami view of the country. I go through life day after day without firearm violence even registering in my thoughts.
There are parts of the world with a high incidence of shark attack. Australia and South Africa, for example. But my risk of being attacked by a shark is zero unless I swam off certain beaches at certain times of the year. As long as I stayed in the hotel pool, or walked the streets I would be fine. In fact, in probably 99 percent of Australia you are safe from shark attack. The thought of a shark attack wouldn't enter your mind anymore than you were in Iceland or Chicago.
My risk is slightly greater to get shot in America compared to getting eaten by a shark. And since it COULD potentially happen, regardless of how totally unlikely at about 2 in 100,000, it is nice to be able to defend myself if the need ever arose.
This guy lost the lottery, but turned the tables. And again, well over 99 percent of Americans will NEVER face anything even remotely like this in our population of 300,000,000: http://www.nbc6.net/news/13585506/detail.html?dl=headlineclick
BTW, where general violent crime is concerned the US is nothing special anymore and parts of Europe are catching up fast and surpassing us in some areas like robberies. Frankly I personally, with my demographics and lack of criminal involvement in street gangs and the drug trade, might be MORE at risk in Europe for a violent incident. I haven't played with the numbers, but with well over 80 percent of the shooters and victims of violent crime in the US being gang banger types killing each other (and not Joe or Jane average person with access to a gun)...
Here is another one of those exceedingly rare cases of home invasion robbery, and why they are so rare here compared to parts of Europe.
http://www.local6.com/news/13542239/detail.html
Charon
-
If I moved to iceland I would be in danger of committing suicide. you guys must have em doing it front of you everywhere you go... who could live like that?
I am glad that we don't have your government that causes all those suicides.
lazs
-
If I stand in the middle of the highway that runs in front of my house, I can see approximately 2 miles to the north and a mile or so to the south.
In the last 10 years there have been nine highway fatalities within those limits.
Gun fatalities within the same area? Zero.
-
Originally posted by Shuckins
If I stand in the middle of the highway that runs in front of my house, I can see approximately 2 miles to the north and a mile or so to the south.
In the last 10 years there have been nine highway fatalities within those limits.
Gun fatalities within the same area? Zero.
very good point
-
Gun control isn't, wasn't, and never will be the answer. Criminal control is the answer. Put a few more in the ground, and you can bet they'll settle down.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
If I moved to iceland I would be in danger of committing suicide. you guys must have em doing it front of you everywhere you go... who could live like that?
I am glad that we don't have your government that causes all those suicides.
lazs
The least risk of suicide in the world for the latitude. (that's a cultural thing though). But you can, to your pleasure do it with a shotgun :D
You might also be under the risk to be very happy :D
-
Charon:
"Who would that be? Personally I know 3 people who have died alcohol related deaths and not a single individual involved in firearm violence."
Not kidding, there was a thread about this some good while ago, and some posters had actually been shot!
-
Originally posted by Angus
Depends?
These are overall statistic. The difference is actually quite great.
I showed you a specific example of where the victims didn't have ready access to firearms.
My bet is that many more unarmed people were murdered in that war than all the accidental firearms deaths in all the world let alone the US.
As many here have pointed out, getting shot is so low of a threat that it's not much to get worried about. The average person is more likely to die from a car accident, alcohol, smoking, fatty foods, violent acts not involving a gun, etc.
Given the choice, I'd rather have some crazy people with guns rather than bombs (Oklahoma Federal Building bombing), or flying airliners into tall buildings (9/11).
Gee, had we had some armed marshals or qualified citizens in those airliners, bet we wouldn't be taking our shoes off at airports right now.
Care to show me where stronger anti-gun laws lowered the violent crime rate?
-
Well, you have 8000+ murdered with firearms in the USA every year. That basically means that you are much more likely to be shot dead in the USA than being murdered in the UK. Note, that means shot dead, not just shot.
You are also more likely to be robbed, raped or assaulted than in the UK.
And the UK is NOT the best or perhaps even the average in W-Europe.
W-Europe is more densely populated than the USA. It has many more languages and an amalgam of cultures. The population is also MORE. It has many many cities with millions of inhabitants. So, to cut a long story short, this little continent has every factor that has been described on this thread as the recipe for high crime.
And yet it is so much lower than in the USA. Overall stats. Dot. Punctum.
Me and Charon tend to disagree about the reason, he puts more weight on the cultural/social factor, I put more weight on the difference in access to weapons. That's just that. So call me daft, but I still think that if you start handing out Colts all over Euroland, you will definately see more bullet marks.
-
Guns do come in handy for more than keeping your own government or your neighbor's governement in line. From today's local paper:
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/localnews/stories/DN-robberyshoot_01met.ART.North.Edition1.43b8c05.html
-
angus.. you are aware that we have almost 300 million folks in the US? That more than half our homicides are committed by one or two minorities... firearms or not?
Would you feel better if they committed suicide or were pushed off cliffs?
The homicide rate and crime rate for both australia and england has not gone down with their recent gun bans and draconian laws.. crime in states in the US that has allowed for the right to carry concealed has gone down.
When you compare apples to apples it becomes pretty apparent. The decaying, lilly white societies of your-0-peean socialism can in no way be compared the vibrant and diverse society of America.
Just as you wouldn't not live in a paradise because it had a slightly higher chance of lightning striking you... You would not destroy the freedom that is America just because you wanted to turn it into some your-0-peeean style craphole.
Soviet russia had gun control and low crime and socialism... If you talk to boroda... it was a workers paradise. low crime and no shootings (other than the government shooting it's people).
Why not strive for that?
lazs
-
Once again, research seems to have bogged down. :aok
-
Lazs:
"angus.. you are aware that we have almost 300 million folks in the US? That more than half our homicides are committed by one or two minorities... firearms or not?"
Yes, I do. 1000x our population, which makes comparisons easy to calculate. According to that, to stay in line with the USA, we should have a humble 12 murders last year, 8 out of them by firearms. Guess what...we're probably at 0. (that's a lucky thing though).
Then minorities. Which? Well, you have corpses then anyway.
Our minorities also make a racket, and I'm glad that the baltic people up here are NOT better armed than they are. Last homocide attempt was from lithuania vs same.
As for this:
"Would you feel better if they committed suicide or were pushed off cliffs?"
Do you think that easier access to firearms would lower suicide rates?
And cliffs? Well, in your homeland it is probably 1000 times more likely to get shot to death than ever being pushed off a cliff up here or in Euroland.
And here:
"When you compare apples to apples it becomes pretty apparent. The decaying, lilly white societies of your-0-peean socialism can in no way be compared the vibrant and diverse society of America."
Have you ever been to Europe? You sure don't seem to know much about the place. Maybe you don't trust yourself over without your gun, and since you can't fly ith one, then no-go?
Anyway, this statement is rather offensive tho the continent, which after all has more than 300 million inhabitants on an area smaller than the USA, but yet very much less murders, rapes and robberies.
As for Socialism, - I have been comparing W-Europe with the USA. So, I inform you that W-Europe is and was not under any commie regime, - but anyway, the murder rate is still lower in Russia than it is in the USA. I hope Boroda joins in and fills you up on this one :D
And le finale:
"Just as you wouldn't not live in a paradise because it had a slightly higher chance of lightning striking you... You would not destroy the freedom that is America just because you wanted to turn it into some your-0-peeean style craphole. "
That "lightning" leaves a lot of corpses. And the freedom is for whom? Try to imagine a crowded environment where it doesn't even cross your mind that you need a conceilable firearm just to protect yourself. It is true freedom to be able to feel safe without S&W in the pocket.
Places where you can not live so are called .... crapholes?
(I am grossely insulted on the behalf of the European continent, - and Russia)
-
Not kidding, there was a thread about this some good while ago, and some posters had actually been shot!
The only one I remember was a thread where a guy faked an incident to be a BBS hero. It was clearly proven to be a false story. I usually pay attention to such threads and that is the only one I am aware of on this board.
Charon
-
Originally posted by Angus
And le finale:
"Just as you wouldn't not live in a paradise because it had a slightly higher chance of lightning striking you... You would not destroy the freedom that is America just because you wanted to turn it into some your-0-peeean style craphole. "
That "lightning" leaves a lot of corpses. And the freedom is for whom? Try to imagine a crowded environment where it doesn't even cross your mind that you need a conceilable firearm just to protect yourself. It is true freedom to be able to feel safe without S&W in the pocket.
Places where you can not live so are called .... crapholes?
(I am grossely insulted on the behalf of the European continent, - and Russia)
The freedom is the RIGHT to protect yourself. Gun control doesn't get rid of guns, it gets rid of the honest man's guns. And the crooks keep theirs. And crowded enviroments are the worst places to be, too many people. No, it is not true freedom to feel safe with out a gun, that is called false security. No matter where you go, there will be idiots and crooks, and a man has the right to defend himself from such people.
-
Seems to work the other way in Euroland then. Guns being not so common in rotation = no need for a conceilable weapon to carry on yourself.
As for the freedom, are you allowed to carry a Beretta in your pocket anywhere in the USA?
And oh, the humanity, you can't have one on flights. You can't even smoke!
BTW, again, we do have the right to own and have a gun as long as our record is clean. Just no conceilable multiround arms and assault rifles (& upwards). I am thinking of a 22-250 next. That is the case in my country, and in the rest of Europe the rules vary. What cuts Euroland off the USA is more gun control, - i.e. it is more trouble getting a gun, - you have to register it etc. Be a nice Johnny, and get yourself a licence, and you can own, have, and shoot guns. Just like me :D
But I can't have a small one to fit in my back pocket, nor may I carry one to the cinema. Happily, for I look upon it as a slice of freedom to be able to go to "Die Hard 4" without expecting anybody in the darkness to whisper "Yippie-Kay-Yeah MOF" with a Colt in their hand.....
-
And here:
"Gun control doesn't get rid of guns,"
Well, it seems to keep their numbers lower, and more in the log....
-
Originally posted by Angus
As for the freedom, are you allowed to carry a Beretta in your pocket anywhere in the USA?
Depends on the state. Most now allow citizens to carry concealed Berettas (other brands too).
I should mention that most also require some training and/or licensing.
-
Okay.
Spine chilling. But there is a control on that, you need a licence to carry a conceiled weapon in public?
Anyway, this one tickled me. From a cute webbsite of statistics, - http://www.nationmaster.com.
"You\'re 66 times more likely to be prosecuted in the USA than in France "
hehe :p
-
Originally posted by Angus
Okay.
Spine chilling. But there is a control on that, you need a licence to carry a conceiled weapon in public?
Anyway, this one tickled me. From a cute webbsite of statistics, - http://www.nationmaster.com.
"You\'re 66 times more likely to be prosecuted in the USA than in France "
hehe :p
See my edit. No spine chilling needed. Those Americans carrying a pistola are no threat or danger to law abiding citizens, just the opposite.
-
And that is what you call gun control.
Drivers need a license, and luckily Pilots too. It does not stop accidents however....
Anyway, before I retire, here is a goodie.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RUwS1uAdUcI
Found it when looking for statistics, and it's basically about statistics. Just too good to loose the linkie.
Enjoy ;)
-
Originally posted by Angus
But I can't have a small one to fit in my back pocket, nor may I carry one to the cinema. Happily, for I look upon it as a slice of freedom to be able to go to "Die Hard 4" without expecting anybody in the darkness to whisper "Yippie-Kay-Yeah MOF" with a Colt in their hand.....
Originally posted by Angus
Okay.
Spine chilling.
Ok, now I get it. Angus is afraid that if people have guns at all, they will shoot him. He is paranoid. He thinks there should be no concealable guns at all.
-
Exactly. Since I have gone through some attacks in my life, I live to tell the tales for I didn't get shot :D
BTW....
"Interesting facts on American Crime
Russia has almost twice as many judges and magistrates as the United States. Meanwhile, the United States has 8 times as much crime.
The United States puts 0.7 % of its population in Prison - a vastly higher percentage than any other nation. "
-
Originally posted by Angus
Exactly. Since I have gone through some attacks in my life, I live to tell the tales for I didn't get shot :D
BTW....
"Interesting facts on American Crime
Russia has almost twice as many judges and magistrates as the United States. Meanwhile, the United States has 8 times as much crime.
The United States puts 0.7 % of its population in Prison - a vastly higher percentage than any other nation. "
Define vastly.
-
Vastly (http://www.nationmaster.com/red/graph/cri_pri_per_cap-crime-prisoners-per-capita&b_map=1)
-
Originally posted by Angus
Exactly. Since I have gone through some attacks in my life, I live to tell the tales for I didn't get shot :D
And if you had a gun, those attacks may not have occured, and if they had, they may have been reversed. One less thug on the streets.
-
But I can't have a small one to fit in my back pocket, nor may I carry one to the cinema. Happily, for I look upon it as a slice of freedom to be able to go to "Die Hard 4" without expecting anybody in the darkness to whisper "Yippie-Kay-Yeah MOF" with a Colt in their hand.....
And you would have been ENORMOUSLY more likely to be killed by a drunk driver on the way to the theater. Or to die from a heroin overdose, for that matter.
Charon
-
Yes.
However enormously, almost infinately more likely to get shot in the USA than in my country.
-
Originally posted by McFarland
And if you had a gun, those attacks may not have occured, and if they had, they may have been reversed. One less thug on the streets.
Thugs? Stupid kids is more like it. And some bruises and a blue eye might cure their folly while a bullet through the head cures it a little to much...
-
Dark side of the moon.
:noid
-
Well let's see which system works better.....concealed carry/restricted purchasing of firearms, or the licensing of automobile drivers....at least as far as total fatalities are concerned.
Average number of automobile fatalities in the U.S. per year....around 46,000 - almost half of which are caused by people driving under the influence.....which is agin the law.
Total homicides in the U.S. per year, according to Bureau of Justice statistics, are slightly over 16,000 per year. Half of that figure is criminal on criminal based...involving young gang bangers, who are also not concerned about abiding by the law. They carry unlicensed, concealed weapons, which violates the law in every state in the Union. Approximately 3,000 of the remaining incidents are considered justifiable shootings, i.e. by police using deadly force in the performance of their duties, or law-abiding citizens defending themselves.
The two-fisted, testosterone laced European approach to punks on the street will get you killed in the U.S. These perps will beat you to death.
European gun crime may be lower than ours, but European criminals tend to take over governments and kill tens of millions. In that respect body counts from the twentieth century would be tremendously lopsided.
-
LOL... angus.. you still can't name a gun control law that was put into place anywhere that worked can you?
People here by the tens of thousands go around armed all the time and cause no problem.
Since you can't name a law that worked... this will probly be another question that you have no logical answer for.... What guns should I be allowed to have and where should I be allowed to take them?
I believe our country is far to restrictive... I simply point to the fact that the more people who go armed in this country the lower the crime rate.
So what laws are "good" gun laws to you? Who decides who is allowed to defend themselves?
What do you say to the family who is victim of a home invasion robbery because you made sure that they were unarmed?
In Va the school where the shooting took place of almost 30 people.. up until last year it was allowed for people to carry concealed. some board members just as ignorant and dangerous as you took away that right.
Let me ask you... if we were in a classroom that day...hiding while a madman went up and down the hall killing unarmed students... who would you want in the room with you... me with a .45 Kimber or... some board member with your mentality that had passed the "gun free zone" ordinance?
You are playing god when you disarm people.. I find that offensive in the extreme... you are the enemy.
lazs
-
Yes.
However enormously, almost infinately more likely to get shot in the USA than in my country.
In terms of real risk the difference would not be sufficient for it to enter my mind, or significantly change any behavior I might have in either country. I know this from experience. While I am hardly a man of the world, I have spent some time in some of the the notable cities of Europe as well as the US and found I took the same minor precautions in all. Know where you are, know where the "bad" areas are. Avoid those areas. Be alert.
Have you ever been to the US, Angus?
Of course, in both the US and most of Europe alcohol kills far more people than firearms. I would assume you would be equally agreeable to add significant additional restrictions on alcohol for the common good, such as limiting consumption to low-alcohol content beers (no spirits allowed), and not served in any locations, such as a pub, where driving might be involved. An entirely reasonable solution for a misused industrial solvent (and an issue under consideration in various forms by the EU health commissions and national health services -- Cheers!).
Charon
-
charon.. angus is only interested in limiting other peoples freedoms. He is quite confident that he could get an exemption for anything that he enjoys or feels he "needs".
I bet there are a lot of people in his country that consider him the enemy. I bet there are people who want guns and can't have em who don't feel that the laws are fair... they might not have the same trust for the system that allows some to have guns and not others that angus has.
lazs
-
Originally posted by AKIron
Define vastly.
Please take a number and get in line on the Angus definition list.
He seems to overlook such things. :)
Of course we have went into the "I`m offended for Russia" mode at the moment.
-
Originally posted by McFarland
The freedom is the RIGHT to protect yourself. Gun control doesn't get rid of guns, it gets rid of the honest man's guns. And the crooks keep theirs. And crowded enviroments are the worst places to be, too many people. No, it is not true freedom to feel safe with out a gun, that is called false security. No matter where you go, there will be idiots and crooks, and a man has the right to defend himself from such people.
Thank you you have made more sense than anyone on this thread. I could have not said it better myself.
Gun owner and self-proclaimed gun freak.
Jugman
-
Charon:
"Of course, in both the US and most of Europe alcohol kills far more people than firearms."
Yes.
Then give guns to them drunken ones....neat ones?
As for the word "Vastly", I am sure that you native english speakers can find out that it means...a lot?
If we had US statistics we should have 8 people dead by gun murder since last July. The poll stands at 0.
8/0=?
-
Angus, the total number of violent crimes in Iceland in the year 2005 numbered only 27. Of those, 15 were murders.
The total number of convictions for that same period, for ALL violations of the penal code, numbered only 715....for the whole dang country.
When you're arguing for the effectiveness of gun laws in your own country you're dealing from a stacked deck. You don't HAVE a crime problem of any sort...period. We could arm every single law-abiding citizen in your country and your statistics wouldn't change one single percentage point.
The comparison of Iceland's gun-crime statistics versus those of the United States doesn't hold water for that very reason.
Regards, Shuckins
-
LOL
-
here's a neat John Stossel 20/20 piece on firearm regulation and crime reduction.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_YTM_eAWnQ
And a links showing how fast parts of Europe are catching up to the US, regulations or no regulations. The spread of the US style inner city street gang, and Gang Bangers don't obey gun laws.
Gun and knife killings are getting out of control as six Londoners were murdered over the past week and one child is stabbed to death each week, anti-crime campaigners warned...
He added although government figures show a small reduction in gun related crime, it is under reported and has to be viewed against "unprecedented" high levels of knife and gun crime over the last five years.
Although the Trust welcomed the fact the majority of murders leads to an
arrest and conviction, prevention is a better cure it said.
Mr Brennan said: "There are currently 270 recorded firearm related offences committed on the streets of Britain every week."
http://www.lse.co.uk/ShowStory.asp?story=MK2438914E&news_headline=gun_and_knife_murders_out_of_control
I still wouldn't hesitate to visit London though (any more than I will hesitate going into downtown Chicago tomorrow for the Taste of Chicago and 3rd of July Fireworks show; I'd just (and will tomorrow) stay out of the handful of neighborhoods where such crime typically (overwhelmingly) happens.
BTW, I'll be sharing the lake front with over 1,000,000 people -- three times the population of Iceland packed into in about 2 square miles (though there may only be 300,000 or so at any one time -- of all ethnic backgrounds and economic strata. Done it plenty of times with no fear.
Charon
-
Sometimes visual aids will help when dealing with the slower student.
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/22_1183460752_apple.jpg)
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/22_1183460797_orange.jpg)
:D
-
The Uniform Crime Reporting Program reports that the number of murders in the United States, from all causes (guns, knives, etc.) for the year 2004 was 16,100. That yielded a murder rate of 5.1 per 100,000 population. That rate has held true for the last several years, having fallen from a high of 24,000 per year.
Iceland has a population of approximately 300,000. There were fifteen murders in the country during the year 2005. That yielded an overall murder rate of 5 per 100,000.
The two rates then are 5.1 to 5. That's about as close as one can get statistically. If these rates are typical, then the U.S., which has 1,000 times the population SHOULD have about 1,000 times the number of murders that Iceland does.
-
hmm... our white murder rate is less than 3 per 100,000.. about like canada.. wonder what icelands was... probly all of that 5 per 100,000.
maybe they are giving too many guns to guys like angus? Or... not enough to everyone else?
I most certainly will want a gun when I know people like angus exist.
lazs
-
Lasz, et al, read the article at this site. It is well written and researched and explains in accurate, if unpopular terms, what has happened to British gun rights over the last century, and discusses the attitudes of British law toward the carrying of ANY weapon for self-defense.
Note particularly that around the year 1900, before any major gun control laws were passed in England, that the total number of gun murders in London, the largest city in the world at that time, could be counted in single digits. In essence, Britain did not HAVE a gun problem.
Not by coincidence, the first gun laws were passed around the time the British government became concerned about the growing communist movement among the nation's workers, and its "potential" for violence.
http://www.reason.com/news/show/28582.html
Draw your own conclusions.
Regards, Shuckins
-
Yes.. I have read joyce lee malcoms excellent book on the subject.
The reason citizens become disarmed is because the government fears them.
In our country it has always been assumed that having the government fear you is a good thing. In the socialist countries it is considered a bad thing.
With that simple difference... we will never understand the socialists and they will never understand us.
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
hmm... our white murder rate is less than 3 per 100,000.. about like canada.. wonder what icelands was... probly all of that 5 per 100,000.
maybe they are giving too many guns to guys like angus? Or... not enough to everyone else?
I most certainly will want a gun when I know people like angus exist.
lazs
well...that's being a tad disingenuous.
the combined murder rate here is around 1.8 per 100,000...but your forte is the race card so...lets play.
throw out all the aboriginal homicide, all these distraught immigrants killing there wives and kids, plus all the gang-bangers committing public service homicides, the white murder rate is probably close to .6-.7 per 100,000.
angus...you can't understand the states unless you go there.
there are plenty of safe white picket fence neighbourhoods, but also there are rather large generational ghettos, the lasting residual effects from centuries of in-house slavery.
it's creepy man...you'd want a glock.
-
torque... what are you going on about? The population of your country is 85% white with 9% asian and...
A whopping 2% black. What minorities are giving you your 1.8% murder rate? How much do minorities contribute?
In the US we have a population that is 69% white...
12% hispanic and 12% black.. Hispanics commit murder at three times the rate of whites and blacks with 12% of the population commit over 51% of all the murders in the entire US.
our homicide rate for whites is about like that of any other whitebread socialist country... certainly not off by more than 1 per 100,000 or so...
I am certainly not going to go unarmed because the minorities can't control killing themselves (and us in rates 7 times higher than we kill them)
In fact.... I am much more likely to want to be armed.
The US is a very safe place but we have a lot of minorities who can't control themselves and white trash that can't either... no more than any place else but.. we have more minorities in the mix.
You are correct that there are areas where you would need to be armed but in those areas... even being armed doesn't help... even the cops are afraid to go there.
Still.. even with all that... or maybe even because of it... this is still the very best country in the entire world to live in.
lazs
-
Originally posted by Shuckins
The Uniform Crime Reporting Program reports that the number of murders in the United States, from all causes (guns, knives, etc.) for the year 2004 was 16,100. That yielded a murder rate of 5.1 per 100,000 population. That rate has held true for the last several years, having fallen from a high of 24,000 per year.
Iceland has a population of approximately 300,000. There were fifteen murders in the country during the year 2005. That yielded an overall murder rate of 5 per 100,000.
The two rates then are 5.1 to 5. That's about as close as one can get statistically. If these rates are typical, then the U.S., which has 1,000 times the population SHOULD have about 1,000 times the number of murders that Iceland does.
I am afraid your numbers are wrong, or the comprehension?
There may have been 15 people in prison for murder which is typical, - and although our sentences are indeed soft, you still sit many a year behind bars for murder.
AFAIK no murder so far this year.
Look at this one:
http://www.nationmaster.com
nice site, although the numbers are not absolutely new.
-
For the slow student:
North America > United States > Crime statistics
AMERICAN CRIME STATS:
Assaults 2,238,480 [1st of 57]
Car thefts 1,147,300 [1st of 55]
Drug offences 560.1 per 100,000 people [4th of 34]
Murders 12,658 [6th of 62]
Murders (per capita) 0.042802 per 1,000 people [24th of 62]
Murders with firearms 8,259 [4th of 32]
Murders with firearms (per capita) 0.0279271 per 1,000 people [8th of 32]
Rapes 89,110 [1st of 65]
Rapes (per capita) 0.301318 per 1,000 people [9th of 65]
Total crimes 23,677,800 [1st of 60]
So, if you say that ample artillery and ammo are keeping crime rate largely at bay, then either the USA is the least civilized western state, or, - you're wrong.
Compare with the French. A country packed with Frenchmen, Afros, and Muslims....riots as well.
FRENCH CRIME STATS:
Assaults 106,484 [9th of 57]
Car thefts 301,539 [4th of 55]
Drug offences 176.1 per 100,000 people [14th of 34]
Murders 1,051 [12th of 62]
Murders (per capita) 0.0173272 per 1,000 people [40th of 62]
Rape victims 0.7% [10th of 20]
Rapes 8,458 [8th of 65]
Rapes (per capita) 0.139442 per 1,000 people [15th of 65]
Total crimes 3,771,850 [4th of 60]
Total crimes (per capita) 62.1843 per 1,000 people [14th of 60]
p.s. you are more than 60 times more likely to be prosecuted in the USA than in France. (AFAIK)
p.s. 2 to compare stats in your head there is roughly 1 Frenchman for every 4 Americans.
-
Isn't it a bit crazy that the land of the free is actually the land of the imprisoned? Maybe thats why the statue of liberty serves/served as a prison. Sign of things to come for immigrants.. :D
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_pri_per_cap-crime-prisoners-per-capita
-
when did the statue of liberty serve as a prison? that's news to me could you please elaborate on this interesting story?
while you're at it explain to me how it is I'm imprisoned.
-
angus,
you can't compare Americans with anyone else in the world. we are a class onto ourselves and on the whole far superior to any other people.
the best you can hope for is compare yourselves with each other. why not debate your relative worthlessness with other euros and leave us out?
generally speaking we could care less about your governments, for instance I don't even know how iceland is governed and who the big kahuna there is. on the other hand you could probably name all of the American presidents and write a paragraph on each administration outlining the overall legacy of each president. you guys are more aware of our governmental policies than we are.
you guys should focus on your problems. we can take care of our own and have enough surplus to take care of yours as well, as evidenced by the countless interdictions we are forced into by your consistent incompetencies and petty rivalries.
I wish that you lesser brings would content yourselves with your respective locales and worry less about us. we are quite content with our society and our way of life.
it's independence day here today we don't need your guff.
thanks.
-
Storch, you have a level up. :aok
Except for the "other people." Are they the rest of the world?
-
Angus, this is the site that I got those statistics from:
http://www.statice.is/?PageID=1289
I may have misinterpreted the statistics on murder. This is one of those click and go charts, and those are sometimes difficult to manipulate properly.
On the other hand, how is it that with the yearly average number of murders hovering around 5 that your prison system never shows more than 15 being incarcerated in any one year? If your authorities imprison murderers for long periods of time as you state then there should be a larger number showing up on the charts.
Again, I maintain that you're dealing from a stacked deck. The isolation of your country, the homogenous nature and small size of your population, lends itself to a low crime rate.
There may be a cloud on the horizon for this idyllic state of yours however: the increasing influence of east European mafia drug trafficking. This group is expanding its influence world wide and is not adverse to using violence to further its ends.
Recent interceptions of major drug shipments to Iceland from Lithuanian mafia sources are raising concerns about the encroachment of this group on Icelandic soil.
According to Brynjar Nielsson, an advocate of the Supreme Court in Iceland, "The nature of crime is changing quickly and it is necessary to make use of all clues about international organized crime in this country. International crime is setting down roots....and we should not be afraid to talk about it."
Been reading a number of online articles about crime and crime trends in Iceland.
-
Check out these stats on the top countries for murder:
In first place:
India - 37,170
Russia - 28,904
Colombia - 26,539
South Africa - 21,995
Mexico - 13, 829
United States - 12, 658
Source: The Seventh United Nations Survey of Crime Trends and Operations of Criminal Justice Systems. For the three year period 1998-2000.
I don't remember India having a gun-control problem. Yet they lead the world in total number of murders. Note also that the total number of murders for the U.S. is much lower than the 16,000 plus normally listed in FBI statistics. That's because the number of justifiable homicides are NOT included in these statistics.
Note also that every single nation in the top 5 is known to be heavily involved in the trafficking of illegal drugs by organized crime. Is there a correlation between the two? You better believe it. Would gun-control laws have an impact on those stats. Certainly not.
If drug trafficking and the gang and organized crime that goes with it could be brought under control the murder and violent crime statistics of some of these countries would become almost nil.
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur-crime-murders
-
Originally posted by storch
angus,
you can't compare Americans with anyone else in the world. we are a class onto ourselves and on the whole far superior to any other people.
..and so modest too. :rofl
the best you can hope for is compare yourselves with each other. why not debate your relative worthlessness with other euros and leave us out?
Geography is certainly not your strong suit Storch. Iceland is not in the continent of Europe and I'm not aware that Iceland is even in the EU. You, like others, like to basket any "other people" as Euros and it just shows your ignorance.
generally speaking we could care less about your governments, for instance I don't even know how iceland is governed and who the big kahuna there is. on the other hand you could probably name all of the American presidents and write a paragraph on each administration outlining the overall legacy of each president. you guys are more aware of our governmental policies than we are.
Indeed. It is called being educated about the world, rather than just the place in which you live. I'm surprised to see you admit your ignorance.
you guys should focus on your problems. we can take care of our own and have enough surplus to take care of yours as well, as evidenced by the countless interdictions we are forced into by your consistent incompetencies and petty rivalries.
I agree that Angus and others should focus on their own problems. This thread was started by Charon, an American, who decided to start a post about gun crazy Swiss people.
Just what "countless interdictions" have the US been forced into since WW2? Or are you playing the old "we saved your butts in WW2" broken record again?
I wish that you lesser brings would content yourselves with your respective locales and worry less about us. we are quite content with our society and our way of life.
You are content with your society? LOL. All I see in these gun threads is how gangs and the crimminal element REQUIRE gun ownership for protection in the US. Then I read all the immigration threads and see just how disconteneted you guys are, particularly with respect to Mexicans.
it's independence day here today we don't need your guff.
I was going to start a thread a while ago saying Happy 4th of July to all the Americans on the board. After reading your post above I decided not to.
thanks.
...whatever
[/B]
-
Originally posted by Angus
Compare with the French.
:rofl
"Now that`s funny.
.........................
..........................
I don`t care who you are."
-
Schuckins:
You're spot on there in many things. Indeed we only have some 15 or so locked in for murder as a total. And many of those charts are a bit confusing.
Some years there is no murder at all, and some have a few, but anyway, the figures are low.
As for the changing environment, it is true, - our problem could be the mafias of the eastern blocks, mostly Lithuania/Latvia.
Out of those very few murders we have (one of the most recent convictions was probably manslaugher due to carelessness) we have victims from the baltics and one Vietnamese as well!)
Although the number of immigrants as a % is yet small, it has multiplied in the last few years, and the people coming are mostly for the poorer end, - gold-diggers. Just like the latinos in the USA.....
Anyway, I'm glad they can't even buy guns, hehe.
And Storch, you will have to figure out yourself what level-up means.....
-
One person can make all the difference in the world.
The difference between life and death....for a lot of people.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"
Police praise man who shot at robber
11:23 PM CDT on Wednesday, July 4, 2007
By MARISSA ALANIS / The Dallas Morning News
malanis@dallasnews.com
A Fort Worth man who only wanted to protect his wife stuck in an Albertsons store during a robbery is being hailed for his heroics by police.
3500 block of Sycamore School Road, Fort Worth
The retired man may have shot one of the robbery suspects early Wednesday at the store in the 3500 block of Sycamore School Road.
Three men armed with guns robbed the store shortly after midnight and stole wallets and purses belonging to customers, said Lt. Dean Sullivan, a Fort Worth police spokesman.
The man, whom police didn't identify because he is a witness, saw two of the men walking around nervously before they entered the store. The witness said he called 911 when one of the men pulled out a gun and fired as he walked into the store.
About 20 seconds later, the witness's wife tried to call him from her cellphone inside the store. But he never got to talk to her.
"I just heard her saying, 'There is nothing in my purse,' " he recalled. "And there was a 'pow.' The phone went dead."
The man, who has a concealed handgun license, sprang into action. He walked into the store with his .45-caliber pistol under his shirt.
"I really thought I'd find her in the store shopping and get her out the back door," he said. "That was my intention. ... I had no intention of confronting these armed bandits."
But in the store, one of the robbers pointed the gun at the man. The man then fired twice. The robber ran away, and it's unknown whether he returned fire, Lt. Sullivan said. Outside the store, the retired man fired again.
Lt. Sullivan said Rayshaun Johnson was possibly hit during the robbery. Mr. Johnson, 17, was injured on his backside and foot. He was dropped off in the parking lot of Huguley Memorial Medical Center in Fort Worth.
Lt. Sullivan said Mr. Johnson faces a charge of aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon once he's released from the hospital. Police continue to search for the other two suspects. Suspect descriptions were unavailable.
The man said he does not feel like a hero.
"I don't feel good at all that there is an 18-year-old guy who's been injured and is going to go to some terrible place because it was a horrible mistake that somebody talked him into," he said. "I was worried about my wife. I just wanted to get her out of there." "
-
last week (or maybe the week before last) in sunrise, fl. a retired guy aged 72 was in the head at a wendy's that was being robbed. as he exited the head he was confronted by the two armed youths. the retiree a concealed weapons certificate holder shot both would be robbers, killing one.
I don't think it made papers I caught a glimpse of this story on the TV news.
mr curval, I believe iceland is considered to be part of europe and in any event for all intents and purposes the people who inhabit those islands are indeed european. clearly they are not American. If I may call your attention to another matter mr curval, you may want to refrain from engaging me in intardnet eye gouging matches. the last time you squealled like a pink short wearing flit...well never mind. in any case you are far too sensitive for rough word play so I'll give you a free pass this time.
carry on with your handwrining and over concern regarding the goings on in ours, the greatest of all republics.
out of curiosity I decided to check up on iceland, to see where it was considered to be a geographic part of
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iceland
It seems the person needing the geography lesson has been too busy two stroking about in a half pair of trousers.
-
The first white guy born in America was actually an Icelander.
But that's another story :D
(back in those days, the well armed Icelanders were hacking and shooting each others at a very good pace)
And those 2 armed youths were....armed?
-
Originally posted by Angus
The first white guy born in America was actually an Icelander.
But that's another story :D and he was promptly eaten by the aboriginals who then died of indigestion.
(back in those days, the well armed Icelanders were hacking and shooting each others at a very good pace)
And those 2 armed youths were....armed? yes they were armed. I'm pretty sure they were legged as well but didn't get a chance to utilized either.
I'll see if I can locate something regarding the story on the sun-sentinal site.
-
Originally posted by storch
mr curval, I believe iceland is considered to be part of europe and in any event for all intents and purposes the people who inhabit those islands are indeed european. clearly they are not American. If I may call your attention to another matter mr curval, you may want to refrain from engaging me in intardnet eye gouging matches. the last time you squealled like a pink short wearing flit...well never mind. in any case you are far too sensitive for rough word play so I'll give you a free pass this time.
carry on with your handwrining and over concern regarding the goings on in ours, the greatest of all republics.
out of curiosity I decided to check up on iceland, to see where it was considered to be a geographic part of
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iceland
It seems the person needing the geography lesson has been too busy two stroking about in a half pair of trousers.
What you belive and what is fact are two very different things.
Perhaps you should travel outside of your little coocoon before proclaiming yourself all knowledgeable and so great.
There's a big world out there.
I expected the pink shorts jab...it is all you've got. I wouldn't trade places with you for anything. You are an arrogance and ignorant human being and exemplify the reasons Americans are so unfairly hated around the world. It is people like you who give the rest the awful reputation you guys have. Congrats.
-
Nice hack there storch:
This is the input:
"and he was promptly eaten by the aboriginals who then died of indigestion."
That I didn't write.
Enjoy your day
:p
-
well...i don't know why you think you're so special laz, other than your problems were self inflected and ten fold. minorities here also commit a disproportionate amount of crime as well, blacks and aboriginals have homicide rates 4-5 times that of the national average.
the homicide rate in toronto to date stands at 35, gang-bangers account for about 17 of those while being only 9% of the population.
they skew the numbers to a degree were you're comparing apples to oranges, which seems rather moorish.
save the automated 'right to bear precious'. i never mentioned it, like i said, some places can be creepy third word ghettos and you'd be insane not to carry.
curval, i don't think cuban did much during the two world wars in europe. storch does well to highlight the stark similarities between islamic wackos and his ilk. maybe after they work out between themselves whom is superior, we can get on with living our everyday humble lives.
-
Originally posted by Curval
What you belive and what is fact are two very different things.
Perhaps you should travel outside of your little coocoon before proclaiming yourself all knowledgeable and so great.
There's a big world out there.
I expected the pink shorts jab...it is all you've got. I wouldn't trade places with you for anything. You are an arrogance and ignorant human being and exemplify the reasons Americans are so unfairly hated around the world. It is people like you who give the rest the awful reputation you guys have. Congrats.
holy moley simmer down there putt putt.
I knew for a fact that iceland was indeed part of europe and I provided you with a linky attesting to that. perhaps the spittle on your monitor prevented you from seeing it. in any case I invite you to take a look for yourself at the conveniently placed linky and determine it's accuracy.
my little cocoon? I have travelled extensively and have visited four continents, staying for extended periods on all four and not a holiday jaunt but work related. I agree with you that there is indeed a big world out there, a world which I have had the opportunity to visit fairly extensively though not entirely. thanks for pointing it out to me, I really admire people who have such a firm grasp of the obvious.
with regard to the pink short jab, my second jab was a half trouser jab and not a pink short one.
-
Originally posted by Angus
Nice hack there storch:
This is the input:
"and he was promptly eaten by the aboriginals who then died of indigestion."
That I didn't write.
Enjoy your day
:p
:rofl I can't pull one over on you it seems.
-
torque... imagine if you had 12% black and 12% hispanic. I don't know why you can't see.
I would gladly trade for your tiny little asian population and take the 2% black to go with it. you have no idea.
Our white population commits very little crime... just like yours. what are you going on about?
lazs
-
I rarely use Wiki as a source of fact.
My understanding is that Iceland is not part of Europe or the EU. It is CERTAINLY not part of Continental Europe as it is an island.
If I am wrong I apologise....perhaps Angus could clear that up for us.
My apology would be real by the way...unlike your hollow efforts in the past.
-
I extended a sincere apology. how you chose to view that apology is beyond my ability to control. please forgive me if I find men attired in children's clothing considering themselves to be dressed for business a bit comical. however there is no need to despare and don't feel bad, I find women wearing inverted laundry baskets and men wear bedsheets comical as well.
-
Originally posted by storch
I extended a sincere apology. how you chose to view that apology is beyond my ability to control. please forgive me if I find men attired in children's clothing considering themselves to be dressed for business a bit comical. however there is no need to despare and don't feel bad, I find women wearing inverted laundry baskets and men wear bedsheets comical as well.
lol
Yup..very sincere. Thanks for making my point.
-
Originally posted by Curval
I rarely use Wiki as a source of fact.
My understanding is that Iceland is not part of Europe or the EU. It is CERTAINLY not part of Continental Europe as it is an island.
If I am wrong I apologise....perhaps Angus could clear that up for us.
My apology would be real by the way...unlike your hollow efforts in the past.
Alaska is not part of the continental and contiguous United States, Hawaii, Guam, Puerto Rico and three of the Virgins are not either yet they are American soil.
Iceland belongs to europe in the same way these respective territories and states belong to north america.
I'm sure I needn't mention that england fought a rather costly and beastly little conflict to retain the falklands islands which while laying just off of south america consider themselves english. the english do not see themselves as european and yet they are a part of europe.
one can easily see where one might be a bit confused, let's not even factor oceania into this discussion, we save that for a future eye gouging exchange.
can someone answer this? is turkey part of europe or asia?
-
Originally posted by storch
Iceland belongs to europe in the same way these respective territories and states belong to north america.
LOL!:rofl
-
ok I'm glad you are having a good time. no worries you've been wrong before and there's no shame in it. :D
-
You're wrong Curval.
Iceland is considered to be part of northwest Europe because of its relative proximity and its culture.
It was originally settled by Norse explorers, who brought Irish slaves with them. Most modern native Icelanders are of Scandinavian-Celtic descent. Iceland was part of the old kingdom of Denmark-Norway, but became an independent republic after World War II. The Althing, which has been meeting almost continuously for more than a thousand years, and is directly related to similar ancient institutions in Scandinavia, is considered to be the oldest representative assembly in the world.
The national language is Icelandic, which is of north Germanic extraction and is very closely related to Old Norse, the language of the Vikings.
Just a reminder that the British Isles do not touch northwest Europe either but are also considered to be part of Europe.
Regards, Shuckins
-
iceland belong to russia, ask boroda.
"can someone answer this? is turkey part of europe or asia?'
yes.
-
Originally posted by john9001
iceland belong to russia, ask boroda.
"can someone answer this? is turkey part of europe or asia?'
yes.
:lol
-
Originally posted by Shuckins
You're wrong Curval.
Iceland is considered to be part of northwest Europe because of its relative proximity and its culture.
Just a reminder that the British Isles do not touch northwest Europe either but are also considered to be part of Europe.
Regards, Shuckins
Iceland, according to everything I have read may be CONSIDERED northwest Europe but it is not a member of the EU (European Union).
http://www.eubusiness.com/Institutions/iceland-eu.87/
I do take your point about the British Isles...but Britain IS a member of the EU.
Using Stich's argument Austrailia, prior to it's Independence, was part of Europe, despite being on the continent of Austrailasia.:rolleyes:
Likewise...Bermuda would be Europe too I suppose?
-
Originally posted by lazs2
torque... imagine if you had 12% black and 12% hispanic. I don't know why you can't see.
I would gladly trade for your tiny little asian population and take the 2% black to go with it. you have no idea.
Our white population commits very little crime... just like yours. what are you going on about?
lazs
err...what are you babbling on about laz...is this all you have to do?
i never disputed your numbers, just your moorish attempt to compare apples to oranges.
the 2001 census is rather old, now we have close to 3% black, 4% S asian/black and 4% aboriginal....so roughly 11% of the population committing a disproportionate amount of homicides.
toronto is what...the fifth largest city in north america with 3 million people, the gang-bangers account for more than half of the 60-70 homicides the city has a year...do you get it now?
and since statscan doesn't categorize by race, it's moorish to compare.
asians?...you know most of that crime goes unreported because they're such a tight-knit community, maybe it is you that has no idea living in a tiny white-bread kali town.
i worked on and off for fives years in the states. everything from paying off the mob to work in ny city, to clubbing with the brothas in hartford ct. i'm somewhat familiar with how americana works and how it doesn't work, so save your 'you have no idea' speeches.
-
Hihi.
Let's clear this one up.
Iceland Geographically and mostly culturally belongs to Europe, althoug many Europeans consider us to be rather USA-affected.
But we are not members of the EU (Neither is Norway), so many of the EU regulations do not apply to us.
And we are a democracy, not a socialist country.
Greenland is the true border. They basically belong to America. But the culture is affected by the Danish.
With very much guns in rotation, as well as cultural problems, despite no gangs or cities, their murder (and gun murder) rate is rather hideously high...
And here:
" imagine if you had 12% black and 12% hispanic"
If yoy want to compare such stats to the USA, try Spain :D
Original Hispanic with lots of communication to Africa.
Or Portugal?
-
torque.. if you think my town is 'whitebread' then you have no idea.
My brother is canadian and I have spent time there. you are 85% white while we are less than 69% white.
We do keep track of serious crime by race here. blacks and hispanics are committing about 6 times the amount of crime that whites are.
the figures I can find still show that you have 2% black... while we have over 12% ours commit over half the murders. I have seen no figures for "aboriginal" are you taking about indians? original owners of your country?
we have 25% black and hispanic while you have less than 3% we have about the same for asian and American indians.
your 2% black would have to be the most murderous on the planet to even approach 52% of the killings.
lazs
-
"moorish attempt '? vat ist moorish attempt, je no parlay canadianski.
-
angus, with regard to your government, is iceland a democracy or a republic?
-
Originally posted by Curval
Iceland, according to everything I have read may be CONSIDERED northwest Europe but it is not a member of the EU (European Union).
http://www.eubusiness.com/Institutions/iceland-eu.87/
I do take your point about the British Isles...but Britain IS a member of the EU.
Using Stich's argument Austrailia, prior to it's Independence, was part of Europe, despite being on the continent of Austrailasia.:rolleyes:
Likewise...Bermuda would be Europe too I suppose?
ok curval, what about the canary islands, the azores, the balearics and other islands in the mediterranian are those not european as well? I do believe bermuda is part of europe are you not english subjects?
-
Look Stich...you're right. You win this mighty intardet fight. Everywhere that isn't the great and wonderful US of A is Europe and anyone who doesn't agree with you is a Euro who is simply jealous of you and your country.
-
:rofl sheesh don't blow a gasket. since you said I was an ignorant uneducated dumbell I thought I would ask someone of your evident brilliance to enlighten me but if you want to hide under a bushel basket well.....
-
Well, european or not, part of what we know as the western world.
However it does not change the fact that if you INCLUDE those corners into the EU statistics and compare the whole pool with the USA, the results are even more marked.
Iceland's crime rate is under EU. etc......
-
of course they are angus. you have 300,000 or so people, less than 20% are foreign born and all but 700 of those are from europe. your population is homogenous right down to their worship. 85% of icelanders belong to the national church of iceland.
in contrast my neighborhood has about 300,000 citizens 80% of which, including myself are foreign born.
it is as lazs states. you have no idea at all what it is like to live in such a multiethnic and thereby multicultural environment.
there should be no crime at all in iceland. societal pressure should be sufficient to keep everyone in line.
-
"85% of icelanders belong to the national church of iceland."
You sort of get born into that thing ;)
Anyway, the melting-pot doesn't have to mean everybody starts killing each other. Look at the UK or France. Look at London....
Why does the whole stats of the USA have to be in the more serious criminal categories worse than London?
Oh, and by the way, one of the last murders up here (autumn 2005) happened in the US airbase between two white Americans.
Odd.
-
Angus, to start with we are speaking of our rights here in the U.S.
As also has been explained to you, over and over, you cannot possibly compare apples and oranges, which is what you are trying to do. It simply can`t be done.
Iceland compares with....well nothing on the face of this planet except Iceland. Not a put down, just fact.
You certainly can`t compare the U.K. or London :) with the U.S. Way, way different cultures and lifestyles in general. The world is slowly catching up to these areas in terms of what we are speaking about. Crime in general will increase in these areas as this happens. It`s a given. They are insuring that by creating the market with gun bans. Like sugar to an ant.
France...................hehe ......not even going there on this board. :)
On a side note, I`m not sure how much weight I would put in statistics coming from and possibly manipulated by the government of a country in which it highly restricted and banned handguns, etc. There is not but one reason for that. The government fears it`s citizens. The cause for that is clear as long as reasoning for the individual has not been banned.
-
Too late, it has already been done. Why do you think Angus only beleives the junk his govment feeds him?
Item - Agenda status
Guns - banned
Freedom of Speech - almost
Reasoning - just aboot complete
All rights and Liberties - getting there fast
-
Originally posted by Angus
Oh, and by the way, one of the last murders up here (autumn 2005) happened in the US airbase between two white Americans.
Odd.
damn yankees
-
Originally posted by McFarland
Too late, it has already been done. Why do you think Angus only beleives the junk his govment feeds him?
Item - Agenda status
Guns - banned
Freedom of Speech - almost
Reasoning - just aboot complete
All rights and Liberties - getting there fast
Your ignorance is now apparent and booked on this thread.
Guns: Allowed with permission. (I could shop enough for a firing squad)
Freedom of speech: less likely to bring you trouble than in the USA.
Reasoning: Above your skill.
All rights and liberties: Oldest congress in the world and anyway less likely to get you killed or jailed than the US.
Get here quickly :D
-
Originally posted by Angus
Your ignorance is now apparent and booked on this thread.
Guns: Allowed with permission. (I could shop enough for a firing squad)
Freedom of speech: less likely to bring you trouble than in the USA.
Reasoning: Above your skill.
All rights and liberties: Oldest congress in the world and anyway less likely to get you killed or jailed than the US.
Get here quickly :D
"reasoning: above your skill" :rofl that's funny right there.
-
Originally posted by Angus
Oh, and by the way, one of the last murders up here (autumn 2005) happened in the US airbase between two white Americans.
Odd.
That's consistent with what we've been telling you, the source of the crime problem isn't guns it's americans.
Canada has more guns per capita than the US. States like idaho and north dakota haver more guns than people and they also have very low violent crime rates. Places like washington DC with very strict gun control laws and a low gun to people ratio have very high violent crime rates. Society in wasington DC is also quite different than say alaska or wyoming. Logically one must deduce then that guns are not the causitive factor.
-
One of the great fallacies about gun control put forward in these debates is that restrictive ownership laws are necessary to get violent crime under control.
In the case of the British, that argument is bogus. In the 1920s, when the British government passed its first gun control law, the incidences of firearms murder in London could be counted on one set of hands, with a few fingers left over. That law was passed as a result of government paranoia about the possibility of violence within the labor movement resulting from the growing influence of communist agitators.
The incidences of violent crime remained low throughout the first part of the twentieth century, but began an upward swing in the 1950s. While the majority of this crime was unrelated to firearms ownership, the government used it as an excuse to pass even more restrictive legislation, in blatant violation of the spirit of the 1689 Bill of Rights which guaranteed the right to own arms for protection to the English people.
Perhaps more destructive to public safety was the adoption of an attitude by the government and the courts that victims of violent crime must always back away from a violent confrontation, no matter the circumstances, and of an attitude that it should never be necessary for a citizen to carry a "weapon" of any sort for personal protection. There was no "need" for self defense because "society" would protect the individual.
Note the incongruity of those two attitudes. Citizens must back away from a violent confrontation, but society will protect the citizens threatened by violence. The term "society" in this case refers to the institutions of authority and ones fellow citizens. The individual attacked must rely on his fellow citizens and governmental authorities for his protection. These governmental institutions might have the power to disarm the law-abiding populace, but they do not have the power to protect the individual from personal violence. All too often, one's fellow citizens ignore the individual's plight and walk right on by as he or she is being attacked. As is becoming all too obvious in present day England, "society" only arrives in time to pick up the pieces.
Despite it's proponents trumpetting the benefits of the handgun ban for curbing violence, the truth remains that Britain's homicide and other crime rates are growing steadily, at a time when America's homicide rate is falling dramatically. While thirty years ago America's homicide rate was about seven times that of Britain's, in the year 2000 that gap had narrowed to three times the rate, and has continued to narrow.
The causes of violent crime are never as simple as the mere presence of guns, for much of the increase in violence in modern western nations is due to a change in youth culture, which revels in violence, sex, and defiance of authority. It doesn't help the average citizen understand the pervasiveness of this type of influence for the newspapers and authorities to cite the murder of a child on the city streets of London without relating the fact that the youth was 16 years old and the member of a violent gang who was stabbed to death by rival gang members.
India is the most violent country on the face of the earth, if one counts only the number of murders that take place there each year. More than 36,000 people are murdered there annually. In the absence of large numbers of privately owned firearms, the causes must lie elsewhere; in the pervading culture, or in ethnic strife.
Other cultures with low crime rates, such as Switzerland and Iceland, have widely varying rates of gun ownership. The absence of violent crime must, by process of elimination, lie with other factors; cultural and geographic isolation, or having a small and homogenous population.
But in the modern world, gun control has become the placebo for the treatment of the problem of violent crime. That problem will never be brought under control as long as its real causes are not understood and addressed, and the firearms booger bear is routinely trotted out to explain it.
-
I love all you whitebread your-0-peeeans and canadians telling us you know about multicultrualism and diversity.. you get a couple of muslim ghettos where the people riot once in a while and you think you know something about it.
Yet.. when we talk about real problems we are called racists.
I admit that we are losing what was good about America.. But what the founders wanted is still the most free country in the world.. the founders wanted us to have unrestricted right to bear arms. We have less than that... our freedom is infringed.. our constitution is being denied.
And that is not good enough for the UN and the your-0-peeans.. they want to butt in to our business.
I would not want to live anywhere but in the US at this point. I can't think of one country that recognizes that the people... that the right to keep and bear arms is a right of the people... an individual right.. I can't think of a country where that right is spelled out other than here.
Yet, I can't think of a country where the people have not had to revolt against their government or a country where the strong do not prey on the weak or a country who's government does not abuse it's power. where crowds don't riot.
None of these things is likely to change. I want to be in a country that recognizes that it is my right to bear arms.
lazs
-
This thread starts off by the Eu-O-Peans being told that gun control is pointless, and told from self appointed representatives of a nation that has very much worse crime rate, be it murder, rape or armed robbery.
Then the self appointed experts also point out that nothing in Eu-Op land can statistically be compared to the USA, so that comparison is pointless.
Now isn't this flip great. Has anybody here been telling the USA (Should I call you "Use-Some-Arms") what to do about your stuff? I beg to differ.
And here:
"Canada has more guns per capita than the US. States like idaho and north dakota haver more guns than people and they also have very low violent crime rates. Places like washington DC with very strict gun control laws and a low gun to people ratio have very high violent crime rates. Society in wasington DC is also quite different than say alaska or wyoming. Logically one must deduce then that guns are not the causitive factor."
Is also an interesting point that (I bet all your favourite person) Michael Moore pointed out very promptly.
Now, how is the gun law difference, and the amount of conceilable arms. That makes me curious, because, as I pointed out, I could by myself the equipment for a firing squad. Legally. So Lazs, - I can bear arms. Just not you-know-what arms, and not in the supermarket.
-
are you saying that if you could own handguns you would then be forced to go on a murder rampage for some reason? that the only thing that stops you is not being able to own this or that type of firearm?
maybe you have a close friend or neighbor that you know will be this way?
One has to wonder why more soldiers... young men in stressful conditions and carrying full auto firearms.. why they don't just glaze over at every arguement and just slaughter each other.
lazs