Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Hortlund on April 15, 2003, 05:27:15 AM
-
I would like to hear your analysis on how guns for everyone prevent crime and how guns for everyone helps scare tyrants and invaders away.
...in light of the recent war in Iraq I mean...where something like 80% of the population had their own private AK-47.
-
Offhand I would bet that before this war only those Iraqi citizens who were members of the Baath party were allowed to own guns. Since the Iraqi military abandoned their bases, other Iraqi citizens have looted their guns.
ra
-
Arguing the point with lazs is useless Steve...he is a "you can take my gun away when you pry it from my cold dead fingers" kinda guy. Ain't nuttin gonna change that man's mind..and you gotta respect him for his conviction.
-
Lots of people had an AK-47 or at least a hand-gun in Iraq. Not just Ba'athists.
-
simply put... who was the biggest threat to coalition forces? Was it the republican guard or militia? who caused the most casualties? I would say that the militia did indeed cause a lot more grief to our forces.
Course... we are talking desert here... not much place to hide... whole country is the size of California.. Militia was not very dedicated to keeping the sadman in power either...
Imagine a jungle or forrest invoronment and a dedicated milita...say viet cong... or the like...
The U.S. is huge. It has excellent terrain (for the most part) for militia. Stepping out of the cities... most police forces would be useless.
as for crime.... most are using the AK's for defense against looters.. I bet that if there were no guns now in the hands of the law abiding... if it were simply "survival of the fittest looter" there would be much more crime...
The U.S. policy is... If the guy has one AK then he is just defending himself and to leave him alone... if he has more than 3 it is a weapons cache.
there were a few incidents of armed looting but they have been few compared to people defending against looting... when the looting stops it will be because of guns.
even considering that iraq is full of crazies right now (suicidal forces and foreighners with agendas) and in a state of lawlessness.... I would say that guns are doing pretty much as I (and John Lott among others) have allways said they would. Would you break into an iraqi home to loot knowing that the owner was armed with an AK?
lazs
-
Yeah, but I have been agreeing with lazs.
Heck, I'd like to have a gun too (well, I do have one, but that one is an assault rifle, and I sure as he** cant use it whenver I feel like it. And I have to keep it locked up in three parts AND with the ammo at a different location AND with a chamber lock, so in case I'd need it fast, it would take something like 10 minutes for me to just assemble the bloody thing and load the ammo (Im in the national guards, we get stuff like that))
ANYWAY
I also agree that the Police really cant protect us citizens. I see that everyday at work.
I've never believed in the "arm the citizens to protect them from tyrants"-part though.
*edit -I was answering to Curval btw...then lots of people posted at the same time
-
Hortlund... look at the historical examples so far as fighting against the "invaders"... look at the french, japanese and American forces in vietnam... look at afganastan... The world is not some large city in a small eurpopean country...
The U.S. is huge. If only 30 or 40 milloin citizens took up arms to help the majority of the populace fight tyranny... they would be harder to defeat than the viet cong.
detterant tho is the main advantage. It is better if everyone understands the facts and it simply never happens. I think that iraq proved my point... so long as they had the will.... the militia was more problem than the regular army.
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
I think that iraq proved my point... so long as they had the will.... the militia was more problem than the regular army.
lazs
I think that only applies to invaders with a "western civilization"-view on things.
I mean if teh US forces had chosen the Soviet/Russian or Chinese or Japanese philosophy when it comes to the morality of gunning down civilians, those militias really would pose less of a problem then snakecheese on a racetrack.
-
fyi snake**** on a racetrack is deadly
bottom line:
I guarantee that invaders, from any country, would have a tougher time fighting against a country that had armed civillians than one that didn't.
America has more than it's share of high-powered weapons...among other things.
-
No hortlund... Look at the russians in afghanistan.. or the japs in vietnam... even the germans in russia... All those invaders felt like you do and every one of em created a quagmire. I think that the Americans did it right this time.
An invader that frees me from tyranny is not the same as an invader that brings tyranny. Americans have their own idea of right and wrong... you may not agree with it but you would have to respect it as an invader.
when you mow down the populace you create militia. When you publicly execute or terrorize you create militia especially if the alternatives are live free in the boonies and fight or live in terror in the city.
lazs
-
Originally posted by Wlfgng
fyi snake**** on a racetrack is deadly
[/b]
Yeah...maybe to those pansy assed cars you make in the US. :)
Here in Sweden we build cars that will survive a head on collision with an 800-pound moose.
-
there were a few incidents of armed looting
Understatement of the century. Easily.
-
Yeah...maybe to those pansy assed cars you make in the US.
Here in Sweden we build cars that will survive a head on collision with an 800-pound moose.
cars??!!?? who said anything about cars ? :p
-
No Cars for Moose!
:D
-
dowding... perhaps you have info that I don't? I didn't see many reports on armed looters hitting private citizens... I did hear that citizens were defending their homes with AK's tho.
The deterant effect of armed citizens protecting their hmes is obvious to anyone.
lazs
-
Shops and private houses were/are being looted. As were the hospitals - in fact, one US marine was killed at one of the hospitals by attacking looters, IIRC.
-
Dowding,
Might be a different incident, but I read the report about a Marine who was killed at a Hospital checkpoint by 2 persons dressed as landscapers. One of the persons was shot and killed and found to have a Syrian passport...the other got away.
Also, from one of the reporters on the ground in Baghdad. He reported the majority of the looting was government offices and agencies, with a small minority of private businesses being hit. Now this report was about 4-5 days ago, so the situation might have detoriated since then.
-
note the past tense in your post dowding.. it is all working out.
People are defending home and hearth with guns. Those incidents happened during a transitional time of anarchy and shortages of the most basic needs such as food and water... no one knew who was in charge and what the intentions of the 'invaders" was... small wonder that a percentage of the population went a little crazy...
I see iraq as a conformation of my belief in an armed citizenry.
lazs
-
It still happened. How about the hospitals that were ransacked? They were full of wounded already and were short of supplies, before the looters got there.
The Coalition dropped a bollock. They should have had troops at every hospital, power-station, water-treatment plant and museum in the city. Afterall, they've since claimed that it is all part and parcel of regime change - they therefore should have expected it.
-
I am not surprised that there would be armed groups looting in the transitional period between victory and order... we agree on that but... I still hold that, as a law abiding or.. moral, iraqi citizen you are better off armed than not. I agree that we should defend areas until such a time as a police force can be recruited from the locals... I don't know about "bollock" it all up... I Think that we have done an outstanding job considering... The amount of suffering that has been generated by a war of this scale ... well ... it's allmost beyond belief that things have went so well. What is the population of Iraq? 25-30 million? Amazing ... 25-35 million people thrown into anarchy allmost instantly and things still going this well? Amazing.
lazs
-
yeah.. America should have had millions of people there to keep the country running WHILE we also fought a war... lol
yeah and the citizens, engineers, etc of Iraq should just sit home or get on with the looting... lol
when does Iraq stand up for itself instead of tearing itself apart?
oh.. wait.. the US marines MADE them loot, pillage and plunder..
ok, whatever.
to Iraq:
take responsibility for your own damned country!
we got rid of the opressor, you wanted to have things YOUR way and for us to leave..
I keep hearing "go home yankee"... but then you want us to help you police yourselves.. cripes.
lose - lose proposition.. time to move on (ungrateful tards)
-
those guns sure helped them to liberate themselves from saddam, wait no. no they didnt.
-
yes, .. yes they did.
they just needed a little help from US armor first is all :)
-
Originally posted by Frogm4n
those guns sure helped them to liberate themselves from saddam, wait no. no they didnt.
iraq people were not armed until right before the US/UK troops "invaded" .
at the last minute, saddam removed restrictions on gun sales and even passed out military weapons to the people hopeing they would do what the "battle-hardend republican guard" and the fedayeen thugs could not do, protect him.
saddam,of course was wrong to think the iraqis would protect him. he really really thought the people he opressed, tortured and killed for 30 years loved him. After all, 100% of the iraqis voted for him last election.
-
Originally posted by Frogm4n
those guns sure helped them to liberate themselves from saddam, wait no. no they didnt.
The mere possession of a gun does not create a mindset. It does not make one strive for freedom when every other person is willing to turn you over to the secret police. Just as it doesn't make you a crazed killer.
I often wonder why guns are given credit for being able to control people's minds? ;)
-
because they are an easy scapegoat. im a crazy liberal but i think people should be able to own a gun and if they are stupid enough to let their children play with them. NATURAL SELECTION!!!
-
Hortlund: I would like to hear your analysis on how guns for everyone prevent crime
How about just "reduces considerably" instead of "prevents".
and how guns for everyone helps scare tyrants and invaders away.
...in light of the recent war in Iraq I mean...where something like 80% of the population had their own private AK-47.
That's a great thing about owning a gun - you can choose whether to use it or not in defence of yourself.
If you, Hortlund, think that iraqi government was worth defending by population against mpossible odds, you brains must be addled.
As for "scaring the tyrants", one man's tyrant is another one's inconvenience or lesser of few evils, etc. Apparently Hussein was pissing us off more than he was iraqis, if they did not use their guns to oust him.
Wlfgng: when does Iraq stand up for itself instead of tearing itself apart?
oh.. wait.. the US marines MADE them loot, pillage and plunder..
Actually, it was SH regime that kept civil order". We broke it down, allowed the criminals to abuse the population while we watched - and now you are blaming the victims.
miko
-
Originally posted by Dowding
It still happened. How about the hospitals that were ransacked? They were full of wounded already and were short of supplies, before the looters got there.
The Coalition dropped a bollock. They should have had troops at every hospital, power-station, water-treatment plant and museum in the city. Afterall, they've since claimed that it is all part and parcel of regime change - they therefore should have expected it.
coalition set up own large hospitals and moved most severely wounded to these hospitals. easier to move hurt iraqi to hospital in easily defendable area you control than to try and secure prime target in not yet secured urban area. also some hospitals are being defended just not every hospital. why defend ten when you can use three for total coverage of wounded and defend those three? level of rioting and such is insanely low for population. also joint patrols beginning.
-
as miko says... guns lower crime rates.. you will allways have crime. The people of iraq are a perfect example of gun control just as hitlers regime was... both regimes kept guns out of the hands of the populace until the very last minute in desperate last ditch efforts to stay in power... both regimes feared an armed populace.
lazs
-
and now you are blaming the victims.
I'm not blaming the victims.. I'm blaming the perpetrators!
when does this country stand up and become responsible for itself? soon I hope.
blaming the Americans is a joke and is unrealistic as hell.
who goes to war with the additional task of 'governing' the country while they are in battle? gimme a break.
now that the major fighting is over yeah, the Americans have a respnosibility to get things in order, but during the heated battles while trying not to get killed they should also act as policemen?
uh ok.. that's realistic NOT
-
Society is safer when Criminals dont know who is armed
The Gluteny of Gun laws prevent LAW Abiding Citizens from guns..While Criminals. do what they do..they break LAWS!....So ask your self do criminals care about trigger locks, magazine capacity or what type of gun they have......NO they dont..
As we have seen before..
IS a criminal going to attak a girl with a gun or the girl with out the gun? Ya ,,dumb question huh?
Love BiGB
xxoxo
-
I dont' think guns have to do with crime. If someone is going to rob a store, he is going to do it, gun or no gun. Crime goes with the economy. It seems to me during bad economic times, crime increases. During good economic time, it decreases.
Why take away guns from honest people and let the criminals have them? It makes no sense. But i'm just a smack talking liberal, what do I know.
-
sixpense... if you are indeed a liberal... and you feel the way you do about guns... How do you get along with fellow liberals when the subject comes up? I am serious... the main reason I dislike liberals so much is their intolerance.... It is that intolerance that forces them to make the facts suit their beliefs or "feelings". I have found that liberals can be especially vitriholic to other libs who don't "tow the line" in lockstep agreement.
lazs
-
vitriholic
damn dude knock it off !!! :)
(had to look it up lol)
-
Wlfgng: I'm not blaming the victims.. I'm blaming the perpetrators!
when does this country stand up and become responsible for itself? soon I hope.
I understand that you are not trying to - but that's what you end up doing. The "country" is not a physical object or a person. It's a category name that we invented to describe a bunch of individuals living in some place - very varied bunch.
I am sure the people who are being abused would really like to "become responsible" fro themselves, but if they had the power, they would not have the problem of being looted/robbed in the first place.
If some country comes in and knocks out our government and puts police chiefs on the extermination lists and releases gang members from juvenile detention facility (they would claim that US government put them there because they refused to join the Boy Scouts of course) and then blames teh victims of ensuing chaos and looting, how would you like it?
Did you blame koreans for not being responcible in LA lootings? Would make as much sense.
miko
-
I understand what you're trying to say however when I see a country/people/group whatever you'd like to call it, that erupts with the chaos as witnessed in Iraq, I'd blame the population.
like the LA riots.. who was to blame?
the police?
rodney king?
the people that lived there and did the looting.
I applaud the Iraqi's that have stood up and begun defending their own neighborhoods, business, etc
THAT's what I'd like to see.
-
oops.. doubled
-
I understand what you're trying to say however when I see a country/people/group whatever you'd like to call it, that erupts with the chaos as witnessed in Iraq, I'd blame the population.
like the LA riots.. who was to blame?
the police?
rodney king?
the people that lived there and did the looting.
I applaud the Iraqi's that have stood up and begun defending their own neighborhoods, business, etc
THAT's what I'd like to see.
the bottom line is that the troops want to leave and come home as soon as possible, instead of trying to act like police in a foreign country. The sooner the better for all concerned.
-
Wlfgng: like the LA riots.. who was to blame?
the police?
rodney king?
the people that lived there and did the looting.
Right - bot not Koreans who lived there and were looted.
I am definitely blaming the police/state government for allowing that to happen - they knew what was going on but deliberately withdrew from the area - taking law and order with them - and left the people without protection at the mercy of thugs.
The people there that did the looting were bred and un-educated in such way that one could not expect anything else from them, but it is the business of the government to deal with the reality - or butt out and let citizens protect themselves before the trouble starts - at least they would be prepared or leave the blighted area.
miko
-
that's the thing with war
no one really wins
-
Amen on that.
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
I would like to hear your analysis on how guns for everyone prevent crime and how guns for everyone helps scare tyrants and invaders away.
...in light of the recent war in Iraq I mean...where something like 80% of the population had their own private AK-47.
well its really quite simple. You need enough balls to pull the trigger.
-
More guns = less crime? Compare the US with Japan. The US has vastly more guns than Japan, but Japan has far less crime.
-
X2Lee: well its really quite simple. You need enough balls to pull the trigger.
But mostly a reason.
miko
-
beet1e: More guns = less crime? Compare the US with Japan. The US has vastly more guns than Japan, but Japan has far less crime.
What else is different in US compared to Japan? Let's compare frequency of crime commited by japanese in US with that of Japan and with that commited by some other groups in US.
You would get a very good indication that it's the people who commit crime, not guns.
miko
-
I would be more than willing to bet that arming every single jap subject would not increase their homicide or crime rate... it may even drop slightly. But... they really don't need much help in that regard... open up their country a little and we will see what happens then.
lazs
-
Forget hypothetical arming of Japan. How about swiss? They are well armed. Same with israelis. Not much violent crime in both places.
miko
-
International murder rate comparisions (http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcgvinco.html)
[For international gun and non-gun homicide, suicide, and total violent death rates, see GunCite's International Violent Death Rates]
Arbitrary Comparisons Between Countries
The U.S. has a high gun murder rate, whereas a country like England with strict gun controls has almost no gun murders and a very low murder rate. Doesn't this show that gun control is effective in reducing murder rates? Not exactly. Prior to having any gun controls, England already had a homicide rate much lower than the United States (Guns, Murders, and the Constitution: A Realistic Assessment of Gun Control, Don B. Kates Jr.). Japan is another country typically cited (see Japanese Gun Control, by David B. Kopel). (Briefly discussing the difference in homicide rates between England and the U.S. is Clayton Cramer's, Variations in California Murder Rates: Does Gun Availability Cause High Murder Rates?)
Gun control opponents can play similar games. The Swiss with 7 million people have hundreds of thousands of fully-automatic rifles in their homes (see GunCite's "Swiss Gun Laws") and the Israelis, until recently, have had easy access to guns (brief summary of Israeli firearms regulations here). Both countries have low homicide rates. Likewise this doesn't mean more guns less crime.
The U.S. has a higher non-gun murder rate than many European country's total murder rates. On the other hand, Taiwan, the Philippines, and Mexico have non-gun murder rates in excess of our total murder rate.
Incidentally in 13th century Europe, several studies have estimated homicide rates in major cities to be around 60 per 100,000. (Even back then, the equivalent of coroners, kept records.)
There are many, many factors, some much more prominent than gun availability that influence homicide rates and crime in general. (See this excerpt from 1997 FBI Uniform Crime Report and GunCite's "Is Gun Ownership Correlated with Violent Deaths?")
Due to the many confounding factors that arise when attempting international comparisons, this approach would appear to hold little promise for determining the influence of gun levels (or handgun availability) on violence rates.
-
The U.S. has a higher non-gun murder rate than many European country's total murder rates.
WooHoo! U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A!
-
Originally posted by Dowding
It still happened. How about the hospitals that were ransacked? They were full of wounded already and were short of supplies, before the looters got there.
The Coalition dropped a bollock. They should have had troops at every hospital, power-station, water-treatment plant and museum in the city. Afterall, they've since claimed that it is all part and parcel of regime change - they therefore should have expected it.
You're an arm chair general with 20/20 hindsight....the coalition entered Bagdad and cities throughout Iraq, fed civilians, treated wounded both friendly and hostile and fought an armed enemy which removed their uniforms and wore civilian clothes, used suicide bombers and hid behind innocents, all the while looking out for Iraqi citizenship....just not good enough for you I suppose?
Have you posted anything positive regarding this war?
-
Originally posted by Wlfgng
blaming the Americans is a joke and is unrealistic as hell.
But of course, its already started, but that ones a new topic...
-
yup
-
Don't know about lazs, but I own my guns because I want to, and because I enjoy shooting them.
I don't expect to ever need any more justification than that, nor will I ever give any.
-
Originally posted by Fatty
Don't know about lazs, but I own my guns because I want to, and because I enjoy shooting them.
I don't expect to ever need any more justification than that, nor will I ever give any.
But Fatty! Don't you understand!?!?!?! People can't own guns just becuase they like them and like shooting them!!! The only reason to own a gun is because you're afraid of your life or becuase you plan on overthrowing the government.
;)
-
fatty... those are my reasons also..plus... the protection issue.
I also feel that I shouldn't have to give them up becuse some groups in the U.S. are not responsible/criminal with them. I think because of that I find them even more useful. Koreans who defended their stores in the LA riots didn't get looted.
I also take every opportunity to show new people how fun shooting can be.. I have never taken anyone out shooting who didn't have a good time... Hopefully... I have combated some prejudice.
lazs
-
Originally posted by miko2d
You would get a very good indication that it's the people who commit crime, not guns.
miko
Miko,
A few days ago I was walking down one of the main streets in Amsterdam, and couldn't help noticing the pock marked appearance of the pavement(sidewalk) caused by discarded chewing gum. So let's ban chewing gum! But oh - I hear you cry. The problem is not the chewing gum, but the people who discard it carelessly and without regard to others. And so nothing is done, and the pavements get more and more fouled up. However, in Singapore, they took a different view. They realised that chewing gum litter was caused by people, ie. chewing gum did not spontaneously extract itself from the wrapper, mix itself with moisture and then deposit itself on the pavement. But despite this realisation, that the problem is caused not by chewing gum, but by people, Singapore has long had a ban on chewing gum. It is illegal to possess chewing gum in Singapore! And do you know what? The streets are completely free of it. The ban works. I don't mind chewing on a piece of gum occasionally, but it was worth sacrificing to walk around Singapore without my foot getting stuck to the pavement every few yards. :mad:
-
heh.. yeah.. chewing gum is the same as guns..
remember that !
:eek:
Beetle, can you write the same thing in 20 words or less? :)
jk
-
oops.. how'd that get there?
-
So you want us to ban guns so you don't step on a shell casing next time you visit the US?
And what is your position on bananas and their well documented, exceedingly dangerous peels?
-
(orders Fatty a beer) nice one
-
Ruger mini-14 with Leupold 4.5 x 20 - 50 mil
Ruger p95 9 mil
Ruger Pocket Rocket Enclosed hammer .357 1 1/2 barrel
Ruger 10/22 Carbine with Midway Bull Barrle with Red Dot sight
Mosseberg 500a 12 guage 18- 28 inch barrles
I want a lever action next..o yaa and a GE mini gun:D
I want a Benneli Tactical Shotgun...please
I siloute shoot 100-300 yd
and i trap shoot - 5 stand
-
Protect your right to keep and chew gum!!!
:rolleyes:
-
It's more the person who's got the guns than the guns themselves that I'm concerned with. For instance, Lazs lives bout 45 minutes West of me and has guns- doesn't bother me one bit. However, 20 minutes East of me lives BGBMAW. The fact he has firearms scares the living Begezzus out of me.
-
hehe///oyaaa....
Airhead..lets meet sometime:)
just for beer or rum though
-
Originally posted by BGBMAW
hehe///oyaaa....
Airhead..lets meet sometime:)
just for beer or rum though
LOL Sure, BGBMAW. I met Lazs and didn't get shot, but when my Kevlar comes back from the cleaners I'll buy the first round. :)
-
They could have sterilized everyone in singapore and gotten the same no chewing gum results in a generation.
lazs
-
lazs and airhead .. thanks bro's.. !
(lauged my bellybutton off)The fact he has firearms scares the living Begezzus out of me.
They could have sterilized everyone in singapore and gotten the same no chewing gum results in a generation.
-
I have a small noodle so i must have gun's to feel manly
LOL
(http://home.attbi.com/~c.hambleton/wsb/media/134502/site1016.jpg)
-
that is indeed a manly firearm (sorry about the noodle thing).
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
sixpense... if you are indeed a liberal... and you feel the way you do about guns... How do you get along with fellow liberals when the subject comes up? I am serious... the main reason I dislike liberals so much is their intolerance.... It is that intolerance that forces them to make the facts suit their beliefs or "feelings". I have found that liberals can be especially vitriholic to other libs who don't "tow the line" in lockstep agreement.
lazs
Hehe. Let's talk about intolerance, shall we? My anti-war postings have met nothing but open minded dialogue from the conservative majority here, right? Riiiiiight. BTW & FWIW, I own and enjoy firearms. Keep an Ultrastar 9mm next to the bed and a Rossi .357 in my desk. Got a Winchester lever action 30-30 in the closet along with a .22 single shot I trained my kids with. (No, they didn' t need lotsa discipline, I mean I trained them in fire-arms use and safety :) ) Anyone who joins in lock-step with either liberal or conservative "party line" is a mindless sheep. I am also anti-union, but pro choice. Go figure.
-
how do you like that Ultrastar?
any probs?
-
Originally posted by Wlfgng
how do you like that Ultrastar?
any probs?
Like other Star pieces I've owned, it's amazingly accurate. I bought it mostly for concealled carry when I got my permit. Plenty of power and disappears under a jacket. I haven't shot more than 4-500 rounds through it, but it has given no problems so far. Not so much as a smoke-stack. Of course I polished the ramp as soon as I got it.
-
worst thing about shooting guns.....
CLEANING THEN AFTER SHOOTING 600 rounds in an hour:(
god..i wish i could spray them off and put them back in safe....hate that part...arghhhhh
How many times i have ran oil soaked swabs thru the fukn barrel..still dirty as ahell
-
I clean mine every 20 rounds LOL.
And yes it sucks.
But it stays accurate .(http://home.attbi.com/~c.hambleton/wsb/media/134502/site1021.jpg)
-
my win 300 mag
(http://home.attbi.com/~c.hambleton/wsb/media/134502/site1007.jpg)
-
i need a distance..come on.,,thats probably 100yds..lolol:)
-
Now I know why HTC disabled file attachments. rc51's gun photos were soaking up all the bandwidth. Jeez, the lights in my house go dim when downloading one of his posts. How many hundred pics are we yet to see of your gun, RC? Do you take it to bed with you? You'd laugh, but I used to have a toy gun that I slept with - was afraid my brother would take it and hide it - lol.
Poor Rc and the noodle jokes. I think RC said he was jewish, so probably had more clipped off than the average American. ;)