A Worldwide Gun Control Debate happening today in London?

[Oblivion437]

Originally posted by johnny: Shows how much you know about Europe, which is absolutely totally zippededooda. And for the last time, quit refering to Europeans as if it's one race, nothing is more insulting than that.

Hey Jack-ass, did I start this identity politics bullshit? No sir...You'll recall it was someone who made such condescending dispositions about American policies, that we needed to be 'taught better' by 'Europeans.'

Theye employed that Generalization, not I...I merely turned it on its head by demonstrating that while some random group be they "Europeans" Union or not, the "we" that JF Kerry referred to, or some random gawker who decided that post-modernism was cool, if you're going to teach us, could you at least please kindly learn from your own mistakes regarding oppressive government before telling us how to solve ours? In case you didn't notice, we've just been through 4 administrations, 24 years in total, of runaway, irresponsible, and downright illegal expansionistic government. I say it's time for some damn change, violent if necessary, hopefully not. I've seen nothing that outright says, black & white, that violent revolution is absolutely necessary to correct the wrongs in our system.

I do dearly apologize for getting royally pissed at condescensions, even if they're directed at me, my people or my nation. Normally I just brush it off as random arrogance, stuffed-shirt anti-realism, or plain stupidity. But this had the pretense of some genuine humanity to it, which was pretty much self-destructed.

I apologize, I don't like being shat upon, if pride offends you, ban me. I really don't care.

Originally posted by Aerich: I feel a lot safer knowing that the average joe hothead isn't walking around (or driving around!) with a gun. That outweighs any concerns I might have re: muggers or burglars. That's not to say I give up any rights to my personal safety or security: I have a home alarm, am near-paranoid about awareness, and have significant training in martial arts. With all of that, I'd prefer to keep the guns out of general society.

However, and every reliable statistic gathered can prove this: Neither violent crimes, nor the proliferation of firearms in the hands of violent individuals willing to use them irresponsibly can positively correlate to gun control. If we were safer under such circumstances (highly debatable, supposing the gun were never invented along with every technological advance owed to it, I'd hate to think about the power vaccuum that would exist, and what, perhaps Vassal-like force that arise to fill it, as war would still persist, but the only ones able to engage in it would be those able to dedicate their lives to the business of warfare, they'd hold considerable power...Not to mention that stabbings seem to be more lethal, or under the circumstances are performed in such a fashion as to ensure a greater percentage of deaths per attack as compared to shooting victims) there would be some point of data showing it. The complete, or near-complete statistical disparity on these two points seems to indicate no positive or negative correlation.

Some people will, and have, argued that makes us more vulnerable to criminals who have guns when we don't. Possibly. However, criminals are more likely to shoot if they are being shot at, so you may be more likely to be shot if you have a gun. I'll take my chances barehanded. Even if I do get robbed, so what? I'll still have my life and health, and I don't carry much cash anyway.

For the US at least, that's totally untrue. You stand a considerably greater risk in complicity than you do in violent, armed resistance. Also, criminals have stated (just ask John Stossel) that they don't fear other criminals or the cops as much as armed citizens, who are actually more dangerous to them than other gangsters. Chances are they'll run or surrender to your (obviously superior) position. Criminals are inherently lazy, cowardly and downright stupid people. That's why they're criminals. Just ask Henry Hill, who knew more of the toughest crooks than you'd ever have a chance of meeting if you'd hung out in Robert's Lounge every day from 1970-1980.

Note that I consider domestic gun control and international military issues to be two separate things. My views on gun control do not extend into the field of security of the State.

Is depending on *someone else* a good idea, especially when it comes to personal safety? Suppose you lived in say...The Germanic empire, when say...The Huns come rolling across the border...You don't want to be the shmuck who waited for the Roman Army, believe me...

Granted that was a different time, when national borders, nations themselves and a hell of a lot else didn't exist, when the most civilized cluster of individuals on the planet was also the most barbaric, yadda yadda yadda. This is neither the time nor the place for a debate of Iron Age history, the movement of the Huns, or why Alleric the Goth should go down as a heroic figure.

[Aerich]

I think you missed my point, Oblivion. I don't depend on anyone else for my own safety. I consider myself armed, with my brain, my alertness, my knowledge, and my body, just not with a gun. I've also got darn good handspeed, so I figure I have at least an even chance against a knife, especially if I can take somebody by surprise. In any case, it's better to circumvent dangerous situations before it gets to the "defend your life" stage. It can be as simple as spotting a mugger or having good "street posture".

My point is that I'm certainly not faster than a bullet, and I'm happier knowing that there are fewer handguns around here than in the States. It reduces the chances of me getting hurt due to accidents or idiots who can't hold their temper. It makes ME feel safer walking around.

On a different point, I don't quite see how carrying a gun makes anybody safer from muggers. If a mugger is threatening you with a gun, he obviously already has it out and available, and won't be inclined to let you finish pulling yours. In that situation, it's more likely that you will get shot, instead of just losing some money. The only way packing a gun makes it safer is if the mugger knows beforehand that you have a gun and passes you by. I'd be interested to see some crimes statistics from a large city where a fair number of the citizens carry guns - say someplace in Texas? Just let me say that I'm somewhat doubtful of the deterrent effect.

I remove my objections to carrying guns (or more accurately, I say that stronger reasons tip the balance in favour of it) if it is a case of defending one's life against equal or greater force; in the case of women facing rape situations, it goes double. I just don't want to get shot by some drunk guy in the bar that doesn't like my attitude, or by some motorist that thinks I cut him off.

And I will challenge your statistical analysis. You compare shooting deaths to stabbing deaths - the comparative lethality is not the issue here; the issue is numbers of shooting deaths in the USA (on a per capita basis) compared to other places that have more gun restrictions. I've also seen some statistics about the murder rate in the States compared to Canada, and I recall it was a fair bit higher. Arguably that is partially attributable to easier access to weapons. At the very least, it's harder for wacko office workers to go off the deep end and murder their colleagues. Although we've had a few of those here, too. There's plenty of hunting weapons around, just not much in the way of handguns.

Anyway, sorry Larry, for derailing the intended purpose of the thread yet again. Part of the problem is that none of us saw the debate and we only have one (biased) source about what happened, so we fall back on the general issue of gun control so we have something to argue about. [img]smile.gif[/img]

[Oblivion437]

If I can find the Detroit Free Press article, well, there was the case of an attacker having the initiative, with a gun, and the victim still came out on top. Remember, these aren't very bright guys. Generally if you had a room with about two dozen of them, you'll find the ash tray provides not only more engaging conversation, but higher scores on IQ tests...

Also, look up Florida's post-CCW legislation rates Re: person-to-person violent crime, it's gone down since the law has passed, I'm not going to say it's brought it down, but it may have...John Stossel thinks so. It would seem that, before any shots were even fired, the mere threat of it has done some good. Fellow citizens feel safer around one another, because they know (or at least feel) that they're watching out for eachother. Kinda leaves a warm fuzzy feeling in your stomache, doesn't it? Don't worry, I have a large bottle of Tums for that, you really shouldn't have done the watered mustard thing...

I'm not saying learning unarmed combat, diplomatic and nonviolent survival techniques are bad, or a waste of time. I'm saying that, there are certain situations where you'll need a gun, and not have one, and you'll be in a real bad way at that moment.

The thing is, the majority of murders are not comitted with firearms, but with knives, hands, feet, or hand tools even. One case years back where a guy was beaten to death with a fire hose. The thing is though, the number of stabbing assaults that turn into murders because the victim just so happened to die from multiple stab wounds, per the number of overall crimes, is much much much greater than with firearms. To say the least, blasting a victim with a .45 is never a sure bet, stabbing them in the throat is...You'd be surprised the gunshot wounds they've treated, along with the knife wounds, one fellow was lucky the blade of the knife actually fell perfectly between the hemispheres of his brain, and caused only minimal damage.

Footnotes:

Rifles are far deadlier than pistols, especially hunting rifles, which can successfully take down a man at about 1000 meters.

Firearms accidents in places with CCW (right to carry or shall issue, if you're curious, I can roughly explain those in greater depth) are either not higher, or are in miniscule quantities so. 1 or 2 more accidents a year than beforehand.

Logically, gun control won't stop criminals from possessing firearms. Firearms are made on (very precisely tuned) common industrial machinery, with little disparity from other fine tuning precision parts. If you live in an industrial area with a total gun ban, and there are still gun crimes, chances are pretty good one of those big buildings in the distance house a set of machine tools that are currently, as you see the building, making firearms. They might even be turning down ammunition as well. How hard, really, would it be to hide a miller, lathe and stamper in a precision metallic parts plant?

We don't allow people to drive while inebriated, and from a legal standpoint, someone drunk does not have capacity, and is for that time not a functional citizen...I'll let you run with the implications.

[Larry_OHF]

Its getting too heated, and the personal attacks are too ugly now.