Douva's Gun Thread

[Douva 0]

Quote

So why are the homicide rates so much higher in the US than in western nations where this so-called "defense" is not available.

I'm not saying this is the reason, but it is worth pointing out that gun crime is the highest in the states with the strictest gun laws.

To most of us, this issue isn't about the number saved or lost; it's about having the right to defend oneself, without being completely dependent on the government.

I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

[Douva 0]

Quote

The politicians use the "scary looking" style of the weapon to whip up uninformed citizens into supporting those bans, making them think they are fully automatic machine guns, which they are not.

I was actually amazed at how common this misconception was, as the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban neared its sunset. I had an absurd number of people ask me if I planned on buying a machine gun once they were legalized again. They were shocked when I told them that the ban had nothing to do with machine guns.

It didn't help matters that media outlets unfamiliar with the difference between semi-automatic and fully-automatic rifles did their parts to perpetuate the myth. CNN even did a piece where a police officer fired a fully automatic AK-47 at a stack of cinder blocks, obliterating the blocks, and told the audience that it was the type of gun covered by the ban. He then picked up a semi-automatic AK-47, identified it as a non-banned gun, and fired it at a piece of paper, while the camera focused on another set of cinder blocks, inadvertently (CNN claimed) giving the impression that not only were the banned guns fully-automatic (which they weren't) but also much more powerful (which they weren't).

I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

[shropshire 0]

Nope, I don't dislike guns (intensely or otherwise). I was in the forces and had great fun using them at times. I dislike the idea of too many guns in general circulation and the damage that they can do to innocents.

So, my problem is not with guns per se, it's with people, with guns.

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[kallend 2,146]

Quote

Quote

Other violent crime rates are quite similar, just US homicides that are way out of line.

All homicides or just gun homicides? Please answer.

If you want to make a point then do your own homework. The data are all there, waste your own time looking it up.

HINT. If gun homicides are excluded, the USA's homicide rate is almost the same as Australia's and not much different than the rates in Canada and the UK. It's gun homicides that make all the difference.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 2,146]

Quote

Quote

So why are the homicide rates so much higher in the US than in western nations where this so-called "defense" is not available.

I'm not saying this is the reason, but it is worth pointing out that gun crime is the highest in the states with the strictest gun laws.

To most of us, this issue isn't about the number saved or lost; it's about having the right to defend oneself, without being completely dependent on the government.

Didn't answer my question.

Let's try again. Why are the homicide rates so much higher in the US than in other western nations where this so-called "defense" is not available. The rate of other violent crimes is not so different from nation to nation, just homicides.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

So why are the homicide rates so much higher in the US than in western nations where this so-called "defense" is not available.

I'm not saying this is the reason, but it is worth pointing out that gun crime is the highest in the states with the strictest gun laws.

To most of us, this issue isn't about the number saved or lost; it's about having the right to defend oneself, without being completely dependent on the government.

Didn't answer my question.

Let's try again. Why are the homicide rates so much higher in the US than in other western nations where this so-called "defense" is not available. The rate of other violent crimes is not so different from nation to nation, just homicides.

Because (as you well know, since you get the same answer every time you ask the question) it is the difference in CULTURE, not what is/is not used for attack or defense.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[kallend 2,146]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

So why are the homicide rates so much higher in the US than in western nations where this so-called "defense" is not available.

I'm not saying this is the reason, but it is worth pointing out that gun crime is the highest in the states with the strictest gun laws.

To most of us, this issue isn't about the number saved or lost; it's about having the right to defend oneself, without being completely dependent on the government.

Didn't answer my question.

Let's try again. Why are the homicide rates so much higher in the US than in other western nations where this so-called "defense" is not available. The rate of other violent crimes is not so different from nation to nation, just homicides.

Because (as you well know, since you get the same answer every time you ask the question) it is the difference in CULTURE, not what is/is not used for attack or defense.

1. How exactly is US culture so different from Canadian or Australian or British? All watch the same TV and movies, speak (almost) the same language...

2. That does NOT explain why homicides are different from robberies or rapes or other assaults. You're suggesting a culture that magically selects gun homicides for special emphasis in the USA without guns being somehow responsible.

LAME, try again with the blinkers off.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[JackC 0]

Quote

More than likely, I'll go through my entire life without ever pointing a gun at another human being and without ever hunting game for survival, but until my government can indisputably guarantee me that outcome, I'll be hanging onto my firearms.

If you haven't used something in the last year or two, the chances are you don't really need it.

Some people are obviously quite happy to cart a shed load of stuff around that they don't use. Personally I can't be arsed which is why I don't carry a canoe around with me either.

[craddock 0]

Quote

If you want to make a point then do your own homework. The data are all there, waste your own time looking it up

What point? I was asking for information you seemed to have.

Quote

HINT. If gun homicides are excluded, the USA's homicide rate is almost the same as Australia's and not much different than the rates in Canada and the UK. It's gun homicides that make all the difference.

Thanks. Even if this may be nothing more than your opinion. When I get a chance I will "do my own homework" to verify Your point.

That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

1. How exactly is US culture so different from Canadian or Australian or British? All watch the same TV and movies, speak (almost) the same language...

2. That does NOT explain why homicides are different from robberies or rapes or other assaults. You're suggesting a culture that magically selects gun homicides for special emphasis in the USA without guns being somehow responsible.

LAME, try again with the blinkers off.

Let's see...what was that quote, above? It should sound familiar...

Quote

If you want to make a point then do your own homework. The data are all there, waste your own time looking it up.

There have been multiple studies that show a correlation between societal factors and tendencies toward violence in the American culture.

Rebuttal of those studies is left as an exercise for the student.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[warpedskydiver 0]

Quote

Quote

It would also do them well to show some flexibility with respect to gun laws. Why do so many gun advocates get upset when a state tries to ban military style firearms?

OK, I'm a total gun NOOB here, but weren't assault weapons that have full-auto already banned back in the 1930s or something?

And didn't the much more recent, so-called Assault Weapons Ban just have a lot of bullshit complications and loopholes, such that it didn't really do anything meaningful? Since full auto weapons were already illegal anyway?

someone who knows more about this stuff please correct me if I'm wrong.

You are correct sir along with the 1986 GCA there have been so many laws passed that any new laws will be focused on taking away ALL firearms.

I don't care what is said by the media and lawmamkers, when you read the legislation you will see that the intent is not to curb any crimes at all, but rather to make a criminal of already law abiding peaceful people.

Those of you in favor of gun control: maybe whatever you do is the next crimanal act that needs to be resolved by extreme measures ( assembling in public, free speech, etc. )

[kallend 2,146]

Quote

Quote

1. How exactly is US culture so different from Canadian or Australian or British? All watch the same TV and movies, speak (almost) the same language...

2. That does NOT explain why homicides are different from robberies or rapes or other assaults. You're suggesting a culture that magically selects gun homicides for special emphasis in the USA without guns being somehow responsible.

LAME, try again with the blinkers off.

Let's see...what was that quote, above? It should sound familiar...

Quote

If you want to make a point then do your own homework. The data are all there, waste your own time looking it up.

There have been multiple studies that show a correlation between societal factors and tendencies toward violence in the American culture.

Rebuttal of those studies is left as an exercise for the student.

But I'm not making the point, I'm asking YOU to justify YOUR point.

How do you measure "culture"? What units did you use?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Let's see...what was that quote, above? It should sound familiar...

Quote

If you want to make a point then do your own homework. The data are all there, waste your own time looking it up.

There have been multiple studies that show a correlation between societal factors and tendencies toward violence in the American culture.

Rebuttal of those studies is left as an exercise for the student.

But I'm not making the point, I'm asking YOU to justify YOUR point.

How do you measure "culture"? What units did you use?

You don't seem to have problems finding information when it supports YOUR point... Google is still your friend, regardless.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Douva 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

So why are the homicide rates so much higher in the US than in western nations where this so-called "defense" is not available.

I'm not saying this is the reason, but it is worth pointing out that gun crime is the highest in the states with the strictest gun laws.

To most of us, this issue isn't about the number saved or lost; it's about having the right to defend oneself, without being completely dependent on the government.

Didn't answer my question.

Let's try again. Why are the homicide rates so much higher in the US than in other western nations where this so-called "defense" is not available. The rate of other violent crimes is not so different from nation to nation, just homicides.

We're a more violent country than most western nations. We always have been. Our culture is less homogenized than most western countries, and we have a pretty significant class divide. The violence written into our nation's DNA is the biggest factor. Readily available guns make it easier for some of that violence to be carried out, but as I've already stated, most of us agree that that's not a good enough reason to ban them.

I've lived in America my whole life (27 years). I've never seen a shooting, and I've never seen someone brandishing a firearm in public. I have known a couple of people who've accidentally shot themselves in the foot or leg, but idiots are usually capable of hurting themselves without guns. Statistically, I believe your odds of being killed by a gun in America are about the same as your odds of being killed on a skydive. If you avoid violent neighborhoods, don't get involved with gangs, and don't handle firearms without proper training, your odds get MUCH better. Most level-headed Americans simply aren't that worried about gun violence. There are plenty of other threats that are much more likely to kill us.

I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

[Douva 0]

Quote

Quote

More than likely, I'll go through my entire life without ever pointing a gun at another human being and without ever hunting game for survival, but until my government can indisputably guarantee me that outcome, I'll be hanging onto my firearms.

If you haven't used something in the last year or two, the chances are you don't really need it.

Some people are obviously quite happy to cart a shed load of stuff around that they don't use. Personally I can't be arsed which is why I don't carry a canoe around with me either.

I haven't used my reserve parachute in the last year or two. I haven't used the seatbelts in my car in the last year or two. I haven't used the fire extinguisher in my house in the last year or two. Shall I go on?

I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Why do so many gun advocates get upset when a state tries to ban military style firearms?

Because they're no different than non-military semi-auto rifles, they just "look scary" to gun-o-phobes, and it would be stupid to ban a type of rifle because of the way it looks. AR15's, for example are the most widely used rifle in a target competition called "highpower rifle", which is shot from 200, 300 and 600 yards. Just because they look like a military rifle, doesn't mean that in civilian hands that they are used for military purpose.

So, why do so many anti-gun advocates get upset about citizens owning military style firearms?

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

OK, I'm a total gun NOOB here, but weren't assault weapons that have full-auto already banned back in the 1930s or something?

And didn't the much more recent, so-called Assault Weapons Ban just have a lot of bullshit complications and loopholes, such that it didn't really do anything meaningful? Since full auto weapons were already illegal anyway?

someone who knows more about this stuff please correct me if I'm wrong.

You may call yourself a new guy, but you already know more than most citizens about this.

Yes, full-auto machineguns were regulated in the 1930's. You can still own them, but you have to register yourself and the gun with the BATF, and pay a tax. No new machineguns made since 1986 can be sold to civilians, so the supply is finite, and therefore the prices are outrageous. Thus, they are mostly for wealthy collectors.

The recent so-called assault weapons ban was about semi-auto rifles that look scarey to the gun-o-phobes. That law was in effect for 10 years, and expired last year. Did gun crime shoot up after the law's expiration. Of course not. It was all bullshit. Mostly it was passed in the first place because people were fooled into believing that it was about machine guns, when it fact it was about cosmetic features like pistol grips, flash suppressors and folding stocks.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

California banning the 50 cal sniper rifle. How someone could possibly protest that is beyond me. For that matter how could such a thing be legal in the first place?

What's wrong with .50 caliber rifles?

That's the maximum caliber allowed by current law. If you don't like the law, try and change it. And since you seem to presume that there is something horrible about .50 caliber rifles, please tell me what the maximum legal caliber should be, in your opinion.

Not a single crime has ever been committed with such a rifle. So why are you so afraid of them?

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Quote

So why are the homicide rates so much higher in the US than in western nations where this so-called "defense" is not available.

Alot of people give you credit for being very smart. Why do you pretend not to be? You can answer that question easily.

Kallend knows the truth, he just likes to play games to try and fool people into believing that guns are really bad things. See the "Ban Air Guns" thread for another example of his deceitful game playing. He's not interested in truth, logic or reasoned debate - only in trying to fool people into believing bad things about guns.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Quote

Other violent crime rates are quite similar, just US homicides that are way out of line.

All homicides or just gun homicides? Please answer.

Aw, come on now. You're going to blow kallend's cover asking questions like that.

Yes, Americans kill each other more often with knives than in other countries too.

I suppose that's because all the guns make them do it.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

If gun homicides are excluded, the USA's homicide rate is almost the same as Australia's and not much different than the rates in Canada and the UK. It's gun homicides that make all the difference.

You presume that those gun murderers would not have committed the same murder using some other weapon. That's a false presumption. I would think a college professor would know better than to make such a illogical false presumption.

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

Not a single crime has ever been committed with [a .50 caliber] rifle. So why are you so afraid of them?

Someone recently posted something claiming that .50 cal rifles have been used in 66(?) crimes in the history of the nation (which is a tiny proportion, admittedly).

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[justinb138 0]

Quote

Quote

Not a single crime has ever been committed with [a .50 caliber] rifle. So why are you so afraid of them?

Someone recently posted something claiming that .50 cal rifles have been used in 66(?) crimes in the history of the nation (which is a tiny proportion, admittedly).

I believe it was actually 6.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

If you haven't used something in the last year or two, the chances are you don't really need it.

Oh good. Then I can ditch my reserve parachute, since I don't need it any more. That will make my rig about 10 lbs. lighter. Woohoo! Thanks for the expert advice.

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

I believe it was actually 6.

That's possible. It was a non-zero number with a six digit in there somewhere. I haven't been able to find the actual post, but it was definitely pro-gun literature (or propaganda, depending on your position).

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!