-
Re: You knew this was going to be a result of Obama getting elected
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Pan Dah
Unless I'm reading something terribly incorrectly, the tables at that link do not include homicides.
A simplified answer can be found at:
with extensive detail linkable from:
Those are the tables I was looking for, but must not have entered the search data google requires.
-
Re: You knew this was going to be a result of Obama getting elected
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ArmySGT.
Twenty five million Australians and 300 million Americans. Couldn't be a contributing factor.
If we're talking about crime rates in terms of percentage rather than in strict numerical terms, that factor looks a whole lot smaller.
-
Re: You knew this was going to be a result of Obama getting elected
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Pan Dah
Thank you.
-
Re: You knew this was going to be a result of Obama getting elected
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jennahoff
Basically it goes like this... Bad guy will always find way to get a gun.
If bad guy knows you dont have a gun, it makes his job alot easier.
i dont wanna make a bad guys job easier.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T6IZOrs-i6g
The thing is, most homicides are not drive-by shoot-ups by habitual criminals. They occur at home and involve family members. My hunch is that tensions at home would be much less likely to turn fatal in many cases if there was not a gun at hand.
Though, this argument is rather moot, given that the US Constitution protects arm-bearing.
-
Re: You knew this was going to be a result of Obama getting elected
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ArmySGT.
Not really that hardest part about killing is just doing it. There is a lot of mental resistance to the action. The object has little part in the act and cannot perform without the actor. Blaming a gun for murder is like, blaming a car for driving with the drunk behind the wheel.
More people survive gunshots than being stabbed. Knives slash and cut through flesh causing massive loss of blood. Bullet wounds are smaller and affect less tissue that closes in upon itself.
Gun are just more sensational.
I don't know. Gun shots are fairly instant and don't involve a struggle and repetitive action like a stabbing does. Most killers act on impulse, in a moment of intense emotion. If it was more difficult to find a weapon at that moment, it would be, I think, more likely to pass without someone dying.
The car analogy doesn't seem like an apt one to me, as cars have a purpose beyond inflicting injury. Guns don't.
-
Re: You knew this was going to be a result of Obama getting elected
Quote:
Originally Posted by
flickad
And without the gun, it would be much harder to kill.
American is a country that is inundated with guns. Even if you prohibited all guns there would still be a ton floating around. A lot would come over the borders to the south.
Taking away the option to buy guns legally, only takes guns away from people who want them for non-illegal purposes.
-
Re: You knew this was going to be a result of Obama getting elected
Quote:
Originally Posted by
flickad
The thing is, most homicides are not drive-by shoot-ups by habitual criminals. They occur at home and involve family members. My hunch is that tensions at home would be much less likely to turn fatal in many cases if there was not a gun at hand.
Though, this argument is rather moot, given that the US Constitution protects arm-bearing.
Most homicides involve illegal weapons.
-
Re: You knew this was going to be a result of Obama getting elected
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jester214
Most homicides involve illegal weapons.
It makes sense to try and tackle the illegal arms trade, then, rather than further promulgating a gun culture.
However, I guess that since it is both firmly entrenched and a Constitutional right for you guys, a straight-out ban isn't really an option in any event.
-
Re: You knew this was going to be a result of Obama getting elected
Quote:
Originally Posted by
flickad
However, I guess that since it is both firmly entrenched and a Constitutional right for you guys, a straight-out ban isn't really an option in any event.
Exactly, to remove it now would just hurt people that them legally.
-
Re: You knew this was going to be a result of Obama getting elected
Quote:
Originally Posted by
flickad
I don't know. Gun shots are fairly instant and don't involve a struggle and repetitive action like a stabbing does. Most killers act on impulse, in a moment of intense emotion. If it was more difficult to find a weapon at that moment, it would be, I think, more likely to pass without someone dying.
The car analogy doesn't seem like an apt one to me, as cars have a purpose beyond inflicting injury. Guns don't.
A gunshot is no more "fairly instant" than a stabbing since either has to destroy the same organs and/or sever the same nerve connections.
I will give you that statistically guns are used more often. This is for the same reason that they are carried. They guns don't require you to be of the same physical stature or strength as your opponent. A 100 pound woman is the equal of a 300 pound man in a gun fight.
Guns have other purposes besides killing for defense or food. There is a large international following of competitive target shooters that are every bit into their sport as any other. I was invited down to Australia in fact by some lovely folks from your own high power contingent at the resent matches held here at the NRA whittington center.
The point I made is that both a fire arm and a car are inanimate objects. Blaming the inanimate object for a death caused by the operator accomplishes what exactly? Will we ban cars because cars operated by drunk drivers cause more deaths than firearms?
-
Re: You knew this was going to be a result of Obama getting elected
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ArmySGT.
A gunshot is no more "fairly instant" than a stabbing since either has to destroy the same organs and/or sever the same nerve connections.
I will give you that statistically guns are used more often. This is for the same reason that they are carried. They guns don't require you to be of the same physical stature or strength as your opponent. A 100 pound woman is the equal of a 300 pound man in a gun fight.
Guns have other purposes besides killing for defense or food. There is a large international following of competitive target shooters that are every bit into their sport as any other. I was invited down to Australia in fact by some lovely folks from your own high power contingent at the resent matches held here at the NRA whittington center.
The point I made is that both a fire arm and a car are inanimate objects. Blaming the inanimate object for a death caused by the operator accomplishes what exactly? Will we ban cars because cars operated by drunk drivers cause more deaths than firearms?
I guess to me it seems like the primary purpose of a gun is to kill or maim, while that is not the primary purpose of a car. That is why I think it's a different thing from cars, though granted a car can be an incredibly dangerous weapon in the hands of an irresponsible person. We have licensing laws and drink driving laws to deal with that, though I imagine there must be a system of licensing for legal gun ownership as well. A free-for-all is too irresponsible to contemplate.
-
Re: You knew this was going to be a result of Obama getting elected
I married into a family of die hard republicans who will preach until they die about the necessity of guns. The funny part is that none of them has ever needed a gun for self-defense. I, on the other hand, have been held up at gun point. And I can tell you that if I had a gun on my person, it would have done absolutely no good.
Americans should thank whoever that this isn't Sweden. As of 2005 they were the highest taxed country in Europe. And, if you were convicted of any crime, even a DUI, then your gun rights were revoked. I find this thought funny because I live in Louisiana. All people do down here is drink and hunt.
-
Re: You knew this was going to be a result of Obama getting elected
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Melonie
No problem ! I can pick up a fully automatic AK-47 down there for a couple of hundred US dollars.
Only if you want to spend time in a Central American jail!
Types of Legal Firearms: Individuals are only allowed to possess the following weapons:
.12-.22 caliber non-automatic pistols and rifles;
Up to .45 caliber semiautomatic pistols and rifles;
Up to .12 caliber shotguns;
Up to .460 caliber rifles and carbines;
Weapons which form part of authorized collections;
Weapons used for sports and hunting.
Purposes of Lawful Firearms Ownership: sports, hunting, collection
DOMESTIC FIREARM LEGISLATION (4)
The 1995 Arms Law gives responsibility in the fields of granting and registering firearms permits to an organ of the Ministry of Public Security called the General Arms Board. The Board is required to compile and maintain up-to-date registers of all weapons in the country.
Licencing Requirements: Licences are only granted once detailed information on the weapon and owner is taken by the Department, and once the owner has demonstrated competence in basic mechanics, handling and safety measures. Residents can acquire, possess and carry weapons in accordance with the law. Article 7 stipulates that the following groups cannot carry weapons:
those on parole;
those under 18, unless accompanied by an adult purely for hunting or target-shooting purposes, and then only those over 14;
those with physical or mental disabilities affecting the handling of firearms;
those who have been convicted of an offense with a firearm, if an order from a competent authority exists forbidding them from the use of firearms.
Registration Requirements: Under normal circumstances individuals cannot register more than three weapons for personal use.
Training Requirements: Aptitude to handle firearms is a condition for granting a legitimate user licence. However, submission of documentation to certify such aptitude is only required, in practice, in cases where the legitimate user licence is being sought for a military weapon for conditional civilian use, or when an existing legitimate user applies for a permit to carry his or her weapon.
Storage Requirements: n/a
Prohibited Firearms: n/a
Penalties: n/a
MANUFACTURE, IMPORT AND EXPORT
It is illegal to manufacture, own, carry, import, use or deal in weapons that with a single pull of the trigger can fire more than one projectile in succession, or semiautomatic weapons whose magazines carry more than ten units.
REFERENCES
CIA, The World Factbook, Costa Rica: http://www.odci.gov/cia/publications/factbook/index.html.
Except for the Overview, this national profile was adapted from Costa Rica: Diagnostico Armas de Fuego by Max Loria for the Arias Foundation for Peace and Human Progress, 2000 (translated by Greg Puley).
© SAFER-Net 2003
-
Re: You knew this was going to be a result of Obama getting elected
I couldnt help but think of Chris Rock's solution, make the bullets cost $200 a piece (I actually forget the amount he says lol). AN excellent comedy piece. And apropos.
-
Re: You knew this was going to be a result of Obama getting elected
Why should responsible, sane citizans who have passed all the apropriate background screenings have their right to own a gun taken away...if that happens the only people with guns will be criminals illegally and THE GOVERNMENT. This why is our right to bear arms is so important. Think about that a second, especially after the past 8 years. Yes murder is bad, violence but stop and think about the the BIG PICTURE! Why is that so hard for some people to understand.
-
Re: You knew this was going to be a result of Obama getting elected
Quote:
Originally Posted by
RubysRevenge
Why should responsible, sane citizans who have passed all the apropriate background screenings have their right to own a gun taken away...if that happens the only people with guns will be criminals illegally and THE GOVERNMENT. This why is our right to bear arms is so important. Think about that a second, especially after the past 8 years. Yes murder is bad, violence but stop and think about the the BIG PICTURE! Why is that so hard for some people to understand.
Because they don't believe in the right to defend yourself. They believe the monopoly on violence should only be given to the government and it's representatives. Unfortunately reality has a way of intersecting this faith. A lot of them would call bible thumpers goofy for their world view due to their faith.
-
Re: You knew this was going to be a result of Obama getting elected
All the gun stuff has pros and cons for both sides. I personally think the constitution defends our right to own guns and it should not be taken away. assult rifles ... maybe a little extreme. but unless you have never fired an assult rifle you really probably dont understand that there isnt a whole lot of difference other than less reloading and such. Yes bullets can come out a little quicker, but for instance, our military uses M-4 and M-16. Both weapons have different setting including single shot, 3 round burst. You really are not shooting That much faster other than youdont have to reload as often because of the magazine. It isnt like an oozie fits into what anybody would want for defense purposes.
As far as it being easier to handle than large hunting rifles, it certainly is. But on that note, with some practice a small pistol would do the trick even better.
-
Re: You knew this was going to be a result of Obama getting elected
Quote:
Originally Posted by
LEIGH_LANDON
I couldnt help but think of Chris Rock's solution, make the bullets cost $200 a piece (I actually forget the amount he says lol). AN excellent comedy piece. And apropos.
It's a lot easier to make bullets at home than weapons themselves. Otherwise a decent plan.
Problems with all the laws is the administration. For criminals who will not obey laws,a gun is a tool of the trade which they are really hesitant to give up because they plan on making money with guns.
-
Re: You knew this was going to be a result of Obama getting elected
Quote:
Originally Posted by
RubysRevenge
Why should responsible, sane citizans who have passed all the apropriate background screenings have their right to own a gun taken away...if that happens the only people with guns will be criminals illegally and THE GOVERNMENT. This why is our right to bear arms is so important. Think about that a second, especially after the past 8 years. Yes murder is bad, violence but stop and think about the the BIG PICTURE! Why is that so hard for some people to understand.
Problem is states' rights to make their own gun laws and the lobbying that make them hesitant to make responsible laws. And the lobbying that also makes the Fed hesitant too. This is beyond the Constitution and its amendments which does not limit 'arms' ownership and doesn't even define 'militias'. But it only implies ,at best, that individual owners should not have more powerful weapons than official militias and the military, and I suppose police which must be implied someplace in there.
-
Re: You knew this was going to be a result of Obama getting elected
Not a big fan of the guns here. I was disappointed when our border guards started being issued guns. The first person people see when they come to my country should not be a guy with a gun...it's not who we are.
-
Re: You knew this was going to be a result of Obama getting elected
Yes. Guns, when they are not needed, often just serve to escalate things. However, they will make the armed criminals' jobs easier.
This country was given birth with the use of guns, people traditionally used guns to gather food (some few still do), and the USA has a lot more gun owners per capita than most other countries. I can see why some people feel they are necessities.
Hidden video monitoring is helpful (for businesses etc) to catch crimes, rather than trying to subdue them yourself unless you are well-trained.
-
Re: You knew this was going to be a result of Obama getting elected
Quote:
Originally Posted by
threlayer
Ruled by the People?? When did that happen?
More likely it's because scared people want to have protection from the crazed lunatics that will overrun their bungalow and steal all their belongings just after murdering their family.
Problem is the crazed lunatics have already bought their multiple assault rifles and grenades and have taken training in some reactionary-oriented mountain camp led by ex-CIA mercenaries, so they will win.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Deogol
You need to make a movie script out of that one.
Sorry but that has already been done. I'm talking about what such scared people think as justification for having a heavily armed home. As if arms are going to save them against their worst nightmares.
-
Re: You knew this was going to be a result of Obama getting elected
Quote:
Originally Posted by
flickad
I guess to me it seems like the primary purpose of a gun is to kill or maim, while that is not the primary purpose of a car.
Well yes, but if you're using a gun to kill or maim somebody who is in the act of trying to kill or maim you, I'd say that is a commendable purpose.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Butrcup98
I married into a family of die hard republicans who will preach until they die about the necessity of guns. The funny part is that none of them has ever needed a gun for self-defense. I, on the other hand, have been held up at gun point. And I can tell you that if I had a gun on my person, it would have done absolutely no good.
I don't think any of us are stating that possessing a firearm is a "get out of being raped/robbed/murdered" card. One of the biggest advantages that criminals will always have is the element of surprise. The thing is, they have that element of surprise whether you're armed or not. But if they know in advance that you're not armed, then there's that much more incentive for them to do their misdeeds. Conversely, if they know in advance, that they may face life threatening resistance across that convenience store counter, inside that bank, inside that home, inside that car, they will probably think twice.
Have you perhaps considered the reason that your family has never needed to defend themselves is because they've made it clear what will happen if somebody tries to do them harm?
-
Re: You knew this was going to be a result of Obama getting elected
Quote:
Originally Posted by
hockeybobby
Not a big fan of the guns here. I was disappointed when our border guards started being issued guns. The first person people see when they come to my country should not be a guy with a gun...it's not who we are.
I'm sorry, but I found that statement somewhat funny.
Firearms are a very good thing for people to see when they enter this country. It implies exactly who we are and what we are willing to tolerate as a people. We are not a country that refuses to arm our law enforcers and for that I am thankful.
Ever hear the joke about: "stop ... stop or I'll say stop again!"? I'll assume not. :)
The right to bear arms is a two-fold protection that our forefathers had the insight to protect and propagate. It protects the people from the people and it protects the people from the government.
I do not own a gun ... I have rarely fired a gun (maybe two times in my entire life) ... I am terrified to be around guns (I know this is just because of my inexperience around them) ... and I will vehemently defend the right of our citizen's to own them.
Narcissus
-
Re: You knew this was going to be a result of Obama getting elected
I'm guessing you're an American. I was talking about my country (Canada).
Those forefathers you are talking about lived a long time ago in a universe far far away. Things have changed somewhat since then. I mean, if you really think it's necessary for citizens to be armed in order to keep the peace and have something resembling a civilization, I'd only ask this: how's that working out for ya?