Why you have no right to bear arms

[Lockout Casualty]

1) The chart didn't account for overall crime just homicide rates which shows people incilined to murder will do so anyways.

2) The main point regarding the gangsters is that it inflates the gun homicide rate, while other countries don't have to deal with the gang violence the US does.

3) Like the article mentions Japan still sees a lot of suicides by other things (e.g. jumping in front of a train another impulsive way to commit suicide).

1. I meant homicide rate when I said crime rate. Still, that doesn't change my point: homicide rates didn't stay up. However, my later post shows that gun crime is falling at a faster pace than violent crime is overall. Still, gun homicide rates are much lower than US, which I attribute to gun control. Where it will be in another decade remains to be seen, the trend lately is for it to go down.

2. All countries have gang violence, it may only be (or appear to be) worse because of the easy access to guns, which would naturally elevate the levels of violence one would see.

3. Japan has a vastly different culture. In the US people get multimillion dollar bonuses for corruption, in Japan they kill themselves out of shame. Also, I didn't claim there would be no suicide with gun control. I specifically said it would affect a particular type. Red herring.

[CanadianLoonie]

Is this an attempt to link violent acts that do not involve guns with the ownership/ non ownership of guns ?

Nearly all the reliable available information points to the fact that posession of a gun in the home endangers you and your loved ones.

Why would any rational intelligent person ignore this and posess a gun in the home ?

Respectfully, it is your logic that is tainted with emotion.

[William_Clarkson]

Is this an attempt to link violent acts that do not involve guns with the ownership/ non ownership of guns ?

Nearly all the reliable available information points to the fact that posession of a gun in the home endangers you and your loved ones.

Why would any rational intelligent person ignore this and posess a gun in the home ?

Basically everyone in Switzerland keeps a gun in the home and are pretty safe. There's also countless responsible gun owners in the US who never are endangered.

Also, you have to account for the countless people assaulted in events where no gun was involved. If a woman is being raped her best chance of protecting herself would be with a gun (even though there is a greater chance she would be shot).

Another thing is how in a society where more people have guns they may act as a deterrent for someone who could otherwise cause trouble.

[Lockout Casualty]

How about...gun laws are obsolete.

I'll ponder on this a bit before I make up my mind.

I recall when the first 3D printed gun hit the internet. I'll get back to you.

[Lockout Casualty]

Basically everyone in Switzerland keeps a gun in the home and are pretty safe. There's also countless responsible gun owners in the US who never are endangered.

Also, you have to account for the countless people assaulted in events where no gun was involved. If a woman is being raped her best chance of protecting herself would be with a gun (even though there is a greater chance she would be shot).

Another thing is how in a society where more people have guns they may act as a deterrent for someone who could otherwise cause trouble.

In Switzerland, the higher than average gun ownership is due to mandatory service, at the end of which one is allowed to keep his weapon. So they're all trained, their guns are rifles, securely stored, and they aren't treated as toys, a la US.

Oops, forgot the rest of the post.

The real issue in the US is the lax laws surrounding guns. As the OP states (and I agree), it's not out to ban guns outright, but to control them so only those qualified have access.

And what if said woman being raped is attacked from behind, doesn't have time to reach into her purse to get the gun, and the perp gets a loaded gun as a bonus?

How about an alarm system as a deterrent? A criminal must be aware of the gun before it can deter him. What if he stakes out the place, breaks in when no one's home and steals it (again, their storage laws are not like ours)? What if the criminal is not deterred, comes in and shoots the occupant right away to avoid the trouble?

[Buddhas Hand]

Respectfully, it is your logic that is tainted with emotion.

Not at all , as I have stated all the reliable available information points to the fact the posession of a gun in the home is more dangerous to you and your loved ones than not having a gun in the home .

My personal experience also supports this fact.

It is on the basis of this fact that i do not have a gun in the home, nothing to do at all with emotion.

If information pointed to the fact that a gun in the home did indeed make a person and their loved ones safer i would posess a gun in the home if i lived in a society that made me fearful of my own and loved ones safety , thankfully i do not live in such a society.

[Ghostsof1915]

The previous graphs show you can skew your stats to say whatever you want.

Here's the big picture:

The United Kingdom has one of the lowest rates of gun homicides in the world.^[5] There were 0.04 recorded intentional homicides committed with a firearm per 100,000 inhabitants in 2010. Gun homicides accounted for 2.4% of all homicides in the year 2009.^[6]

Or as they said on All in the Family. "Would you be happier little girl if they were pushed out of windows?"

1. "UNODC Homicide statistics". United Nationals Office on Drugs and Crime. Retrieved 8 August 2013.

[William_Clarkson]

1. I meant homicide rate when I said crime rate. Still, that doesn't change my point: homicide rates didn't stay up. However, my later post shows that gun crime is falling at a faster pace than violent crime is overall. Still, gun homicide rates are much lower than US, which I attribute to gun control. Where it will be in another decade remains to be seen, the trend lately is for it to go down.

2. All countries have gang violence, it may only be (or appear to be) worse because of the easy access to guns, which would naturally elevate the levels of violence one would see.

3. Japan has a vastly different culture. In the US people get multimillion dollar bonuses for corruption, in Japan they kill themselves out of shame. Also, I didn't claim there would be no suicide with gun control. I specifically said it would affect a particular type. Red herring.

1) Gun crime decreasing faster is a given. Your other post suggested that the source I used had an agenda, but what's to stop the government from having an agenda to make their gun control laws look like a sucess.

Still, assuming it is reliable, the government source you linked to had 1.3M violent acts compared to 1.2M in the US, which has a much, much larger population. http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/violent-crime/violent-crime#disablemobile

2) I personally think the US gang violence is more to do with the media and living conditions in some places

3) Still, the people who see a gun and just do it could easily be ticked by other things.

I'll respond to the other posts later.

[Buddhas Hand]

Basically everyone in Switzerland keeps a gun in the home and are pretty safe. There's also countless responsible gun owners in the US who never are endangered.

Also, you have to account for the countless people assaulted in events where no gun was involved. If a woman is being raped her best chance of protecting herself would be with a gun (even though there is a greater chance she would be shot).

Another thing is how in a society where more people have guns they may act as a deterrent for someone who could otherwise cause trouble.

From an article i posted in post #27 in this thread.

The John Hopkins centre for gun policy research has some sobering facts on this; women living in a home with one or more guns were three times more likely to be murdered; for women who had been abused by their partner, their risk of being murdered rose fivefold if the partner owned a gun.

Nor did guns make the women safer; women who purchased guns were 50% more likely to be killed by an intimate partner. So LaPierre's "good woman with a gun" is actually, it seems, putting herself in danger.

You should read the whole article/ post , more people with guns does not equate to a safer society , this is a fact.

[Magikal]

What a load of garbage.

First of all the author writes:

With this in mind, let’s look over that list again. Dope, gay sex, gun ownership… hmmmm. I don’t happen to indulge in any of these three, but you’re telling me that if you do, it’s absolutely none of my business,

My answer to this is, that's right. It is absolutely none of your business if someone owns a firearm. It is none of your business if someone is homosexual and it is none of your business if someone smokes marijuana. What gives you the right to know about other people's lives to that extent?

Firearms are tools. Just like anything else it is how they are used and stored that determines if they are safe or not. It is just as possible to kill someone with a hammer, saw, knife etc. as it is to kill someone with a firearm.

It should never be about banning something like firearms from society. Instead it should be about education on proper control, usage and storage of firearms. Banning firearms simply takes the cowardly way out and revokes my right to own and use them for hunting/sport/target shooting.

If I want to hunt and eat fresh game that isn't tainted with hormones or chemicals and is killed in a much more humane way than most animals you buy at the supermarket are, then it is my right to do so. I don't see how providing clean and untampered meat for myself/friends/family is not a need. Don't forget about those individuals who don't live in the city and who may have been raised with hunting and eating wild game as a major part of their lives. Why should that be taken away from them so the gun fearing cowards can have their way?

If someone is going to murder someone it won't matter if guns are legal or not. People have been killing eachother for centuries before firearms came around. The big issue is about culture and education of firearms and their uses.

When the author talks about gun owners asking everyone to trust them I had a good chuckle. We all have to do that thousands of times a day. We trust you when you are driving in your vehicle that you will do it safely and not hit anyone......whicch unfortunately still happens every day. We trust eachother walking down the street that the person walking towards us won't steal our stuff or hurt us. The list of examples is endless but I trust you get my point

The author also uses an example of having a hobby of throwing rocks at kids. That's a sign of a mental disorder and is nowhere near the same thing as owning a firearm. You aren't going to the park and shooting at kids and just missing them. We are at gun ranges or in the wilderness hunting. The author's example here is ridiculous.

The author is a joke and has no logical argument to stand on.

[Lockout Casualty]

1) Gun crime decreasing faster is a given. Your other post suggested that the source I used had an agenda, but what's to stop the government from having an agenda to make their gun control laws look like a sucess.

Still, assuming it is reliable, the government source you linked to had 1.3M violent acts compared to 1.2M in the US, which has a much, much larger population. http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/violent-crime/violent-crime#disablemobile

2) I personally think the US gang violence is more to do with the media and living conditions in some places

3) Still, the people who see a gun and just do it could easily be ticked by other things.

I'll respond to the other posts later.

1. The statistical data is in line with the rest of the nations where gun control is strict. There's little reason to think Britain would be any different. What reason would the government have to mislead on this statistic? I hope it's not an implication common in the US, you know the one about a tyrannical government. As for US comparison, I really don't want to bother right, but I would first look at methods of collecting the data. Rarely do nations have identical anything.

2. I agree, living conditions in inner cities are terrible. Environment has a lot to do with crime, introduce guns into the mix, and you have the US.

3. Always a possibility. Harm reduction, not elimination?

[Ghostsof1915]

I find it funny, that no one questions getting a drivers licence, insurance, and registration and plates for a car. But try in the US to put the same things on firearms everyone goes nuts.

A car can kill, maim or injure. A firearm can do the same. Both if you are careful, follow common sense and rules can be used safely.

ACTS, PROVE might sound stupid. But it's grounded in common sense.

Assume every firearm is loaded.

Control the muzzle direction at all times.

Trigger finger is out of the trigger guard and off the trigger.

See that the firearm is unloaded.

PROVE it's safe:

Point the firearm in the safest possible direction.

Remove all ammunition.

Observe the chamber.

Verify the feeding path.

Examine the bore each time you pick up the firearm.

I guess common sense isn't so common these days.

[elvis15]

I cannot find any information on the dangers of living next door to a gay couple.

I believe that living next door to a pot grower /dealer would be more dangerous than not .

Every bit of reliable information i can find backs up the fact that owning/posessing a gun is more dangerous to you and your loved ones than not owning/posessing a gun.

I could post up many articles and studies but i chose this one as it describes the effect posessing/carrying a gun changes your veiw about others , their supposed danger to you and if they are carrying a weapon/gun.

Technically the article (at least to what I read) noted living next to someone with a gun versus owning one yourself. I'd think as a LGBT person or pot grower you'd also experience increased levels of violence against you as well compared to someone in the same area as those people. Maybe not the same reasoning behind it, and I've never stated the percentages would be the same, but there's risk associated with everything (and, as noted, often associated with irrational fear like the article talks about).

So you missed this part:

Maybe I did end up missing a salient point later on, but considering the length of the article and the weakness of what I'd read to that point, I was fine with not spending more time on it than I already had.

[Smashian Kassian]

This is nonsense.

1. Name the uses for a knife; name the uses for a firearm. Here's a hint: one has many uses, the other kills.

2. People can die from stray fire, it happens all the time. On the hand hand, I don't need to worry about whether you know how to cut a steak. You'll hurt yourself and yourself only.

3. All the "examples" you cited have a reference to harming another as an unintended consequence. Compare that with firearms and think about it for a moment. Does it make sense to you why your "parallels" are silly?

People should mind their own business so long as your actions don't have an adverse affect on them. Once that line is crossed, then your business becomes a matter of public consideration.

well said

[avelanch]

you have no right to bear arms unless you take the rest of the animal too. freakin poachers.

[avelanch]

double post

[Nuxfanabroad]

Who was that asshat movie star who peddled the NRA for an eternity?Forgot the handle. Was it Lancaster?

State of the world is depressing, AFAIC.

Violent movies & videogames, framing conflicts & enmity developing between diff cultures, classes & genders. Media in bed(serious orgy) with gov & big business. Even in the name of religion/God, they peddle wars as solutions to endless man-made problems.

How many young people today have patience to contrast lessons learned in the good ol' analogue days? Our collective 'wisdom from history' has also been altered/marred.

Our biggest battle to come is within ourselves, & our consumerist addiction to buy/spend/exploit, at ALL COSTS

Oliver Stone had some good angles on the downturn of western culture, with his earlier work. Whether it's maniacs in NBK or sociopaths uttering "greed is good", it's all connected, & boils down to selfish greed.

Used to find these social issues enlightening/interesting..don't think I care much any more.

Certainly DON'T envy the young. What a time they've inherited.

[freebuddy]

Who was that asshat movie star who peddled the NRA for an eternity?Forgot the handle. Was it Lancaster?

State of the world is depressing, AFAIC.

Violent movies & videogames, framing conflicts & enmity developing between diff cultures, classes & genders. Media in bed(serious orgy) with gov & big business. Even in the name of religion/God, they peddle wars as solutions to endless man-made problems.

How many young people today have patience to contrast lessons learned in the good ol' analogue days? Our collective 'wisdom from history' has also been altered/marred.

Our biggest battle to come is within ourselves, & our consumerist addiction to buy/spend/exploit, at ALL COSTS

Oliver Stone had some good angles on the downturn of western culture, with his earlier work. Whether it's maniacs in NBK or sociopaths uttering "greed is good", it's all connected, & boils down to selfish greed.

Used to find these social issues enlightening/interesting..don't think I care much any more.

Certainly DON'T envy the young. What a time they've inherited.

Charlton Heston was the guys name. A lot of the people who buy guns that the NRA is pettling are the same ones who keep doing if, like the 50 plus crowd, The NRA has trouble selling to younger, non-whites and females for example, they're not as interested as a whole.

[Nuxfanabroad]

Thanks FB, I should have remembered, but that might be some type of media-induced trauma! :^)

[freebuddy]

Thanks FB, I should have remembered, but that might be some type of media-induced trauma! :^)

The only time I think of him is if they're showing an old planet of the apes movie on TV.