Jees FWB, quote enough people?

That is an Olympic arms AR15 pre-ban with telescoping stock. I paid a little over $1400.00 for it.

Hey, when I debate I try and do it properly. There's no point in spewing out comments without some backup. :)

[quote:45ce5]Are you suggesting that killing a burgler is alright if he's trying to enter your house[/quote:45ce5]

You might have me here. If someone broke into my house I would try to detain them first by holding them at gun point, then if unsuccessful, I would shoot them. Can I ask the man "excuse me, are you breaking in just to steal replaceable merchandise or are you here to hurt someone?"? I guess I could but "by definition" is a thief honest? :) However, that was not the point of the quote. The point of the quote was that for the study in question to come up with the statistics stated (and in fact the statistics that you use in your most recent post appear to have come from the same study) they had to skew the numbers by only including gun-related cases to crimes where the perpetrator was killed. They did not include any time where he was only injured or held with a gun until police arrived. Had they done so the numbers would not have proven their hypothesis.

[quote:45ce5]Did you read all the links I posted?[/quote:45ce5]

Yep. And I almost commented that your links were very biased in their interpretation of some studies, as I'm sure the websites that I like to use are slanted towards their political belief. Most of my numbers, however, came from governement statistics not lobbyist sponsered studies. But, you are right to be sceptical of statistics. That's why this discussion should be based not in crime rates or deaths caused but in an analysis of what rights and liberties we have as humans.

As for the stats that you listed - I believe many to be exaggarated. The article that you site include Dr. Kellerman as one of its sources. As stated before I find his methods to unsound and biased. One thing in the article that is interesting to me is that it states there are 65 MILLION handguns in the US. With that many guns and relatively so few accidental deaths, I would say that the gun owners of America have an incredible safety record. And the fact that there are so many and relatively few crimes committed per gun shows that the gun itself is not the evil party here.

[quote:45ce5]Just because crime increases does not mean it is control related./quote]

I agree, but it sure seems strange that it was declining for several years prior to the ban.

As for the racism point, it's not relavent to this discussion.

[/quote:45ce5]824 which I believe, if guns were bannedm wouldn't exist.[quote:45ce5]

Maybe this number WOULD decline, but at what cost. If murders, rapes, etc. increased far more than that number would it be worth it? And you are assuming that ALL guns would be turned in (all 65 million handguns plus shotguns, rifles, etc.), including those held by criminals. NOW who is kidding themselves?

[/quote:45ce5]All that happens is that the "bad" guys end up with more weapons.
[quote:45ce5]

Exactly my point.



[/quote:45ce5]Yes, but you're being pedantic.[quote:45ce5]

And I thought I was being sagacious. :lol: Pedantic, hmm, great word. I had to look it up. I'm not sure I'll ever be able to use it in a sentence, but it's a great word.

And from another one of your posts:
[quote:45ce5]You can't trust people. They are stupid.[/quote:45ce5][/quote:45ce5]

There is the difference between us. I believe that individuals can be trusted. That they are innocent until proven guilty. That individuals are smart enough to make decisions for themselves without the need for government to hold their hand or be their daily protector. That they are granted certain inalienable rights by their Creator, these being life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, that..... Do I hear God Bless America playing in the background? :o :wink: :D :D :D

Ahh.... the root of it all. The fact that you blatantly acknowledge that you don't care for the rights or even wishes of the vast majority of gunowners only hurts your cause. That is the arguement that makes the NRA stronger by the day.

Anyway, thats all I've got to say on this thread. I will use my vote and my donation money to speak for me. THATS what this country is all about.

Sorry for hi-jacking the post, rude, but you know, conversations do drift and this is a discussion forum.

Outlawing guns would be like prohibition...good luck!

Very good arguments, on both sides (execpt the Trains,Planes and Automobiles aurgument). This is like arguing religion or politics, it's hard to find a middle ground. I know the the US is a long way from banning guns. But I do believe that we need stronger gun laws. There our people out there, who don't like the idea that every law abiding citizen can have a gun. People snap, and when they do, a gun is the last thing they need access to....
There is a good book you should all read by a man named Huff called How to Lie with Statistics.
Guns are a problem. What is the solution?

Switzerland

[quote:299e7]No such law exists. The militia keep their guns at home. Maybe that is what is confusing you.
[/quote:299e7]

and

[quote:299e7]Well then it brings questions about the validity of your source as I've shown the Swiss comment was clearly a lie.[/quote:299e7]

I don't know anything about Switzerland but her are a couple of quotes from the link you gave us:

"The Swiss Constitution states: "Every Swiss male is obligated to do military service." Each Swiss male has to serve a minimum of 330 days in the Armed Forces over a period of at least 22 years, from age 20 to 42. "

and

'Due to the long tradition and the special organization of the Swiss armed forces as a militia army, special rules are applicable for army weapons. Between their regular annual service of two or three weeks per year, Swiss soldiers and officers keep their personal weapons at home. After they have left the army, they may keep those arms in order to continue practicing at rifle or pistol ranges managed by local communities."

This makes it sound like every male must be in the army and every army guy, past and present gets to keep a MILITARY gun at home (full auto? I wonder). That sounds like pretty much everybody to me. Maybe THAT's why:

"The use of firearms in crimes in Switzerland is relatively rare. "

That's because Switzerland is a great place to live

Quite the opposite. I believe that it is the right of a nation to ban guns if it so chooses. No where have I suggested that minority anti-gun group take control. In the end it becomes the will of the greatest number of people.

What you deem as the right to bare arms, I deem as imposing upon peoples' choice to live in a gun free society.

Low sparks said:
[quote:80eaa]What is the solution?[/quote:80eaa]
Simple. Enforcement of the laws that are currently on the books. We had a case down here in Georgia where a former Black Panther was stopped for a routine traffic offense. The officer noticed a handgun in the glove compartment. This guy was a convicted felon out on parole. The law says that a convicted felon cannot be in possession of any firearm. He was arrested. The feds chose not to prosecute. A few weeks later he shot a Deputy Sheriff. If the law had been enforced he would have gone back to prison and a life would have been saved but it wasn't. This case further points out that if all the decent folks turn in our guns only the crooks will have them.

Law enforcement system is corrupt...that is where most of the murders happen is convicted fellons released and then they kill someone. They ruin everything for the rest of us...making guns illegal can't be stopped either...that will just make it more dangerous as the people who need the guns to kill people will find a way to get guns illegaly.

Conceded, but so are the pro-gun sources offered imbued with bias.

[quote:729ef]Yep. And I almost commented that your links were very biased in their interpretation of some studies, as I'm sure the websites that I like to use are slanted towards their political belief. Most of my numbers, however, came from governement statistics not lobbyist sponsered studies.[/quote:729ef]

Well I have offered government stats too, particularly in my last post revolving around someone's comments on Switzerland.

[quote:729ef] But, you are right to be sceptical of statistics. That's why this discussion should be based not in crime rates or deaths caused but in an analysis of what rights and liberties we have as humans.[/quote:729ef]

Perhaps, but as I've made it clear, my stance is the same there, that people have the right to live in a gun free society.

[quote:729ef]As for the stats that you listed - I believe many to be exaggarated. The article that you site include Dr. Kellerman as one of its sources. As stated before I find his methods to unsound and biased. One thing in the article that is interesting to me is that it states there are 65 MILLION handguns in the US. With that many guns and relatively so few accidental deaths, I would say that the gun owners of America have an incredible safety record. And the fact that there are so many and relatively few crimes committed per gun shows that the gun itself is not the evil party here.[/quote:729ef]

Except I wonder how many of those guns are owned by the same person. At the end of the day many people are dying from gun-related incidents.

[quote:729ef]
I agree, but it sure seems strange that it was declining for several years prior to the ban.[/quote:729ef]

There will be other issues at stake here.

[quote:729ef]As for the racism point, it's not relavent to this discussion.[/quote:729ef]

Well except we are all taking from our own perspective. I was a social worker and worked in black communities in the US. My anti-gun beliefs stem alot from what I have seen, heard of and experienced.

[quote:729ef]
Maybe this number WOULD decline, but at what cost. If murders, rapes, etc. increased far more than that number would it be worth it?[/quote:729ef]

But nothing has shown that such a correlation exists. What has been offered is conincidental stats from two select country and once again one can't assume that a gun ban is related to this. Our (UK) crime problem is very much down to other issues.

[quote:729ef] And you are assuming that ALL guns would be turned in (all 65 million handguns plus shotguns, rifles, etc.), including those held by criminals. NOW who is kidding themselves?[/quote:729ef]

Not at all, but one has to start somewhere. You make it difficult to get an gun and you punish those who own one before they can do anything with it. At the same time you are slowly making an impact on the culture, reducing the desensitizing element.

[quote:729ef]

Exactly my point.[/quote:729ef]

Except we're refering to legal guns here. The British police force does not elect to use guns because it believes fire will be met with fire.

[quote:729ef]There is the difference between us. I believe that individuals can be trusted. That they are innocent until proven guilty. That individuals are smart enough to make decisions for themselves without the need for government to hold their hand or be their daily protector. That they are granted certain inalienable rights by their Creator, these being life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, that..... Do I hear God Bless America playing in the background? :o :wink: :D :D :D[/quote:729ef]

Sadly I really don't subscribe to these. My experience, my work in certain fields leads me to believe that you can't offer many individuals total control, because they will use it to make someone else's life a misery. This is particularly bad when the social system fails them, something which is not very good in the US.

[/quote:22b9d]

But why do you want guns? It is simply something I don't understand. Are you saying you can't live without them (that'd be scary). I know there is a belief that they'll protect you but this certainly cannot be proven.

Some people enjoy collecting them and firing them on a shooting range...nothing wrong with that. Something I've wanted to do for a long time, just haven't had the dough.

[quote:f3736]But why do you want guns? It is simply something I don't understand.[/quote:f3736]

I'm sure it is a cultural thing. I just don't see anything wrong with it. I grew up with them. And there is where in the long run they will die out - there are not enough people, like Rudedog, passing on the tradition of gun ownership to their children.

[quote:f3736]my stance is the same there, that people have the right to live in a gun free society[/quote:f3736]

Aaahhh, that is the wall between us. Is it possible to have it both ways? I say I have a right to defend myself or even just to own a gun for pleasure and you say you have a right to live in a gun free society. I doubt that it is possible. Unless we divide up the globe, you can have the UK and Australia and we'll take the US. Sound fair?

[quote]Well except we are all taking from our own perspective. I was a social worker and worked in black communities in the US. My anti-gun beliefs stem alot from what I have seen, heard of and experienced./quote]

I'm sorry to hear that. I have done some social work in the inner city also. I think that in doing so it reinforced my belief in the human spirit. And I'm sure your right, my perspective was solidified by my father's experience.

I really don't mean this as an attack on anyone, but I do think that that is a good thing... for society. Hopefully that will then provide forces in the US with the powerful support, the middle-classes, to implement restrictions. Just my final thought.

[quote:dc91b]
Aaahhh, that is the wall between us. Is it possible to have it both ways? I say I have a right to defend myself or even just to own a gun for pleasure and you say you have a right to live in a gun free society. I doubt that it is possible. Unless we divide up the globe, you can have the UK and Australia and we'll take the US. Sound fair?[/quote:dc91b]

:)

[quote:dc91b]I'm sorry to hear that. I have done some social work in the inner city also. I think that in doing so it reinforced my belief in the human spirit. And I'm sure your right, my perspective was solidified by my father's experience.[/quote:dc91b]

Don't get me wrong, there are good individuals and most who are "bad" are so for a social reason, but in the end it is very hard trying to "convert" them. In the end we're all standing very different positions.

To recap, FWB please explain why your against guns. One or two sentences only please. :wink: I kind of lost it in all the post.

The reason I bring up the Automobile, in the gun debate. It is because the number one reason everyone dislikes firearms is because they say people use them to kill other people.

I just point out, statistically, automobiles kill more people!

Believe me, I am for harsher jail sentences. For anyone who commits any type of crime while in the possession of a firearm. I also believe if a child (under 19) is caught mistreating a firearm or bringing a firearm into a public place. Be it a school , city park liberally, whatever. Then that child's parent should be held responsible.
I don't mind waiting 7 days to buy a firearm nor do I mind taking a background check. I have nothing to hide.

Like someone said before. I will support the candidate who reflects my personally views on this subject and who will change the laws in my favor. I will also donate to the organizations who support them as well.
I suggest you do the same.

On a side note. Stepping out of this debate.
I would like to commend both sides for not turning this into a flame war and or personal attack. If for some reason If it does turn into that, I will have no choice but to close the thread. It's nice to know that everyone here can have an intelligent conversation. While defending thier beliefs.
Thanks guys / gals.


Now back to the debate.

Basically, and this is very basic:

- Guns kill, they were invented to kill, they are designed to kill. That is their purpose.
- I believe that a gun ban will save lives. Even if it is just one, that is good enough for me.
- I am not convinced guns save lives. No evidence has been put forward, just speculation. I also don't believe that individual civilians should be given the power to wild such a weapon and thus become judge and executor.
- I believe "legimate" gun users do not need to get their pleasure from firing off weapons and will find something else to do.
- We have a right to live in a gun free society (this is in response to those who bring up the "right to bare arms")

[quote:24bac]The reason I bring up the Automobile, in the gun debate. It is because the number one reason everyone dislikes firearms is because they say people use them to kill other people.

I just point out, statistically, automobiles kill more people![/quote:24bac]

Cars are not designed to kill. Cars serve a valuable purpose. Using your argument we should legalise anthrax, land mines, functional tanks for civilian use, because "they don't kill, people do". It is a poor excuse, in my eyes, and is comparing apples and oranges.

[quote:24bac]On a side note. Stepping out of this debate.
I would like to commend both sides for not turning this into a flame war and or personal attack. If for some reason If it does turn into that, I will have no choice but to close the thread. It's nice to know that everyone here can have an intelligent conversation. While defending thier beliefs.
Thanks guys / gals.[/quote:24bac]

It is unqiue. :) I heartily agree. Well done all.

[quote:24bac]Now back to the debate.[/quote:24bac]

I think we've reached the end here... Sorry for hijacking the thread, you guys can get back to your gun-collecting talk. :)

ok, here is a classic example of a "debate". The people who like to own guns lawfully should be able to do so and the people who don't like them should refrain from buying one!!....sounds simple enough to me.

This debate is like religion....you're either for it or against it....just don't push your views on other people. I'm a gun owner and i respect the "non" owners choice not to be armed. I wouldn't force the issue on them as much as i don't want to hear why i shouldn't own several hand guns. Ultimately it's your choice....i just don't want to be told which way to choose!! :wink:

I never leave the house without a sidearm! my main carry peice is a Ruger P944 .40 cal semi-auto. My kids (7yr girl & 4 yr boy) cna shoot and are tought to respect and handle them safley. NEVER AIM AT ANYTHING YOU ARE NOT WILLING TO DESTROY! I have been a victim of crime too many times. Stabbed twice and shot once. This will never happen again! I live near Detroit and feel much safer with a gun in my belt! My fear is the kids that dont have a clue, a curious kid is a dangerous one. My kids know what to do if they find a gun and I hope other parents will teach thier kids too.
mb fire1:

I feel I should say something here. But I don't want to run the risk of being caught up in this discussion. *carefully backs away*

ok think about it... most people who are commiting crimes with guns get them ILLEGALLY... meaning even if guns were outlawed thered still be people getting them illegally. When u go out to buy a gun at most places they do backround checks and so on, if they see you're repsonible you get the gun...also, why dont we ban knives while we're at it, theyve been use to kill people too, theres also been accidents with them. In this day and age the world will never be rid of guns, no matter what

...hey, it works for Afghanistan...! oOo:

...keep your freakin' guns...just do us a favour...next school-yard massacre...spare us the " ....I can't believe it, why!... "

[quote="Tool-back":d38a5]ok think about it... most people who are commiting crimes with guns get them ILLEGALLY... meaning even if guns were outlawed thered still be people getting them illegally.[/quote:d38a5]

True in Australia a friend of mine and his family bought a large farm and seriously it took him like 6 months before he could get his hands on a weapon. I reckon that's the way to go, I mean I find it a little odd that they sell shotguns at Wall Mart in the US. Im not sure what the limitations are over there, anyone care to answer that?

The laws surroundong the firearms in Australia are good I ean its tragic that it took the Port Arthur Massacre for Australia to tighten its stance on guns and seriously no one has been that pissed off.

In America you have a right to bear arms, banning full auto weapons and the such still gives you the right to bear arms (just not the ridiculously destructive ones like this one bigzooka: )

Just a question to rudedog, why do you need so many guns, the tommy gun i can understand cos its like WWII and all but why the m4 and the ak47?

Hey Oddball, If I wanted I could go to walmart right now and walk out with a shotgun. Hunting is HUGE over here and a shotgun is in most homes. There is one point thats missed here. In our Constitution we have the right to overthrow our govt if it is nessesary. (its not, at least now) with out these weapons the people lose the power to exscersise that right. Im not saying we are going to revolt. It would take an afull lot for that to happen, but we can do it! While crime rates are high here the countries thatt have banned gun have seem sharp rises in gun related crime. The home invasion rate in AUS has shot through the roof since the "buy back" of your guns. There are many pros and cons to this arguement with both sides having some good points but I like it the way it is here.
mb
PS 2 weeks ago I picked up a sweet Chinese SKS 7.62x39 10rnd fixed mag, bayonet and bipod! SWEET!!!!!! gotta go Im off to Cabelas to fondle some goodies.

Hehe, yesterday when I went to the local sporting goods store, they had left a mauser out of the gun case. LOL, I was walking around the store with it...people thought I was crazy... evil:

[quote="Sgt>Stackem":7f70e]Hey Oddball, If I wanted I could go to walmart right now and walk out with a shotgun. Hunting is HUGE over here and a shotgun is in most homes. There is one point thats missed here. In our Constitution we have the right to overthrow our govt if it is nessesary. (its not, at least now) with out these weapons the people lose the power to exscersise that right. Im not saying we are going to revolt. [/quote:7f70e]

lol. It takes much more than guns to overthrow a government, so using that argument is, I'm sorry to say, very lame.

lame, but true and if its in the consitituion do not say its not a valid point, thats as valid as they come when you're talking about the US

[quote="Tool-back":02829]lame, but true and if its in the consitituion do not say its not a valid point, thats as valid as they come when you're talking about the US[/quote:02829]

Hahaha. Now you really are cracking the good ones. :)

The constituion is certainly NOT "as valid as it comes". Although I do think it is a nice idea and Britain could do with one. The theory is good, even if the practise is way off.

rude change the topic name already zooka: freak:

i don't think we're talking about little girls anymore

[img]http://www.jellyweb.com/ut/ownz.jpg[/img]

[quote=FWB]Hahaha. Now you really are cracking the good ones. :)

The constituion is certainly NOT "as valid as it comes". Although I do think it is a nice idea and Britain could do with one. The theory is good, even if the practise is way off.[/quote:6538b]

That part of the Constitution is out-dated.

I don't think banning guns would really solve gun related problems. Drugs are illegal, but people will be willing to do whatever it takes to get them. The same goes for guns.