Small arms are the REAL weapons of mass destruction

Originally posted by Neo Christian Mystic
reply to post by Stormwind

 

It should also be laws forcing people who have guns to have them in a locked safes with the bolt in another locked place. And people should rather learn defensive marshal arts if they are so paranoid that they feel a need to own guns for protection. That's a few ideas, and I guess it won't be popular among most people on this board.

Here are a couple of pictures that illustrate why gun laws don't work, and why they aren't necessary.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/636e4fafc23a.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/2cb3fa48cd2d.gif[/atsimg]


According to tests conducted by the Department of Justice.

Fact: Half of all murders are committed by people on “conditional release” (i.e., parole
or probation).142 81% of all homicide defendants had an arrest record; 67% had a felony
arrest record; 70% had a conviction record; and 54% had a felony conviction.143

142,Probation and Parole Violators in State Prison, 1991: Survey of State Prison Inmates, Robyn Cohen,
U.S. Dept. of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1995.
143 Felony Defendants in Large Urban Counties, 1998, Brian Reaves, U.S. Department of Justice, Office of
Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics, November 2001

If you legally own a gun in America you have alrady undergone a back ground check that says none of those things apply to you. In other words legally owned guns aren't the problem. Failing to deal with criminals and repeat offenders is the problem.

Originally posted by Neo Christian Mystic
reply to post by Obinhi

 

You go ahead carrying arms. You are much more likely to be killed if anyone confronts you, since you pose a serious threat to the person attacking you. How about some comon sense?

How about posting some info to back this up. According to the Department of Justice thousands upon thousands of people defend their lives and property successfully every year with weapons. Submission to the will of a criminal does not insure survival.

DOJ Report

According to the statistics you are more than 360% more likely to get murdered in Chicago than the average US city. I guess that gun ban worked for them. In Chicago you are 340% more likely to be the victim of crime than in the aveage US city. You are also 256% more likely to be raped. Man banning guns really helped keep the women of Chicago more secure.

Chicago Stats

I know I'm beating a dead horse but I wanted to add something else to the thread.

Instead of banning guns or trying to add more laws we should use the ones we have.

In 2005, agencies reported 1,400 arrests of persons denied a firearm or permit; but
the U.S. Department of Justice accepted only 135 of those denial cases for prosecution.99
Given the poor performance of the Federal government in prosecuting felons identified
by an instant background check trying to buy firearms, there is little to support firearm
licensing as a crime prevention measure.

99 Background Checks for Firearm Transfers 2005, U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs,
November 2006.

Please go read the book / e-book "Gun Facts 5.1."

Another Great fact from the book.

Fact: During the Clinton administration, federal prosecutions of gun-related crimes
dropped more than 44 percent.335

335 Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) at Syracuse University covering 1992 through
1998

You have a lot of gun lovers/wackos on this site so you won't get much support, as you already probably noticed. However, the gun crisis in America is out of control. Citizens should've Never had such easy access to weapons of mass destruction but of course, they use the Second Amendment as an excuse for guns in their homes.

Just because you have the right to, doesn't mean you have to.

reply to post by SeventhSeal


Obviously your not paying any attention to the facts and figures presented here. You can let someone enter your home and threaten your family and possibly kill them with a clear conscience but I cant. The research here is given to you without having to do it yourself, why dont you do some yourself to see for yourself that they are accurate.

Originally posted by Stormwind
reply to post by SeventhSeal

 

Obviously your not paying any attention to the facts and figures presented here. You can let someone enter your home and threaten your family and possibly kill them with a clear conscience but I cant. The research here is given to you without having to do it yourself, why dont you do some yourself to see for yourself that they are accurate.

I love that Family argument, I really do.

The point is the gun crisis is out of hand and cannot be controlled. Too many citizens have access to weapons and it's a concern for the safety for many.

reply to post by SeventhSeal


Just a question here...do you believe that if there is more gun control that the criminals will follow the laws and stop using guns? And yes the family thing is a good arguement. Like I said before, I couldnt let something like that happen if there was a way to prevent it, and there is.

reply to post by SeventhSeal


Wow, why don't you move to Chicago or say Washington, where they do not allow guns, you should be safe there.

Just keep repeating the lie enough times, you might actually convince someone, do not know who, but someone.

Did you bother to watch the video I posted earlier. No? Of course not. Why would you bother wanting FACTS when you can continually misrepresent them.

Oh well, you are right, lots of gun nuts here.

Kind of having a hard time are you not? I mean with your superiority and elitist mentality.

When people present you with facts and you can no longer debate using FACTS you begin the standard format right? Denigrate, attack the messenger. Typical tactic.

Gun nuts 1,233,441 elititist gun control nazis ZERO

Hmmm, why do I bring up nazis?

Why not look at history there oh intelligent one. Tell us all what happens when the citizens are no longer allowed guns.

Didn't think so, facts would just get in the way.

Look how well disarming the public has worked in the UK, now the criminals are better armed then the public.

Or mexico where the drug cartels are getting full auto weapons, grenades, and RPG and are attacking the mexican military.

In the US the public has more weapons then the US military.
Would the mexican drug cartels want to cross the border in force i think not at this time.
They would have to wait until the US public was disarmed.
Just today 25 people were killed in Ciudad Juarez mexico by drug gangs.
www.google.com...
english.aljazeera.net...

If drug gangs got that out of control in the US and the US cops were unable or unwilling to do anything you can bet the public would.

Look how well disarming the public has worked in the UK, now the criminals are better armed then the public.

Or mexico where the drug cartels are getting full auto weapons, grenades, and RPG and are attacking the mexican military.

In the US the public has more weapons then the US military.
Would the mexican drug cartels want to cross the border in force i think not at this time.
They would have to wait until the US public was disarmed.
Just today 25 people were killed in Ciudad Juarez mexico by drug gangs.
www.google.com...
english.aljazeera.net...

If drug gangs got that out of control in the US and the US cops were unable or unwilling to do anything you can bet the public would.

reply to post by SeventhSeal






This about right to you?

There is truth that small arms have killed more people than the historically documented use of all the WOMD combined. Particularly the AK-47. Of course most of the killing was done in various conflicts in the Mideast and in tribal warfare and genocide in Africa and drug trade conflicts in South America. The guns are just a convenient tool for a particular means and nothing more. And the point is? (Yes, guns kill. So?) If they didn't have guns they'd be using clubs and machetes. (And that's been heavily documented in those same conflicts too. When there is lawlessness and no respect for the rights of fellow man, people can be outright vicious.)

However none of the laws changing or being added to the books in western countries could have done anything about that. You know why? That whole thing about sovereignty of nations and jurisdiction. With only a few odd exceptions, the developed world nations tend to respect that. Governments are quite happy to let carnage go on in the world if it means no threat or real cost to them.

Anyhow gun laws are pretty ineffective deterrents to crime anyways. Cities that have had long standing gun bans before they were declared unconstitutional (D.C. and Chicago) have always had plenty of gun crimes during the periods in which the gun laws were in effect. As was stated a few times earlier, criminals do not and will not respect the law. They will get and use the guns anyways. Restrictions on possession only place potential hardships on otherwise law abiding citizens. Instead there are already plenty of other adequate laws regarding illegal use of firearms, and that's what the public should demand enforcement of.

On average, I don't feel the need to have a gun. So I don't have one. But I still respect the rights of my fellow citizens to have one, provided they keep and use it in a lawful manner.

Originally posted by SeventhSeal
However, the gun crisis in America is out of control. Citizens should've Never had such easy access to weapons of mass destruction but of course, they use the Second Amendment as an excuse for guns in their homes.

How about a little evidence that they is a lack of crisis here in America. I'll even end it with evidence that America does not have the highest murder rate in the developed world as many claim. I will also through in a little data that shows more guns equals less crime. That equation has even proven true in England.

Fact: Though the number of firearms owned by private citizens has been increasing steadily since1970, the overall rate of homicides and suicides has not risen.132

Targeting Guns: Firearms and Their Control, Gary Kleck, Aldine de Gruyter, 1997. (With supporting
data from the FBI Uniform Crime Statistics, 1972 to 1995.)

Ironically, firearm use in crimes has doubled in the decade after the U.K. banned handguns.140
140 Weapons sell for just £50 as suspects and victims grow ever younger, The Times, August 24, 2007

Fatal gun accidents for children ages 0-14 declined by almost 83% from 1981 to 2002 264 – all while the number of handguns per capita increased over 41%.265

264 264 National Center for Health Statistics
265 BATF estimates on handguns in circulation, BATF, Firearms Commerce in the United States 2001/2002

It doesn't look like much of a crisis to anyone that is paying attention. Accidents, murders and violent crimes are decreasing. Yet in England home invasions and armed crime rose after effectively banning handguns.

Russia has the high levels of crime despite very tough regulations on guns. The rate is nearly four times that of America. America does not have the world's highest murder rate as many claim. In fact a study conducted by Ivy Leauge scholars, and published by Harvard, says that the assertions are false.

International evidence and comparisons have long been offered as proof of the mantra that more guns mean more deaths and that fewer guns, therefore, mean fewer deaths.1 Unfortunately, such discussions are all too often been afflicted by misconceptions and factual error and focus on comparisons that are unrepresentative. It may be useful to begin with a few examples. There is a compound assertion that (a) guns are uniquely available in the United States compared with other modern developed nations, which is why (b) the United States has by far the highest murder rate. Though these assertions have been endlessly repeated, statement (b) is, in fact, false and statement (a) is substantially so.

****

Yet, manifest success in keeping its people disarmed did not prevent the Soviet Union from having far and away the highest murder rate in the developed world.6 In the 1960s and early 1970s, the gun‐less Soviet Union’s murder rates paralleled or generally exceeded those of gun‐ridden America. While American rates stabilized and then steeply declined, however, Russian murder increased so drastically that by the early 1990s the Russian rate was three times higher than that of the United States. Between 1998‐2004 (the latest figure available for Russia), Russian murder rates were nearly four times higher than American rates.

WOULD BANNING FIREARMS REDUCE MURDER AND SUICIDE? A REVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL AND SOME DOMESTIC EVIDENCE DON B. KATES* AND GARY MAUSER**

Just one parting fact from the above mentioned study.

The same pattern appears when comparisons of violence to gun ownership are made within nations. Indeed, “data on firearms ownership by constabulary area in England,” like data from the United States, show “a negative correlation,”10 that is, “where firearms are most dense violent crime rates are lowest, and where guns are least dense violent crime rates are highest.”
11