assault weapons ban!!

[Kingfisher]

We all know guns are not dangerous but put them in the hands of nutters and they become dangerous. So the best way to keep them out of nutters hands is to ban them...well thats the thinking but does it work?

Story from just a couple of days ago. Now remember...
All Guns Are Banned in Japan....

The mayor of Nagasaki was shot in the back twice while waiting for the train.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/04/17/world/main2695446.shtml

Real effective, regarding banned guns. Citizens don't have guns, criminals still have guns.

 

[ninetysixcavy]

Story from just a couple of days ago. Now remember...
All Guns Are Banned in Japan....

The mayor of Nagasaki was shot in the back twice while waiting for the train.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/04/17/world/main2695446.shtml

Real effective, regarding banned guns. Citizens don't have guns, criminals still have guns.

And lets not forget, our elected officials all have protection. The three branches of government: Legislative, Executive, and Judicial all have guns. If you go into a court room I can assure you the judge probably has a pistol. No-one is above the law; that's means no-one. I don't know if that's communism or fascism or both.

Either way, we (America) are at a crossroads right now: our military is streched across the globe and we're the number terrorist target in the world right now. So tell me where's the logic in knowing that there are people plotting on us right now and simultaniously disarming us? You want to just ring up a 5-6 inch female cop to run to your side when our country is officially attacked? Man I can go on and on about reasons why we need guns, but the fact is, if we tighten our shit up, there are very few, if any reasons at all why we should ban guns. This kid should never have gotten those guns. He was a schizophrenic and a danger to society and the flags were everywhere .I'll be damned if he ruins my right to bear arms.

Keep guns legal, America is the beacon of global freedom.

 

[cabey]

Fox in Manchester, England

:2offtopic Hope my fellow Mancs are looking after you:glugglug: :2offtopic

 

[Renegade1Oh]

Most people will never change there minds till it hits home, ie, themselves, girlfriend-wife, elderly parents, children, the playtoy, there property. Then they'll wake-up unless there stupid (Stupid Is As Stupid Does) but it might be toooo late. I hope not. And I hope Canada gets the sh*t together so I can go hunting up there again!! :glugglug: Miss That LaBlatt Blue!!!

 

[Member2019]

Most people will never change there minds till it hits home, ie, themselves, girlfriend-wife, elderly parents, children, the playtoy, there property. Then they'll wake-up unless there stupid (Stupid Is As Stupid Does) but it might be toooo late. I hope not. And I hope Canada gets the sh*t together so I can go hunting up there again!! :glugglug: Miss That LaBlatt Blue!!!

I've personally known no less than a half dozen people who have been either killed or had a gun-related crime at their expense. Hasn't changed my views on guns, only violent crime, I hate it even more. I know gun crimes will continue regardless if they are legal or not, and some of the recent Canadian statistics are very eye-opening.

I've also known no less than 3 people who either killed or prevented a gun-armed perpetrator from successfully committing the crime because they pulled a gun. And in each and every case, the perpetrator made the mistake of pointing the gun, which is what you never do unless you intend to use it. Maybe he didn't know it, but the responsible gun owner did, and discharged their weapon when the perpetrator made that mistake.

You don't pull guns unless you intend to use it. There is no negotiation at that point. And it's why I find the Florida combination of 10-20-life and the right to defend yourself the best in the nation right now. Tough on those who abuse their right, but protective of those who responsibly defend themselves.

 

[ninetysixcavy]

I've personally known no less than a half dozen people who have been either killed or had a gun-related crime at their expense. Hasn't changed my views on guns, only violent crime, I hate it even more. I know gun crimes will continue regardless if they are legal or not, and some of the recent Canadian statistics are very eye-opening.

I've also known no less than 3 people who either killed or prevented a gun-armed perpetrator from successfully committing the crime because they pulled a gun. And in each and every case, the perpetrator made the mistake of pointing the gun, which is what you never do unless you intend to use it. Maybe he didn't know it, but the responsible gun owner did, and discharged their weapon when the perpetrator made that mistake.

You don't pull guns unless you intend to use it. There is no negotiation at that point. And it's why I find the Florida combination of 10-20-life and the right to defend yourself the best in the nation right now. Tough on those who abuse their right, but protective of those who responsibly defend themselves.

I wonder what would happen to this whole issue if we put violent offenders, with a record and found to have a gun, if we put them in jail for severely long terms, maybe even life, the effect that would have on this issue. There should be zero-tolerance for violent criminals who have been caught with illegal firearms, or any guns for that matter. People really complicate this whole issue, but it doesn't have to be so complex. Just throw the bad guys away and let people who have followed the law and are varifiably sane to own guns. It's not that hard.

 

[georges]

Well, it's a debate because there are very modern and wealthy countries like the one I am in now, England, where murder rates are far lower than in America, and guncrime is virtually nonexistent, where guns are outlawed and even the police do not carry guns. Saying "nothing will ever change so why discuss it" is the same thing as saying "there's nothing we can do to stop the Nazis sending our Jewish and Communist friends to death camps so why fight it". Apathy is THE leading reason for all the wrongs coming from America today, and individual choice is fine on a personal level, but what do free-thinking self-serving individuals do when their government is invading other countries on their behalf?

Fox in Manchester, England

Population of England is 4 times lowere than USA population, so it is a nonsense. Perhaps Bobbies are not carrying guns but they won't be able to deal with someone who has a 44magnum or a katana. England is more violent than it was before.I don't consider outlawing guns as a sign of strenght but a sign of weakness and only the right to be a victim. Remember that not everyone likes everyone and you didn't mention socialist systems are the reasons of why many countries failed.

 

[blakey]

Population of England is 4 times lowere than USA population, so it is a nonsense.

Perhaps Bobbies are not carrying guns but they won't be able to deal with someone who has a 44magnum or a katana.

I don't consider outlawing guns as a sign of strenght but a sign of weakness and only the right to be a victim.

Well, there is more than 4 times more gun crime in america than there is in the uk, and more than 4 times the gun deaths
- the figures are along the lines of annual gun deaths in the uk equals monthly gun deaths in New York - i think the actual number is around 50 - 70 for uk gun deaths ( 2005 figures http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4359744.stm scroll down ) - uk population 60 million, population of New York 19 million

there are armed police in the UK to respond to significant threats - admittedly they can be too late on occassion - but UK citizens don't want all police to be armed

and, finally, although gun laws were tightened, and handguns banned, after the UK's own well documented school shooting gun ownership, particularly of handguns, has not been widespread in the UK for at least a hundred years, probably more, and even then it only applied to a small, mostly wealthy, part of the population


just thought i'd give a bit of clarification - as i know the two sides of the whole gun control debate will never agree

 

[ninetysixcavy]

Population of England is 4 times lowere than USA population, so it is a nonsense. Perhaps Bobbies are not carrying guns but they won't be able to deal with someone who has a 44magnum or a katana. England is more violent than it was before.I don't consider outlawing guns as a sign of strenght but a sign of weakness and only the right to be a victim. Remember that not everyone likes everyone and you didn't mention socialist systems are the reasons of why many countries failed.

Exactly. It's like compairing apples to oranges. I go on other boards and it's the same thing: " I don't understand Americans love affair with firearms." Perhaps they should take a few 100 level courses on the history of America and put a cork in it. What's culturally relavent to one culture isn't necesarily applicable to another culture, such as America. All you have to do is ask an out-of-towner if they would like to walk down Queens BLVD or Compton AVE on a dark night by themselves and then let them spout off at the lips. That would take care of them...if they were still alive after it.

 

[blakey]

you have more chance of getting killed by a gun in america than the UK - fact
no matter how you look at it

but it's apparent from the hundreds of posts on here that it's also a fact that many americans feel safer with guns

so - more at risk, but feeling safer :dunno:

 

[Renegade1Oh]

you have more chance of getting killed by a gun in america than the UK - fact
no matter how you look at it

but it's apparent from the hundreds of posts on here that it's also a fact that many americans feel safer with guns

so - more at risk, but feeling safer :dunno:

Well, you might be right, but you stand a REAL BIG chance of getting blown up on a double decker bus, or the subway lines in the UK. Just think for a moment blakey if you had a Baseball Bat, a Knife of decent size, or a gun. And you was there as they the BAD GUYS was going to pull the detinator, you, or someone else, or together might have stopped it and so many from getting hurt. Yes, maybe you and another might have been just a tick too slow and still get blown-up, but doing nothing, your mincemeat. Maybe this you'll understand why and how some of us feel. We don't want that here!

I've personally known no less than a half dozen people who have been either killed or had a gun-related crime at their expense. Hasn't changed my views on guns, only violent crime, I hate it even more. I know gun crimes will continue regardless if they are legal or not, and some of the recent Canadian statistics are very eye-opening.

I've also known no less than 3 people who either killed or prevented a gun-armed perpetrator from successfully committing the crime because they pulled a gun. And in each and every case, the perpetrator made the mistake of pointing the gun, which is what you never do unless you intend to use it. Maybe he didn't know it, but the responsible gun owner did, and discharged their weapon when the perpetrator made that mistake.

I totally agree, I've lost 4 friends due to gun related crimes and drive-by's. Totally STUPID!!! And 3 of my friends have taken a life while protecting there own & family & business. My one friend in Houston, that I thought had a gun just for show, to deter a crime at his shop. Well, 2 thugs came in, Illegals from south of the border, with illegal handguns drawn, and he shot and killed both, with 3 shots. One thug emptied his clip and the other with a revolver fired 4 shots. I was proud of my buddy for his wife and little girl was behind the wall putting price stickers on products while dad was working the counter. NOBODY has messed with his shop for the last 5 years. Shots placed well proves the point!!

 

[blakey]

Well, i've been on the london underground many times, and it's not scary - busy yes, and somebody unlucky will get mugged every 10,000 journeys but you forget, i think, that Britain, including the underground, has been targeted by terrorists many times in the past 30 years - except then they were white british
- more recently they were asian british

and it's acknowledged that a bomber with his finger on a bomb trigger could still press that trigger in the seconds after being shot

i've got plenty of asian friends, including those of pakistani origin from roughly the same area as the london bombers, but most people of different races get on well with eachother in the UK, as i'm sure they do in the US

but i've still to hear a good explanation about what is different about America, compared to every other ( at least formerly ) white, anglo-saxon, english speaking country on earth , that requires its citizens to be armed to such a great extent ?

 

[ninetysixcavy]

Well, i've been on the london underground many times, and it's not scary - busy yes, and somebody unlucky will get mugged every 10,000 journeys but you forget, i think, that Britain, including the underground, has been targeted by terrorists many times in the past 30 years - except then they were white british
- more recently they were asian british

and it's acknowledged that a bomber with his finger on a bomb trigger could still press that trigger in the seconds after being shot

i've got plenty of asian friends, including those of pakistani origin from roughly the same area as the london bombers, but most people of different races get on well with eachother in the UK, as i'm sure they do in the US

but i've still to hear a good explanation about what is different about America, compared to every other ( at least formerly ) white, anglo-saxon, english speaking country on earth , that requires its citizens to be armed to such a great extent ?

The right to protect your family and the right to hunt. If you really want to, we can even look at how sparse Americas lanscape is to the UK and on and on about the intracacies of why America needs firearms in the hands of its citizens. My best friends grandmother is living in the southern landscape in the middle of nowhere and she is all by herself. She can't just be living in the middle of nowhere with illegals and criminals all over who wouldn't hesitate to roll an old lady via home invasion style at any time they want. Our land is very open with lots of areas that people are ALL BY THEMSELVES. Your country is a lot more compact. In America, small towns have maybe one deputy to call for help. Fuck that. They can police themselves. As long as they have a clean record and are sane, end of story.

 

[Member2019]

I wonder what would happen to this whole issue if we put violent offenders, with a record and found to have a gun, if we put them in jail for severely long terms, maybe even life, the effect that would have on this issue. There should be zero-tolerance for violent criminals who have been caught with illegal firearms, or any guns for that matter. People really complicate this whole issue, but it doesn't have to be so complex. Just throw the bad guys away and let people who have followed the law and are varifiably sane to own guns. It's not that hard.

No. Possession isn't the same as use. Yes, they will be charged and got to jail. But there is a difference between possession -- even when it's a felony if you are a former felon -- and actual pulling it, discharging it or even killing someone.

Otherwise, if we're going to make every crime punishable by life, we might as well just kill our judicial system. There's "getting tough on crime" and then there's "getting tough on every crime and making no difference between them." Sorry, even this American Libertarian will defend the criminals on that one. There are, and have to be, different consequences for different crimes, or the entire system will make no difference.

The 10-20-Life combined with your right to defend yourself here in Florida "just works" the best I've seen. Pull a gun, 10 years, Fire a gun, 20 years. Kill someone, life. But if it was in defense, by a responsible individual, you are not prosecuted. And you can be sure those rules vary greatly for convicted felons who gave up their right to the 2nd Amendment when they decided to be irresponsible in the first place.

Arguments are always complex. But the best laws are the ones that are simple balances, just like government.

 

[ninetysixcavy]

No. Possession isn't the same as use. Yes, they will be charged and got to jail. But there is a difference between possession -- even when it's a felony if you are a former felon -- and actual pulling it, discharging it or even killing someone.

Otherwise, if we're going to make every crime punishable by life, we might as well just kill our judicial system. There's "getting tough on crime" and then there's "getting tough on every crime and making no difference between them." Sorry, even this American Libertarian will defend the criminals on that one. There are, and have to be, different consequences for different crimes, or the entire system will make no difference.

The 10-20-Life combined with your right to defend yourself here in Florida "just works" the best I've seen. Pull a gun, 10 years, Fire a gun, 20 years. Kill someone, life. But if it was in defense, by a responsible individual, you are not prosecuted. And you can be sure those rules vary greatly for convicted felons who gave up their right to the 2nd Amendment when they decided to be irresponsible in the first place.

Arguments are always complex. But the best laws are the ones that are simple balances, just like government.

I agree.

 

[Member2019]

I have an attitude here ...

I agree.

Understand I have an attitude on the "tough on crime" turning into "tough on every crime."

I've seen too many teenagers become convicted felons because they damaged more than $500 or -- worse yet -- just merely been around friends that did.
Talk about fucking a young man or woman's future (let alone rights) before they are even an adult.
So this is my clear "bias" and "attitude," and I wanted to point it out.

Hell, when someone says "felon," no one knows the first thing about what they could have done, because it's so broad, with many former, minor crimes being a felon.
Talk about a word being useless!

Like driving off without paying for gas, beer, etc... -- because we're "tough on crime."
One dare turned into one life pre-disposed, before someone even hits majority.

I thank God I was a goodie two-shoes when growing up.
But I could name at least a dozen incidents where I could have been wrongly charged with a felony, if someone wanted to turn what I did into something it was not.

 

[D-rock]

Re: I have an attitude here ...

Understand I have an attitude on the "tough on crime" turning into "tough on every crime."

I've seen too many teenagers become convicted felons because they damaged more than $500 or -- worse yet -- just merely been around friends that did.
Talk about fucking a young man or woman's future (let alone rights) before they are even an adult.
So this is my clear "bias" and "attitude," and I wanted to point it out.

Hell, when someone says "felon," no one knows the first thing about what they could have done, because it's so broad, with many former, minor crimes being a felon.
Talk about a word being useless!

Like driving off without paying for gas, beer, etc... -- because we're "tough on crime."
One dare turned into one life pre-disposed, before someone even hits majority.

I thank God I was a goodie two-shoes when growing up.
But I could name at least a dozen incidents where I could have been wrongly charged with a felony, if someone wanted to turn what I did into something it was not.

Things like that are bad enough, but when you consider that in the future all it would take for more people to potentially commit a "felony" and become a felon is just another law they want to enact, it could get even worse. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if someday in the future the government will enact a law that is so distasteful that people won't want to follow it just so they will able to classify them as felons thus making it easy for them to take away some of their rights. I think even with felonies there has to be a well thought out and logical reason to take away rights. All felonies are not equal.

 

[Roughneck]

WAYNESBURG, Ky. - Miss America 1944 has a talent that likely has never appeared on a beauty pageant stage: She fired a handgun to shoot out a vehicle's tires and stop an intruder.

Venus Ramey, 82, confronted a man on her farm in south-central Kentucky last week after she saw her dog run into a storage building where thieves had previously made off with old farm equipment.

Ramey said the man told her he would leave. "I said, 'Oh, no you won't,' and I shot their tires so they couldn't leave," Ramey said.

She had to balance on her walker as she pulled out a snub-nosed .38-caliber handgun.

"I didn't even think twice. I just went and did it," she said. "If they'd even dared come close to me, they'd be 6 feet under by now."

Ramey then flagged down a passing motorist, who called 911.

Full story

Guns are bad, people! Very, very bad!

but i've still to hear a good explanation about what is different about America, compared to every other ( at least formerly ) white, anglo-saxon, english speaking country on earth , that requires its citizens to be armed to such a great extent ?

* History.

It isn't a "requirement" or a "need" in as much as it is a "right". The brave men and women who fought to win the freedom of this land - fighting against what was arguably the largest most powerful empire of that time - recognised that the right of an individual to be armed was what distinguished him from being a mere subject. It made him a 'citizen'.

* The people who immigrated to this land immigrated to a harsh lifestyle (Abraham Lincoln was born in a house with just three walls). Rugged self reliance was what ensured they survived to eke out a living. That involved being responsible for their own safety and the safety of their property.


As such, "guns" have been a part and parcel of America since her birth.


* If you eliminate most inner city gun crime, you'll find that gun violence as a statistic in itself drops dramatically.

A little personal note here: About a little over a decade ago, I quit working trauma/emergency in hospitals. Most of my primary patient cases were GSWs (Gun Shot Wound) -- gang bangers shooting each other and catching occasional strangers in the cross fire. I got burned out from fighting to save the lives of people who did everything they could to deserve their gun shot wounds. It was also when I switched over to working Pediatrics - I found working with kids to be more rewarding than working with murderers. It's only recently that I volunteered to donate my time and expertise (again) to EMS/Ambulance/First Response.

* America is still a vast nation, with big wide open spaces. Hunting is almost a religion.

* Last but certainly not the least - America is called the "Land of the Free" for a reason. This country was founded upon the cherished principle of individual liberty. A man is free to do whatever the hell he wants, so long as he doesn't interfere with the equal rights of another. Over time, our strict adherence to this principle has diluted - to the point we're tolerating all kinds of abuses from gun laws to income taxation.


The American Experiment is a very unique experiment.
Asking why Americans 'require' to be armed is like asking why England still needs her Church and Monarch (not an apt comparison, I know).


cheers,

 

[Member2019]

If an intruder means to kill you with a gun, you have a far better chance of living if you have a gun too. Fact.

 

[Phaeton]

We also have the right to right to assemble peaceably and the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

So as much as many Americans love guns, the rest of America has the right to challenge that law. What are you going to do shoot me?