Gun question - What should I get?

[Darth Wong]

You know what else we have? Higher rates of stabbing murders. Higher rates of bludgeoning murders. Higher rates of strangulation murders. Our murder rate is higher across the board. I suppose your going to imply that firearms are somehow responsible for that as well?

According to StatsCan, the American homicide rate is roughly 3 times the Canadian homicide rate. Two thirds of American homicides are shootings, while only one third of Canadian homicides are shootings. In other words, the American rate of non-shooting homicides is only 50% greater than the Canadian rate of non-shooting homicides, while the American rate of shooting homicides is 600% greater than the Canadian rate of shooting homicides.

[Nathan F]

I thought we had this little debate about 4 weeks ago?

And if I remember correctly, we didn't get anywhere.

It goes from a simple 'What Gun Should I Get' to a gun control debate all because of a single remark by a single person...

[Nathan F]

You know what else we have? Higher rates of stabbing murders. Higher rates of bludgeoning murders. Higher rates of strangulation murders. Our murder rate is higher across the board. I suppose your going to imply that firearms are somehow responsible for that as well?

According to StatsCan, the American homicide rate is roughly 3 times the Canadian homicide rate. Two thirds of American homicides are shootings, while only one third of Canadian homicides are shootings. In other words, the American rate of non-shooting homicides is only 50% greater than the Canadian rate of non-shooting homicides, while the American rate of shooting homicides is 600% greater than the Canadian rate of shooting homicides.

Out of curiosity, how does Canada compare with some of the other major countries in the world?

[Trytostaydead]

I thought we had this little debate about 4 weeks ago?

And if I remember correctly, we didn't get anywhere.

It goes from a simple 'What Gun Should I Get' to a gun control debate all because of a single remark by a single person...

Do I get an official Shit-stirrer title yet, or do I still have to work on it?

[Einhander Sn0m4n]

I thought we had this little debate about 4 weeks ago?

And if I remember correctly, we didn't get anywhere.

It goes from a simple 'What Gun Should I Get' to a gun control debate all because of a single remark by a single person...

Who would that person be?

I'm gonna PM Darth Wong about a permanent Gun-Control-Debate moratorium. That should end this bullshit.

[Nathan F]

Another thing, I got to thinking. The US has about (very roughly) the same land area as Canada, right? Yet its population is only 30 mil, while the US has a population of 250 mil.

Is it not a fact that once you get so many people tightly grouped in so many large metropolitan areas, you are bound to get higher crime and murder rates? It is unreasonable to think that this might be the reason for the higher crime rates?

The law abiding gun owners which make the huge majority are not the ones who go out and commit the crimes, it is, mainly, the inner city thugs that kill other thugs in gang wars that are making these statistics jump through the roof.

Do you not think that they would just buy guns off the black market if they were made illegal? Yes, they would. That or they would simply find new and more creative ways to kill each other.

When you make guns illegal, you disarm the law abiding citizen that uses firearms for self defense and recreation, not the criminal out in the 'hood 'bustin caps in his nine'.

[Nathan F]

I thought we had this little debate about 4 weeks ago?

And if I remember correctly, we didn't get anywhere.

It goes from a simple 'What Gun Should I Get' to a gun control debate all because of a single remark by a single person...

Do I get an official Shit-stirrer title yet, or do I still have to work on it?

You didn't do it, the one who got the gun control debate going was weemadando with his remark that could have been done without.

[Nathan F]

I thought we had this little debate about 4 weeks ago?

And if I remember correctly, we didn't get anywhere.

It goes from a simple 'What Gun Should I Get' to a gun control debate all because of a single remark by a single person...

Who would that person be?

I'm gonna PM Darth Wong about a permanent Gun-Control-Debate moratorium. That should end this bullshit.

Go back to page one and look for stupid remarks, you will see who I am talking about.

And I think that the moratorium is a good idea, as it is a moot point.

[Einhander Sn0m4n]

I thought we had this little debate about 4 weeks ago?

And if I remember correctly, we didn't get anywhere.

It goes from a simple 'What Gun Should I Get' to a gun control debate all because of a single remark by a single person...

Who would that person be?

I'm gonna PM Darth Wong about a permanent Gun-Control-Debate moratorium. That should end this bullshit.

Go back to page one and look for stupid remarks, you will see who I am talking about.

And I think that the moratorium is a good idea, as it is a moot point.

Actually it was a rhetorical question, but it's on me for not using <RHETORICAL_QUESTION> tags.

Kool, will do.

[Perinquus]

According to StatsCan, the American homicide rate is roughly 3 times the Canadian homicide rate. Two thirds of American homicides are shootings, while only one third of Canadian homicides are shootings. In other words, the American rate of non-shooting homicides is only 50% greater than the Canadian rate of non-shooting homicides, while the American rate of shooting homicides is 600% greater than the Canadian rate of shooting homicides.

I'd like to see the stats, but apparently, I have to pay for them.

I suspect that is largely because the big difference in U.S. and Canadian muder rates are found in the inner-city slums. Statistics show that Canada is less violent than the United States. Fewer guns are only part of the story. The inner-city slums of the United States are murderous, bombed-out-looking places. American visitors to Canada's big cities often ask where the slums are. The answer is that there really aren't any slums, and the lack of violence there reflects it. The contrasts between extreme wealth and extreme poverty are fewer and less striking. Poor inner-city families do not disintegrate to the extent they do in black American ghettos. Canadian murder rates in big cities are about the same as in isolated rural areas. This is in contrast to the U.S. where the murder rates are much lower in suburbs, smaller towns, and rural areas. According to 'THE ECONOMIST" magazine; Blacks, 12% of the United States' population, account for 48% of murders, mostly when inner-city blacks kill each other. (The Economist July 10-16,1993, pg 38.) Few of these guns if any are purchased from retail gun stores.

In the big American inner-city slums, the drug dealing street gangs are a horrible fact of life. They're well armed too, so it doesn't suprise me that they're shooting each other in larger numbers.

[Nathan F]

According to StatsCan, the American homicide rate is roughly 3 times the Canadian homicide rate. Two thirds of American homicides are shootings, while only one third of Canadian homicides are shootings. In other words, the American rate of non-shooting homicides is only 50% greater than the Canadian rate of non-shooting homicides, while the American rate of shooting homicides is 600% greater than the Canadian rate of shooting homicides.

I'd like to see the stats, but apparently, I have to pay for them.

I suspect that is largely because the big difference in U.S. and Canadian muder rates are found in the inner-city slums. Statistics show that Canada is less violent than the United States. Fewer guns are only part of the story. The inner-city slums of the United States are murderous, bombed-out-looking places. American visitors to Canada's big cities often ask where the slums are. The answer is that there really aren't any slums, and the lack of violence there reflects it. The contrasts between extreme wealth and extreme poverty are fewer and less striking. Poor inner-city families do not disintegrate to the extent they do in black American ghettos. Canadian murder rates in big cities are about the same as in isolated rural areas. This is in contrast to the U.S. where the murder rates are much lower in suburbs, smaller towns, and rural areas. According to 'THE ECONOMIST" magazine; Blacks, 12% of the United States' population, account for 48% of murders, mostly when inner-city blacks kill each other. (The Economist July 10-16,1993, pg 38.) Few of these guns if any are purchased from retail gun stores.

In the big American inner-city slums, the drug dealing street gangs are a horrible fact of life. They're well armed too, so it doesn't suprise me that they're shooting each other in larger numbers.

Exactly what I said, except for the numbers, lol.

[Darth Wong]

Another thing, I got to thinking. The US has about (very roughly) the same land area as Canada, right? Yet its population is only 30 mil, while the US has a population of 250 mil.

Most of our Northern tundra is deserted. The population of Canada is densely clustered around its southern border with the US for obvious reasons of climate and economics. Within that region, population density is much higher.

Is it not a fact that once you get so many people tightly grouped in so many large metropolitan areas, you are bound to get higher crime and murder rates? It is unreasonable to think that this might be the reason for the higher crime rates?

Toronto has a population of 5 million and its murder rate is only marginally higher than the national average. Hong Kong has the highest population density on Earth and its murder rate is around one twentieth that of a city like Chicago. American cities are murder hotspots not because of any intrinsic feature of population density, but because of a synergy between an inherently violent society and densely packed violent people.

The law abiding gun owners which make the huge majority are not the ones who go out and commit the crimes, it is, mainly, the inner city thugs that kill other thugs in gang wars that are making these statistics jump through the roof.

Everyone has gangs. Do you think HK has no gangs? Do you think Japan has no gangs? Toronto has gang wars; there was a gang hit in a restaurant in Chinatown many years ago where the shooter nonchalantly walked in and sprayed the victim and his friends with a MAC-10. But these anomalies are rare; when watching American TV, I was always struck by the number of random, senseless killings I saw. Homicides around here are generally targeted, ie- the killer knew the victim. It is a shock to see how many American homicides are random, ie- the victim was just in the wrong place at the wrong time, or became the victim of random violence.

Do you not think that they would just buy guns off the black market if they were made illegal? Yes, they would. That or they would simply find new and more creative ways to kill each other.

Then police the black market. Why the fuck do you people always act as though it's impossible to police a black market? Don't bring up the dead horse of Prohibition; we're not talking about a total ban, and reliable guns and ammo are not as easy to make as cheap liquor.

When you make guns illegal, you disarm the law abiding citizen that uses firearms for self defense and recreation, not the criminal out in the 'hood 'bustin caps in his nine'.

When you distort "license guns" to "make guns illegal", you commit a tired strawman distortion. You do this every fucking time, and I'm getting a little tired of it.

[Beowulf]

Could a mod please split off the gun control "discussion"?

[Darth Wong]

I suspect that is largely because the big difference in U.S. and Canadian muder rates are found in the inner-city slums. Statistics show that Canada is less violent than the United States. Fewer guns are only part of the story. The inner-city slums of the United States are murderous, bombed-out-looking places. American visitors to Canada's big cities often ask where the slums are. The answer is that there really aren't any slums, and the lack of violence there reflects it.

Fair enough; I've been to a few American cities and they do have this bombed-out core that's scary-looking, even from the freeway as you drive past. Why can't anything be done about this?

The contrasts between extreme wealth and extreme poverty are fewer and less striking. Poor inner-city families do not disintegrate to the extent they do in black American ghettos.

At the risk of getting tarred by the right-wingers as a bleeding-heart liberal, dare I point out that we have a more humane approach to welfare and homelessness than the US does, and that this might have something to do with it?

Canadian murder rates in big cities are about the same as in isolated rural areas. This is in contrast to the U.S. where the murder rates are much lower in suburbs, smaller towns, and rural areas. According to 'THE ECONOMIST" magazine; Blacks, 12% of the United States' population, account for 48% of murders, mostly when inner-city blacks kill each other. (The Economist July 10-16,1993, pg 38.) Few of these guns if any are purchased from retail gun stores.

Even the remaining half of homicides would still represents a gun-homicide rate which is triple that of Canada's rate, would it not?

In the big American inner-city slums, the drug dealing street gangs are a horrible fact of life. They're well armed too, so it doesn't suprise me that they're shooting each other in larger numbers.

I don't understand why I get this impression whenever talking to Americans about this issue that the problems of inner-city decay and a thriving black market in firearms are impossible to fix. Why aren't there any solutions? Can't you at least restrict the availability of ammo? Since the average gangbanger has to fire about a million shots in order to hit anything, you'd think that would dry them up pretty quickly

[MKSheppard]

When you distort "license guns" to "make guns illegal", you commit a tired strawman distortion. You do this every fucking time, and I'm getting a little tired of it.

Because that's what happens if you license them. Just go look at
New York City...Licensed guns in the 60s, and then took
them away a few decades later

[Darth Wong]

When you distort "license guns" to "make guns illegal", you commit a tired strawman distortion. You do this every fucking time, and I'm getting a little tired of it.

Because that's what happens if you license them. Just go look at New York City...Licensed guns in the 60s, and then took them away a few decades later

Predictable slippery-slope fallacy. Canada has had gun licensing in one form or another for decades. We still have 7 million fucking legally owned guns in the country.

[Nathan F]

First off, how exactly do you 'police' the black market? You can't. That is the reason it is the black market. And the majority of guns criminals use are cheaply manufactured POS guns, not well built accurate firearms. When you say that reliable guns and ammo are not easy to make, you assume that criminals usually use reliable guns and ammo, which they don't, which shows an ignorance in the area.

The reason that we are wary of licensing is that we have seen what has happened after licensing in the past. Look at GB, first came the licensing, than came the bans. Look at Australia, first came the licensing, then came the bans. Sorry to bring this up, but look at Nazi germany, first came the licensing, then came the bans.

And yes, the northern half of Canada is mostly deserted, but, the majority of the US population is centered in the north east, and the density is much higher.

Yes, the reason is because of densly packed violent people. Just as I said earlier.

[Nathan F]

When you distort "license guns" to "make guns illegal", you commit a tired strawman distortion. You do this every fucking time, and I'm getting a little tired of it.

Because that's what happens if you license them. Just go look at New York City...Licensed guns in the 60s, and then took them away a few decades later

Predictable slippery-slope fallacy. Canada has had gun licensing in one form or another for decades. We still have 7 million fucking legally owned guns in the country.

The majority of which are hunting rifles and long guns, not small pistols, of which are used for self defense.

[Darth Wong]

First off, how exactly do you 'police' the black market? You can't. That is the reason it is the black market.

What the fuck kind of tautology is this? It's illegal therefore it can't be policed? No, it's illegal therefore it is not currently being policed well enough. It does not mean it is IMPOSSIBLE to police.

And the majority of guns criminals use are cheaply manufactured POS guns, not well built accurate firearms. When you say that reliable guns and ammo are not easy to make, you assume that criminals usually use reliable guns and ammo, which they don't, which shows an ignorance in the area.

Even shitty guns and ammo still require manufacturing facilities, and it's hard to set up manufacturing facilities if illegal firearms and ammo are being heavily policed. If America went after the firearms black market with half the fervour they reserved for drugs, why wouldn't it be affected?

The reason that we are wary of licensing is that we have seen what has happened after licensing in the past. Look at GB, first came the licensing, than came the bans. Look at Australia, first came the licensing, then came the bans. Sorry to bring this up, but look at Nazi germany, first came the licensing, then came the bans.

Post hoc false-cause fallacy.

[Darth Wong]

Predictable slippery-slope fallacy. Canada has had gun licensing in one form or another for decades. We still have 7 million fucking legally owned guns in the country.

The majority of which are hunting rifles and long guns, not small pistols, of which are used for self defense.

That nitpick is completely irrelevant to my point, which was that the slippery slope is fallacious and incorrect.

[MKSheppard]

Predictable slippery-slope fallacy. Canada has had gun licensing in one form or another for decades. We still have 7 million fucking legally owned guns in the country.

Well, down here, whenever a city has it's residents license their guns,
the guns are inevitably confiscated a few decades later. It's not just
New York City. Washington, DC is in the list too.

Anyone who licenses a gun worth more than a Lorcin .25 Auto is a fool, IMHO

[Darth Wong]

Predictable slippery-slope fallacy. Canada has had gun licensing in one form or another for decades. We still have 7 million fucking legally owned guns in the country.

Well, down here, whenever a city has it's residents license their guns, the guns are inevitably confiscated a few decades later. It's not just New York City. Washington, DC is in the list too.

You are assuming that A causes B even though it is completely possible that C causes both A and B. Think about that for a minute before leaping to your keyboard to type a rebuttal. A political environment conducive to licensing may be conducive to other gun-control measures as well, so B will naturally follow A. It does not mean that licensing automatically leads to those other gun-control measures. My example proves that.

[Beowulf]

What the fuck kind of tautology is this? It's illegal therefore it can't be policed? No, it's illegal therefore it is not currently being policed well enough. It does not mean it is IMPOSSIBLE to police.

It does mean that's it's damned difficult to police. And it's not like you can just have gun sniffing dogs trying to find them.

Even shitty guns and ammo still require manufacturing facilities, and it's hard to set up manufacturing facilities if illegal firearms and ammo are being heavily policed. If America went after the firearms black market with half the fervour they reserved for drugs, why wouldn't it be affected?

You know, I could make a handgun frame using just a machine shop. A CNC milling machine would be nice, but not necessary. I suppose you're going to have every machine tool in the US be regulated?

[Nathan F]

First off, how exactly do you 'police' the black market? You can't. That is the reason it is the black market.

What the fuck kind of tautology is this? It's illegal therefore it can't be policed? No, it's illegal therefore it is not currently being policed well enough. It does not mean it is IMPOSSIBLE to police.

It IS policed, and, it has had about the same success as the drug wars.

And the majority of guns criminals use are cheaply manufactured POS guns, not well built accurate firearms. When you say that reliable guns and ammo are not easy to make, you assume that criminals usually use reliable guns and ammo, which they don't, which shows an ignorance in the area.

Even shitty guns and ammo still require manufacturing facilities, and it's hard to set up manufacturing facilities if illegal firearms and ammo are being heavily policed. If America went after the firearms black market with half the fervour they reserved for drugs, why wouldn't it be affected?

The guns they get are either A)bought off the black market or b)stolen from another gangster or in a robbery. Criminals have been known to use collectors item guns (engraved and gold inlays, more works of art than a firearm), rusted out hulks of guns, and imported crap from other countries, usually stuff out of the old soviet republics. The ammunition is the same case, imported through the black market or stolen.

The reason that we are wary of licensing is that we have seen what has happened after licensing in the past. Look at GB, first came the licensing, than came the bans. Look at Australia, first came the licensing, then came the bans. Sorry to bring this up, but look at Nazi germany, first came the licensing, then came the bans.

Post hoc false-cause fallacy.

WTF is the deal with you and fallacies? Mind explaining them out a bit? From what I could tell, you are saying that it is a false cause. Not true. If you put two and two together and look at history, you will find that licensing has usually preceded a ban of some sort.

[Nathan F]

Predictable slippery-slope fallacy. Canada has had gun licensing in one form or another for decades. We still have 7 million fucking legally owned guns in the country.

Well, down here, whenever a city has it's residents license their guns, the guns are inevitably confiscated a few decades later. It's not just New York City. Washington, DC is in the list too.

You are assuming that A causes B even though it is completely possible that C causes both A and B. Think about that for a minute before leaping to your keyboard to type a rebuttal. A political environment conducive to licensing may be conducive to other gun-control measures as well, so B will naturally follow A. It does not mean that licensing automatically leads to those other gun-control measures. My example proves that.

Ok, I looked at it from that point of view, and, it is a logical assumption.

Now look at it like this, What if it IS logical to look at the past and see what has happened, and then be wary of that.