Alyrium Denryle wrote:Yeah, and what are your fucking crime rates?
Compared to American cities, they are far lower. And the number of crimes is decreasing every year anyway since the late 1980's.
You also have a more homogenous culture and the shame that comes from gassing millions of innocents to death. Germany=!=America.
America does have a more violent culture. More murders, more rapes. But as you can see in the links provided by (I think it was Denryle), guns are an effective deterrent to crime IN AMERICA.
"Gunslinger indeed. Quick draw, Bob. Quick draw." --Count Chocula
"Unquestionably, Dr. Who is MUCH lighter in tone than WH40K. But then, I could argue the entirety of WWII was much lighter in tone than WH40K." --Broomstick
"This is ridiculous. I look like the Games Workshop version of a Jedi Knight." --Harry Dresden, Changes
"Like...are we canonical?" --Aaron Dembski-Bowden to Dan Abnett
Of particular interest is the huge increase in violent crime & sex offences.
There were various laws passed within the last 5 years or so banning or heavily restricting guns, knives, clubs, batons, kubotons, and many other weapons.
aerius: I'll vote for you if you sleep with me. Lusankya: Deal!
Say, do you want it to be a threesome with your wife? Or a foursome with your wife and sister-in-law? I'm up for either.
Alyrium Denryle wrote:Yeah, and what are your fucking crime rates?
Compared to American cities, they are far lower. And the number of crimes is decreasing every year anyway since the late 1980's.
You also have a more homogenous culture and the shame that comes from gassing millions of innocents to death. Germany=!=America.
America does have a more violent culture. More murders, more rapes. But as you can see in the links provided by (I think it was Denryle), guns are an effective deterrent to crime IN AMERICA.
I doubt the gassing issue is of any relevance for the crime statistic. Why foreigners always first think about that, is a mystery to me.
Finally someone who says, that guns maybe are a way in America, but not a universal solution everywhere. In Europe weapon possession by common citizens is simply mostly unthinkable. Most likely a difference in mentallity.
Tribun wrote:
Compared to American cities, they are far lower. And the number of crimes is decreasing every year anyway since the late 1980's.
You also have a more homogenous culture and the shame that comes from gassing millions of innocents to death. Germany=!=America.
America does have a more violent culture. More murders, more rapes. But as you can see in the links provided by (I think it was Denryle), guns are an effective deterrent to crime IN AMERICA.
I doubt the gassing issue is of any relevance for the crime statistic. Why foreigners always first think about that, is a mystery to me.
Finally someone who says, that guns maybe are a way in America, but not a universal solution everywhere. In Europe weapon possession by common citizens is simply mostly unthinkable. Most likely a difference in mentallity.
But this thread is about AMERICA. Therefore your original bit mocking us was just as irrelevant as the bit about germany's little ethnic cleansing phase.
GALE Force Biological Agent/
BOTM/Great Dolphin Conspiracy/ Entomology and Evolutionary Biology Subdirector:SD.net Dept. of Biological Sciences
There is Grandeur in the View of Life; it fills me with a Deep Wonder, and Intense Cynicism.
Tribun wrote:I doubt the gassing issue is of any relevance for the crime statistic. Why foreigners always first think about that, is a mystery to me.
Kinda like the way that foreigners accuse Americans of being gun-happy?
Finally someone who says, that guns maybe are a way in America, but not a universal solution everywhere. In Europe weapon possession by common citizens is simply mostly unthinkable. Most likely a difference in mentallity.
But, of course, they're also infamous for their high violent crime rate.
Or, maybe you're simply lying.
America's crime rate is disproportionately high because of a number of issues which may be non-causally related to firearm ownership, but the US government has never published a single report indicating that firearms legislation lowered the crime rate.
Last edited by Master of Ossus on 2004-12-16 05:03pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Sometimes I think you WANT us to fail." "Shut up, just shut up!" -Two Guys from Kabul
Latinum Star Recipient; Hacker's Cross Award Winner
"one soler flar can vapririze the planit or malt the nickl in lass than millasacit" -Bagara1000
Before I fight a already lost battle, I better just declare, that from now on I ignore the whole weapon stuff here in the board. It is obviously not my field of experience.
Of particular interest is the huge increase in violent crime & sex offences.
There were various laws passed within the last 5 years or so banning or heavily restricting guns, knives, clubs, batons, kubotons, and many other weapons.
The increase in reported crime figures is because it has become easier to report crimes not because the number of crimes committed has increased.
The British Crime Survey (which doesn't include violent crime it must be noted) has shown that crime has fallen year on year for almost a decade.
Whether violent crime is rising or falling is unknown but burglary has been falling which would seem to be pertinent to the issue of gun use for home protection.
Time to have some more fun. Ever hear of Project Exile? This is an attempt at creating new crime punishments to deter gun crime without negatively impacting legal gun owners.
The concept of the program works as follows.
If someone commits a crime and has a gun on their persons, this is an automatic 5 year mandatory sentence to be served in a federal prison outside of the state. Automatic. You steal a candy bar and a cop nabs you and you have a piss-ant revolver in your pocket, you get a five year sentence out of state.
After starting the program Virginia can now boast a 40% DECREASE in gun crimes. Furthermore the number of criminals who carry weapons while committing a crime with no gun crime being committed has radically dropped. When the police questions criminals as to why they have stopped carrying guns they responded by saying they didn’t want a 5 year prison sentence they couldn’t get out of. So not only has the law helped decrease gun crimes, it encourages criminals not to have guns in the first place which in itself makes things safer because criminals are less likely to make a bad choice and fire a gun.
And here is where things get real fun. All of this occurs without infringing on the rights of law abiding gun owners.
Look at California with all of its tough gun laws. Look at Virginia with project exile. Virginia did more to curb gun crimes without infringing on the rights of its citizens. California should learn from that.
"If the facts are on your side, pound on the facts. If the law is on your side, pound on the law. If neither is on your side, pound on the table."
"The captain claimed our people violated a 4,000 year old treaty forbidding us to develop hyperspace technology. Extermination of our planet was the consequence. The subject did not survive interrogation."
You know what would kick ass? You know what would really deliver the gun control I think is most sensible? A national-level, required, gun safety, maintenence, and use education program, for all gun owners. I'm sure some whiny bitches will stamp their feet and yell, but hey, retards. We teach people to use a car before we let them have it, and it's not even designed as a weapon.
Alas and alack, it's not going to happen. How do I know? A similar non-profit group was created years ago, by the government. It wasn't mandatory, but it was supposed to be heavily suggested.
Guess how many news stations reported it? Zip. Zero. Zipall. Zilch.
Manic Progressive: A liberal who violently swings from anger at politicos to despondency over them.
Out Of Context theatre: Ron Paul has repeatedly said he's not a racist. - Destructinator XIII on why Ron Paul isn't racist.
And now a response to the person who claimed that a shotgun is the best home defense option, not a pistol.
Do you even know what the bloody hell your talking about? US law prohibits shotguns with barrels shorter then 18 inches. A Remington 870 with 18” barrel and tube extension is a prime example of a popular home defense shotgun. I have one. Wonderful gun. But it is not the best option for a home defense situation, not in every situation. The length of the gun makes aiming it take time and you can easily be ambushed going through doorways because its length doesn’t allow you to turn until after your almost fully through the door. The very compact size of a pistol makes it much faster to aim and much easier to turn in your environment. Ever wonder why stockless or 14-10” barrel shotguns are most popular with the police? A pistol is very important when it comes to home defense.
"If the facts are on your side, pound on the facts. If the law is on your side, pound on the law. If neither is on your side, pound on the table."
"The captain claimed our people violated a 4,000 year old treaty forbidding us to develop hyperspace technology. Extermination of our planet was the consequence. The subject did not survive interrogation."
Nitram, when you must look at the fact that gun ownership is a right, not a privilege; you can not make it a mandatory part of gun ownership. And changing that is never going to happen. Instead what you have to do is look at ways to get around this legality and still get gun safety education to the people. I see two possible ways of doing this.
One: Make gun safety a mandatory highschool class. Make it gun safety, marksmanship, etc…
Two: People who are buying guns may receive a significant savings on the price of the gun (on top of any sales prices) if they take a safety training class or can prove they have taken a safety training class. The gun sellers who provide this incentive for the gun buyer then take this information and give it to the government (proof they sold a weapon to someone with proper training) and receive a tax break of their own. This creates a system that massively encourages gun safety without making it mandatory. The vast majority of people would use this system if implemented.
"If the facts are on your side, pound on the facts. If the law is on your side, pound on the law. If neither is on your side, pound on the table."
"The captain claimed our people violated a 4,000 year old treaty forbidding us to develop hyperspace technology. Extermination of our planet was the consequence. The subject did not survive interrogation."
Alyeska wrote:Time to have some more fun. Ever hear of Project Exile? This is an attempt at creating new crime punishments to deter gun crime without negatively impacting legal gun owners.
The concept of the program works as follows.
If someone commits a crime and has a gun on their persons, this is an automatic 5 year mandatory sentence to be served in a federal prison outside of the state. Automatic. You steal a candy bar and a cop nabs you and you have a piss-ant revolver in your pocket, you get a five year sentence out of state.
And given your example of how effectively this has deterred gun related crime, it's not widely adopted because...?
aerius wrote:
Of particular interest is the huge increase in violent crime & sex offences.
There were various laws passed within the last 5 years or so banning or heavily restricting guns, knives, clubs, batons, kubotons, and many other weapons.
Sorry, but I don't find this compelling. You show correlation but not causation. You'll have to show, at the very least, a case from 2002 where (say) a rape was prevented due to the use of any of the weapons you list. Otherwise, it's no more valid than to say that the crime increase was due to relative performance of the national side* in the 2002 World Cup versus the 2004 European Championship.
(* - They are of course UK, not English, figures, so my apologies to the Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish.)
Alyeska wrote:
If someone commits a crime and has a gun on their persons, this is an automatic 5 year mandatory sentence to be served in a federal prison outside of the state. Automatic. You steal a candy bar and a cop nabs you and you have a piss-ant revolver in your pocket, you get a five year sentence out of state.
All of this occurs without infringing on the rights of law abiding gun owners.
That's silly. If it's nescesary that law abiding citizens carry guns, and if there is a chance of wrongful conviction, then inocents will be harmed by such laws.
And doesn't this:
After starting the program Virginia can now boast a 40% DECREASE in gun crimes. Furthermore the number of criminals who carry weapons while committing a crime with no gun crime being committed has radically dropped. When the police questions criminals as to why they have stopped carrying guns they responded by saying they didn’t want a 5 year prison sentence they couldn’t get out of.
mean that penalties for gun ownership would deter criminals from owning guns, rather than leaving normal people at the mercy of a load of armed criminals?
Hi! I'm Prozac the Robert!
EBC: "We can categorically state that we will be releasing giant man-eating badgers into the area."
SirNitram wrote:You know what would kick ass? You know what would really deliver the gun control I think is most sensible? A national-level, required, gun safety, maintenence, and use education program, for all gun owners. I'm sure some whiny bitches will stamp their feet and yell, but hey, retards. We teach people to use a car before we let them have it, and it's not even designed as a weapon.
Alas and alack, it's not going to happen. How do I know? A similar non-profit group was created years ago, by the government. It wasn't mandatory, but it was supposed to be heavily suggested.
Guess how many news stations reported it? Zip. Zero. Zipall. Zilch.
actually the NRA devotes tremendous resources to training people in gun safety and ethical gun ownership. But for lefties to aknowledge that would be to let go of a favorite whipping boy
After starting the program Virginia can now boast a 40% DECREASE in gun crimes. Furthermore the number of criminals who carry weapons while committing a crime with no gun crime being committed has radically dropped. When the police questions criminals as to why they have stopped carrying guns they responded by saying they didn’t want a 5 year prison sentence they couldn’t get out of.
mean that penalties for gun ownership would deter criminals from owning guns, rather than leaving normal people at the mercy of a load of armed criminals?
The idea is that there is no valid reason to deprive people of their right to defend themselves from criminals, who one way or another will be armed. If not with a gun, they'll have various means by which to ply their trade such as bats, chains, and knives.
A gun lets a person who could not compete with a criminal physically defend their person against such predation.
The Third Man wrote:[
(* - They are of course UK, not English, figures, so my apologies to the Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish.)
Just England and Wales, the Jocks run their own criminal justice system.
True enough, but I was actually trying to avoid the sin of stating that the England Football Team are the UK National Side. Everyone knows that's MUFC.
Alyrium Denryle wrote:Yeah, and what are your fucking crime rates?
Compared to American cities, they are far lower. And the number of crimes is decreasing every year anyway since the late 1980's.
You also have a more homogenous culture and the shame that comes from gassing millions of innocents to death. Germany=!=America.
America does have a more violent culture. More murders, more rapes. But as you can see in the links provided by (I think it was Denryle), guns are an effective deterrent to crime IN AMERICA.
Don't see this as unique to america at all, Finland has more weapons than america per capita(10 times more IIRC) and we got some of the lowest crime rates in the world.
Switzerland has even more weapons than Finland per capita and they hardly got any crime either IIRC.
Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who did not.
His Divine Shadow wrote:Don't see this as unique to america at all, Finland has more weapons than america per capita(10 times more IIRC) and we got some of the lowest crime rates in the world.
Switzerland has even more weapons than Finland per capita and they hardly got any crime either IIRC.
Well, to be precise the actual meaning is that guns=!=crime. We can find examples of both heavily armed and heavily disarmed cultures where there are low crime rates.
But do carry on, you wild and wonderful gun-loving Finns. Bless ya all.
Alyeska wrote:Time to have some more fun. Ever hear of Project Exile? This is an attempt at creating new crime punishments to deter gun crime without negatively impacting legal gun owners.
The concept of the program works as follows.
If someone commits a crime and has a gun on their persons, this is an automatic 5 year mandatory sentence to be served in a federal prison outside of the state. Automatic. You steal a candy bar and a cop nabs you and you have a piss-ant revolver in your pocket, you get a five year sentence out of state.
And given your example of how effectively this has deterred gun related crime, it's not widely adopted because...?
I haven’t a clue why other states haven’t adopted it. That California and New York are so heavily anti-gun when that’s proven not to work is a mystery to me.
"If the facts are on your side, pound on the facts. If the law is on your side, pound on the law. If neither is on your side, pound on the table."
"The captain claimed our people violated a 4,000 year old treaty forbidding us to develop hyperspace technology. Extermination of our planet was the consequence. The subject did not survive interrogation."
Prozac the Robert wrote: That's silly. If it's nescesary that law abiding citizens carry guns, and if there is a chance of wrongful conviction, then inocents will be harmed by such laws.
No, your statement is silly. Wrongful convictions are a fact of life. This law does not automatically hurt law abiding citizens.
mean that penalties for gun ownership would deter criminals from owning guns, rather than leaving normal people at the mercy of a load of armed criminals?
First, to clarify things. Very few criminals own weapons. They have stolen or illegal weapons and thus don’t actually own them. What the law means is it decreases gun violence by criminals without restricting the gun ownership rights of law abiding citizens.
"If the facts are on your side, pound on the facts. If the law is on your side, pound on the law. If neither is on your side, pound on the table."
"The captain claimed our people violated a 4,000 year old treaty forbidding us to develop hyperspace technology. Extermination of our planet was the consequence. The subject did not survive interrogation."
The reason that there has been less than stellar acceptance of EXILE in other states has to do with questions with regards to people getting hammered on technicalities. Additionally, it has been accused of being used by Richmond prosecutors as a way to tamper with jury balance. Because fed juries are drawn from a much wider base than a city jury, it allows prosecutors to avoid having to deal with, shall we say, ethnic concerns.
But there are other states that are working on Exile-type programs... I heard Erlicher in Maryland was pushing it, for example.
