fanaskin
Well known agitator
- 55,853
- 137,947
they have to justify their gun ban vs crime problem with constant nudging bias it borders on propaganda.
WW2 vet survived Nazi's only to be beaten to death by two teenagers
- Thread starter Jait
- Start date
zzeris
King Turd of Shit Hill
- 18,858
- 73,597
I like your second thought in the quote but just can't see the first part ever being enforced. Every one of those demographics have access to guns in some way or form.
I'd like to see those statistics. I'm not against guns at all but thinking that the world is a safer place because of them? That just isn't true. Some of the largest death rates purely from weapons of death happened after the gun was invented. Sure, there were more people but the degree of destruction guns and explosive devices can ensure is at least several thousand times greater than before their invention. Nothing in older history is comparable to the killing fields of WW1.
I also want to disprove somewhat the thought of guns being a positive equalizer for defense. It is just as much an equalizer for thugs and criminals as it is for defense. The invention of the gun didn't suddenly drop rape to an ancient crime unknown to the modern age. Guns alone haven't made women any safer than pepper spray has. A well trained samurai warrior was much more effective against bandits than a single cop today against armed criminals. Also, America has the largest prison population on the planet. Violent crime is alive and well. Maybe the lowered stats are because we have such a large criminal element already in the pen. Only so many criminals out there (and white collar crime pays better).
Throw in just how amazingly stupid the average person is, and guns are a very dangerous possession. It doesn't mean that they need to be removed but it does mean they cause some modern problems in society just from their extremely effectiveness even without proper training. Guns work so well in Switzerland because of the society they live in, not because of the gun themselves. Just like modern japan has extremely low crime stats with very rigid gun control. Somehow, even without the GREAT EQUALIZERRRR, they have found ways to lower crime. Guns are just tools but problematic ones at times.
Arbitrary
Tranny Chaser
- 27,121
- 71,817
fanaskin
Well known agitator
- 55,853
- 137,947
Yes it is true, nevermind what governments do if you think governments are going to deisarm themselves of weapons you are sorely mistaken, and the most naive of optimists.
all you're ideas are rooted in theory, a theory that man is naturally good it just the devices and circumstances around him that make him do bad things, well not all of them are, reality plays out differently, not everyone is a good person and without an equalizer the strong dominate the weak.
WOULD BANNING FIREARMSREDUCE
MURDER AND SUICIDE?
among other things that i've posted in the gun control thread, this paper found something of a correlation that where guns are banned violence, rape murder is relatively higher, and where guns are common it's lower, the common perry mason trick gun confiscators use to debate is "gun deaths" are lowered but that implies there is something significant about being killed by a gun compared to a rock or a pipe or a knife or anything else.
they also go throughout history from before the gun was invented and show that areas where guns became cheap and commonplace, murder, attempted murder, violent crime, rape ect all went down, dramatically.
they are , and you are wrong, you would actively be hurting the weakest of people, single woman, elderly, people who actually need these things to protect themselves from criminals who are often younger and stronger.
there's something like3,600 rapes A DAYthat are prevented in america just by the presence of a gun
fanaskin
Well known agitator
- 55,853
- 137,947
this is not really true, yes ww2 was the king of death, but the mongol conquests, the tai ping rebellion, the ming dynasty conquests, all of them killed more people than ww1 did where machine guns, artillery and mustard gas was used. just using horses, swords and arrows for the most part these conquests topped the death count of machine guns and mustard gas.
I think you underestimate man, when he is motivated to do something he will find a way regardless of the available tools.
yes, yes it did, immediately wherever cheap guns where proliferated amongst the population murder and violent crime declined nearly immediately and dramatically.
Zaara
I'm With HER ♀
- 1,611
- 7,510
TrollfaceDeux
Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer
- 19,577
- 3,743
criminals already use guns, legally or illegally, to begin with, if not other weapons...so...what's the point...
OneofOne
Silver Baronet of the Realm
- 6,610
- 8,062
What's the point indeed? Hard drugs arecompletelybanned in the US, yet getting them is... remind me how hard again? We need access to weapons to *try* and keep ourselves safe from those who would do us harm, 'cause they sure as shit will have guns.
TrollfaceDeux
Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer
- 19,577
- 3,743
fanaskin
Well known agitator
- 55,853
- 137,947
history is filled with murder and crime way out of proportion to modern society.
-----
Before you respond please read these 2 things they systematically prove that viewpoint wrong
Would banning guns reduce violent crime and homicide?
START AT PAGE 678 "MACRO HISTORICAL EVIDENCE"
Obama orders CDC gun violence study, study shreds his position
OneofOne
Silver Baronet of the Realm
- 6,610
- 8,062
fanaskin it's generally considered good posting etiquette to either quote or put in quotation marks writing that is not your own. It also makes it easier to separate information you are getting from another source, and your own personal thoughts. This is not an attack, but since you do this often, please consider this request.
zzeris
King Turd of Shit Hill
- 18,858
- 73,597
I don't want to sound like an ass but at least 60 million people died in WW2. The Tai Ping Rebellion killed only 20 million. The Mongol invasions lasted at least a century and here's a link to show some 'slight' exaggerations known to occur when historians wanted to get the audience involved.http://bedejournal.blogspot.com/2011...e-mongols.htmlOr here's a quick link to show one 6 year war led the pack.http://top10wtf.com/top-10-wars-by-death-toll/Oh, BTW, which was second on the list? Not swords, spears, and horses for a quick reference.
What is the real evidence that crime went down as we got closer to the modern era? It's called civilization. The exact opposite of the Dark Ages followed by the Middle Ages. You know, the eras of great medicine, inventions, art, theory, and civilization? Next I guess you'll say guns brought us civilization again right? LOL.
I also stated that we hold the largest prison pop in the world. 5% of total world pop has 25% of the prisoners. I guess if you put over 2 million in jail, your crime rates might go down right? Only so many criminals right? Possible?
I would like to see anything more than the most aggressive guesses and supposition for the rape preventions. It is the most fallacious, overgeneralized, 'stat' I've seen. 'We think only 10% of all rapes are reported and based off a survey(really top notch research), we think there should be this many rapes but those women who had a gun...what heroes!' Which degree of error do you think this 'research' may have?
I do think the research Obama had done needs to be an ongoing project. Considering gun lobbies have helped shoot down this research for the past 15 years, I'm thinking it may not be as good for activists as they'd like. Read this link from the research you highlighted.http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=18319&page=10Now look on page ten and read the very first paragraph. Read where the lack of meaningful earlier research has severely hampered this effort? See some cause and effect here? Think this research will continue for the next decade?
I've never thought guns were the problem but only one state takes away from the mentally ill and ex criminals. California. Some people don't need guns because they aren't right in the head or are criminals. No one is willing to take those guns away though. This isn't a throw the baby out with the dirty bathwater case. It's called responsible gun ownership but fear mongering is preventing the discussion ever moving forward. Just like the gun lobbies like it.
I don't understand the ban argument either. I still haven't seen where people are trying to get rid of shotguns and hunting rifles but I'm more than willing to see this. This is a more generalized statement than a reply.
fanaskin
Well known agitator
- 55,853
- 137,947
Do you not read? i said ww2 was the king and ww1 where machine guns and poison gas was used wasn't there was era's where swords and spears killed more people( really disease killed more but that's another story) and I looked at that list btw, #2 AND #3 was swords/spears and horses(mongol invasions) so you got that totally wrong
you call something evidence that isn't it's just speculation on your part. There Is an immediate correlation to gun distribution/crime if you look at specific areas in history it's obvious, it's not art and medicine that prevents people from robbing and murdering it's threat of force. This is easily provable when you look at countries that have "civilization" but where disarmed, and their crime rates exploded. seriously the angle that art and inventions somehow "soothes the savage beast heart of man" is kinda comical, they had art in the middle ages the best in the world at the time it's not like it really had an effect on murdering the truth is when individuals are able to bully others and do it relativly anonamously(like in an era before telegraphs/phones) guess what is going to happen? the strong bully the weak.
despite "lack of evidence" that vast majority of what evidence there is states the opposite of your claims, you make no mention of the harvard paper that systematically correlates and backs up the conclusions of obama's study.
also if you look atpolls of policeman they show they believe armed citizens and training would reduce crime
look at question 20 over 75% of officers polled responded that the role of having armed citizens is very important to reducing crime.
what's disturbing to me is people who argue that guns don't' stop crime are often mimicking arguments that disseminate soviet era propaganda aimed at America to try and disguise their obscene murder rate that rose dramatically after they disarmed their populace.
you call something evidence that isn't it's just speculation on your part. There Is an immediate correlation to gun distribution/crime if you look at specific areas in history it's obvious, it's not art and medicine that prevents people from robbing and murdering it's threat of force. This is easily provable when you look at countries that have "civilization" but where disarmed, and their crime rates exploded. seriously the angle that art and inventions somehow "soothes the savage beast heart of man" is kinda comical, they had art in the middle ages the best in the world at the time it's not like it really had an effect on murdering the truth is when individuals are able to bully others and do it relativly anonamously(like in an era before telegraphs/phones) guess what is going to happen? the strong bully the weak.
despite "lack of evidence" that vast majority of what evidence there is states the opposite of your claims, you make no mention of the harvard paper that systematically correlates and backs up the conclusions of obama's study.
also if you look atpolls of policeman they show they believe armed citizens and training would reduce crime
look at question 20 over 75% of officers polled responded that the role of having armed citizens is very important to reducing crime.
what's disturbing to me is people who argue that guns don't' stop crime are often mimicking arguments that disseminate soviet era propaganda aimed at America to try and disguise their obscene murder rate that rose dramatically after they disarmed their populace.
Lleauaric
Sparkletot Monger
- 4,058
- 1,823
Are you really going to argue that imperialism was a good thing? C'mon dude... Do you even Belgian Congo?
As far as arming and training citizens, its contextual. My frame of reference is NYC.NYC is an amazingly safe place when you consider its size.. I feel safer in NYC than I do in New Haven. NYC also has some of the strictest gun laws in the US. Having an Armed and Trained civilian militia in NYC would be useless and would create more problems than anything else.
The question is where would such organizations be effective? Would you train and arm the population of high crime areas? Should there be a West Chicago/Livernois Ave militia (or called it Armed Watch)? I don't think that would be very effective. So where do you do it? More affluent/educated people? Ok, but they really wont do much to deter violent crime, because so little of it happens where they live.
Guns do nothing to stop the issues that churn crime and criminal behavior. They offer a good situational answer for it when properly trained people find themselves confronted with crime. But even that, consider, annually there are about 600,000 cases in the United States where someone uses a gun in a violent crime. There are about 70,000 cases where a person uses a gun for self defense. There are 300,000,000 guns legally owned in the United States. More guns doesn't mean less crime. More guns means there will be more instances of self defense, but they will be matched by more instances of violent crime using guns.
Own a gun, train to use it. But don't look at guns as the answer to crime issues. They are an aspirin, offering temporary relief.
As far as arming and training citizens, its contextual. My frame of reference is NYC.NYC is an amazingly safe place when you consider its size.. I feel safer in NYC than I do in New Haven. NYC also has some of the strictest gun laws in the US. Having an Armed and Trained civilian militia in NYC would be useless and would create more problems than anything else.
The question is where would such organizations be effective? Would you train and arm the population of high crime areas? Should there be a West Chicago/Livernois Ave militia (or called it Armed Watch)? I don't think that would be very effective. So where do you do it? More affluent/educated people? Ok, but they really wont do much to deter violent crime, because so little of it happens where they live.
Guns do nothing to stop the issues that churn crime and criminal behavior. They offer a good situational answer for it when properly trained people find themselves confronted with crime. But even that, consider, annually there are about 600,000 cases in the United States where someone uses a gun in a violent crime. There are about 70,000 cases where a person uses a gun for self defense. There are 300,000,000 guns legally owned in the United States. More guns doesn't mean less crime. More guns means there will be more instances of self defense, but they will be matched by more instances of violent crime using guns.
Own a gun, train to use it. But don't look at guns as the answer to crime issues. They are an aspirin, offering temporary relief.
fanaskin
Well known agitator
- 55,853
- 137,947
What about imperialism? that's not even something I said.
of course crime fluctuates based on the culture and conditions of the area but claiming guns don't curb criminal behavior when it shows it head is absolutely wrong.
you are making a false corollary, most crimes are prevented without the gun being fired, just the presence or the knowledge of presence of guns in an area deters crime.
http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp#crime
-----
it is true that cultural stability has a lot to do with it, but here are visual correlations of the broad sense that an armed populace and law and order often go together.
of course crime fluctuates based on the culture and conditions of the area but claiming guns don't curb criminal behavior when it shows it head is absolutely wrong.
you are making a false corollary, most crimes are prevented without the gun being fired, just the presence or the knowledge of presence of guns in an area deters crime.
http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp#crime
it is true that cultural stability has a lot to do with it, but here are visual correlations of the broad sense that an armed populace and law and order often go together.
Goatface
Avatar of War Slayer
- 9,280
- 14,346
bump
found post while looking for something else and had to look to see what happened
www.cbsnews.com
www.kxly.com
www.spokesman.com
found post while looking for something else and had to look to see what happened
Teen pleads guilty in beating death of WWII veteran
Kenan Adams-Kinard, 17, pleaded guilty to the first-degree murder of Delbert Belton, 88 in exchange for two lesser charges being dropped
www.cbsnews.com
Teen gets 20 year sentence for WWII vet’s killing
Kenan Adams Kinard was sentenced Thursday to 20 years in prison for his role in the fatal beating of elderly WWII veteran Delbert “Shorty” Belton in August 2013.
Demetruis Glenn sentenced to 16 years in beating death of Delbert Belton
The atmosphere in the courtroom was somber as Demetruis Glenn, the second teenager accused of killing World War II veteran Delbert "Shortly" Belton, was sentenced to 16 years in jail Thursday.
www.spokesman.com
Chris
Potato del Grande
- 18,206
- -336
In medieval China, you try and defend your home from a burglar and accidentally set off a civil war killing millions... that's proof that guns are less lethal for home defence right there!
And absolutely, if we include the Mongol Conquests and adjust for population percentage, then the "murder" rate in the 1200s dwarfs any era with guns.
We have some stunning arguments here, just as good as the classic "if we remove American blacks from the stats but not European blacks, then America has less gun crime than Europe".
Rajaah
Honorable Member
- 11,262
- 14,933
bump
found post while looking for something else and had to look to see what happened
Teen pleads guilty in beating death of WWII veteran
Kenan Adams-Kinard, 17, pleaded guilty to the first-degree murder of Delbert Belton, 88 in exchange for two lesser charges being dropped
Teen gets 20 year sentence for WWII vet’s killing
Kenan Adams Kinard was sentenced Thursday to 20 years in prison for his role in the fatal beating of elderly WWII veteran Delbert “Shorty” Belton in August 2013.
Demetruis Glenn sentenced to 16 years in beating death of Delbert Belton
The atmosphere in the courtroom was somber as Demetruis Glenn, the second teenager accused of killing World War II veteran Delbert "Shortly" Belton, was sentenced to 16 years in jail Thursday.
John Erp, a service officer for Disabled American Veterans in eastern Washington, spoke about Belton’s military service, where he survived the Battle of Okinawa - one of the bloodiest battles of World War II. “What Shorty did not survive was a brutal beating by attackers who stole his life, then tried to besmirch his character,” Erp said. He said the attackers deserved to be “taken off the very streets that Shorty Belton fought so hard to keep free.”
I'm so goddamn rustled.