Firearms - Page 7

LiUsAiDh · 08-24-2008, 02:39 PM

Haha, if the Kentucky CCC couldn't get any more biased; they just did.

"The people are not to be disarmed of their weapons. They are left in full possession of them."

.... yeah, totally impartial.

Splintered · 08-24-2008, 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Methadrine

None of the scandinavian countries allows carrying that gun anywhere except if you are going to/from the training grounds to home (and wearing the uniform), and if you elect to have a gun at home it's disassembled into various parts and kept in different secured storages.

Are you sure about that? From what I've heard (and I could very well be wrong about this), anyone in Switzerland is open to have a Waffentragschein over the age of 18 who has any profession close to a security guard (Or being in the military), which allows for unlimited carry. Also, hunting rifles are not recorded for purchase, and any trade between individuals is not recorded either, and doesn't require a permit.

With Norway, you can bring your weapon in to any public place as long as you have a valid reason to bring it to somewhere (Shooting range, friend's house who has a gun, etc). I'm in doubt as to how often this is checked. Purchasing a weapon only requires that you take either a course for sports shooting or a course for hunting. Even then, it's generally accepted that most gun crimes are committed with stolen weapons to begin with.

However, I think you're dead right on Finland.

Deadmanwalking_05 · 08-24-2008, 02:41 PM

Yes and they were out of date and nothing was there to show which uses the gun violence occured (I.E. Murder,Robbery,Home Invasion,Self-defense use,ect)

LiUsAiDh · 08-24-2008, 02:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deadmanwalking_05

Well that is where training comes in.

No finger inside the trigger guard and you don't have to worry about an ND

Then why have a gun if you're gonna have your finger permanently outside of the trigger guard.

You have a gun to shoot. You shoot to kill.

Deadmanwalking_05 · 08-24-2008, 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LiUsAiDh

Haha, if the Kentucky CCC couldn't get any more biased; they just did.

"The people are not to be disarmed of their weapons. They are left in full possession of them."

.... yeah, totally impartial.

Yours isn't either....so your point being?

Saya · 08-24-2008, 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deadmanwalking_05

Yes and they were out of date and nothing was there to show which uses the gun violence occured (I.E. Murder,Robbery,Home Invasion,Self-defense use,ect)

They are not out of date. Statistics arent done as frequently as you think. And 2002 was only six years ago. You were using a website from the nineties.

Saya · 08-24-2008, 02:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deadmanwalking_05

Yours isn't either....so your point being?

Your site had absolutely no citation and just linked gun control to genocide, and was wrong about the Austrailian crime rate. It basically just made up facts to suit themselves. Ours used actual accepted statistics and sources.

Deadmanwalking_05 · 08-24-2008, 02:47 PM

It is called reading the threat,also common practice to draw with your finger outside the trigger guard to prevent "Accidental Firing"

As an old friend once said "Keep your Booger hook off the bang switch until you're ready to fire"

LiUsAiDh · 08-24-2008, 02:49 PM

My sources were from Children's Defense Fund and National Center for Health Statistics; which aren't an anti firearm lobby, nor are the
Centers for Disease Control. Which makes them a darn site less biased than yours.

My sources seem to be national health organisations, whom aren't gonna make a fuss for no reason other than a national health threat.

Quote:

As an old friend once said "Keep your Booger hook off the bang switch until you're ready to fire"

I can't even be bothered to take the piss out of your rather reliable source there.

Splintered · 08-24-2008, 02:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saya

Those who want a firearm can get one very easy right now. What if there was a background check necessary at a gun show? There are so many loopholes that need to be fixed.

And as for total homicides, here you are:
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cr...ers-per-capita

And I guess it is a different mindset too, I'll agree with you there. There's just something I don't understand about anyone feeling they need a gun to protect them from school kids. America seems to have a culture of fear.

I'm not worried about protecting myself from school kids. The firearms I have are for hunting and sports/competitive shooting. No one has ever actually died at the hands of the guns I own. However, I like to think that in the case of any emergency, I have the option to defend myself with lethal force if necessary. A type of lethal force that several years taking any martial arts can't give me, nor can a knife really give me in self-defense.

Also keep in mind that I'm a Canadian citizen. Even in Canada, where the loopholes are technically supposed to be closed (Requiring a PAL to own, an LTATT/STATT to transport, and a restricted PAL to own anything on the restricted firearms list, including all handguns), we still have violent crime. In fact, from 1985 to 1995, there was an increase in violent crime.

Violent crime also peaked in 1975, at least according to Wikipedia. The only two acts that effected gun laws around that time were in 1969 and 1977, both of which don't explain why it would have sharply decreased, or sharply increased to 1975.

I'm also curious as to what the gun laws are in Colombia, South Africa, Jamaica, Venezuela, and Russia (the top five). I'm going to do a little bit of research and let you guys know what I find.

LiUsAiDh · 08-24-2008, 03:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Splintered

I'm not worried about protecting myself from school kids.

Because they obviously can't shoot people older than 18.

Quote:

No one has ever actually died at the hands of the guns I own.

Well, that's just great.

Quote:

we still have violent crime. In fact, from 1985 to 1995, there was an increase in violent crime.

'Violent crime'? I can be violent with a slinky spring if I want. It's not likely to kill anyone, unlike a gun. Violence can't be eradicated, gun crime can.

Quote:

Violent crime also peaked in 1975, at least according to Wikipedia. The only two acts that effected gun laws around that time were in 1969 and 1977, both of which don't explain why it would have sharply decreased, or sharply increased to 1975.

There 'violent' goes again. Most probably didn't affect gun laws because they weren't with guns.

Violence =/= Gun crime

Deadmanwalking_05 · 08-24-2008, 03:11 PM

The source was my father a former Deputy Sheriff (1976-83)

LiUsAiDh · 08-24-2008, 03:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deadmanwalking_05

The source was my father a former Deputy Sheriff (1976-83)

Haha, oh fuck, well that's obviously up to date. And you were complaining about stats from 2002?!?!

He must also have done many national reliable surveys on the subject.

Splintered · 08-24-2008, 03:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LiUsAiDh

Because they obviously can't shoot people older than 18.

I'm not older then 18.

Quote:

Originally Posted by LiUsAiDh

Well, that's just great.

Quote:

Originally Posted by LiUsAiDh

'Violent crime'? I can be violent with a slinky spring if I want. It's not likely to kill anyone, unlike a gun. Violence can't be eradicated, gun crime can.

There 'violent' goes again. Most probably didn't affect gun laws because they weren't with guns.

Violence =/= Gun crime

Yes, but eradicating gun crime doesn't necessarily mean you will be able eradicate violent crime either, which is the point I'm trying to make. However, even if you want to make a point that gun control lessens gun crime, then look at the United Kingdom. Even though there have been multiple restrictions on guns, gun crime specifically has been on the rise.

Saya · 08-24-2008, 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Splintered

I'm not worried about protecting myself from school kids. The firearms I have are for hunting and sports/competitive shooting. No one has ever actually died at the hands of the guns I own. However, I like to think that in the case of any emergency, I have the option to defend myself with lethal force if necessary. A type of lethal force that several years taking any martial arts can't give me, nor can a knife really give me in self-defense.

Also keep in mind that I'm a Canadian citizen. Even in Canada, where the loopholes are technically supposed to be closed (Requiring a PAL to own, an LTATT/STATT to transport, and a restricted PAL to own anything on the restricted firearms list, including all handguns), we still have violent crime. In fact, from 1985 to 1995, there was an increase in violent crime.

Violent crime also peaked in 1975, at least according to Wikipedia. The only two acts that effected gun laws around that time were in 1969 and 1977, both of which don't explain why it would have sharply decreased, or sharply increased to 1975.

I'm also curious as to what the gun laws are in Colombia, South Africa, Jamaica, Venezuela, and Russia (the top five). I'm going to do a little bit of research and let you guys know what I find.

I'm not agaisnt owning a hunting rifle for hunting, just as long as you keep it locked up and away. My dad used to own two antique hunting rifles, don't think he owned ammo for them though. He sold them when the gun registration deadline came up. A lot of people here own them to go moose hunting or whatever in the fall. Its just arming yourself to the teeth with rifles and handguns for the explicit purpose of "defense" is where I see the problem.

We do have violent crime here, yes, but no where near the levels of less regulated America. I looked up armed robberies in Newfoundland and the only time they listed what weapon was used it was knives.

LiUsAiDh · 08-24-2008, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Splintered

I'm not older then 18.

Doesn't change my point; you still think the whole demographic below the age of 18 still can't hurt you?

Quote:

Yes, but eradicating gun crime doesn't necessarily mean you will be able eradicate violent crime either, which is the point I'm trying to make.

Agreed, but guns are more dangerous than fists, knives, knuckledusters or whatever.

Quote:

However, even if you want to make a point that gun control lessens gun crime, then look at the United Kingdom. Even though there have been multiple restrictions on guns, gun crime specifically has been on the rise.

1)Source.
2)Gun crime in the UK still isn't to the degree that it is in the States.

Deadmanwalking_05 · 08-24-2008, 03:25 PM

But what the "Stats" don't show are in what cases they are used and are subjectable.

As for my Dad he was one hell of a cop and went into plenty of places that S.W.A.T. would call for back up.

(Dirty Harry he isn't but the fact remains you insulted my dad now it's personal)

Splintered · 08-24-2008, 03:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saya

We do have violent crime here, yes, but no where near the levels of less regulated America. I looked up armed robberies in Newfoundland and the only time they listed what weapon was used it was knives.

Newfoundland is also a lot less urbanized then most of United States. The United States has less space then Canada, with nearly ten times the population (33,390,141 in Canada compared to 301,139,947 in the United States). I believe violent crime can be attributed to increased urbanization and a greater population, then it can to the availability of firearms.

Quote:

Originally Posted by LiUsAiDh

Doesn't change my point; you still think the whole demographic below the age of 18 still can't hurt you?

I'm confused as to what your point is. They can still hurt me, however, it doesn't mean I'm afraid of them. Sure, they can go ahead and get a gun and try to kill me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by LiUsAiDh

Agreed, but guns are more dangerous than fists, knives, knuckledusters or whatever.

And plastic knifes are less dangerous then metal knifes. Shall we ban all silverware then?

Quote:

Originally Posted by LiUsAiDh

1)Source.
2)Gun crime in the UK still isn't to the degree that it is in the States.

Gladly:

http://web.archive.org/web/200606231...wood_Paper.pdf

Start at paragraph 66

http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs07/hosb0207.pdf

Figure 2.1, shows overall increase in gun crime, with a slight decline at the end.

The United Kingdom is also 60,776,238 people strong, compared to the United States.

Cicero · 08-24-2008, 03:31 PM

Wow, this thread grew quickly...

Just thought I'd pop in to have a word about the Australian situation with guns. Thanks to our gun regulation the only people with firearms here are farmers and criminals. Farmers shoot rabbits, criminals shoot each other. It works out pretty well. Sure, there are a few tragic instances of victims being neither pest nor felon, but those cases are few and far between. Our sealife is more dangerous than our firearms.

Not to say I approve of ANYONE owning a gun. They're really just one of those things I wish had never been invented (yes, along with nukes and tanks. And emo music).

And you know what? I do prefer the idea of stabbings to shootings. It's a lot fucking harder to stab someone to death than it is to shoot them in the head, and if you can run away from a knifeman you don't still stand the chance of a bullet catching up to you. Not to mention most people are a lot less inclined to cause harm to others if it involves close proximity and a lot of unsightly mess.

Saya · 08-24-2008, 03:31 PM

She didn't insult him, but he hasn't been in service in 83, so his stories are far more out of date than our statistics.

My stats were labeled HOMICIDE, SUICIDE, and OTHER (accidents). So not so subjectable. Also children should never EVER be shot and killed, wouldn't you agree? So her stats aren't so subjectable either.

LiUsAiDh · 08-24-2008, 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deadmanwalking_05

As for my Dad he was one hell of a cop and went into plenty of places that S.W.A.T. would call for back up.

(Dirty Harry he isn't but the fact remains you insulted my dad now it's personal)

I didn't insult your dad. I'm totally apathetic towards him, but, well Saya says it all with that V.

Quote:

She didn't insult him, but he hasn't been in service in 83, so his stories are far more out of date than our statistics.

Quote:

And plastic knifes are less dangerous then metal knifes. Shall we ban all silverware then?

Yes, but metal knives are necessary for cooking. If they had no other raison d'etre than to cause harm, or to be used for enjoyment then, yes, I'd ban knives.

Quote:

it doesn't mean I'm afraid of them. Sure, they can go ahead and get a gun and try to kill me.

So, you're not afraid of people trying to kill you.... Right...

Splintered · 08-24-2008, 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LiUsAiDh

Yes, but metal knives are necessary for cooking. If they had no other raison d'etre than to cause harm, or to be used for enjoyment then, yes, I'd ban knives.

So competitive shooting and collecting, which a lot of firearms are created for (Walther, Ruger, Sig Sauer, Smith and Wesson, and Heckler and Koch, all make sporting models), are not legitimate, non-harmful, reasons to exist?

Quote:

Originally Posted by LiUsAiDh

So, you're not afraid of people trying to kill you.... Right...

In reality, no, I'm not. However, let me ask you a question: do you believe a fire is going to burn your house down tomorrow, or that you will end up in a car crash? I'll take a guess and say the answer is no.

However, I have a fire extinguisher to protect myself against fires, and an airbag to protect myself against crashes.

Deadmanwalking_05 · 08-24-2008, 03:51 PM

You will never understand the gun culture,and those in the gun culture will never understand you.

You want everyone to be disarmed of guns because you don't like them,gun or not people will still hurt/kill others because it is the dark side of humanity.

Those that defend themselves and families don't matter to you because you have the attitude that if "I don't like it,It has to go",with disreguard to others views on the subject.

It doesn't bother me that you don't want to have a gun,knife,ect for personal protection that's fine. That is your right,but respect my rights as well.

Telling me that I should give up my guns because"It might make the world safer"

Safer for who?

Not for me,not for my family.

Who are you to tell me how I "should" live?

Did I tell you that you had to have a gun?

Did I force anything down your throat?
You chose to read and post in this thread,for what purpose?

To state your opinion or to stirr up trouble?

Deadmanwalking_05 · 08-24-2008, 03:55 PM

My guns haven't hurt anybody,and I do agree that it's the worst thing to hear about when a kid does get shot or is harmed in anyway.

But taking my guns won't stop that.

And as I said before I hunt,punch paper,and knock over soda cans,my guns haven't hurt anyone.

LiUsAiDh · 08-24-2008, 03:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Splintered

So competitive shooting and collecting, which a lot of firearms are created for (Walther, Ruger, Sig Sauer, Smith and Wesson, and Heckler and Koch, all make sporting models), are not legitimate, non-harmful, reasons to exist?

You feel entertainment (the least essential reason to exist) justifies the gun market. Which kills thousands every year?

I mean, I bet it's fun to blow things up. You don't see people carrying nitroglycerine and dynamite around. Why? 'Cause it's fucking dangerous.

If guns could be guarenteed to be only used for sport, fine, go crazy. But they're not.

Quote:

In reality, no, I'm not. However, let me ask you a question: do you believe a fire is going to burn your house down tomorrow, or that you will end up in a car crash? I'll take a guess and say the answer is no.

However, I have a fire extinguisher to protect myself against fires, and an airbag to protect myself against crashes.

Fire extinguishers and airbags don't kill.