The Official Gun Control Debate thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spook

that's what i love about you, jer. you're not shy about having absolutely nothing of substance to contribute.

---

So I take it you consider your shocking lack of tact, narcissism, ego-stroking and ultra-far-left spewage a "contribution"? Even the douchebags here think you're a total douchebag.:rolleyes2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doughboyshredder

Bullshit, I know alot of gun toting country folk that vote Dem, myself included.

It's the liberal wing of the Democratic party that's the problem. Same as the conservative wing of the Republican party is a problem.

---

That can't be!! Every good far-left nutjob knows that everyone who doesn't totally agree with them is a fox-news watching, Bush-loving, ditto-head neo-con racist! There is no middle ground! It's all black and white!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doughboyshredder

Bullshit, I know alot of gun toting country folk that vote Dem, myself included.

It's the liberal wing of the Democratic party that's the problem. Same as the conservative wing of the Republican party is a problem.

---

Calm down sparky.;)

I didn't say that everyone who opposes gun control was a Republican and everyone in favor of it was a Democrat. The question was asked how anyone could politicize a tragedy like the one at VT.

In our media driven, eight-second-sound bite society, the Dems are known for being in favor of gun control and the Republicans are known for opposing it. I was making very general statements regarding that fact, nothing more.

[QUOTE=Jer;1234673]So I take it you consider your shocking lack of tact, narcissism, ego-stroking and ultra-far-left spewage a "contribution"? Even the douchebags here think you're a total douchebag.:rolleyes2
QUOTE]

excellent riposte, sir.

while i do not accept your characterization, it should be obvious that neither tact nor humility are strong suits here and, therefore, i should hardly be noticeable.

i'm only ultra-far left to people like you, jer. there are lots of people who think like i do on planet earth. it's a shame you didn't realize that sooner.

nonetheless, i'm happy to assist in the opening of your mind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spook

while i do not accept your characterization, it should be obvious that neither tact nor humility are strong suits here and, therefore, i should hardly be noticeable.

---

Yet everyone still seems to notice what an egomaniac douchebag you are.

Quote:

---

there are lots of people who think like i do on planet earth.

---

That's too bad. Why don't you go join them in Magical Happy Land? There are lots of people who think the Earth was "created" 20,000 years ago - doesn't mean they're not douchebags.

oh this should be good. Spook and Jer in a duel. thread fallout reaches an all time low:nonono2:

Some comparitive statistics showing that the US does, in fact, have a firearm problem Firearm Stats Whether gun control is the solution should be the area for discussion.

Oh, and Spats document where he draws the conclusion that firearms prevented 1.5m crimes demonstrates some reading skill issues. The document he draws the 1.5m number from goes on to say that this is an "absurd" conclusion based on a sanity check. Go figure :eek:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spats

In the UK, where handguns have been completely illegal since 1997, handgun crime has increased from 2,687 (1998/1999) to 4,347 (2004/2005).

(Source: British Home Office, http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs06/hosb0206.pdf)

It's common sense. The more difficult it is for regular citizens to get a gun, the more incentive criminals have to get them, because they know that they won't ever have to confront armed citizens.

Remember: making guns illegal will make criminals stop using guns, just like making drugs illegal has stopped drug addicts from using drugs.

---

handgun crime does not equal handgun fatalities. i can't be bothered looking it up but i'd be curious to see what those numbers reveal. owning a gun can help protect you against an armed criminal, if you know how to use it, are ready to kill, and aren't taken by surprise. good luck. but does having an armed populous reduce crime? or does it just mean that instead of a criminal putting a gun to your face and robbing you, now he's just much more likely to just shoot you first and then rob you so he doesn't have to worry about whether you're armed or not?

more guns equals more gun fatalities, this is not up for debate. the more guns you have the more suicides you have, the more accidental shootings you have, the more impulse/spontaneous crime of passion shootings you have, or drunken arguments and fights you have ending with a gunshot. but banning guns isn't going to keep guns out of the hands of true criminals, organized crime, street gangs, thugs, etc.. and its certainly not going to stop someone like the columbine killers from going on a premeditated rampage. also, its not like these school shootings are unique to the united states, in montreal alone we've had three (most recently last fall).

the real problem is poverty and lack of education.. fix those two and everything else will fall into place.

ps. legalizing drugs (all of them) would also fix an awful lot of problems.

If this info is correct then, yeah the standard Hitler line is bullshit.

Gun registration and licensing (for long guns as well as for handguns) were legislated by an anti-National Socialist government in Germany in 1928, five years before the National Socialists gained power. Hitler became Chancellor on January 30, 1933. Five years later his government got around to rewriting the gun law enacted a decade earlier by his predecessors, substantially amel ior a ting it in the process (for example, long guns were exempted from the requirement for a purchase permit; the legal age for gun ownership was lowered from 20 to 18 years; the period of validity of a permit to carry weapons was extended from one to three years; and provisions restricting the amount of ammunition or the number of firearms an individual could own were dropped). Hitler's government may be criticized for leaving certain restrictions and licensing requirements in the law, but the National Socialists had no intention of preventing law-abiding Germans from keeping or bearing arms. Again, the firearms law enacted by Hitler's government enhanced the rights of Germans to keep and bear arms; no new restrictions were added, and many pre-existing restrictions were relaxed or eliminated.


At the end of the Second World War, American GIs in the occupying force were astounded to discover how many German civilians owned private firearms. Tens of thousands of pistols looted from German homes by GIs were brought back to the United States after the war. In 1945 General Eisenhower ordered all privately owned firearms in the American occupation zone of Germany confiscated, and Germans were required to hand in their shotguns and rifles as well as any handguns which had not already been stolen. In the Soviet occupation zone German civilians were summarily shot if they were found in possession of even a single cartridge.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by powstash

oh this should be good. Spook and Jer in a duel. thread fallout reaches an all time low:nonono2:

---

don't be so dour. it's not a duel if one side is unarmed with anything but "douchebag."

since the "love it or leave it" mantra is so common in the u.s., it doesn't hurt to have an occasional reminder in this land of immigrants that that mentality is antithetical to even the popularly accepted foundations of this "democracy" embraced by rabid flag-wavers (disregarding, of course, indigenous genocide, slavery, exclusion and abuse of women and poor, and the fact that it was written exclusively by powerful white males).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spook

don't be so dour. it's not a duel if one side is unarmed with anything but "douchebag."

since the "love it or leave it" mantra is so common in the u.s., it doesn't hurt to have an occasional reminder in this land of immigrants that that mentality is antithetical to even the popularly accepted foundations of this "democracy" embraced by rabid flag-wavers (disregarding, of course, indigenous genocide, slavery, exclusion and abuse of women and poor, and the fact that it was written exclusively by powerful white males).

---

Hey ! We're "A peace loving nation" remember. We're told this time after time after time after ... despite slivers of evidence to the contrary. "In God we trust", but we must keep religion out of it. With these underlying conflicts is it any wonder that we "go postal" from time to time. Having a gun or two handy helps :nonono2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grapedrink

more guns equals more gun fatalities, this is not up for debate.

---

"the best available time series and cross-sectional studies [show that], the overall net effect of gun availability on total rates of violence is not significantly different from zero. [Emphasis in original.]1"

http://hnn.us/articles/871.html

Quote:

---

the real problem is poverty and lack of education.. fix those two and everything else will fall into place.

---

I agree with you...to a certain extent.

There is correlation between poverty and lack of education and crime, but I would put the causation with other factors. Mostly cultural.

There are tens, maybe hundreds, of thousands of people who have no education to speak of and live below the poverty level, who do not commit crimes(gun related or otherwise).

Case in point: I live in the middle of a huge Latino community right now. Very family oriented. There is zero crime here. People leave their doors unlocked and their windows open all the time. Valuables are left in plane site and nobody touches them. Yet, most people here don't even have a high school education, and are lucky if they make minimum wage. If poverty and lack of education were the problem, then this place should be a killing field, but it's not.

The problem is cultural, but that's the third rail in this kind of discussion. Nobody will touch it, for a variety of reasons.

I don't have any viable solutions, but some things that have a strong correlation to crime are not the problem and distract from any real solutions(if any exist).

MUZZLE LOADING MUSKET.

People can still have the right to own a gun. People can still hunt, be more skilled. People can still defend thier homes. It would be hard to hide.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spook

don't be so dour. it's not a duel if one side is unarmed with anything but "douchebag."

since the "love it or leave it" mantra is so common in the u.s., it doesn't hurt to have an occasional reminder in this land of immigrants that that mentality is antithetical to even the popularly accepted foundations of this "democracy" embraced by rabid flag-wavers (disregarding, of course, indigenous genocide, slavery, exclusion and abuse of women and poor, and the fact that it was written exclusively by powerful white males).

---

You forgot about those white males evading Taxes from England. Listen fuckstick, all of what you said is well known and very true. You ARE NOT ENLIGHTENING US you stupid fuck. The above is very much a part of who we are. But we are MUCH MORE THAN THAT. Why don't you get on your moral high road and walk off into the sunset to the land of the eternal douchnozzle and take your judgement with you. You reek of ego,judgement and arrogance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AsheanMT

You forgot about those white males evading Taxes from England. Listen fuckstick, all of what you said is well known and very true. You ARE NOT ENLIGHTENING US you stupid fuck. The above is very much a part of who we are. But we are MUCH MORE THAN THAT. Why don't you get on your moral high road and walk off into the sunset to the land of the eternal douchnozzle and take your judgement with you. You reek of ego,judgement and arrogance.

---

who said anything about enlightening anybody, ashean?

how could anybody such as yourself who actually believes that "we are the leaders" because "this is a democracy," as i believe you shrieked, be any more enlightened? every time you post you show how much you know. i'm in awe. seriously.

you take thing way too personally for such a tough guy. kick back, relax, enjoy a little diversity in your world. it's dangerous and unhealthy to expect everybody on planet earth to think the same way you do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doughboyshredder

If this info is correct then, yeah the standard Hitler line is bullshit.

Gun registration and licensing (for long guns as well as for handguns) were legislated by an anti-National Socialist government in Germany in 1928, five years before the National Socialists gained power. Hitler became Chancellor on January 30, 1933. Five years later his government got around to rewriting the gun law enacted a decade earlier by his predecessors, substantially amel ior a ting it in the process (for example, long guns were exempted from the requirement for a purchase permit; the legal age for gun ownership was lowered from 20 to 18 years; the period of validity of a permit to carry weapons was extended from one to three years; and provisions restricting the amount of ammunition or the number of firearms an individual could own were dropped). Hitler's government may be criticized for leaving certain restrictions and licensing requirements in the law, but the National Socialists had no intention of preventing law-abiding Germans from keeping or bearing arms. Again, the firearms law enacted by Hitler's government enhanced the rights of Germans to keep and bear arms; no new restrictions were added, and many pre-existing restrictions were relaxed or eliminated.


At the end of the Second World War, American GIs in the occupying force were astounded to discover how many German civilians owned private firearms. Tens of thousands of pistols looted from German homes by GIs were brought back to the United States after the war. In 1945 General Eisenhower ordered all privately owned firearms in the American occupation zone of Germany confiscated, and Germans were required to hand in their shotguns and rifles as well as any handguns which had not already been stolen. In the Soviet occupation zone German civilians were summarily shot if they were found in possession of even a single cartridge.

---

Not to be crass, but what is your point? Wikipedia seems to expand little more than you did.

The 1938 Law expressly barred Jews from businesses involving firearms. On November 11, 1938 [3], new regulations were issued barring Jews from owning any weapons, even clubs or knives. The new regulations coincided with the national night of violent persecution of Jews and destruction of Jews' synagogues and businesses, known as Kristallnacht.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MeatPuppet

I agree with you...to a certain extent.

There is correlation between poverty and lack of education and crime, but I would put the causation with other factors. Mostly cultural.

There are tens, maybe hundreds, of thousands of people who have no education to speak of and live below the poverty level, who do not commit crimes(gun related or otherwise).

Case in point: I live in the middle of a huge Latino community right now. Very family oriented. There is zero crime here. People leave their doors unlocked and their windows open all the time. Valuables are left in plane site and nobody touches them. Yet, most people here don't even have a high school education, and are lucky if they make minimum wage. If poverty and lack of education were the problem, then this place should be a killing field, but it's not.

The problem is cultural, but that's the third rail in this kind of discussion. Nobody will touch it, for a variety of reasons.

I don't have any viable solutions, but some things that have a strong correlation to crime are not the problem and distract from any real solutions(if any exist).

---

thats kinda like saying that since not all smokers develop lung cancer then you can't conclude that smoking causes lung cancer. its no secret where most of your countries criminals are coming from, poor lower class neighborhoods. less than 3% of the prison population has a college education.. nearly half haven't even graduated high school.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grapedrink

its no secret where most of your countries criminals are coming from, poor lower class neighborhoods. less than 3% of the prison population has a college education.. nearly half haven't even graduated high school.

---

you must mean the "criminals" who are actually getting busted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snowy Wintergarden

I brought up this question in the Va shooting thread and was asked to make a seperate thread, so here it is.

I wanted to know why some Americans feel so strongly about gun ownership.
I don't necessarily want to debate the ancient "right to bear arms" thing - because that doesn't explain why people feel strongly about it.

40-some people were just shot and people like P McPoser accuse reporters of "politicizing" the shooting by asking about gun control.

When you compare gun deaths per capita in the US against gun deaths per capita in other countries...well, isn't obvious there's a problem in the US?

I'm not criticizing, I'm confused. Obviously there's a cultural component to gun ownership in the US I'm unaware of - if someone could fill me in on that I'd be thankful.

---

Back to the original question asked in the thread - Why do people feel strongly about it?

I have two reasons:

1) The government fails in its job to protect me
2) It would be the only tool of force to protect against government oppression.

Let me address both.

1) I have been in Baltimore for about 13 years and the following has happened:

• ex-wife robbed at gunpoint by a covicted murderer
• I tried to break up the mugging of a retarded man
• My apartment robbed
• Priest mugged during my weeding rehearsal (yes it is true - we subdued the junkie too)
• My house robbed (they spent the night)
• A junkie was casing the house while the girlfriend returns 2 days after above robbery
• Car broken into at least 4 times
• Constantly accosted by junkies (2 recent incidents that almost came to blows)

So I am at the point where I might actually buy a gun top protect myself, as the city of Baltimore could really give a shit about protecting its citizens

2) YOu may say the government won't oppress us. But, how do you really know? How would you fight back? I believe anything can happen, and as many Bush haters believe - we are getting closer to government oppression.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spook

who said anything about enlightening anybody, ashean?

---

Why, you did, douchebag.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spook

nonetheless, i'm happy to assist in the opening of your mind.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spook

it's dangerous and unhealthy to expect everybody on planet earth to think the same way I do.

---

Fixed it for ya, douchebag.

Since when did violent criminals care about laws, gun control or otherwise?

now please excuse me while I go puke because I read too many spook-jer exchanges (1 being too many). Why don't I just ignore spook already?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jer

Why, you did, douchebag.

---

sigh. yes, jer, that was in reference to the existence of people who think like i do, because you seem to be under the impression that i'm the only one. not making you think one way or another.

regarding your second pettiness, of course it applies to me. i never suggested otherwise.

maybe that's you're problem. you're so one-dimensional and absolute that you think anybody who doesn't think like you do is as well.

as i have said several times, i don't expect you or anybody else to come around to my way of thinking. i'm not trying to make you do so. i've been around enough folks like you that i have no illusions about those possibilities.

that doesn't mean i'm not going to make my argument. so you might as well just get over it. being fixated and angry isn't going to make a bit of difference.

maybe you, ashean, roo and a few others should form an anger management support group. i'm obviously bothering you a lot more than you bother me. though i am flattered by all the attention.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grapedrink

thats kinda like saying that since not all smokers develop lung cancer then you can't conclude that smoking causes lung cancer.

---

If there were some correlation established between all people with lung cancer, whether they smoked or not, that was stronger than the correlation with smoking, you could say that, or at least strongly suggest it.

Quote:

---

its no secret where most of your countries criminals are coming from, poor lower class neighborhoods. less than 3% of the prison population has a college education.. nearly half haven't even graduated high school.

---

You are confusing correlation with causation.

This is not an easy problem to solve. There is a strong correlation between socio/economic status and crime. But there is nothing about being poor that makes you a criminal. There are other factors at work. Same is true for education. To focus on these two factors is to ignore/neglect the real cause of the problems we are trying to solve.

Bottom line: If a person has a strong set of morals/ethics they won't become criminals. If they don't, they very likely will resort to crime. But these are instilled by a person's culture and are not dependent on income/education.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Summit

Since when did violent criminals care about laws, gun control or otherwise?

now please excuse me while I go puke because I read too many spook-jer exchanges (1 being too many). Why don't I just ignore spook already?

---

don't forget to vote for my avatar first! :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spook

BLAHfuckingBLAH

---

For fuck sake! Are you still talking?!:nonono2:

Unbelievable. I didn't think I would ever put a non-alias on my ignore list. You just proved me wrong.

You just made my ignore list. Don't bother replying, I won't be able to see it.