STOP THE GUNS

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Selective reading there I think:

Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


However, do you not agree that the world would be a better place if there were no guns at all and never had been?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


There's no guns allowed in England - still have crime, huh? Guess the guns aren't the causative factor, hmm?

I will ask the same question again and maybe you could answer it this time...:

However, do you not agree that the world would be a better place if there were no guns at all and never had been?

Maybe selective understanding on your part? How could my answer be anything but a disagreement, ESPECIALLY with the explanation below it that you snipped? Just for your sake, however, I'll answer again.

You purportedly already HAVE that gun free utopia, there in Merry Olde - not having much of an effect on the crime rate, is it? I'd say that's enough of an answer to prove my point, and answer yours.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Amazon 7]

Quote

However, do you not agree that the world would be a better place if there were no guns at all and never had been?

Not really... as an example.. I hate to use this BUT... think of the movie 2001 A Space Oddessy.... remember the proto humans.. they got a bone.. and killed another proto-human.

HUMANS have used weapons of one sort for millions of years.. we are good at it. That is why we are essentially at the top of the food chain.. and when does go to an environment where we are not and are threatened.. we take along the best weaopn we can find.. I prefer the .44 magnum myself.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

However, do you not agree that the world would be a better place if there were no guns at all and never had been?

I'll make a leap and agree that, yes, the world would be a better place if there were no guns at all and never had been.

It's still a leap. There HAVE been guns and there ARE guns, and there will be guns for the future. As Ice-T sang, "Try to ban the AK? I've got ten of em stashed with a case of hand grenades."

So, In seeing that video, I saw a guy who had a gun that he wasn't supposed to. (I also noticed other unhealthy habits, like drinking sodas and eating fast food - even driving on the wrong side of the road). He figured there wasn't anyone else who had a gun, so he brandished it. Obviously, not being trained proper respect for firearms or even respect for people, he used it.

Yeah, it would have been swell if there was no gun. But there was. Like it or not, for a gun-free state to work there must be no cheaters. If a cheater wants a gun, then another cheater will get him one. If he can't do that, then he will build him one.

The only way for a state to make sure there are no cheaters is to impose Draconian penalties on the possession, sale, transport or manufacture of them. These measures would be intolerable in Western societies.

Therefore, it must be admitted that guns have been around and will be around. The world would have been a better place without heroin, but it is here and has been and isn't going away. The world would have been a better place without cocaine, but it is here and has been and isn't going away.

So, since the only LOGICAL thing to do is admit that guns will be around, the only just, fair and equitable thing to do is to give people the chance to have guns to defend themselves.

Just as much as the blood of those who suffer accidental deaths is on the hands of those like me who support the right to bear arms, the blood of victims who were never given a fighting chance is on the hands of the cold and heartless people who view their lives as unimportnat when compared to the evils that a gun can cause when in the wrong hands.

Right now in England, guns are ONLY in the hands of wrongdoers or a bully government. Here's an idea - England should first disarm its government. The police and military should disarm. Why should they be excepted from a gun ban?

If you think about the reasons why they should be excepted from a gun ban, you are confirming the reasons why guns are good to have. It shows the benefit of them. And it is a classist, elitist, bigoted and imperialistic view of society to suggest that peasants should not be allowed to have such things - only the government.

Macchiavelli would be proud. (Actually, he wouldn't. The Prince was his dissertation and venting on despotic rule)

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Scoop 0]

God bless melodramatic America. Who said an armed society is a polite society? What a crock of shit.

Just remember this is UK culture and not US so most of what your saying just doesn't ring true over here.

My point wasn't to bring up this debate again as its been done to death. It was more to raise awareness of the campaign and support. As someone stated its more about pressuring society to stand up against those who do own guns illegally and get them to give up their guns.

If you think this campaign is targetted at hardened criminals then you really must be thick as shit. Its directed at youths who see guns (and knives) as a status symbol and can end up getting into situations they needn't be in when fueled by testosterone, fear, adrenaline and bravado.

If your arguing the only way to be fair, now its too late, is to arm everyone, maybe you should tell your president that, when in his 'world police' role hes trying to prevent the armaments of other countries so he knows he can still beat the shit out of them if he has to

[SpeedRacer 1]

The phrase "Stop the guns" sounds weird.

Were the guns going somewhere?

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

The phrase "Stop the guns" sounds weird.

Were the guns going somewhere?

Yup... the bobbies were chasing them down the lane yelling "Stop! Stop, or I'll yell "stop" again!"

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Who said an armed society is a polite society? What a crock of shit.

Lazurus Long.. in a book by Robert Heinlein

[SpeedRacer 1]

I just have this image of guns sprouting little feet & marching down the street. And a bunch of protestors trying to stop them.

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[Scoop 0]

Quote

Yup... the bobbies were chasing them down the lane yelling "Stop! Stop, or I'll yell "stop" again!"

Why, do officers in the US shoot someone if they make off from them then? Is that person running away such a threat that they need to be shot. Theres 2 options here, either your talking shit (which I believe to be the case) or all officers really are that fat over there that their only hope of detaining someone is if they are in a body bag.

Cut down on your pork life mate, get some exercise!

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Why, do officers in the US shoot someone if they make off from them then?

perhaps they committed a crime and are a threat to commit a repeat crime if they get away?

Do you also think they should only shoot them in the shoe in order to trip them?

Perhaps a cop, when facing a knife wielding criminal, should also disarm and face him only with his own knife. That would even it up......

just to match stereotypes with you - over here, not every crook is drunk off his ass and just a minor nuisance. not every cop call is a bar fight

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[Scoop 0]

My point is there are more officer response options than a use of deadly force. Believe it or not I don't run down the road blowing a whistle asking people politely to stop running away from me.

When firearms are used they certainly don't aim for non lethal areas as thats not practical. They fire at the centre mass to eliminate the threat, whatever the injuries are, thats dealt with afterwards if possible.

I don't understand your point really

As for your stereotypes, your thinking of the Irish, thay are the drunks

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

God bless melodramatic America.

We like out melodrama. I'd rather be a melodramatic yank than king, queen or even jack of europe. I would like to be an earl and an OBE, but just so I could be an "earlobe."

Quote

If your arguing the only way to be fair, now its too late, is to arm everyone, maybe you should tell your president that, when in his 'world police' role hes trying to prevent the armaments of other countries so he knows he can still beat the shit out of them if he has to

So, we are in agreement. I see that you get my point. Power is a zero sum game. He with gun gets a bigger share. When someone has a gun, the way to balance the power is to let others have them.

Quote

Who said an armed society is a polite society?

I don't know who said it first, but I just said it. If a person think that the next person that he tries to mug may be packing a little heat, he'd tend to consider whether it's worth the risk to display bad manners.

Quote

Just remember this is UK culture and not US so most of what your saying just doesn't ring true over here.

Fine. So long as you Just remember this is US culture and not UK so most of what your saying just doesn't ring true over here. So I won't bitch about your policies and you won't bitch about ours. I can, however, point out flaws in it. Maybe even say, "I told you so." You can do the same thing.

Man, people hate when I use their logic against them.

Quote

If you think this campaign is targetted at hardened criminals then you really must be thick as shit.

Mentally, I'm as thick as diarrhea - thoughts pour out so easily that I struggle to hold them in. Then they explode forth with great force. From a physical sense, yeah, my girth could cause some serious constipation.

Quote

Its directed at youths who see guns (and knives) as a status symbol and can end up getting into situations they needn't be in when fueled by testosterone, fear, adrenaline and bravado.

So, it's to show kids that guns are not a status symbol. A good thing, says I. But it's what parents should be doing, isn't it?

Also, would you believe anything your gov says about status symbols? I wouldn't.

And note that the real factors you mentioned are testosterone, fear, adrenaline and bravado. Need I also mention the group dynamic at work? Hey, if confronted by a group of testosterone laden, fearful, adrenaline raging chest-pumping guys who can snap, I'd prefer to have a little something to let them know that their emotions and actions can be controlled if they let them. A little something to tip their balance from "fight" to "flight."

Youths typically fail to see long term consequences, like jail if they get caught, etc. But they do have the perception to recognize that potential victim has a gun, and the short term prospect is getting shot. From what they've heard, getting shot hurts, and they don't want that. Thus, a short-term solution works better for them in the long run.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[shropshire 0]

<>.... what? I bet that you policemens rules of engagement aren't that lax.... He may have commited another crime oneday if I didn't waste hime, your honour.

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[Scoop 0]

Mostly good points. We need to stay in agreement that different cultures have different ways of doing things. To suggest that the British public should be armed is quite frankly scary and I believe most would be in agreement with me. I wouldn't let most loose with a firework let alone a gun.

Your quite right about the group dynamic thing. Groups can be explosive and do things they wouldn't normally do alone. But peer pressure etc causes kids to join gangs and also for security in some parts of the UK (thining big cities)

As for parenting. Behave. The parents are barely adults themselves. I had parents teaching the kids (no more than 3 years old) to throw bottles at us when we go on the estate. What kind of parent is an alcoholic teenage repeat offender.

Most of the kids I know in these gangs have no parental guidance. They are kicked out of the house all day and night and return when its convenient for their parents, left to walk the streets. They get in big gangs, drink alcohol have disagreements with other gangs and get involved in street crime and when you inform their parents they couldnt give a fuck as the next night they are back out on the streets again



Maybe its time we started licenceing who can have kids. Some of them just don't have a chance

[Skyrad 0]

The problem is the attitudes of the kids. I don't think for a second that that video is going to make a blind bit of difference. Sure we should try and change their behaviour but I just don't think the film is an effective way of doing it. We also have a massive knife problem because the problem is these kids don't know reality from fiction. I'd like to see a program where youths get to talk to the mothers and children of knife and gun victims. where they are exposed to photos and where posible actual bodies of victims of these crimes. I'd like to see the punishment for carrying these weapons bloody harsh is camps which are so bloody hard that the little shits would rather hang themselves than go back to reoffend. I'd like to see the program run as compulsory for all offenders of violent crime. What I don't want to see is another pathetic attempt to be cool whilst showing a message. I haven't posted much in this thread but its inacurate in places. Not all handguns are illegal in the UK and you'd most likely be shocked to see some of the weapons that are legal. The point is that as already mentioned, itt really isn't the gun that is the problem but the idiots holding them. I'd also like to see alot more resources go to the Customs service to restore the level of inspections required to detect the import of illegal weapons and drugs.

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

If you walk round with a weapon for self defence you either feel very unsafe in your environment, are a little bit funny in the head, feel that you might need it (ie because you have a habbit of winding people up) or are doing it because its macho.

Ever been a Boy Scout?

Quote

The chances of me ever needing a handgun are extremely minimal and if I had the choice between carrying one round my whole life and probably not needing it or going with out, I'd go without, as if I could be bothered maintaining that and lugging it around with me.

The same could be said of condoms....But I would carry one anyway

Really, Guns do not kill people. They are a tool, and if someone wants to kill someone they are going to do it with any tool.

Allowing people to defened themselves is a good thing IMO.

If you notice you are griping about illegal uses of weapons. So crush those that break the law, not own the tool.

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

However, do you not agree that the world would be a better place if there were no guns at all and never had been?

No, people killed people long before guns existed. If they were never created they would still kill each other. Human nature, not the "Curse of the Gun".

Please wxplain why people are killed every year without guns?

[Scoop 0]

People can defend themselves. I'm sure I've covered this numerous times. It seems to me that alot of you guys cant even comprehend a confrontaional situation where a gun isn't involved. Gun crime is actually very ow in the UK and the amount of people injured by guns is even lower!

A dirty bomb is just a tool too, don't hate the bomb, hate the extremists

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

People can defend themselves.

So, a 50 year old man has the same ability as a 25 year old man? How about a 30 year old woman vs a 25 year old man?

Now how about a 50 year old man, and 5 25 year old men?

Does the 50 year old really have a chance? Does the 30 year old woman?

Like it or not, not everyone is 200 pounds and studies martial arts 5 days a week.

Quote

A dirty bomb is just a tool too, don't hate the bomb, hate the extremists

YES! With out the extremist, there would be no bomb in the first place. You wanna throw the BOMB in jail?

Besides you claim that you have peace over there, then you write this:

Quote

I had parents teaching the kids (no more than 3 years old) to throw bottles at us when we go on the estate

Seems to me that you have a violent society already.

It is a shame that you choose to breed victims.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

My point is there are more officer response options than a use of deadly force.

Indeed. And deadly force is only used when there is a threat of death by the person against whom deadly force is used. "Suicide by cop" became a vogue thing. Heck, have cops kill you and maybe a lawsuit can take care of your family. And still, despite this, the most acclaimed piece of police work is a video of a police sniper using deadly force to shoot the pistol out of the guy's hand.

Cops do everythign in their power not to kill. The husband of my wife's best friend since childhood is a local cop who was in the situation of kill or be killed, and he chose the former. He also deals with the consequences.

Guess why I couldn't be a cop. There's a reason why cops have such huge drinking problems. Why they have such family problems. Why they commit suicide at an alarming rate.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Scoop 0]

Quote

So, a 50 year old man has the same ability as a 25 year old man? How about a 30 year old woman vs a 25 year old man?

That was a small range of your samples. You are touching on impact factors vaguely. These will affect a persons perceived position of disadvantage. Here are a few for example (list is endless)

Age,
Weight,
Size,
Build,
Behaviour,
Drink or Drugs,
Weapons used or present,
Lighting,
Number of perceived aggressors,
Number of perceived victims,
Persons mannerisms,
Location,
Tactical response options

So for example if we build on your first examples and assume we are in the UK as the topic was originally

EXAMPLE 1:

50 year old man is confronted by a 25 year old man, no apprant cause of dispute. 25 year old is being very aggressive and squaring up to him. He is swearing loudly and tenses his fists, his turns his body into a bladed fighting stance raises his arms. His head is tipped forward to protect his neck, his face is pale as his blood had rushed to all muscles and neccesary organs ready for a confrontation and to prevent bleeding in event of an injury (bodies natural defence). He has now stopped shouting (second major warning sign) and is focused on you. Its day time, in the town centre, he appears to have been drinking and doesnt seem to be in posession of any weapon.

You'd probably be justified in delivery a pre-emptive strike, be it a kick, punch, palm heel strike or other basic movement. Alternatively of course, you could try and get away if there is an escape route and a safe location. For example into a busy shop. IT WOULD NOT BE PROPORTIONATE TO USE A FIREARM IN THIS CIRCUMSTANCE

EXAMPLE 2:

30 year old woman is confronted by the same man. She would probably perceive herself to be at more of a risk than the unlucky candidate in example one and so would be justified in using a higher use of force based on how she felt at the time. For example she may pick something up thats to hand to defend herself or gouge his eyes. I would still say at this point USE OF AFIREARM IS NOT PROPORTIONATE

EXAMPLE 3 (my own)

Downtown Shittsville, some sleezy dark backstreet. An 18 year old woman of slight build is confronted by a group of males aged late 20s. They make improper advances and suggest she comes with them, when she forcefully declines they inform her she doesn't have an option and one of them produces a knife and another leans forward to take hold of her. At this point she screams "FREEZE MOTHERFUCKERS!!" and pulls a pistol out of her handbag. She makes many clear demands for them to back off and moves back herself to create space despite this one male still advances with a knife, she therefore discharge sthe weapon and drops the aggressor. The other males leave. THAT WOULD BE PROPORTIONATE


Building on aprecious post... therefore shooting someone who ran AWAY from you would also not be proportionate. Exactly whos life was in danger at that point?

EDIT TO ADD: If you would pull a gun on anyone who would have a dispute with you at the first sign of aggression you shouldn't be carrying a gun in my opinion. But then, that wouldn't happen as we all know as America is armed, its such a polite society and people don't have disagreements

[kallend 2,026]

Quote

Quote

Incidentally you failed to answer my original question...

Statistical data from the US suggests that crime is reduced when the public has an effective form of self defense.
.

Ummm - there is very considerable disagreement about that among bona-fide criminologists, and a lot of Lott's work has been discredited.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

That was a small range of your samples. You are touching on impact factors vaguely. These will affect a persons perceived position of disadvantage. Here are a few for example (list is endless)

Yes, the list is endless. But a weapon will level things out in a hurry.

Quote

50 year old man is confronted by a 25 year old man, no apprant cause of dispute. 25 year old is being very aggressive and squaring up to him. He is swearing loudly and tenses his fists, his turns his body into a bladed fighting stance raises his arms. His head is tipped forward to protect his neck, his face is pale as his blood had rushed to all muscles and neccesary organs ready for a confrontation and to prevent bleeding in event of an injury (bodies natural defence). He has now stopped shouting (second major warning sign) and is focused on you. Its day time, in the town centre, he appears to have been drinking and doesnt seem to be in posession of any weapon.

You'd probably be justified in delivery a pre-emptive strike, be it a kick, punch, palm heel strike or other basic movement. Alternatively of course, you could try and get away if there is an escape route and a safe location. For example into a busy shop. IT WOULD NOT BE PROPORTIONATE TO USE A FIREARM IN THIS CIRCUMSTANCE

1. What if the perp already started attacking?
2. You are assuming that the 50 year old is capable of performing those strikes in a manner that would be effective. Not everyone is.
3. Also alcohol and drugs can reduce the fel of pain of an attack. Making the attacker much less likely to quit.

So, maybe the USE of a gun is not warented without physical attack, but pulling one out with the intent to use it would make the guy split. In taht case the "I have a bigger club" can work as a deterant.

Quote

30 year old woman is confronted by the same man. She would probably perceive herself to be at more of a risk than the unlucky candidate in example one and so would be justified in using a higher use of force based on how she felt at the time. For example she may pick something up thats to hand to defend herself or gouge his eyes. I would still say at this point USE OF AFIREARM IS NOT PROPORTIONATE

Pick up what? A pair of nunchucks? A staff? Get real, very few people can use a weapon much less something they "find" if they are lucky.

Again, her pulling out a fire arm would give the perp the chance to cut and run, even without shots being fired. And if not then she would not have to try and fight someone that could be twice her size.

Quote

Downtown Shittsville, some sleezy dark backstreet. An 18 year old woman of slight build is confronted by a group of males aged late 20s. They make improper advances and suggest she comes with them, when she forcefully declines they inform her she doesn't have an option and one of them produces a knife and another leans forward to take hold of her. At this point she screams "FREEZE MOTHERFUCKERS!!" and pulls a pistol out of her handbag. She makes many clear demands for them to back off and moves back herself to create space despite this one male still advances with a knife, she therefore discharge sthe weapon and drops the aggressor. The other males leave. THAT WOULD BE PROPORTIONATE

But you will not allow her to have that option. So what would happen then?

Quote

Building on aprecious post... therefore shooting someone who ran AWAY from you would also not be proportionate. Exactly whos life was in danger at that point?

Who said to automatically shoot someone? A pretty big misunderstanding for you and others is that anyone with a gun is looking to use it. My Mom and Dad have been "packing" for 10+ years and they have NEVER pulled it out, much less shot anyone.

However, I do have a buddy that was confronted by a guy in a drive through. There were cars in front of him and behind him, so he was locked into place. A guy came out of the car in front of him and started walking towards his car. Carrying a knife and a baseball bat, and acting strange. My buddy pulled his pistol out and when the guy got to his window and started yelling at the guy to give him his money...My buddy tapped the window glass with the pistol and then pointed it at him.

The guy left in a hurry and my buddy shot no one.

That I would call a win.

Quote

EDIT TO ADD: If you would pull a gun on anyone who would have a dispute with you at the first sign of aggression you shouldn't be carrying a gun in my opinion

Agreed. Notice only you think that we are all Wild Bill over here. I have had a drunk push me and make threats against me. I had a .357 but it never saw the light of day. I didn't need it. But I will admit it felt nice to know that I was not screwed if he had a weapon or some buddies.

Quote

But then, that wouldn't happen as we all know as America is armed, its such a polite society and people don't have disagreements

And England has tons of lovable drunks looking for fights right?

Get over the stereotypes and Hollywood BS. Ask yourself this...In a situation where you have a guy with a knife threatening you, would you rather have a gun, or nothing? Now forget you are 200 pounds and trained?

In your world the girl in your third scenario might be rapped or killed. In mine she has a fighting chance.

[Scoop 0]

I can tell you mate being 210 pounds (get it right) and 'trained' or not, its still scary as fuck and I've never been in that situation luckily. By the way, the extent of my training in knife defence was to practice pat, wrap, attack. But ultimately if you can, get away from the weapon. Only fight if you are trapped.

I can see where a gun is handy for sure but these instances just don't occur alot over here. Im serious, I'm not saying we live in some twee country free of crime, because we all know thats crap, but stuff like that doesn't really happen.

I believe it was you who said I live in a country of victims? What about all the instances where legally held weapons have been accidentally discharged and hurt or killed people. What about when peoples kids have taken them and got into bother and ended up dead or shooting up a school (as an example)

Anyway, I don't paticularly want to argue this furthur as I'm pretty certain that the way things are over here is good for us but could be better and the same could also be said for how things are going on your side of the pond. I don't want to debate which is better as we will simply never agree, statistics can be provided proving and disproving both ways.

I feel that I am in quite a good position to comment on certainly local crime and say that we don't need our citizens arming to defend themselves and we don't even need a routinely armed police force, although I wouldn't be against the last given that they frequently attend situations on a daily basis that many people wouldn't even see in a year let alone get themselves directly involved with.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

What about all the instances where legally held weapons have been accidentally discharged and hurt or killed people. What about when peoples kids have taken them and got into bother and ended up dead or shooting up a school (as an example).

this is a good point to take up. With culture treating guns as more and more of an outcast part of life, parents do not know enough to teach their kids how to handle and respect firearms - how can they? they are so scared of the hype that the parents don't even have common sense on this responsibility. The more guns are demonized, the worse it gets. Also, the more guns are demonized the more youth sees them as ego items and less as tools - also exascerbating the problem.

If guns were as normal as, say, hammers, in everyday life, they wouldn't be an issue.

In other words, all the hype and hysteria is creating exactly the environment the anti-gun wackos imagined - validating their originally, wacko assumptions. Believe me, I'm not thrilled with someone who is scared of guns owning one either. I have no issued at all with someone familiar and respectful of them owning one though.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants