mnealtx 0 #26 April 21, 2007 It's definitely subjective, and I do understand where you're coming from, as well - I don't agree with it, but I understand it.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Axe_Murderer 0 #27 April 21, 2007 QuoteCheers. I understand (and agree to some extent) your point but here in the U.K I'm not so sure that we feel the same way (yet). We dont feel too threatend (inner city folk may be more and more). In fact, I'd feel (very subjective) in more danger if I knew that more people were carrying guns on the streets (probably a very scary thought for most Brits). I agree, i'd feel uneasy about knowing people (and not knowing exactly who) were carry guns on the streets Agreed also, things might change as society gets more and more violent, i might change my mind then and be crying out for American style guns laws, but for me personally, we've not reached that stage yet.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,489 #28 April 21, 2007 QuoteIf you can find evidence of gun massacres (after Capone's time, please - I know about the Valentine's day massacre {which was Mafia gang violence related to Prohibition, if I recall correctly}), I'd like to see them. Just to clarify, you want to see if there were any massacres after prohibition but before 1968? Why only massacres?Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #29 April 21, 2007 QuoteQuoteIf you can find evidence of gun massacres (after Capone's time, please - I know about the Valentine's day massacre {which was Mafia gang violence related to Prohibition, if I recall correctly}), I'd like to see them. Just to clarify, you want to see if there were any massacres after prohibition but before 1968? Why only massacres? That's what the people against concealed carry for self defense rail on about ... "Gunshine State" "New Dodge City" "Blood in the streets". They don't care about individual murders, and they don't care about non-gun murders. Only the 'big stuff' that they can use to further their agenda. The number of murders and rate per 100k has greatly increased since 1968...even though the availability has declined... but yet the anti's still say it's due to the guns...Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #30 April 21, 2007 If I knew that some of the drongos that I work with had scissors let a lone a gun... I'd be taking early retirement..... today!! (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #31 April 21, 2007 Quote I agree that a sensible, law abiding citizen poses no threat if they keep a firearm, but where do you draw the line? Hell I want to draw the line at current military weaponry which is esentially banned here. I think it would be fun to have an older small tank with its little gun on it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Axe_Murderer 0 #32 April 21, 2007 Quote Quote Quote If you can find evidence of gun massacres (after Capone's time, please - I know about the Valentine's day massacre {which was Mafia gang violence related to Prohibition, if I recall correctly}), I'd like to see them. Just to clarify, you want to see if there were any massacres after prohibition but before 1968? Why only massacres? That's what the people against concealed carry for self defense rail on about ... "Gunshine State" "New Dodge City" "Blood in the streets". They don't care about individual murders, and they don't care about non-gun murders. Only the 'big stuff' that they can use to further their agenda. The number of murders and rate per 100k has greatly increased since 1968...even though the availability has declined... but yet the anti's still say it's due to the guns... I thought they were Springsteen albums Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #33 April 21, 2007 U of Texas - 1966 - certainly comes to mind. If it's true that the use/sale of drugs was minimal before the 60s, then you really should look at that as what has changed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
crotalus01 0 #34 April 22, 2007 so why not ban everything that is commonly used as a murder weapon? That would mean no more guns, hammers, baseball bats, knives, bows, crossbows, poisons, chemicals, drugs, etc. And those are just the fairly common weapons of choice. How would society be then? If you really get a bug up your ass to kill someone, you can find a way. Guns might make it a bit easier but they are not the only tool available for the pissed off or the determined. As for me and my house, we will serve the LORD... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Royd 0 #35 April 22, 2007 Quote there are pro's and con's for both arguments, you've gone for one approach, we've gone for the other, neither are right or wrong, BOTH are wright and wrong in equal measures So why the vehement argument? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freethefly 6 #36 April 22, 2007 QuoteI'm thinking of having this picture as my signature... it's ok isn't it? http://bfv.gametrack.org/images/rank/recruit.jpg Try this one"...And once you're gone, you can't come back When you're out of the blue and into the black." Neil Young Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhys 0 #37 April 22, 2007 QuoteAgreed also, things might change as society gets more and more violent, i might change my mind then and be crying out for American style guns laws, but for me personally, we've not reached that stage yet.... Finally I can see eye to eye with you. You came into these conversations 'guns blazing' and came across as an angry young man. I guess your user name doesn't help that stereotype? I hate hand guns too, they are not necessary. The problem America ha, is that the guns are already there in alarming numbers throughout the civilian societies. a hand gun ban and a 'proper' buy back scheme will reduce the number of fire arms available but will never get rid of them. what do you do? do you support the NRA that wants every kid to have their own gun or do you oppose them with no consequence? That seems like the only real 2 options for US citizens at present. There is a problem, people will die (unnecessarily), and there are things that can be done to lower the likelihood of such occurrences. Unfortunately it is too late for the US to stop it altogether. For the same reason you cant bring back the Dodo from extinction....What is done is done. you can blame the 2nd amendment. I'm just glad the country I will be retiring to (New Zealand) doesn't have such problems. We do have problems but I can never see our citizens shooting at each other in war. It hasn't been in our culture since the New Zealand wars almost 2 centuries ago..."When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites