rehmwa 2 #76 December 18, 2007 QuoteHow's that gun ban working out in DC, Professor? I believe the DC natives are "trebling" in their boots ... 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 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
warpedskydiver 0 #77 December 18, 2007 Quote Quote Quote Strangely enough my room in college (back in the '60s) had a big area of patched plaster on one wall. Apparently a former student, one Christopher Roads, had fired a small bore target pistol at the wall at some time, for which he got into a certain amount of trouble with the college authorities. Chris Roads went on to be a member of the UK Olympic team, then deputy director of the Imperial War Museum and producer of the BBC documentary "The Gun" (and author of its associated book). He was also the driving force behind turning Duxford Airfield into Europe's largest aviation museum. Guns and booze are a great combination for college partiesSounds like an interesting guy. His book is out of print, but available on the used market. We had lots of interesting students at Cambridge in the '60s, like Eric Idle, Graham Chapman and John Cleese, Stephen Hawking, Brian Josephson, Arianna Stassinopoulos (now Huffington), Sonia Antonia Maino (now Ghandi), most of Pink Floyd, and me. I was the only one that took up skydiving, though. Too bad you did not turn out half as interesting as the rest of those other fine students. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vpozzoli 0 #78 December 18, 2007 Quote No I am aware that the Dunblane massacre was the trigger for action it does not necessarily mean that gun crime was not rising and hence the politicians felt that action was needed. You should give your MPs more credit. Even they were perfectly aware that this particular legislation was not going to affect the crime rate in any way, but simply prevent events like Dunblane and Hungerford from happening ever again. Which it did, by the way, and hence was a complete success. Ciao. Vale Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #79 December 18, 2007 QuoteQuote How's that gun ban working out in DC, Professor? Could be better, but for the presence of Virginia a mile away. Yeah, that didn't work when Mayor Berry tried it, either - sorry. If DC's violent crime rate (1508.4/100k) is due to VIRGINIA's guns, why is Virginia's violent crime rate 5.34 times LOWER at (282.2/100k)? QuoteAs I wrote previously, a patchwork of different laws is absolutely useless, which is why you gun enthusiasts are so adamantly opposed to actually doing anything about it. Maybe because it's ALWAYS the legal gun owners that have to make all the changes - just like the Dems, the gun-banners' idea of 'compromise' is "You give up something and we don't give up anything".Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #80 December 18, 2007 Quote Quote No I am aware that the Dunblane massacre was the trigger for action it does not necessarily mean that gun crime was not rising and hence the politicians felt that action was needed. You should give your MPs more credit. Even they were perfectly aware that this particular legislation was not going to affect the crime rate in any way, but simply prevent events like Dunblane and Hungerford from happening ever again. Which it did, by the way, and hence was a complete success. Ciao. Vale Except that you can't say it won't happen "ever again" - you can only say "it hasn't happened since".Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,108 #81 December 18, 2007 You know, having to choose Washington DC, the most atypical city in the entire USA, to justify your position just draws attention to how WEAK your position is. Having to compare a city with a state to justify your position just draws attention to how WEAK your position is.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #82 December 18, 2007 Quote You know, having to choose Washington DC, the most atypical city in the entire USA, to justify your position just draws attention to how WEAK your position is. Crime is crime, Professor - and you yourself seem to have no problems grasping the weakest of straws to try to make your point.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vpozzoli 0 #83 December 18, 2007 Quote Quote Quote No I am aware that the Dunblane massacre was the trigger for action it does not necessarily mean that gun crime was not rising and hence the politicians felt that action was needed. You should give your MPs more credit. Even they were perfectly aware that this particular legislation was not going to affect the crime rate in any way, but simply prevent events like Dunblane and Hungerford from happening ever again. Which it did, by the way, and hence was a complete success. Ciao. Vale Except that you can't say it won't happen "ever again" - you can only say "it hasn't happened since". Excuse me, what is it exactly that I cannot say will happen "ever again". Just want to make sure you understand what is actually being discussed before replying to you. Cheers, Valentino Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,108 #84 December 18, 2007 QuoteQuote You know, having to choose Washington DC, the most atypical city in the entire USA, to justify your position just draws attention to how WEAK your position is. Crime is crime, Professor - and you yourself seem to have no problems grasping the weakest of straws to try to make your point. Lets take a look at those straws: Strong correlation between suicide AND homidice rates and % of households with guns, compared state by state in the US. Peer reviewed research previously cited. Strong correlation between gun fatalities and % households owning guns, compared between English speaking "western" nations. Correlation between handgun purchase and subsequent risk of shooting death in the USA. Peer reviewed research previously cited. Over 300,000 guns EACH YEAR transfer into the hands of criminals from "law abiding citizens" in the USA. Dallas, Texas has more firearm homicides each year than the WHOLE of England. As does Houston. As does San Antonio. All you can come up with as rebuttal is Washington DC, the most untypical city in the entire USA, located right next to a state with very easy access to guns. Seems to me that the straw grasping is yours.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pop 0 #85 December 18, 2007 QuoteI do not want or feel the need to own a gun Ill 2nd that.7 ounce wonders, music and dogs that are not into beer Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pop 0 #86 December 18, 2007 QuoteI do recall that folks in the UK generally don't grow up around firearms And proportionally gun crime in UK is lower that in the US7 ounce wonders, music and dogs that are not into beer Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
christelsabine 1 #87 December 18, 2007 Quote ... Too bad you did not turn out half as interesting as the rest of those other fine students. Whoa! Does that imply you know anything about the others named? dudeist skydiver # 3105 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1969912 0 #88 December 18, 2007 Quote Quote Quote But you are not in favor of doing anything to enforce such a ban if it causes you the slightest inconvenience, and then you happily bray that such prohibitions don't work because "criminals will always get guns" Criminals will always get guns if they want them. QED John, assuming you actually read my post, you know that I didn't simply say "criminals will always get guns...". Instead, I posted data/analysis/example information to support my assertion. If you are truly interested in discussing the US gun homicide problem (if any), why didn't you comment on that information? Are you interested in serious discussion on the subject or not? The information I posted is quoted below: Quote Criminals will always get guns if they want them. Consider England as an example. They are much less homicidal than us, and don't have anywhere near the per capita gun possession that we do (6/100 people v. 90/100 people). Also, they have had strict national licensing, etc. since at least the 1930's. All legally owned guns in the country were registered if required, so when some guns were later banned, there was a high compliance rate. Additionally, the British citizens were likely much more willing to accept more restrictions the us. Should be easy to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, right? Well, since the 1988 and 1997 restricions their firearm murder rate has not undergone a statistically significant change in either direction, and criminals are still getting guns. People can get them illegally by mail, locally through the black market, or whatever. People are even converting BB guns into .22 Cal rifles. Ditto for blank sports starting guns and even deactivated (chamber/barrel welded in) firearms. Considering the homicidal nature of US criminals and the huge supply of weapons here, I can't think of what might work.... BTW, would you please restate your ideas in re a possible solution? I'm having trouble finding it because I don't know what thread/post it was in. thanks "Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ." -NickDG Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
philh 0 #89 December 18, 2007 "That story was about the number of people that have been hurt or killed, not just about the number of people murdered. There's a difference. Plenty of people get shot with guns, but don't die. " agreed. but forgive me for thinking that homiicide is more important than injury.If you feel the Uks gun laws are such a failure how do you explain that gun homicides are so low and falling? perhaps all our criminlas are bad shots? A gun friednly culture is unlikely to make them worse.You can focus on the London numbers quoted in the Mirror if you want or you could focus on these quotes from the Home Office report: "Firearms (including air weapons) were used in 21,521 recorded crimes in England and Wales in 2005/06, a fall of six per cent or 1,375 crimes compared to 2004/05. This is the second consecutive fall in firearm crimes following a five per cent fall in the previous year... Gun crime remains a relatively rare event. Firearms (including air weapons) were used in 0.4 per cent of all recorded crime: " Compare to the USA where gun were used roughly in 400,000 crimes per year.Even when you correct for population differences thats still a huge discrepancy. Not one Id be really proud of if I were an American. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #90 December 18, 2007 Quote Quote I do not want or feel the need to own a gun Ill 2nd that. That is fine. But leave mine along"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
warpedskydiver 0 #91 December 19, 2007 QuoteQuoteI do not want or feel the need to own a gun Ill 2nd that. And I can understand your point, and would not want anyone to force you to have to change. I just wish all anti gun advocates would simply do as you do, instead of trying to force their will upon everyone else. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #92 December 19, 2007 QuoteQuote Except that you can't say it won't happen "ever again" - you can only say "it hasn't happened since". Excuse me, what is it exactly that I cannot say will happen "ever again". Just want to make sure you understand what is actually being discussed before replying to you. Cheers, Valentino Can't remember what you wrote? Let me refresh your memory: "prevent events like Dunblane and Hungerford from happening ever again."Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #93 December 19, 2007 Quote Lets take a look at those straws: Strong correlation between suicide AND homidice rates and % of households with guns, compared state by state in the US. Peer reviewed research previously cited. Kellerman damn sure isn't "research" QuoteStrong correlation between gun fatalities and % households owning guns, compared between English speaking "western" nations. Still waiting for the actual DATA, not a synopsis of some report. QuoteCorrelation between handgun purchase and subsequent risk of shooting death in the USA. Peer reviewed research previously cited. Peer reviewed research previously debunked. QuoteOver 300,000 guns EACH YEAR transfer into the hands of criminals from "law abiding citizens" in the USA. Still waiting on the hard data on that, as well, showing the main source of crime guns. QuoteDallas, Texas has more firearm homicides each year than the WHOLE of England. As does Houston. As does San Antonio. And Japan has more suicide by hanging - what's your point, other than trying to blame the guns rather than the criminals? QuoteAll you can come up with as rebuttal is Washington DC, the most untypical city in the entire USA, located right next to a state with very easy access to guns. YOU are the one trying to assert that it's all about the guns. DC is analogous to a state for purposes of the UCR stats. You still have YET to prove that DC crime is due to Virtinia guns. You're also need to explain the GROSS disparity between DC crime and Virginia crime if you're going to try that tack. QuoteSeems to me that the straw grasping is yours. In your world, I'm sure it does.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vpozzoli 0 #94 December 19, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuote Except that you can't say it won't happen "ever again" - you can only say "it hasn't happened since". Excuse me, what is it exactly that I cannot say will happen "ever again". Just want to make sure you understand what is actually being discussed before replying to you. Cheers, Valentino Can't remember what you wrote? Let me refresh your memory: "prevent events like Dunblane and Hungerford from happening ever again." And what exactly happened at Dunblane and Hungerford? Vale Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #95 December 19, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote Except that you can't say it won't happen "ever again" - you can only say "it hasn't happened since". Excuse me, what is it exactly that I cannot say will happen "ever again". Just want to make sure you understand what is actually being discussed before replying to you. Cheers, Valentino Can't remember what you wrote? Let me refresh your memory: "prevent events like Dunblane and Hungerford from happening ever again." And what exactly happened at Dunblane and Hungerford? Vale We all know quite well what happened there - quit playing the innocent. It is your presumption that they "can never happen again" that is incorrect, as you well know.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nigel99 574 #96 December 19, 2007 Quote"prevent events like Dunblane and Hungerford from happening ever again." And what exactly happened at Dunblane and Hungerford? Vale We all know quite well what happened there - quit playing the innocent. QuoteHowever because the Hungerford massacre also involved a legal gun owner killing with his legally held guns, public feeling had turned against private gun ownership, allowing a much more restrictive ban on handguns to pass. I think the point is that with a gun ban in place there are no more legal handgun owners and therefore by definition it can never happen again.Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #97 December 19, 2007 If you wish to split hairs that finely just to 'win your point', that's fine - I think everyone else understood what I was getting at.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vpozzoli 0 #98 December 19, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuote Except that you can't say it won't happen "ever again" - you can only say "it hasn't happened since". Excuse me, what is it exactly that I cannot say will happen "ever again". Just want to make sure you understand what is actually being discussed before replying to you. Cheers, Valentino Can't remember what you wrote? Let me refresh your memory: "prevent events like Dunblane and Hungerford from happening ever again." And what exactly happened at Dunblane and Hungerford? Vale We all know quite well what happened there - quit playing the innocent. It is your presumption that they "can never happen again" that is incorrect, as you well know. Ok, since you're not playing along, I'll just state plainly what is by now quite obvious to everybody but you, apparently. So, what happened at Dunblade and Hungerford was that a common, law-abiding citizen, went bonkers and shot up a bunch of people with his legally acquired and owned guns. As a result, legislation was passed making it illegal for private citizens to acquire and own that type of firearm. So, as of today: 1 - all previously owned handguns have been confiscated, with no exception (gun registry) 1 - it is impossible for a private citizen to acquire a handgun legally, as no gun shop is allowed to sell them any more. As a result of this there are no legally owned handguns in the hands of any British citizen, and this will remain so as long as this legislation is not repealed. So, in light of this, care to explain to all of us how the fuck a British citizen that decides to go berserk is going to shoot up a bunch of people with a handgun he, as a matter of fact, does not and cannot own? I hardly think that pointing his index finger at people and going "Pow pow!" with his mouth will have quite the same effect, wouldn't you agree? It's quite clear that, as long as this legislation is in effect, what the legislator wanted to prevent is, in fact, never going to happen. Care to explain why you think differently? Cheers, Vale Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #99 December 19, 2007 I'm sure the families of the gun homicides mentioned in the Home Office report are comforted by the fact that it wasn't a LEGAL gun that killed their loved ones, as well... Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vpozzoli 0 #100 December 19, 2007 Quote I'm sure the families of the gun homicides mentioned in the Home Office report are comforted by the fact that it wasn't a LEGAL gun that killed their loved ones, as well... OK, just as I thought, you don't really have a point, only white noise. Bye bye. Vale Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
