- All Purchases made this month instantly go into the draw to win a USD $ 100.00 credit to your HoP account.
Forums > Social Discussion > apologies for bush
Login/Join to Participate
Posted:so sorry
-Such a price the gods exact for song: to become what we sing
-Seek freedom and become captive of your desires. Seek discipline and find your liberty.
-When the center of the storm does not move, you are in its path.
Posted:one thing about guns that Ill say in their defense:
going to a gun range and shooting away a big lot of ammo is way more fun than it has a right to be!
I don't like being around guns except at shooting ranges though - especially handguns. Rifles are ok though.
another point is that if you are going to be fighting a war with your weapon (the reason gun ownership is guaranteed in the USA), a handgun is virtually worthless - you need at least a carbine for that. handguns are great for committing crimes with though - just about perfect actually.
going to a gun range and shooting away a big lot of ammo is way more fun than it has a right to be!
I don't like being around guns except at shooting ranges though - especially handguns. Rifles are ok though.
another point is that if you are going to be fighting a war with your weapon (the reason gun ownership is guaranteed in the USA), a handgun is virtually worthless - you need at least a carbine for that. handguns are great for committing crimes with though - just about perfect actually.
-v-
Wiederstand ist Zwecklos!
Posted:Dio - my argument is that it doesn't seem to be working well for you and tens of thousands of dead people and thier relatives will agree.
And just because a country is founded in war and guns does that mean it always have to act through war and guns? I know your President seems to think so (whilst forgetting that a lot of those guns were paid for by the French).
And just because a country is founded in war and guns does that mean it always have to act through war and guns? I know your President seems to think so (whilst forgetting that a lot of those guns were paid for by the French).
Delete
Posted:
Dom. You have been alot more patient then i would have been. This is more a question of can you convert a *sorry guys* brainwashed american, then should they be allowed to own guns.
No offence meant by the brainwashed thing. Maybe you arn't. Maybe i am?!!?
Good luck Dom. I am going to go and read a book on the other side of the world, pretend America doesnt exist and dirty my brain some more.
PS I know, i know. I have met some lurvley americans.
Dom. You have been alot more patient then i would have been. This is more a question of can you convert a *sorry guys* brainwashed american, then should they be allowed to own guns. No offence meant by the brainwashed thing. Maybe you arn't. Maybe i am?!!?
Good luck Dom. I am going to go and read a book on the other side of the world, pretend America doesnt exist and dirty my brain some more.
PS I know, i know. I have met some lurvley americans.
There is a world made of air, one of earth and one of water.
And there is one made of fire, and all of them fight for supremacy. They are fighting now, in my head.
Posted:My thing Dio is when this country was founded, it took more than 10 seconds to load a gun.........have you ever seen the early settlers riffles? they took a few mins to load. now you have some clips with over 20 shots in them, riffles at the time of settelment, one shot.........see the differance?
You can't avoid pain by fencing yourself from it.
Some times you need the help of others more than anything else
But you have to let them close enough to help......
People want to be needed, I found that out too
Posted:"negative influence is needed just as much as positive, the balance thing ya know, you cant have good with out bad, light with out dark, peanut-butter with out jelly, no one side can ever have full controll, you'd loose balance, universal chaos, and such i think thats why this planet is dieing, not becasue evil is gaining controll or visa-versa, but with all the medical advances that keep people alive longer, and the more we cheat death, the universe has nothing to build off of, no energey returning to the source, and stuff..........well brain will understand that so bye.... "
Maybe thats why people are shooting each other with their legel weapons... trying to keep the universe in balance?
(Fryed fish - I couldn't agree more on both threads
)
Maybe thats why people are shooting each other with their legel weapons... trying to keep the universe in balance?
(Fryed fish - I couldn't agree more on both threads
)There is a world made of air, one of earth and one of water.
And there is one made of fire, and all of them fight for supremacy. They are fighting now, in my head.
Posted:Written by: Looper
Dom. You have been alot more patient then i would have been. This is more a question of can you convert a *sorry guys* brainwashed american, then should they be allowed to own guns.
No apologies necessary, unless you're trying to make some sort of generalization that ALL americans are brainwashed, which it does sound like. I'm really [censored] sick of all of these generalizations about americans. I know the elections pissed people off around the world, keep in mind they pissed off/saddened half the country as well. And no one seems to realize that efforts have taken place to overturn election results, that protests have been staged, letter writing campaigns, etc. And being a part of those efforts is pisses me off even more to see people who can't open their tiny little brains enough to see that there are two sides of every coin, so they decide to make sweeping generalizations about the populace of a country. Ignorance...
Written by: Looper
Good luck Dom. I am going to go and read a book on the other side of the world, pretend America doesnt exist and dirty my brain some more.
PS I know, i know. I have met some lurvley americans.
PS - So why say that then? Please do go muddy up your brain some more, and try to pretend that america doesn't exist(why stop there?).
Dom. You have been alot more patient then i would have been. This is more a question of can you convert a *sorry guys* brainwashed american, then should they be allowed to own guns. No apologies necessary, unless you're trying to make some sort of generalization that ALL americans are brainwashed, which it does sound like. I'm really [censored] sick of all of these generalizations about americans. I know the elections pissed people off around the world, keep in mind they pissed off/saddened half the country as well. And no one seems to realize that efforts have taken place to overturn election results, that protests have been staged, letter writing campaigns, etc. And being a part of those efforts is pisses me off even more to see people who can't open their tiny little brains enough to see that there are two sides of every coin, so they decide to make sweeping generalizations about the populace of a country. Ignorance...
Written by: Looper
Good luck Dom. I am going to go and read a book on the other side of the world, pretend America doesnt exist and dirty my brain some more.
PS I know, i know. I have met some lurvley americans.
PS - So why say that then? Please do go muddy up your brain some more, and try to pretend that america doesn't exist(why stop there?).
First intention, then enlightenment..
Ars Pyronomica
" Life is programmed. Whether death is programmed or not is yet to be determined."
Posted:Okay. I did mean the opologies stuff musashii. I spose i didn't mean 'pretend America doesn't exist', rather the situation? And that is why you are mad... cause when people think of America now they only think of the situation.
I wasn't, promise, and most people don't. I was also thinking bout my (american) flatmate (who i have spent the most time talking to bout the 'situation'), and the good that you country has done in the past. But at the moment it has almost entirely selfish, egotistical, short term ideas. I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT AMERICANS. I am talking about your countries agenda and political practices.
I don't care who you voted for. I was not attacking you or americans. It was badley (and hastely) worded and in retrostpect was incorrect. I am not trying to pretend america doesn't exist Musashii... Rather the opposite... i have been talking almost constantley to people about the situation, talked to politicians and people on the street. I meant it as a light hearted post, because, frankley, the thread depressed the hell out of me.
Once again, apologies... and this time you can take it personally, if you wish
I wasn't, promise, and most people don't. I was also thinking bout my (american) flatmate (who i have spent the most time talking to bout the 'situation'), and the good that you country has done in the past. But at the moment it has almost entirely selfish, egotistical, short term ideas. I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT AMERICANS. I am talking about your countries agenda and political practices.
I don't care who you voted for. I was not attacking you or americans. It was badley (and hastely) worded and in retrostpect was incorrect. I am not trying to pretend america doesn't exist Musashii... Rather the opposite... i have been talking almost constantley to people about the situation, talked to politicians and people on the street. I meant it as a light hearted post, because, frankley, the thread depressed the hell out of me.
Once again, apologies... and this time you can take it personally, if you wish
There is a world made of air, one of earth and one of water.
And there is one made of fire, and all of them fight for supremacy. They are fighting now, in my head.
Posted:hey man that peanut butter and jelly thing is under copy wright laws I want royalties damn it!
I want royalties damn it! You can't avoid pain by fencing yourself from it.
Some times you need the help of others more than anything else
But you have to let them close enough to help......
People want to be needed, I found that out too
Posted:hmm, this thread AND 'the situation' depress the hell out of me too. I understand what you meant now a little better tho, apologies accepted. It's just that above all the generalizations about americans sicken me, as any kind of prejudice does, and I've lost respect for quite a few people given their inability to measure an individual for who they are, not where they're from.
But to bash the current administration? Carry on then. I wish I had the luxury of even trying to stick my head in the sand for four years, but someone has to watch these pigs
It's just that above all the generalizations about americans sicken me, as any kind of prejudice does, and I've lost respect for quite a few people given their inability to measure an individual for who they are, not where they're from. But to bash the current administration? Carry on then. I wish I had the luxury of even trying to stick my head in the sand for four years, but someone has to watch these pigs
First intention, then enlightenment..
Ars Pyronomica
" Life is programmed. Whether death is programmed or not is yet to be determined."
Spanner
BRONZE Member since Feb 2003
![Spanner]()
remembers when it was all fields round here
Location: in the works... somewhere...
Total posts: 2790
BRONZE Member since Feb 2003
remembers when it was all fields round here
Location: in the works... somewhere...
Total posts: 2790
Posted:Written by: DJ Dantana
I stopped a rape from happening one time, because instead of dailing 911 and waiting for police, I dialed 9mm (that's nine millimeter). I did not even need to pull the trigger. A hugh muscular naked black man got stopped by little old me.
Written by: DJ Dantana
I've been shot at by crazy drunk native americans not just once, but twice, WITH AK-47s. I've had a 18" knife pulled on me by a psycho bangledeshian.
Could you please explain to me the relevance of these people being black, Native American or Bangladeshi?
I stopped a rape from happening one time, because instead of dailing 911 and waiting for police, I dialed 9mm (that's nine millimeter). I did not even need to pull the trigger. A hugh muscular naked black man got stopped by little old me.
Written by: DJ Dantana
I've been shot at by crazy drunk native americans not just once, but twice, WITH AK-47s. I've had a 18" knife pulled on me by a psycho bangledeshian.
Could you please explain to me the relevance of these people being black, Native American or Bangladeshi?
"I thought you are man, but
you are nice woman.
yay,
:R"
Posted:These situations would be pretty different if we all went back to having swords rather than guns. 
Raph
Raph
Delete
Posted:I second the notion 
First intention, then enlightenment..
Ars Pyronomica
" Life is programmed. Whether death is programmed or not is yet to be determined."
Posted:oh yea, did I mention I've been hunted by old crazy white guys, but they didn't find me. Ninja, vanish!
we eat and we drink and we smoke and we try!
DeletePosted:Written by: DJ Dantana
I stopped a rape from happening one time, because instead of dailing 911 and waiting for police, I dialed 9mm (that's nine millimeter). I did not even need to pull the trigger. A hugh muscular naked black man got stopped by little old me. Five minutes later the police showed up and arrested him. My neighbor had called the police because of the woman screaming. The rapist had ripped off all her cloths and she was bitten and bleeding and he was choking her when I had got there. The police thanked me for saving the woman's life.
Written by: DJ Dantana
I've been shot at by crazy drunk native americans not just once, but twice, WITH AK-47s.
Written by: DJ Dantana
I've had a 18" knife pulled on me by a psycho bangledeshian
Written by: DJ Dantana
And most recently I had to use my M-16 to hold off a crazy 2 time violent felon crack head from murdering "3 children one woman and two men".
Written by: DJ Dantana
oh yea, did I mention I've been hunted by old crazy white guys, but they didn't find me.
hmmm..... maybe i'm confused, but this doesn't seem to to correspond with your argument that "an armed society is a polite society"
sounds like you, in OK, have encountered more than your fair share of (potentially) violent crimes, even though everyone and their granny is armed to the hilt
remind me never to visit Oklahoma, coz judging by the sounds of it, i'd be cowering in terror in my bed at night
I stopped a rape from happening one time, because instead of dailing 911 and waiting for police, I dialed 9mm (that's nine millimeter). I did not even need to pull the trigger. A hugh muscular naked black man got stopped by little old me. Five minutes later the police showed up and arrested him. My neighbor had called the police because of the woman screaming. The rapist had ripped off all her cloths and she was bitten and bleeding and he was choking her when I had got there. The police thanked me for saving the woman's life.
Written by: DJ Dantana
I've been shot at by crazy drunk native americans not just once, but twice, WITH AK-47s.
Written by: DJ Dantana
I've had a 18" knife pulled on me by a psycho bangledeshian
Written by: DJ Dantana
And most recently I had to use my M-16 to hold off a crazy 2 time violent felon crack head from murdering "3 children one woman and two men".
Written by: DJ Dantana
oh yea, did I mention I've been hunted by old crazy white guys, but they didn't find me.
hmmm..... maybe i'm confused, but this doesn't seem to to correspond with your argument that "an armed society is a polite society"
sounds like you, in OK, have encountered more than your fair share of (potentially) violent crimes, even though everyone and their granny is armed to the hilt
remind me never to visit Oklahoma, coz judging by the sounds of it, i'd be cowering in terror in my bed at night
My mind not only wanders, it sometimes leaves completely
Posted:Raph - then that'd make you one of the Musketeers. Cool! But I awlays thought it'd be hard to swordfight in one of those big floppy hats.
Delete
Posted:all us as american have let the world down and i am sorry as well
SLEEP WITH ANGELS muckieha
DeletePosted:Written by: Dom
Raph - then that'd make you one of the Musketeers. Cool! But I awlays thought it'd be hard to swordfight in one of those big floppy hats.
I've never tried fencing in a big floppy hat, but I agree it probably wouldn''t be very helpful.
But as long as the choice of weapons involves rapiers, katanas, or hand-and-a-half gothic broadswords, I'm in!
Raph
Raph - then that'd make you one of the Musketeers. Cool! But I awlays thought it'd be hard to swordfight in one of those big floppy hats.
I've never tried fencing in a big floppy hat, but I agree it probably wouldn''t be very helpful.
But as long as the choice of weapons involves rapiers, katanas, or hand-and-a-half gothic broadswords, I'm in!
Raph
Delete
Posted:In the UK:
When individuals are confronted by intruders there are some actions they should follow. Direct contact should be avoided whenever possible. If unavoidable, the victim should adopt a state of active passivity. In most cases the best form of defence is always avoidance. If this isnt possible, act passively, be careful what you say or do and give up valuables without a struggle. This allows the victim to take charge of the situation, without the intruders awareness, through subtle and non-confrontational means. People can cooperate but initiate nothing. By doing nothing there is no chance of inadvertently initiating violence by saying something such as "Please dont hurt me".
http://news.scotsman.com/uk.cfm?id=1377062004
br>
That is some funny stuff.
Y'alls laws are terrible.
Hey Faberge, I must be both very unlucky and very lucky. Unlucky to have had so many life threatening experiences happen to me. Lucky to have survived. I assure you, this isn't normal.
When a person's life is threatened by violence, it changes their outlook on life. For instance, I got tired of getting my life threatened, and not having a gun on me. I do not like the feeling of being unarmed against crazy people with knives and guns and stuff.
When individuals are confronted by intruders there are some actions they should follow. Direct contact should be avoided whenever possible. If unavoidable, the victim should adopt a state of active passivity. In most cases the best form of defence is always avoidance. If this isnt possible, act passively, be careful what you say or do and give up valuables without a struggle. This allows the victim to take charge of the situation, without the intruders awareness, through subtle and non-confrontational means. People can cooperate but initiate nothing. By doing nothing there is no chance of inadvertently initiating violence by saying something such as "Please dont hurt me".
http://news.scotsman.com/uk.cfm?id=1377062004
br>
That is some funny stuff.
Y'alls laws are terrible.
Hey Faberge, I must be both very unlucky and very lucky. Unlucky to have had so many life threatening experiences happen to me. Lucky to have survived. I assure you, this isn't normal.
When a person's life is threatened by violence, it changes their outlook on life. For instance, I got tired of getting my life threatened, and not having a gun on me. I do not like the feeling of being unarmed against crazy people with knives and guns and stuff.
we eat and we drink and we smoke and we try!
DeletePosted:It is good to see how other people think, even though it is almost inconceivable to think that (as he believes) victim passivity puts the victim (secretly) in control of a hostile situation. The good doctor is touting the line his government has taken - that law abiding citizens need not own the means to defend themselves and that law enforcement can keep them safe. Were he to take any other position he would be in conflict with his governments philosophy. When the legal system is predisposed to say that you cannot use a weapon to defend your family or yourself that seems to take precedence in prosecutors minds. While in the UK breaking into someone's home and threatening their life is a crime, it appears that the greater crime is in owning a firearm and using it to defend your loved ones. Again, interesting how people think - especially because some people in our country want to emulate this. Incredible, but good to know how they think......
The subjects in the UK are not clamoring in large numbers for greater rights to defend themselves and their property. They are not electing to office, people who will do anything to make life more dangerous for criminals in the UK.
As I see it UK subjects are living in conditions of their own creation. Conditions that they could scream about and vote to change. They seem satisfied to passively allow crimes to be committed against themselves, hope that they are not hurt or killed, and let the police have a go at catching the criminal after the fact.
That is an attitude that we must not allow to take hold here in the USA.
The subjects in the UK are not clamoring in large numbers for greater rights to defend themselves and their property. They are not electing to office, people who will do anything to make life more dangerous for criminals in the UK.
As I see it UK subjects are living in conditions of their own creation. Conditions that they could scream about and vote to change. They seem satisfied to passively allow crimes to be committed against themselves, hope that they are not hurt or killed, and let the police have a go at catching the criminal after the fact.
That is an attitude that we must not allow to take hold here in the USA.
we eat and we drink and we smoke and we try!
DeleteSpitFire
GOLD Member since Dec 2002
Mand's Girl....and The Not So Shy One
Location: Calgary, Alberta Canada
Total posts: 2723
GOLD Member since Dec 2002
Mand's Girl....and The Not So Shy One
Location: Calgary, Alberta Canada
Total posts: 2723
Posted:Of course, you are forgetting that per capita, crime is lower over in the UK than it is in the US. Oh wait....the way you interpret the statistics, the UK is more dangerous than the US.
Most people in the UK like that their country does not have a gun culture. Does that make them cowards, as you indirectly imply? No....their world views are different than yours. Are they right? Are you right? It all comes down to your opinion and what kind of environment you want to live in vs. theirs. There is no right or wrong, in my mind, but you're defending your position, and beating a dead horse.
We've gone in circles in this thread, many many circles.
Most people in the UK like that their country does not have a gun culture. Does that make them cowards, as you indirectly imply? No....their world views are different than yours. Are they right? Are you right? It all comes down to your opinion and what kind of environment you want to live in vs. theirs. There is no right or wrong, in my mind, but you're defending your position, and beating a dead horse.
We've gone in circles in this thread, many many circles.
Solitude sometimes speaks to you, and you should listen.
DeletePosted:Background to Australian gun laws 101 -
Twelve days after 35 people were shot dead by a single gunman in Tasmania, Australia's state and federal governments agreed to enact wide-ranging new gun control laws to curb firearm-related death and injury. Between July 1996 and August 1998, the new restrictions were brought into force.
"There was a decrease of almost 30% in the number of homicides by firearms from 1997 to 1998."
-- Australian Crime - Facts and Figures 1999. Australian Institute of Criminology. Canberra, Oct 1999
http://www.converge.org.nz/pma/gunaus.htm
br>
More facts to come... interesting reading and a beer or two at lunch is slowing my pace slightly.
*Understand that restiricting guns may only be a contributing factor in this statistic... that is why i am still looking*
Twelve days after 35 people were shot dead by a single gunman in Tasmania, Australia's state and federal governments agreed to enact wide-ranging new gun control laws to curb firearm-related death and injury. Between July 1996 and August 1998, the new restrictions were brought into force.
"There was a decrease of almost 30% in the number of homicides by firearms from 1997 to 1998."
-- Australian Crime - Facts and Figures 1999. Australian Institute of Criminology. Canberra, Oct 1999
http://www.converge.org.nz/pma/gunaus.htm
br>
More facts to come... interesting reading and a beer or two at lunch is slowing my pace slightly.
*Understand that restiricting guns may only be a contributing factor in this statistic... that is why i am still looking*
There is a world made of air, one of earth and one of water.
And there is one made of fire, and all of them fight for supremacy. They are fighting now, in my head.
Posted:Hi, DJ Dantana, Im not in this for the money but I had to wonder how high the crime rate was in the USA, after reading your line: You see, in the USA, the places where all the good people can carry guns, it is very safe. WE have the lowest crime rates in the nation (p 6).
It also made me wonder how the US crime rate compared to other countries, or if crime rate was a good argument or even a relevant one for carrying guns.
Ive said this before, but the only conclusion I could make on Americas record with gun responsibility is to ban guns. As the Riflemans Association says:
Firearms are the second leading cause of traumatic death related to a consumer product in the United States and are the second most frequent cause of death overall for Americans ages 15 to 24. Since 1960, more than a million Americans have died in firearm suicides, homicides, and unintentional injuries. In 2001 alone, 29,573 Americans died by gunfire: 16,869 in firearm suicides, 11,671 in firearm homicides, 802 in unintentional shootings, and 231 in firearm deaths of unknown intent, according to the National Center for Health Statistics. Nearly three times that number are treated in emergency rooms each year for nonfatal firearm injuries (NRA).
I just add to Loopers Background to Australian gun laws 101 by saying that when they introduced laws to ensure guns were locked safely away, youth suicides were reduced by a significant percentage.
Guns Kill People
but I had to wonder how high the crime rate was in the USA, after reading your line: You see, in the USA, the places where all the good people can carry guns, it is very safe. WE have the lowest crime rates in the nation (p 6). It also made me wonder how the US crime rate compared to other countries, or if crime rate was a good argument or even a relevant one for carrying guns.
Ive said this before, but the only conclusion I could make on Americas record with gun responsibility is to ban guns. As the Riflemans Association says:
Firearms are the second leading cause of traumatic death related to a consumer product in the United States and are the second most frequent cause of death overall for Americans ages 15 to 24. Since 1960, more than a million Americans have died in firearm suicides, homicides, and unintentional injuries. In 2001 alone, 29,573 Americans died by gunfire: 16,869 in firearm suicides, 11,671 in firearm homicides, 802 in unintentional shootings, and 231 in firearm deaths of unknown intent, according to the National Center for Health Statistics. Nearly three times that number are treated in emergency rooms each year for nonfatal firearm injuries (NRA).
I just add to Loopers Background to Australian gun laws 101 by saying that when they introduced laws to ensure guns were locked safely away, youth suicides were reduced by a significant percentage.
Guns Kill People
If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh
DeletePosted:well, the thing is, the USA can hardly be used as an example in the case where you have some areas with stricter gun control and some with looser gun control, since the borders between states are not subject to any kind of regulation.
There are higher crime rates in places like New York City or Washington DC where there are also much stricter gun codes than say in Houston, Texas. I suppose those two cities made stricter gun laws to try to bring down the crime rate, but this is kind of a pointless effort when someone in DC can just cross the river to Virginia to purchase their gun quite easily and then drive back over the river hassle free. Heck, they can even take public transit. Gun control laws for limited areas are practically worthless.
So then, is the reason Houston is safer than NYC or DC because it is easier for a non criminal to own a gun there? I doubt it. It probably has more to do with poverty rates, population density, and stuff like that. and trying to compare the gun control laws of a US city or state to gun control laws of another country is futile - even if they had the exact same wording of the law in the same legal system, the implications would be radically different because of how differently the boarders are controled in regards to guns - try flying to london with a gun in your suitcase vs. driving over a bridge into NYC if you want to experience what I mean.
Then there is alos a huge difference between states in how you are allowed to use your gun in terms of self defense. Law codes in the northeastern US are based primarily off English law, and are much more restrictive than say in Texas, where the codes are heavily influenced by spanish law. Spanish law puts a much larger emphasis on the ability of the individual to take charge of their own defense and the security of their property. This in turn changes the perception of a would be burgular... maybe. If you are in DC and have broken into someone's house, that person can really only shoot you if a) he has a fully licienced and registered and completely legal weapon, and b) he can show some sort of evidence that you provided a direct threat to his survival (i.e., he's also better have a throw down gun to plant on your body). If you break into someone's house in Texas, anyone who lives there can shoot you with any gun that happens to be around (only fully automatic assalt rifles and the like have to be registered) and the police will not ask a single question about the body. It was not your house and you were not invited in, so you knew you were risking their life, end of story - no hassle for the shooter beyond giving a statement to the police in the comfort of his own recliner. doesn't matter if you were shot in the back, shot 5 times, or whatever. heck, people can even shoot at you for trying to break into their car. thus, I do beleive that criminals in Texas are a lot more wary about breaking into someone else's stuff than they are in DC. I think this mainly means they just try to do a better job of making sure no one is home first though. and please note before you flame me that I am not saying one or the other situation is better, I'm just describing the difference that exists even in the USA.
Gun laws and related rules vary widely in the USA, but the stricter ones are largely undermined by the less strict ones in other areas and therefor prevented from doing much besides rendering the non-criminal more impotent in his self defense. This is where DJ Dan's attitudes come from. I do not beleive this sort of trend applies in other countries or continents where gun control is more stricter but more uniform. gun control is only effective if it is consistant within a regulated area. the USA does not have this, and will not anytime soon.
Last point from me. I beleive that the the article in the bill of rights of the US constitution that garuntees the right to bear arms is outdated. It was a good idea at the time given the situation and tech level of weapons 200 years ago, but the orginal argument for it makes little sense now unless you are going to allow private citizens to also own anti-aircraft missles, main battle tanks, and other such things that a citizen's militia would need to defend themselves from a government military, and that is clearly ridiculous. A madman with a musket is easily disposed of with minimal damage done to society, but a loony with modern weapons is a threat many many orders of magnitude greater, and the limited benifit that comes from owning your own weapon is now far outwieghed by the much increased danger now presented by someone who has flipped their lid.
There are higher crime rates in places like New York City or Washington DC where there are also much stricter gun codes than say in Houston, Texas. I suppose those two cities made stricter gun laws to try to bring down the crime rate, but this is kind of a pointless effort when someone in DC can just cross the river to Virginia to purchase their gun quite easily and then drive back over the river hassle free. Heck, they can even take public transit. Gun control laws for limited areas are practically worthless.
So then, is the reason Houston is safer than NYC or DC because it is easier for a non criminal to own a gun there? I doubt it. It probably has more to do with poverty rates, population density, and stuff like that. and trying to compare the gun control laws of a US city or state to gun control laws of another country is futile - even if they had the exact same wording of the law in the same legal system, the implications would be radically different because of how differently the boarders are controled in regards to guns - try flying to london with a gun in your suitcase vs. driving over a bridge into NYC if you want to experience what I mean.
Then there is alos a huge difference between states in how you are allowed to use your gun in terms of self defense. Law codes in the northeastern US are based primarily off English law, and are much more restrictive than say in Texas, where the codes are heavily influenced by spanish law. Spanish law puts a much larger emphasis on the ability of the individual to take charge of their own defense and the security of their property. This in turn changes the perception of a would be burgular... maybe. If you are in DC and have broken into someone's house, that person can really only shoot you if a) he has a fully licienced and registered and completely legal weapon, and b) he can show some sort of evidence that you provided a direct threat to his survival (i.e., he's also better have a throw down gun to plant on your body). If you break into someone's house in Texas, anyone who lives there can shoot you with any gun that happens to be around (only fully automatic assalt rifles and the like have to be registered) and the police will not ask a single question about the body. It was not your house and you were not invited in, so you knew you were risking their life, end of story - no hassle for the shooter beyond giving a statement to the police in the comfort of his own recliner. doesn't matter if you were shot in the back, shot 5 times, or whatever. heck, people can even shoot at you for trying to break into their car. thus, I do beleive that criminals in Texas are a lot more wary about breaking into someone else's stuff than they are in DC. I think this mainly means they just try to do a better job of making sure no one is home first though. and please note before you flame me that I am not saying one or the other situation is better, I'm just describing the difference that exists even in the USA.
Gun laws and related rules vary widely in the USA, but the stricter ones are largely undermined by the less strict ones in other areas and therefor prevented from doing much besides rendering the non-criminal more impotent in his self defense. This is where DJ Dan's attitudes come from. I do not beleive this sort of trend applies in other countries or continents where gun control is more stricter but more uniform. gun control is only effective if it is consistant within a regulated area. the USA does not have this, and will not anytime soon.
Last point from me. I beleive that the the article in the bill of rights of the US constitution that garuntees the right to bear arms is outdated. It was a good idea at the time given the situation and tech level of weapons 200 years ago, but the orginal argument for it makes little sense now unless you are going to allow private citizens to also own anti-aircraft missles, main battle tanks, and other such things that a citizen's militia would need to defend themselves from a government military, and that is clearly ridiculous. A madman with a musket is easily disposed of with minimal damage done to society, but a loony with modern weapons is a threat many many orders of magnitude greater, and the limited benifit that comes from owning your own weapon is now far outwieghed by the much increased danger now presented by someone who has flipped their lid.
-v-
Wiederstand ist Zwecklos!
Posted:"So then, is the reason Houston is safer than NYC or DC because it is easier for a non criminal to own a gun there? I doubt it. It probably has more to do with poverty rates, population density, and stuff like that."
Excellent point - the reasons behind why people are getting shot is more important than the issue of gun control, I believe.
"heck, people can even shoot at you for trying to break into their car."
As it happens, a couple of years ago a guy from west Belfast stopped two teenagers breaking into his car. West Belfast has a really bad reputation for joyriders (who have created havoc on the streets, including causing the deaths of children and adults over the years - apart from the hassle of replacing your car). Anyways, he went out to the driveway, chased off one boy and pulled the other through the window the teen had already broken, before holding him down til the police arrived. That guy was arrested and recently sentenced to 9 months in prison for assault. The paper I work for launched a campaign and he was released on bail yesterday pending a retrial. I realise this goes entirely against my ethos of civilians not carrying guns... but there does need to be a happy medium - in that, guidelines should be established for the use of reasonable force to protect your property. Of course, what defines 'reasonable force' will be the problem - but perhaps each individual case should be taken on it's own merit.
"I beleive that the the article in the bill of rights of the US constitution that garuntees the right to bear arms is outdated."
Totally agree.
Excellent point - the reasons behind why people are getting shot is more important than the issue of gun control, I believe.
"heck, people can even shoot at you for trying to break into their car."
As it happens, a couple of years ago a guy from west Belfast stopped two teenagers breaking into his car. West Belfast has a really bad reputation for joyriders (who have created havoc on the streets, including causing the deaths of children and adults over the years - apart from the hassle of replacing your car). Anyways, he went out to the driveway, chased off one boy and pulled the other through the window the teen had already broken, before holding him down til the police arrived. That guy was arrested and recently sentenced to 9 months in prison for assault. The paper I work for launched a campaign and he was released on bail yesterday pending a retrial. I realise this goes entirely against my ethos of civilians not carrying guns... but there does need to be a happy medium - in that, guidelines should be established for the use of reasonable force to protect your property. Of course, what defines 'reasonable force' will be the problem - but perhaps each individual case should be taken on it's own merit.
"I beleive that the the article in the bill of rights of the US constitution that garuntees the right to bear arms is outdated."
Totally agree.
Getting to the other side 
Posted:According to the National Self Defense Survey conducted by Florida State University criminologists in 1994, the rate of Defensive Gun Uses can be projected nationwide to approximately 2.5 million per year -- one Defensive Gun Use every 13 seconds.
Among 15.7% of gun defenders interviewed nationwide during The National Self Defense Survey, the defender believed that someone "almost certainly" would have died had the gun not been used for protection -- a life saved by a privately held gun about once every 1.3 minutes. (In another 14.2% cases, the defender believed someone "probably" would have died if the gun hadn't been used in defense.)
In 83.5% of these successful gun defenses, the attacker either threatened or used force first -- disproving the myth that having a gun available for defense wouldn't make any difference.
In 91.7% of these incidents the defensive use of a gun did not wound or kill the criminal attacker (and the gun defense wouldn't be called "newsworthy" by newspaper or TV news editors). In 64.2% of these gun-defense cases, the police learned of the defense, which means that the media could also find out and report on them if they chose to.
In 73.4% of these gun-defense incidents, the attacker was a stranger to the intended victim. (Defenses against a family member or intimate were rare -- well under 10%.) This disproves the myth that a gun kept for defense will most likely be used against a family member or someone you love.
In over half of these gun defense incidents, the defender was facing two or more attackers -- and three or more attackers in over a quarter of these cases. (No means of defense other than a firearm -- martial arts, pepper spray, or stun guns -- gives a potential victim a decent chance of getting away uninjured when facing multiple attackers.)
In 79.7% of these gun defenses, the defender used a concealable handgun. A quarter of the gun defenses occured in places away from the defender's home.
Source: "Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun," by Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz, in The Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, Northwestern University School of Law, Volume 86, Number 1, Fall, 1995
Among 15.7% of gun defenders interviewed nationwide during The National Self Defense Survey, the defender believed that someone "almost certainly" would have died had the gun not been used for protection -- a life saved by a privately held gun about once every 1.3 minutes. (In another 14.2% cases, the defender believed someone "probably" would have died if the gun hadn't been used in defense.)
In 83.5% of these successful gun defenses, the attacker either threatened or used force first -- disproving the myth that having a gun available for defense wouldn't make any difference.
In 91.7% of these incidents the defensive use of a gun did not wound or kill the criminal attacker (and the gun defense wouldn't be called "newsworthy" by newspaper or TV news editors). In 64.2% of these gun-defense cases, the police learned of the defense, which means that the media could also find out and report on them if they chose to.
In 73.4% of these gun-defense incidents, the attacker was a stranger to the intended victim. (Defenses against a family member or intimate were rare -- well under 10%.) This disproves the myth that a gun kept for defense will most likely be used against a family member or someone you love.
In over half of these gun defense incidents, the defender was facing two or more attackers -- and three or more attackers in over a quarter of these cases. (No means of defense other than a firearm -- martial arts, pepper spray, or stun guns -- gives a potential victim a decent chance of getting away uninjured when facing multiple attackers.)
In 79.7% of these gun defenses, the defender used a concealable handgun. A quarter of the gun defenses occured in places away from the defender's home.
Source: "Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun," by Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz, in The Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, Northwestern University School of Law, Volume 86, Number 1, Fall, 1995
What hits the fan is not evenly distributed.
DeletePosted:ey is it really true that even swords are illegal now in australia??
are illegal now in australia??First intention, then enlightenment..
Ars Pyronomica
" Life is programmed. Whether death is programmed or not is yet to be determined."
Posted:You can still buy them in some shops... so it isn't illegal to own them, just to carry them in public. Same with knives and stuff. Don't have time to look up the definition of 'weapon' right now, but i can tell you it is the most peacful place i have ever lived.
There is a world made of air, one of earth and one of water.
And there is one made of fire, and all of them fight for supremacy. They are fighting now, in my head.
Posted:Wise words vanize, I have to agree the article in the bill of rights that guarantees the right to bear arms is redundant. An in society today, there are limited benefits from owning a weapon, apart from a the ego boost. I used to be pro-gun, growing up with them as a kid on a farm, but in todays society they are difficult to justify.
Dio, I think The National Self Defense Survey, you presented lacks some objectivity. Im sure that most of the gun defenders interviewed believed that someone "almost certainly" would have died had the gun not been used for protection. I dont think the Survey disproves the myth (or do you mean theory) that having a gun available for defense wouldn't make any difference. In some respects that survey is like doing a survey of beer drinkers, and asking them if they like beer.
Looper, are you sure about the sword/knife laws in Australia? I thought it was a State thing. Like in Victoria, the Bracks State Gov banned knives, swords etc. And all I know is that the martial arts shop down the road removed all their swords and stuff overnight, replacing them with wooden replicas.
Dio, I think The National Self Defense Survey, you presented lacks some objectivity. Im sure that most of the gun defenders interviewed believed that someone "almost certainly" would have died had the gun not been used for protection. I dont think the Survey disproves the myth (or do you mean theory) that having a gun available for defense wouldn't make any difference. In some respects that survey is like doing a survey of beer drinkers, and asking them if they like beer.
Looper, are you sure about the sword/knife laws in Australia? I thought it was a State thing. Like in Victoria, the Bracks State Gov banned knives, swords etc. And all I know is that the martial arts shop down the road removed all their swords and stuff overnight, replacing them with wooden replicas.
If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh
DeletePosted:Written by: Stone
Im sure that most of the gun defenders interviewed believed that someone "almost certainly" would have died had the gun not been used for protection. I dont think the Survey disproves the myth (or do you mean theory) that having a gun available for defense wouldn't make any difference. In some respects that survey is like doing a survey of beer drinkers, and asking them if they like beer.
15% doesn't exactly seem like "most" of the interviewees...
And of course you can't interview someone on gun defense unless they've been in that situation. The beer-drinker analogy doesn't really hold up because you're talking about people who had an encounter and saved anything from the $20 in their wallet to their life and the lives of others... of course they're going to be biased, they saw their life and/or property protected by those who might take them from them.
And also of note, the 91% that didn't even wound or kill their attacker... the deterrence factor alone seems pretty strong. But also look at the statistic - the people who defended themselves knew how to practice enough restraint in order to prevent ANY loss of life, not just their own. Granted, some may have been bad shots, but I don't think they would have confessed to it. Seems like a pretty responsible gun-carrying society from these numbers.
Im sure that most of the gun defenders interviewed believed that someone "almost certainly" would have died had the gun not been used for protection. I dont think the Survey disproves the myth (or do you mean theory) that having a gun available for defense wouldn't make any difference. In some respects that survey is like doing a survey of beer drinkers, and asking them if they like beer.
15% doesn't exactly seem like "most" of the interviewees...
And of course you can't interview someone on gun defense unless they've been in that situation. The beer-drinker analogy doesn't really hold up because you're talking about people who had an encounter and saved anything from the $20 in their wallet to their life and the lives of others... of course they're going to be biased, they saw their life and/or property protected by those who might take them from them.
And also of note, the 91% that didn't even wound or kill their attacker... the deterrence factor alone seems pretty strong. But also look at the statistic - the people who defended themselves knew how to practice enough restraint in order to prevent ANY loss of life, not just their own. Granted, some may have been bad shots, but I don't think they would have confessed to it. Seems like a pretty responsible gun-carrying society from these numbers.
What hits the fan is not evenly distributed.
DeletePosted:and how many of that 91% were actually on cocaine at the time and only reacting to a percieved threat born of drug induced paranoia?
out of all the handguns guns I have seen being pointed at someone in my life and not in the possesion of a law enforcement official, roughly 75% of them were being weilded by people on coke or speed and, frankly, in each of those cases their presence was completely uncalled for given my perception of the situation.
as far as the stats are concerned, one side is quoting from a biased source, and so is the other. the thruth (what exists of it anyway) is likely somewhere inbetween - gun ownership is not as bad as the anti-gun people make it out to be, and not as benificial as the pro-gun crowd.
out of all the handguns guns I have seen being pointed at someone in my life and not in the possesion of a law enforcement official, roughly 75% of them were being weilded by people on coke or speed and, frankly, in each of those cases their presence was completely uncalled for given my perception of the situation.
as far as the stats are concerned, one side is quoting from a biased source, and so is the other. the thruth (what exists of it anyway) is likely somewhere inbetween - gun ownership is not as bad as the anti-gun people make it out to be, and not as benificial as the pro-gun crowd.
-v-
Wiederstand ist Zwecklos!
Similar Topics
Using the keywords [apologie* bush] we found the following similar topics.1. Forums > apologies for bush [277 replies]
2. Forums > Bush Words [18 replies]
3. Forums > Bush caught redhanded again [28 replies]
4. Forums > Bush and Kerry in Dead Heat [18 replies]
5. Forums > when is the bush gonna burnout [24 replies]
Show more..
© 1998 - 2017 Home of Poi Ltd,
New Zealand unless otherwise stated.
All rights reserved
*All prices converted to United States dollars using XE.com.