G
gamewell45
Guest
Some people in here tend to inject politics into the discussion and as such, it inhibits rational debate.Huhhh?You’ve not mentioned anything of a political nature in your comments?
- Status
A
AnotherVoice
Guest
I thought of this thread when I read this from a 2007 news article.
In March 1982 the small town of Kennesaw, Georgia, A suburb of Atlanta, unanimously passed an ordinance requiring each head of household to own and maintain a gun. Since then, despite dire predictions of “Wild West” showdowns and increased violence and accidents, not a single resident has been involved in a fatal shooting – as a victim, attacker or defender. The town has about 28,000 residents and has been a safe place for over 25 years.
In March 1982 the small town of Kennesaw, Georgia, A suburb of Atlanta, unanimously passed an ordinance requiring each head of household to own and maintain a gun. Since then, despite dire predictions of “Wild West” showdowns and increased violence and accidents, not a single resident has been involved in a fatal shooting – as a victim, attacker or defender. The town has about 28,000 residents and has been a safe place for over 25 years.
T
TheWalsh
Guest
Come now Gamewell45, your remarks are altogether political. You advocate a governmental ban or severe restriction on private ownership of firearms. Tell me it isn’t so.
B
Black_Angel_1
Guest
They shouldn’t make it mandatory but they shouldn’t ban firearms…Look at it this way…
Banning Firearms is basically supporting crime. Criminals won’t stop using Guns if it is illegal, However, law abiding citizens will. Leaving them with no way to defend themselves against people who don’t follow the ban…
Banning Firearms is basically supporting crime. Criminals won’t stop using Guns if it is illegal, However, law abiding citizens will. Leaving them with no way to defend themselves against people who don’t follow the ban…
S
Sophia86
Guest
Lycorth,
Clearly you have issues with both your manners, and people from the UK…
lycorth:
And
royalarcher:
Clearly you have issues with both your manners, and people from the UK…
If you wish to act civilly, then I might bother taking part. However until then I do not want to waste my time.
And
royalarcher:
The same goes to you. I thought this was a place for discussion, not a place to be used as an excuse for casting hurtful blame.
S
Sophia86
Guest
Actually don’t bother, I am moving on to another thread.
_
-I object to violence because when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary; the evil it does is permanent- Mahatma Gandhi.
_
-I object to violence because when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary; the evil it does is permanent- Mahatma Gandhi.
C
cynic
Guest
more guns sold to the law-abiding = more guns sold secondhand = more guns eventually ending up in the hands of criminals
R
rpp
Guest
More guns make a more polite society.
Criminals will always have guns. The UK’s experience with banning gins is proof of this. (300% increase in gun crime in the first year they were outlawed. No significant decrease since.)
Criminals will always have guns. The UK’s experience with banning gins is proof of this. (300% increase in gun crime in the first year they were outlawed. No significant decrease since.)
C
cynic
Guest
It’s usual to provide a link for that sort of statement.
Re"Criminals will always have guns"
You’re right inasmuch as the U.S probably having reached a saturation point for firearms sold illegally. However, just for the sake of debate, the majority of criminals are stupid, lazy and disorganised. Ease of access has got to be a factor in whether you’re average gangster wannabe gets hold of a handgun.
R
rpp
Guest
You are so right. Sorry.
telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1576406/28-gun-crimes-committed-in-UK-every-day.html
timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article808026.ece
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6960431.stm
Which is exactly why existing laws should be better enforced before crazy new ideas should be enacted as law.
C
cynic
Guest
Thank you, but the first two link an increase in gun violence to an increase in drug trafficking.
Wikipedia provides some referenced statistics en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence
The U.S firearm homicide rate is several times that of Australia or England and Wales, where ownership is heavily restricted.
Wikipedia provides some referenced statistics en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence
The U.S firearm homicide rate is several times that of Australia or England and Wales, where ownership is heavily restricted.
R
rpp
Guest
Well, The USSSA (United Soviet Socialist States of Aaerica) has a lot more people than both of those countries. Also, Wikipedia is not a reliable source.
Gun control is nothing less than a form of cowardice. It is like trying to use statistics to outlaw automobiles.
C
cynic
Guest
Cowardice in relation to…? Strange.
R
rpp
Guest
Were you talking to me? I support gun ownership and have a concealed handgun license. I am not certain what you are referring to.
I noticed that you edited your message. I will stick to your original version.
C
cynic
Guest
Well I dunno. Were you saying that the populations of these countries are afraid to take resposibility for their personal safety by owning firearms?
G
gamewell45
Guest
Very few of them complied with the ordinance.
C
chriso
Guest
That seems like quite a stretch according to my personal experience. I’d be interested to know what information you base this stated progression upon?
I have no statistics other than personal experience where my father, and all of my close friends fathers, drilled it into us to “never sell one of your firearms.” I’ve / we’ve owned guns since childhood and if what you say is true then the more guns I/we’ve bought over the decades would have resulted in all these secondhand sales you point to? Which has not been the case in my experience. Which would discount your third level of progression as well regarding them winding up in criminal hands.
I, and all 3 of my brothers, and our closest friends we grew up sharing shooting sports with, all still own the first firearms our fathers and mothers got for us some 30 plus years ago.
C
chriso
Guest
Were they charged with any offense? I think thats what the OP was actually proposing in spite of us getting so far off into the whole “gun rights” debate “en-force” wasnt it? “Requiring Revolver Ownership”…
L
Lycorth
Guest
Another anti-gun fanatic who refused to answer my question. Interesting.
Let’s see what else the almighty Wikipedia has to say…
Wikipedia: Gun Politics in the Czech Republic -* “It is generally not common for licensed gun owners to commit violent crimes with their guns and most of the gun crimes are committed with illegal weapons that are beyond the control of the law.”
*Note: you can legally obtain fully automatic firearms in the Czech Republic.
Wikipedia: Gun Politics in Finlandand Gun Crime in Finland - “Finns have fourth most firearms in the world per capita… totalling 1.8 million registered privately owned firearms and 100,000–200,000 unregistered firearms. Gun related homicides are rare, comprising 14% of the total number of homicides, which is comparatively low.”
Wikipedia: Gun Politics in New Zealand - “New Zealand’s gun laws are notably more liberal than other countries in the Pacific, focusing mainly on vetting firearm owners, rather than registering firearms or banning certain types of firearms. Firearms legislation is provided for in the Arms Act and its associated regulations, though stricter unofficial police and government policies also apply.”
Wikipedia: Gun Politics in Switzerland - “*Police statistics for the year 2006records 34 killings or attempted killings involving firearms, compared to 69 cases involving bladed weapons and 16 cases of unarmed assault. Cases of assault resulting in bodily harm numbered 89 (firearms) and 526 (bladed weapons). This represents a decline of aggravated assaults involving firearms since the early 1990s. Some 300 deaths per year are due to legally held army ordnance weapons, the large majority of these being suicides. The majority of gun crimes involving domestic violence are perpetrated with army ordnance weapons, while the majority of gun crime outside the domestic sphere involves illegally held firearms.”
*Note: as per the article, shooting is a common pastime in Switzerland - *“Recreational shooting is widespread in Switzerland. Practice with guns is a popular recreation, and is encouraged by the government, particularly for the members of the militia.”
*According to the assumption of the anti-gun fanatics, more guns always means more crime with guns. This is not the case.
What is needed is cultural overhaul, not gun control. That which glorifies criminal violence or promotes it (openly or subtly) must be suppressed and removed. Those who advocate or promote criminal violence must be arrested and prevented from spewing filth. Those who commit crimes must be arrested, tried, and dealt with - and without kid gloves. Laws must be passed that criminalize crime and violence as well as laws that ensure that only law-abiding legal citizens of good record may be allowed to own firearms - and those laws must be regularly enforced and updated if and when necessary. Laws must include mandatory firearms education in schools so that people are brought up knowing the basics of gun safety. A mandatory civil service ought to be on the books as well, to provide adequate education in a number of relevant fields, including firearms safety and morality, similar to what goes on in Switzerland.
Banning inanimate objects without tackling the criminal problem at its human source will only disarm the innocent and invite more crime.
C
chriso
Guest
If this is true, then we ought to be able to find statistical support from the records in Austrailia and the UK where strict gun bans have been enacted One could assume that there are now far fewer criminal activities involving firearms, and with far lesser severity of crimes committed?
- Status